MOV:The Fig Tree  by Harold Camping

   An Analysis of the Future of National Israel

   Copyright 1983 by
   FAMILY STATIONS, INC.
   290 Hegenberger Road
   Oakland, California 94621

   TABLE OF CONTENTS

   Introduction

   Chapter 1 - God's Promise to National Israel
   Chapter 2 - God's Promise to Abraham Personally
   Chapter 3 - Abraham's Resurrection
   Chapter 4 - The Seed of Abraham
   Chapter 5 - Israel
   Chapter 6 - God's Glorious Eternal Israel
   Chapter 7 - Ezekiel 37
   Chapter 8 - God's Plan to Evangelize the World
   Chapter 9 - I Will Bring Back the Captivity
   Chapter 10 - Ezekiel 39
   Chapter 11 - The Millennium
   Chapter 12 - The Dragon and The Beast
   Chapter 13 - The First Resurrection
   Chapter 14 - When Is the Rapture?
   Chapter 15 - Judgment Day
   Chapter 16 - Romans 11
   Chapter 17 - The Fig Tree

   INTRODUCTION

   What is the future of the nation of Israel? Does God still owe this
nation future blessing as a result of promises and commitments He had
made to them during the days of Abraham or during the days of King
David? How do the Biblical promises given to Israel relate to the New
Testament church which has now been in existence almost 2000 years?
Does the return of national Israel to its land in l948 relate to
Biblical promises? Why does national Israel of today remain in such
steadfast opposition to Christ as its Messiah? Is the rapture of the
church going to usher in a golden age for national Israel with Christ
reigning over it as king?

   These are some of the questions we will seek to answer in this
study. As we obtain solutions to these questions we will also unfold
much truth concerning God's plan to evangelize the world as well as
God's plan for the return of Christ. Moreover we will carefully examine
many Old and New Testament passages that are widely misunderstood by
many theologians of today. Therefore I trust that this study shall
prove to be of great help and significance not only to those who are
interested in prophecy, but also to those who simply wish for a better
understanding of God's Word in all of its aspects.

   The source we will go to for these answers will, of course, be the
Bible. God's Word concerns itself not only with national Israel but
also with all who would seek a relationship with the God Who created
the world and Who has provided redemption through the blood of the Lord
Jesus Christ.

   We will begin our study with an examination of the founding of the
nation of Israel. By looking very carefully at the promises made to
Abraham, who was the beginning of Israel, we will be able to discern
the commitments God made concerning Israel. We will then look at the
rest of the Bible to discover how these commitments have been kept.
Indeed we will come to know precisely what, if anything, God still owes
national Israel.

   Since there exists today so much misunderstanding concerning the
Biblical declaration of God's master program for Israel, in this study
we plan to look patiently at the most commonly used verses of the Bible
that seemingly relate to future blessing for national Israel. This will
be done because any study of any part of the Bible is valuable. But it
will also be done because we realize that no conclusion arrived at by
Bible study can stand unless it is found to be in harmony with anything
and everything else in the Bible that might be related to the subject
at issue.

   The fact is, I believe one of the most serious failings ex- isting
today as theologians pursue truth from the Bible is a lack of
thoroughness in Bible interpretation. Only too frequently a conclusion
or doctrine derived from one part of the Bible is not carefully
examined in the light of related information wherever it may be found
in any other part of the Bible.

   Thus, conclusions and doctrinal positions are frequently posited
from Old Testament verses with no attempt to discover whether the New
Testament has any bearing on these verses. Consequently great error is
held on many aspects of Bible teaching. Even though much time and
patience will be required, it is my hope that in this study, every
attempt will be made to examine each conclusion in the light of every
pertinent passage in the Bible.

   CHAPTER 1 - GOD'S PROMISE TO NATIONAL ISRAEL

   When and how did the Israel begin? Is it a nation that goes all the
way back to Noah? Can we know its precise beginning? Indeed we can know
its beginning. By carefully reading the Bible we can know without the
possibility of error the exact circumstances relating to the founding
of Israel.

   The birth of the nation of Israel coincides with commands by God to
the ancient patriarch Abraham. Abraham was a Gentile living in Ur of
the Chaldees. God commanded him to leave his homeland and go to a land
in which he would live as a stranger. The land he was sent to was the
land of Canaan which became the land of Israel.

   As Abraham faithfully obeyed God, he received significant promises
concerning himself and concerning his seed. These promises related to
the land, to Abraham and his seed's relationship to God, and to the
character and extent of his seed. These promises must be looked at very
carefully if we are to understand God's present day commitments to
national Israel. The promises in question are especially set forth in
the twelfth through the twenty-eighth chapters of Genesis. We will
examine these most carefully.

   Two Kinds of Promises

   When we read these promises given to Abraham (Abraham was called
Abram until Genesis 17) in Genesis 12 through Genesis 28, we are going
to discover that some related only to the seed of Abraham while other
promises related to Abraham himself as well as to his seed.

   We read for example in Genesis 12:7:

   . . . the Lord appeared unto Abram and said, Unto thy seed will I
give this land.

   This promise does not concern itself with Abraham but only with his
seed. On the other hand, we read in Genesis 13:15:

   For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and thy
seed for ever.

   This promise is very definitely concerned not only with the seed of
Abraham but also with Abraham himself.

   The fact that there were two kinds of promises made to Abraham is
usually not noted by theologians who are commenting upon God's promises
to Abraham concerning Israel. But we should sense the grave importance
of the distinction that exists between these two kinds of promises.
Only by taking careful note of this distinction will we be able to see
clearly God's commitments to national Israel of long ago as well as to
present dy national Israel.

   We will therefore begin our study by looking at the promises made
only to the seed of Abraham, but not to Abraham himself. After we have
diligently searched the Bible for all it might say that relates to
these promises, we will then examine God's promises concerning Abraham
himself, as well as concerning his seed.

   God Promises Israel the Land of Canaan

   At the time that Abraham entered the land of Canaan God made a
faithful promise to him concerning the land. In Genesis 12:6-7 the
Bible declares:

   And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Sichem, unto the
plain of Moreh. And the Canaanite was then in the land. And the Lord
appreared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land:
and there builded he an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him.

   As we have already noted, this promise was made with no commitment
whatsoever to Abraham himself. Rather it was a promise given only to
the seed of Abraham. His seed would be given the land on which Abraham
walked as a stranger.

   We might also note two other aspects of this promise. First, it
appears to be an unconditional promise, and secondly there is no
commitment concerning the duration of time that Abraham's seed would be
the inheritors of the land. Let us keep these two facts in view as we
continue our study.

   In Genesis 15:18-21 we read for the second time that God had made a
promise to Abraham concerning his seed. There we read:

   In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto
thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great
river, the river Euphrates: The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the
Kadmonites, And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims, And
the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the
Jebusites.

   Please note as you carefully read these verses that this promise,
like that given in Genesis 12:6-7, does not promise land to Abraham
himself but only to his seed. Moreover, like the promise recorded in
Genesis 12:7 it appears to be unconditional, and no information is
offered concerning the length of time his seed would inherit the land.

   Once more in the book of Genesis, God makes reference to His promise
to Abraham in which He declares that the land would be given to the
seed of Abraham. In Genesis 24:7 we read:

   The Lord God of heaven, which took me from my father's house, and
from the land of my kindred, and which spake unto me, and that sware
unto me, saying, Unto thy seed will I give this land; he shall send his
angel before thee, and thou shalt take a wife unto my son from thence.

   Please note that once again this language relates only to the seed
of Abraham, not to Abraham himself. Moreover it appears to be
unconditional in nature, and it offers no suggestion as to how long
Abraham's seed would inherit the land.

   These then are the promises the Bible records for us. They were
given to Abraham but they offer no promise to Abraham himself. Rather
they are promises to his seed that they would be given the land of
Canaan which would also be called the land of Israel.

   Have God's Promises to National Israel Been Fulfilled?

   The logical question that now must be faced is this; does the Bible
speak of any fulfillment of this promise to the seed of Abraham that
they would become the inheritors of the land? We know, of course, that
the father of national Israel is Abraham. He fathered Isaac, who in
turn fathered Jacob. Jacob fathered twelve sons who became the heads of
the twelve tribes of Israel. Thus, there can be no doubt that national
Israel may be regarded as the seed of Abraham. We must, therefore,
examine these twelve tribes to see if they indeed received the land of
Canaan even as they were promised in Genesis 12:6,7, Genesis 15:18-21,
and Genesis 24:7.

   In the first chapter of Joshua, forty years after Israel had left
Egypt, God is speaking to Joshua concerning the nation of Israel.
Israel had been wandering in the wilderness these forty years but now
is ready to enter the land of Canaan. Therefore God declared to the
Israelites in Joshua l:2-4:

   Moses my servant is dead: now therefore arise, go over this Jordan,
thou, and all this people, unto the land which I do give to them, even
to the children of Israel. Every place that the sole of your foot shall
tread upon, that have I given unto you, as I said unto Moses. From the
wilderness and this Lebanon even unto the great river, the river
Euphrates, all the land of the Hittites, and unto the great sea toward
the going down of sun, shall be your coast.

   God is about to keep the promise He made to Abraham that his seed
would be given the land of Canaan.

   Israel Is Given the Land Unconditionally

   But remember, we saw in the Genesis account that the promise of the
land to the seed of Abraham appeared to be unconditional. That is, it
was a gift of God to Israel which they would receive without being
required to meet any prior conditions.

   When we look further, we see indeed that Canaan was given to the
Isralites unconditionally. In Deuteronomy 9 we read:

   Hear, O Israel: Thou art to pass over Jordan this day, to go in to
possess nations greater and mightier than thyself, cities great and
fenced up to heaven,...(Deuteronomy 9:l)

   Speak not thou in thine heart, after that the Lord thy God hath cast
them out from before thee, saying, For my righteousness the Lord hath
brought me in to possess this land: but for the wickedness of these
nations the Lord doth drive them out from before thee. Not for thy
righteousness, or for the uprightness of thine heart, dost thou go to
possess their land: but for the wickedness of these nations the Lord
thy God doth drive them out from before thee, and that he may perform
the word which the Lord sware unto thy fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob. (Deuteronomy 9:4-6)

   Using this language, God very clearly indicates that the land had
been given to them as a gift from God without requiring Israel to meet
any conditions. It is given to them altogether as an evidence of God's
sovereign gracious love to them.

   The Duration of Israel's Possession of the Land was Conditional

   Remember, too, that at the time God made His promise to Abraham
concerning the giving of the land to his seed, no reference was made as
to how long they would possess the land. Does the Bible have anything
more to say concerning this aspect of the promise?

   Indeed it does. We read for example in Deuteronomy 8:l8-20:

   But thou shalt remember the Lord thy God: for it is he that giveth
thee power to get wealth, that he may establish his covenant which he
sware unto thy fathers, as it is this day. And it shall be, if thou do
at all forget the Lord thy God, and walk after other gods, and serve
them, and worship them, I testify against you this day that ye shall
surely perish. As the nations which the Lord destroyeth before your
face, so shall ye perish; because ye would not be obedient unto the
voice of the Lord your God.

   We see, therefore, clearly that while God's gift of the land of
Canaan was unconditional, Israel's continued possession of the land was
conditional. If they became unfaithful to God they would be destroyed.
Now we can understand why God in His promises to Abraham made no
reference to the length of time they would possess the land. The length
of time they would possess the land would depend on the faithfulness of
national Israel.

   Have the Promises been Fulfilled in Their Entirety?

   But now the big question must be asked. Did God fulfill entirely His
promise that the seed of Abraham would possess the land? In Genesis
l5:l8-20 God had promised that Abraham's seed would be given the land
from the river of Egypt unto the great river Euphrates. Indeed in verse
20 God mentions that Israel is to possess the land of the Hittites. The
Hittites comprised a great nation far to the north of present day
Israel's land. They were a nation located at least as far north as the
river Euphrates. In fact, in Joshua l:4 God declares that Israel was to
go in to possess the land unto the great river, the river Euphrates,
all the land of the Hittites . . .

   This is certainly a great area of land. Was there ever a time when
Israel actually possessed all of this land? And if it didn't, doesn't
this force us to conclude that God still owes Israel the land?

   We can see that the answer to this question has enormous
consequences. Israel today does not possess the land all the way to the
Euphrates river. Thus, if the Israelis are still to possess this land,
it can be concluded that Israel of today still has a glorious future,
for God is always faithful to His promises. On the other hand, if the
Bible clearly teaches that God has fully kept His promise to Israel,
then we must look for an entirely different solution to the future of
modern Israel. Wonderfully, we need not speculate whether God has fully
kept His promise to Israel concerning the land. In Joshua 2l:43?84?345
the Bible declares:

   And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give
unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein. And the
Lord gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto
their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before
them; the Lord delivered all their enemies into their hand. There
failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the
house of Israel; all came to pass.

   In this lucid statement God is declaring in no uncertain terms that
He indeed had given to Israel all the land that He had promised to
their fathers. Indeed this is an emphatic declaration that the promise
to Abraham concerning the gift of the land to his seed has been
fulfilled.

   But how can this statement be made in Joshua 2l? There is no
Biblical evidence that at the time Joshua was speaking to Israel they
actually possessed the land of the Hittites. The fact is, within the
central parts of the land of Canaan there still existed portions of
land they did not fully possess. For example in Joshua 23:l-5 we read:

   And it came to pass a long time after that the Lord had given rest
unto Israel from all their enemies round about, that Joshua waxed old
and stricken in age. And Joshua called for all Israel, and for their
elders and for their heads, and for their judges, and for their
officers, and said unto them, I am old and stricken in age: And ye have
seen all that the Lord your God hath done unto all these nations
because of you; for the Lord your God is he that hath fought for you.
Behold, I have divided unto you by lot these nations that remain, to be
an inheritance for your tribes, from Jordan, with all the nations that
I have cut off, even unto the great sea westward. And the Lord your
God, he shall expel them from before you, and drive them from out of
your sight; and ye shall possess their land, as the Lord your God hath
promised unto you.

   The language of these verses clearly indicates there was not a full
possession of the land. How then are we to understand Joshua 21 where
God expressly declares He has kept all of His promises concerning the
land?

   God Defines His Own Terms

   The answer to this question must be seen in the fact that God
defines His own terms. Whatever God meant as He promised Abraham in
Genesis 12:7 or Genesis 15:18-21 that his seed would be given the land
of Canaan, in Joshua 21 God is flatly declaring that those promises
have been fulfilled. No matter how we might argue, the fact stands that
God has fulfilled His promises. God who made the promise is certainly
qualified to know when the promise (as God had intended it) had been
fulfilled.

   We must therefore surrender our personal judgment or any personal
speculation to the clearcut statement of Joshua 21. Indeed, God has
more to say in His Word concerning His faithfulness with regard to the
promise of the land.

   While the book of Joshua was written very soon after Israel entered
the land of Canaan, one of the last books of the Old Testament is that
of Nehemiah. It was written almost one thousand years after Joshua. And
it is in this book that we read again that God has been entirely
faithful to His promises concerning the land.

   Ezra, the holy priest of God, is praying to God. Under the in-
spiration of the Holy Spirit he declares in Nehemiah 9:7-8:

   Thou art the Lord the God, who didst choose Abram, and broughtest
him forth out of Ur of the Chaldees, and gavest him the name of
Abraham; And foundest his heart faithful before thee, and madest a
covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the
Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Jebusites, and the Girgashites,
to give it, I say, to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou
art righteous:...

   Note carefully that these verses speak of God's promise to Abraham
that God would give to His seed the land of Canaan. No reference is
made to the land having been given to Abraham himself. Thus, in these
verses, God has in view only the promises made as recorded in Genesis
l2:6-7, Genesis l5:l8-2l, and Genesis 24:7.

   Note the declaration that God "hast performed thy words." God is
declaring that He has faithfully kept His commitments and promises to
national Israel.

   Note, too, that the land of the Hittites is named. We saw both in
Genesis 15:18-21 and in Joshua 1:4 that God had promised to the seed of
Abraham the land of the Hittites which was located far to the north of
present day Israel. But in this declaration of Nehemiah 9:7-8, God
assures us that His promise to give the land of the Hittites to the
seed of Abraham has been fulfilled. He has performed His Words. Thus we
need speculate no longer as to whether Israel at any time possessed the
land so far north that even the land of the Hittites was included. No
doubt of any kind should remain in our minds. God has been entirely
faithful in giving national Israel all of the land He had ever promised
them. We must remember, of course, that in His promise to Abraham, God
did not guarantee continuous possession of the land. God reiterated
many times in His Word that if Israel did not remain faithful, it would
be destroyed. Thus, the ten tribes were destroyed in 722 B.C. by the
Assyrians. In 587 B.C. Judah and Benjamin and the remnants from the ten
tribes were destroyed or taken captive by the Babylonians. Again in
A.D. 70 Jerusalem was thoroughly devastated by the Roman, Titus.
Following this destruction Israel did not again possess the land until
A.D. 1948. We can't help but wonder about the outcome of its present
possession of the land. As a nation, Israel remains rebellious toward
God, not accepting Jesus as its Messiah. Will God again destroy it from
the land? We will find the Biblical answer to this question later in
this study.

   But as far as God's unconditional promise to the ancient patriarch
Abram, that his seed would possess the land, we have seen that that
promise has been faithfully kept.

   Following the Scriptures step by step, everything has fit together
very neatly, bringing us to the conclusion that God has fulfilled His
promises to national Israel concerning the land of Canaan.

   But Have We Looked at Everything Relating to the Land of Israel?

   But have we looked at everything in the Bible concerning the land
and Israel? Don't we read, for example, in Ezekiel 37:2l-22:

   And say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I will take the
children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and
will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land: And
I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel;
and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two
nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at
all:...

   Don't these verses speak of a future gathering of the nation of
Israel to their land? Doesn't Ezekiel 37:25 continue, "And they shall
dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your
fathers have dwelt?" What are we to do with these verses? Are they
perhaps to be looked upon as modifiers of some kind insofar as the
language of Joshua 2l and Nehemiah 9 is con- cerned? Surely, whenever
we come to any conclusion concerning Bible truth we should be ready to
examine that conclusion in the light of anything and everything in the
Bible that might relate to that conclusion.

   Moreover, the conclusion we have made thus far concerning na- tional
Israel is ominous. If it is correct, then Israel's present occupation
of the land is not a fulfillment of prophecy. Then, too, we would not
expect present day Israel to have any expanded blessing in the land.
Therefore, we must not hesitate to look at any Bible statements that
might affect our conclusion that God has fulfilled all of His promises
to national Israel concerning the land. Thus, we must look at Ezekiel
37 and other similar passages very carefully.

   Before we look at Ezekiel 37 and its impact upon our present
conclusions concerning national Israel we should look again at the
promises made to Abraham. For we shall discover that there is an
intimate relationship between the promise made to Abraham that he
himself would be given the land, and the promises set forth in such
passages as Ezekiel 37.

   CHAPTER 2 - GOD'S PROMISE TO ABRAHAM PERSONALLY

   In the first chapter of our study we have seen that God made certain
promises to the seed of Abraham, national Israel, but Abraham himself
was not included in these promises. We have also seen that God declares
that He has faithfully kept these promises. But do you recall that
there was a second group of promises? These consisted of promises made
to Abraham concerning the land which included Abraham as the possessor
as well as his seed. We have not examined these promises thus far. But
we should examine them now with great care. For in understanding these
promises we will also be able to understand the other commitments, such
as Ezekiel 37:2l-25, which relate to the land.

   In Genesis l3:l4-l7, at the time Lot decided to dwell in the rich
Jordan Valley, God is making a promise to Abraham concerning the land
of Canaan.

   And the Lord said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him,
Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art
northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward: For all the land
which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever. And
I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can
number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered.
Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of
it; for I will give it unto thee.

   Note that in this promise God is apparently promising the literal
material land of Canaan. The promise is apparently without any
conditions which must first be satisfied by those who are to receive
the land. Note, also, that the seed of Abraham are to be those to whom
the land is to be given.

   Thus far, the promise is identical to that which we previously
studied which is recorded in Genesis 12:7, Genesis l5:l8-2l, and
Genesis 24:7. But as we look at Genesis l3:l4-l7 more closely, we will
discover two very important promises not included in the previous
verses we studied.

   Genesis l3:l5 declares "to thee will I give it..." This is a solemn
commitment on God's part that Abraham himself would possess the land.
It is a striking addition unrelated to the promises made in Genesis
12:7, Genesis 15:18-21, and Genesis 24:7, which we had studied in
Chapter 1. We will look at the significance of this statement
presently. But let us first see the other important promise that was
added.

   Abraham is Given the Land Forever

   The other promise which we find in these verses is that the land was
given to Abraham and his seed forever. Verse l5 declares, to thee will
I give it, and to thy seed forever. God has now introduced a time
factor that was not found in the Genesis l2:7, Genesis l5:l8-2l or
Genesis 24:7 accounts. And the time factor is exceedingly significant
inasmuch as it extends all the way into eternity. Forever, the Hebrew
word olam, is the word God uses when speaking of the everlasting nature
of God. It is a word that goes through the barrier of time all the way
into eternity.* Thus, we see that indeed we are now studying an
entirely dif- ferent kind of promise concerning the land than that
recorded in Genesis l2:7, Genesis l5:l8-2l, and Genesis 24:7. It is so
different that we almost wonder if we have read it accurately. But when
we read Genesis l7 we find the promises of Genesis l3 repeated and
re-emphasized. In Genesis l7 God has recorded the moment when Abraham
officially became the head of the nation of Israel. For it is in this
chapter that we read of ninety-nine-year old Abraham being circumcised.
Circumcision was the sign that for the following 2000 years would mark
the nation of Israel as being a separate nation from the nations of the
world.

   We read in Genesis l7:8:

   And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land
wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting
possession; and I will be their God.

   -----------------------------

   *The Hebrew word olam is found more than 400 times in the Old
Testament. Its usual translation is that of for ever or everlasting. In
a few places it is translated to signify the extremity of time. Thus,
occasionally it is translated old or ancient. However, in those verses
where olam is used in connection with God's covenant promises to
Abraham the context clearly dictates that olam must be translated for
ever or as everlasting. This is so because Abraham can receive his
inheritance only after he has been resurrected and we shall see later
in our study that the resurrection is to take place at the end of the
world. Later, we shall also see that Romans 4 is a commentary on these
verses. And Romans 4 clearly points us to eternity rather than the
physical land of Canaan which will be destroyed the last day of this
present world's existence.

   Note that all of the promises of Genesis 13 are included in this
statement. He as well as his seed are to be the possessors of the land.
The land would be an everlasting possession.

   In His Lifetime Abraham Never Possessed the Land

   However, one new word has been introduced. We read, the land wherein
thou art a stranger. The word stranger is a significant word. For it
introduces us to the fact that during Abraham's lifetime on this earth
he dwelt as a stranger in the land of Canaan. He never did possess any
of the land of Canaan. When his wife Sarah died, Abraham had to
purchase a cave from the sons of Heth so that he might have a burial
place for Sarah (Genesis 23). Moreover, in Hebrews ll the Bible gives
us further information concerning the fact that Abraham dwelt as a
stranger in the land of Canaan. There we read:

   By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he
should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not
knowing whither he went. By faith he sojourned in the land of promise,
as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob,
the heirs with him of the same promise: For he looked for a city which
hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God. (Hebrews 11:8-10)

   These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but
having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced
them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.
(Hebrews ll:l3)

   We are faced, therefore, with the incontestable fact that under no
circumstance was the promise of Genesis l3 or Genesis l7 that Abraham
would possess the land fulfilled in any way during Abraham's lifetime.

   How Can Abraham Possess the Land?

   Now we have a difficult problem. The Bible clearly promised the land
to Abraham, yet it just as clearly teaches that that promise was never
fulfilled insofar as Abraham is concerned. Therefore, it must be
fulfilled at some future time. Does this mean that at some time in the
future Abraham will be resurrected so that he can again live in this
world? Will he have the same experience as did Lazarus whom we read
about in John 11, who was resurrected after he had been dead for four
days?

   But Lazarus was resurrected to live in this present world only for a
brief period of time. He was not resurrected to live forever in this
world for then he would still be living today. Because God promised
Abraham that he would be given the land forever, this implies that once
he was resurrected to inherit the land, he would never die again. So in
order for God to fulfil His promise to Abraham concerning his
everlasting possession of the land, Abraham must be resurrected to live
again on earth, and must be resurrected in such a way and at such a
time that he will live forever on earth.

   We are brought to the inescapable conclusion that the promises
concerning the land given to Abraham in Genesis 13 and Genesis 17
require a time for fulfillment when Abraham will have been resur-
rected. And when he is resurrected he will live forever. This is very
serious, for this means that the fulfillment of this promise cannot be
realized in its final sense until the end of time. For it is only then
that time will be no more and eternity will begin. Where is this line
of reasoning going to take us? We will look at this question in the
next chapter.

   CHAPTER 3-ABRAHAM'S RESURRECTION

   We have been looking rather seriously at the head of national
Israel, a man named Abraham. We have seen that God made two kinds of
promises to him. The first consisted of unconditional promises that the
land of Israel was to be given to the descendants of Abraham, but not
to Abraham himself. The length of time they would possess the land
depended upon their faithfulness in serving the Lord. We saw that these
promises were entirely fulfilled by God. The second kind of promise
related not only to the seed of Abraham but to Abraham himself. He was
to inherit the land himself. And both he and his seed were to inherit
the land forever. We saw that this promise was not fulfilled for
Abraham. As long as he lived he was a pilgrim and a stranger.

   Therefore the certain conclusion we had to come to was that Abraham
must be resurrected at some future time in order to bring this second
kind of promise to fulfilment.

   But how will this be? What does the Bible say about some future
resurrection of Abraham? In fact, what does the Bible say about the
resurrection of anyone who has trusted in the promises of God?

   Perhaps we should let the Bible guide us on this. We read in the
Gospel of John four very significant verses that speak to the timetable
of the resurrection of the believers in Christ. All of these focus on
the last day.

   And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which
he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at
the last day. (John 6:39)

   And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth
the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will
raise him up at the last day. (John 6:40)

   No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw
him: and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:44)

   Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and
I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:54)

   In these four verses God is underscoring and emphasizing not only
that there will be a resurrection, but also that it will be the last
day. Because Abraham was a believer who implicitly trusted God, we
sense that this resurrection of the last day must include him.
Therefore, we want to study these verses very carefully.

   The Resurrection is the Last Day

   As we have noted in each one of these four verses, the timing of
these verses is seen to be the last day. Does this phrase have the same
meaning as the term the latter days or the last days? We know
immediately this cannot be because these latter two terms which use the
plural days relate to the whole New Testament period. Later in our
study we will see this clearly. But the term last day is not the same
as last days. Rather, when we search the Bible for anything that
relates to the phrase the last day, we find that it is found only eight
times in the whole Bible. We should carefully study these eight
occurrences to discover all we can regarding the meaning of the phrase
the last day.

   In addition to the four places we have already examined from John 6,
it is found in:

   Martha saith unto him, I know that he shall rise again in the
resurrection at the last day. (John 11:24)

   He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that
judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in
the last day. (John 12:48)

   In the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried,
saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. (John 7:37)

   Also day by day, from the first day unto the last day, he read in
the book of the law of God. And they kept the feast seven days; and on
the eighth day was a solemn assembly according unto the manner.
(Nehemiah 8:18)

   When we study these eight places to determine what we can con-
cerning the phrase, the last day, we arrive at some very important
conclusions.

   The Last Day Is Not a Long Period of Time

   First of all, we discover that the phrase yhe last day cannot be
referring to a long period of time. Both in John 7:37 and in Nehemiah
8:18 the last day refers to the feast of tabernacles. It was a day -
not a long period of time. This is important because some teach that
the resurrection of believers can take place at various times separated
by a time period as long as 1000 years. This kind of reasoning cannot
hold up in light of the knowledge that the last day is a day like the
last day of the feast of tabernacles.

   Both Old and New Testament Believers Will Be Resurrected The Last Day

   Secondly, we discover that both the Old Testament believers and the
New Testament believers will be raised the last day. That is, there is
one resurrection of all of the saved whether they lived thousands of
years before Christ or whether they lived long after Jesus went to the
cross.

   From the language of John 6 there is no doubt that the New Testament
believers will be resurrected the last day. It is certainly impressive
that God underscores this wonderful event four times in this chapter.
Surely no one who reads the Bible faithfully can miss this significant
teaching.

   But from the language of John 11:24 there is no doubt that the Old
Testament believers will also be resurrected the last day. This can be
known with certainty because John 11 is concerned with Lazarus, the
brother of Mary and Martha, an Israelite who lived and died on the Old
Testament side of the cross. He, like David or Abraham or any other Old
Testament believer, was looking forward to the cross.

   And yet Martha, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, declared
of her brother Lazarus, I know that he shall rise again in the
resurrection of the last day. Thus we are assured that the resurrection
of Lazarus will take place at the last day, which is the same time all
of the New Testament believers arise. Since Abraham, like Lazarus, was
an Old Testament believer, the resurrection of Abraham must also take
place on the last day, at the same time all the New Testament believers
arise.

   The Last Day is Judgment Day

   Thirdly, we discover in looking at these eight verses that the last
day (at which time the resurrection of the believers takes place)
occurs simultaneously with Judgment Day. Verse 48 of John 12 clearly
teaches us this, as it declares concerning the unsaved, the word that I
have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.

   But Judgment Day is at the end of time. It is the event that
immediately precedes the destruction of this universe by fire and the
ushering in of the New Heaven and New Earth. Revelation 6:12-17 teaches
us this in such dramatic fashion.

   And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a
great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and
the moon became as blood; And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth,
even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a
mighty wind. And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled
together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.
And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and
the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every
free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains;
And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the
face of Him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb:
For the great day of His wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

   The great day of God's wrath is Judgment Day. And as these verses
teach, this awful event occurs on the day that the universe is
collapsing and the time keepers, the sun and moon and stars, are no
longer functioning.

   Revelation 20:11,12 also most clearly identifies Judgment Day with
the end of this world.

   And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it, from whose
face the earth and the heaven fled away; and there was found no place
for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and
the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book
of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were
written in the books, according to their works.

   The phrase "from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away"
guides us to understand that at the time God is judging the unsaved of
the world (the spiritually dead who stand before God), the universe as
we now know it will have come to an end. Thus we know that the term
"the last day" is indeed the last day. It is the last day of this
present earth's existence. It is the moment when eternity begins.

   These truths regarding the resurrection of the last day, therefore,
teach us that the resurrection of Abraham, at which time he is to
inherit the land, must be at the end of time. It must be on the last
day of this earth's existence, the day that Christ comes on the clouds
of glory to judge the world.

   Both Believers and Unbelievers are Resurrected the Last Day

   And it must be the time when not only the believers are resur-
rected but also the unbelievers. For the unbelievers cannot be judged
until they have been resurrected. We are not surprised, therefore, to
read of one resurrection of both the saved and the unsaved.

   Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that
are in the graves shall hear his voice. And shall come forth; they that
have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done
evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. (John 5:28,29)

   Please note in these verses that the hour is coming. It does not
speak of hours (plural). Clearly there is one time, the last day, when
all mankind is resurrected.

   Neither are we surprised, therefore, to read concerning the coming
of our Lord Jesus Christ that:

   Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be
darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall
fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:...
(Matthew 24:29)

   The last day of this world's existence begins like any other 24-hour
day. But then Christ returns on the clouds of glory and all of the
celestial bodies (the sun, the moon, the stars) that were created to
measure time (Genesis l:l4) are all taken out of existence. Time is no
more, for there exists no means to measure time. Time has ended and
only eternity exists. Such is the last day, when Abraham will be
resurrected to enjoy the completion of the promises of Genesis 13 and
Genesis 17.

   We have spent considerable time trying to understand the im-
plications of the promise to Abraham that he, himself, would in- herit
the land of Canaan. We have seen that this can have its fulfillment
only at the end of this world when Abraham and all believers will be
resurrected.

   How Can Abraham Inherit the Earth if it is to be Destroyed?

   But this raises a very difficult question. In II Peter 3, God
declares that this earth, this universe, is going to be destroyed by
fire. In Revelation 6:12-14 God describes the end of the world as
follows:

   And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, there was a
great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and
the moon became as blood; And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth,
even as a fig tree casteth her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a
mighty wind. And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled
together; and every mountain and island were moved out of their places.

   The question that we must face, therefore, is concerned with the
puzzle: How can Abraham inherit the land of Canaan at a time when this
whole earth is destroyed? Surely Genesis 17:8 specifically declared:

   And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land
wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting
possession; and I will be their God.

   Have we been going down a blind alley? Is it possible that in spite
of all we have learned regarding the last day, our conclusion that it
is the end of time is in error?

   Wonderfully, the Bible comes to our rescue. Remember we are always
to interpret the Bible by the Bible. Therefore, the Bible is its own
dictionary. It defines its own words. Specifically, we want to look
more intently at this phrase of Genesis 17:8, "the land of Canaan."
This is the land that Abraham as well as his seed is to inherit
eternally. In this verse what does the Bible mean by the phrase "the
land of Canaan?"

   There are, of course, many passages in the Bible that point to a
very physical land of Canaan. It has existed in this world and does
exist right to the very present day. But certainly it will not exist
after the last day. For then it too will be destroyed by fire. So the
question still remains, how can Abraham inhabit the land of Canaan if
he cannot come into his inheritance until Judgment Day, when the
physical, material land of Canaan is destroyed?

   The New Testament Comes to our Rescue

   In Romans 4 we will find our answer. In fact, we will find that
Romans 4 is a commentary on all of Genesis 17. We will presently
develop this relationship in greater depth because only by doing so
will we truly understand all of the other passages, like Ezekiel
37:20-25, which speak of the land. But now we will look only at the
phrase, "the land of Canaan."

   In Romans 4:13 God declares:

   For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to
Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness
of faith.

   Please note that this verse speaks of a promise that was made to the
seed of Abraham as well as to Abraham himself. It therefore is directly
parallel to what we read in Genesis 17 where an inheritance is promised
to Abraham himself, and to his seed.

   The Land of Canaan Equals the Whole World

   Note, too, that it speaks of being heir to a piece of land. No, it
doesn't use the phrase "the land of Canaan", as we read in Genesis
17:8. Rather it uses the phrase "the world."* In other words, God is
making the Old Testament phrase "the land of Canaan" equivalent to the
whole world. God is exercising His own divine prerogative to define
words.

   When Abraham in Genesis 13:14 was told by God to "Lift up now thine
eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward,
and eastward and westward: For all the land which thou seest to thee I
will give it and to thy seed forever", by eyes of faith he was seeing
the "whole world."

   *Some would contend that the word "world" as it is used in Romans
4:13 is speaking of the world of national Israel. Not only does such an
idea contradict the rest of Romans 4, but it must be realized that the
word "world" (Greek: kosmos) is never used in the Bible of an
individual nation.

   Can you begin to sense that we have come to an exceptionally grand
truth when we understand the concept that Abraham was to inherit the
whole world?

   Remember that the last day is Judgment Day. That is, it is the day
when this present world will have come to an end. The unsaved are
judged and removed into Hell. This present world is destroyed and God
creates a new universe called "new heavens and a new earth." Tying
together the two phrases "the last day" and "the world",therefore,
brings us to the dramatic and wonderful truth that it isn't this
present world with all of its sin and corruption that Abraham would
inherit. It is the new earth, the new universe, that God will create
out of the ashes of this present earth. It is the earth Jesus spoke of
in Matthew 5 as He declared, the meek shall inherit the earth.

   Now we can see why God promises in Genesis 13:15 that Abraham would
be given the land forever. So, too, in Genesis 17:8 he is told that the
land of Canaan would be an everlasting possession. The resurrection of
Abraham and the beginning of the new heavens and the new earth both
have their place at the end of time when only eternity remains. It is
in this new earth, this new universe, that Abraham will be the
possessor of the land forever.

   But who then are the seed of Abraham spoken of in Genesis 13 and
Genesis 17? How do these chapters with their promises of a seed relate
to the Biblical truth that Abraham will be the inheritor of the new
heaven and the new earth? We will examine this exceedingly important
question as we continue our study.

   CHAPTER 4 - THE SEED OF ABRAHAM

   Thus far we have seen that in Genesis we read God's promise to
Abraham that he would be the inheritor of the land of Canaan forever.
Based upon the Biblical evidence, we have concluded that this promise
will be fulfilled in its ultimate sense at the resurrection of the last
day, when this present sin-cursed earth has been replaced by the new
heavens and new earth. Later in our study we shall see that this
promise begins to have fulfillment from the time that we are saved.

   But now other questions must be faced. The same promise that was
made to Abraham concerning the land was also made to his seed. Who are
his seed? Is his seed limited to national Israel? If his seed is not
national Israel, who is it? We cannot be satisfied with our conclusions
concerning Abraham and the new heaven and new earth until we know how
his seed fits into the whole picture. Let us begin to answer these
questions by searching the Bible for information concerning the seed of
Abraham.

   As we saw earlier in our study, the first record of the promise God
made to Abraham concerning the land which would be in- herited by
Abraham and his seed forever is found in Genesis 13:14,15. There God
gives us a clue concerning the multitudinous nature of the seed. Verses
15 and 16 of Genesis 13 record:

   For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to
thy seed for ever. And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth:
so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed
also be numbered.

   This promise is reinforced by the language of Genesis 28:13-15.

   And, behold, the Lord stood above it, and said, I am the Lord God of
Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest,
to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; And thy seed shall be as the
dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the
east, and to the north and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed
shall all the families of the earth be blessed. And, behold, I am with
thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will
bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I
have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

   In Genesis 15 the Bible records that Abraham received a vision from
God. In it God showed him that his seed would be as the stars of
heaven. Genesis 15:5-7 declares:

   And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven,
and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto
him, So shall thy seed be. And he believed in the Lord; and he counted
it to him for righteousness. And he said unto him, I am the Lord that
brought thee out of Ur of the Chaldees, to give thee this land to
inherit it.

   By carefully examining these verses we can understand, therefore,
that God has purposed that the seed of Abraham would be exceedingly
numerous. But we still haven't learned who his seed was to be. Was it
limited to the blood descendants of Abraham? Or is it to include others?

   Abraham's Seed Is to Include People from Many Nations

   It is in Genesis 17:2-8 that we begin to find the solution to these
questions. In this passage God records:

   And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply
thee exceedingly. And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him,
saying, As for me, behold my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a
father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called
Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have
I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make
nations of thee and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish
my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their
generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to
thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after
thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for
an everlasting possession; and I will be their God.

   Please note that these verses are those which we studied earler.
They show us that the land was promised not only to Abraham's seed
forever but also to Abraham himself.

   But additionally, these verses give us a valuable clue concerning
the nature of Abraham's seed who are to be the inheritors of the land.
Note verse 4: thou shalt be a father of many nations. Note verse 5: for
a father of many nations have I made thee. Note verse 6: I will make
nations come from thee. Three times in these few verses God is
declaring that Abraham's seed would include people from many nations.
And it is this seed that would inherit the land forever. Therefore, we
can immediately understand that the seed that God has in view is not
limited to national Israel.

   The Descendants of Ishmael or Esau - Are They the Seed?

   But how can this be? How can Abraham become the progenitor of many
nations? True, Abraham fathered Ishmael by Hagar. And Ishmael became
the head of the Arab nations of today. Additionally, the seed of
Abraham's grandson, Esau, also became a separate people. One of Esau's
three wives was a daughter of Ishmael (Genesis 36:3). Thus his
descendants became a part of Ishmael's descendants, so that together
they became the progenitors of the present Arab nations.

   Nevertheless we know that it was not through Ishmael and Esau that
God would fulfill His promise to Abraham that he would be the father of
a multitude of nations. Let us see how we can know this. Notice that in
these verses of Genesis God is repeatedly speaking of a covenant. Verse
2 declares: I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will
multiply thee exceedingly. In verse 4 we read: behold, my covenant is
with thee, and thou shalt be the father of a multitude of nations.
Verse 7 adds: And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and
thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant,
to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

   In verse 7 God is speaking of an everlasting covenant. Verse 8,
which follows, identifies this everlasting covenant with the land that
was to be given to Abraham and his seed for an everlasting possession.

   And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land
wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting
possession; and I will be their God.

   Thus we already know that this everlasting covenant which promises
Abraham a seed that would come from a multitude of nations, a seed
which would inherit the land forever, could not have reference to the
descendants of Ishmael and Esau. The descendants of Ishmael and Esau
became political nations. But nowhere in the Bible is any political
nation promised the land forever. That, of course, would be an
impossibility because all political nations will cease to exist at the
end of time.

   Remember earlier in our study we found that Romans 4:13, which is a
commentary on Genesis 17, indicates that the land is the world.
Therefore, we saw that it is in the new heaven and new earth that the
promise of the land forever his its fulfillment. This assures us that
the political seed of Abraham, the Arab nations of whom Ishmael and
Esau are progenitors, cannot be the seed in question.

   Moreover, Genesis 17 itself shows that Ishmael and his descen- dants
are not in view when God promises that Abraham would father many
nations. At the time God is speaking to Abraham in Genesis 17 he is
childless by his wife Sarah. Therefore, he momentarily believes these
promises will be fulfilled by Ishmael whom he had fathered some years
earlier by Sarah's maid, Hagar.

   But God declares to Abraham in Genesis 17:20, 21:

   And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him,
and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve
princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation. But my
covenant will I establish with Isaac, which Sarah shall bear unto thee
at this set time in the next year.

   These verses clearly indicate that God has in view a seed that would
come through Isaac rather than Ishmael. Therefore, we are very
confident that God's promise to Abraham that he would be the progenitor
of many nations did not have in view the descendants of Ishmael or Esau.

   Who then are these nations that we read about in Genesis 17:4-6 that
Abraham is to father? In Genesis 17:21 God speaks of a covenant He
would establish with Isaac, the son of Abraham by Sarah. This covenant
is brought to our attention in a number of places in Genesis 17. Is it
a clue that helps us to identify the seed of Abraham are who are to
inherit the land with Abraham? In Genesis 17:10-13 God speaks of this
covenant which He has made with Abraham and his seed:

   This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy
seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye
shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of
the covenant betwixt me and you. And he that is eight days old shall be
circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is
born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not
of thy seed. He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with
money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your
flesh for an everlasting covenant.

   Circumcision, the token or sign of the covenant God has made, is to
be administered not only to Abraham, but also to his servants who were
not in his blood line. That helps to complicate matters. Are they to be
the seed that would bring into existence the many nations? We do need
help to determine precisely what God means when He speaks of Abraham
fathering a multitude of nations.

   Romans 4 Shows Us how We Are to Understand Genesis 17

   Where shall we look for more information to help us? Remember
earlier in our study we saw that Romans 4 was quite related to Genesis
17. Let us look at that chapter again and we will find that it is
indeed a marvelous commentary on Genesis 17.

   By studying Romans 4 we will find that in Genesis 17 God is
outlining His salvation plan that is to be available to the whole
world. We will see that the everlasting covenant God made with Abraham
and his seed is the covenant of redemption. It is an everlasting
covenant because God's salvation plan is everlasting. Genesis 17 speaks
of Abraham being the father of a multitude of nations because God has
in view the salvation of people from every nation of the world. In
other words, by following the Biblical principle of letting the Bible
interpret the Bible we shall discover that Genesis 17 is not involved
with national Israel at all. Rather it is totally focused on the Lord
Jesus Christ and the wonderful salvation He provides through His shed
blood.

   Let us look at Romans 4 to see the intimate relationship it bears to
Genesis 17.

   We read in Romans 4:9-13:

   Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the
uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for
righteousness. How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision,
or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. And
he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of
the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the
father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that
righteousness might be imputed unto them also: And the father of
circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also
walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had
being yet uncircumcised. For the promise, that he should be the heir of
the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but
through the righteousness of faith.

   Please note that these verses identify precisely with the verses
which we have been studying in Genesis 17. They speak of Abraham. They
speak of the sign of circumcision. And they speak of Abraham being the
father of the circumcision as well as the father of all them that
believe, which would include people from every nation.

   The Seed of Abraham Includes All Who Believe in Christ as Savior

   This stupendous information suddenly shifts our attention from the
normal blood relationship by which we think of seed or descendants to
another kind of descent altogether. Only national Israel, which is
called the circumcision in Romans 4:9-12, are the blood descendants of
Abraham. But God, in Romans 4, is speaking of all them that believe as
the seed of Abraham.

   But this phrase "all them that believe" identifies with salvation.
It relates to those from every nation who have become saved by the
blood of Christ. It relates to a vast company of people coming from
every nation into the body of Christ. No wonder, then, that Romans 4:13
speaks of "the righteousness of faith." The righteousness we receive in
salvation is a gift of God that is given to us by God's grace on the
merits of Christ's shed blood. It is imputed to those who have trusted
in Christ as Lord and Savior. Thus in Romans 4 God is instructing us
that the promises of Genesis 17 relate to salvation in the Lord Jesus
Christ.

   That salvation is indeed in view is shown by verses 2-8 of Romans 4
which introduce us to this disclosure concerning the seed of Abraham:

   For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory;
but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God,
and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh
is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that
worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his
faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the
blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without
works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and
whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not
impute sin.

   The covering of sins, the forgiving of iniquities, has to do
altogether with salvation. And because these verses in Romans 4 are a
commentary on the statements of Genesis 17, we know that salvation is
the target of these verses in Genesis that indicate Abraham was to
father many nations.

   God reassures us that this is so as we find further in Romans
4:16-24:

   Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the
promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the
law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the
father of us all. [As it is written, I have made thee a father of many
nations,] before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the
dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. Who
against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many
nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be. And
being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when
he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's
womb: He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was
strong in faith, giving glory to God; And being fully persuaded that,
what he had promised, he was able also to perform. And therefore it was
imputed to him for righteousness. Now it was not written for his sake
alone, that it was imputed to him; But for us also, to whom it shall be
imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the
dead, . . .

   These verses also relate entirely to Genesis 17. The phrase, "I have
made thee a father of many nations", ties back to Genesis 17:4, 5.
Romans 4:18-20, which speaks of Sarah's dead womb, relates back to
Genesis 17:19 and 21. And we see from the language of Romans 4:23-25
that the entire passage relates to all who have believed on the Lord
Jesus Christ.

   Indeed Romans 4 has truly guided us down a path that opens up our
whole understanding concerning Genesis 17. In Genesis 17 God is not
making promises to national Israel concerning the physical land of
Canaan. Rather He is making promises concerning salvation. This
salvation would come to people from every political nation including
national Israel.

   That salvation for all who believe in Christ was in view when God
made these promises to Abraham is further seen in Romans 4:23-25:

   Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to
him; But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him
that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who was delivered for our
offences, and was raised again for our justification.

   God is declaring in these verses that the promise of salvation was
given not only to Abraham but to all of us who believe in Christ.

   What a grand promise God made to Abraham in Genesis! It was the
whole plan of salvation that God had in view.

   The Sign of the Covenant Is Circumcision

   No wonder, therefore, that the sign of the covenant was
circumcision. Circumcision, the cutting away of the foreskin, involved
the shedding of blood. And it was Christ's blood that was shed that we
might receive the blessings of the covenant.

   Later on, God declared to Israel "circumcise the foreskin of your
heart" (Deuteronomy 10:16). Physical circumcision was pointing to a
spiritual relationship with God that could be accomplished only by
Christ being cut off for us. That is, He must take upon Himself our
sins and be punished by God as payment for our sins. The punishment in
view required that He endure Hell for our sins. He must be cut off from
God. Do you recall His cry, "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken
Me?" That is the essence of Hell.

   Moreover physical circumcision involved the male reproductive organ.
Thus in a beautiful way it was pointing to the seed who would come from
the loins of Abraham who in turn would be the head of a vast company of
believers. That seed is Christ who was a blood descendant of Abraham
and who became the head of a vast company of believers from every
nation. It was in Christ that Abraham became the father of a multitude
of nations.

   We can see now why God promised Abraham in Genesis 17 that his seed
would inherit the land forever. Earlier in our study we saw that the
land was the New Heaven and New Earth. It is an eternal land that all
believers in the Lord Jesus Christ will possess. We already possess
that land in a real sense from the moment that we are saved, for we
become citizens of the kingdom of God. The New Heaven and New Earth is
the place where the kingdom of God comes to final fulfillment. But
until the end of time the kingdom of God has its homeland in heaven.
The New Heaven and New Earth is an extension of Heaven, for Heaven is
where God is. Even as God is presently in Heaven so He will be with us
forever in the New Heaven and Earth. Thus the land God speaks of in
Genesis 17 is an integral part of God's salvation plan.

   Galatians 3 Helps us Understand God's Promises to Abraham

   Other passages in the Bible also develop the truths we are learning
from Romans 4 as it explains Genesis 17. For example in Galatians 3:7-9
God declares:

   Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the
children of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would
justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto
Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. So then they
which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

   Wonderfully, in these verses the Bible reinforces the truths we have
already discovered. The Scripture, that is, the Old Testament,
anticipated that the children of Abraham would include the heathen, the
Gentiles who would believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.

   This marvelous promise would find its fulfillment through Christ, as
verse 16 of Galations 3 declares:

   Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not,
And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is
Christ.

   In the first instance, therefore, Christ is the seed of Abraham who
is to inherit the world, who is in view when God made promises to
Abraham concerning his seed. But because Christ became the head of a
vast company of believers from every nation, God then states in
Galations 3:26-29:

   For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as
many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There
is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is
neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye
be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the
promise.

   How marvelously everything is beginning to fit together. God had
given one kind of a promise to national Israel whereby it (not Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob) received the physical land of Israel. But He made a
far greater and more wonderful promise to the whole world as He
promised that all who would believe in the Lord Jesus Christ would be
the seed of Abraham who would inherit the land (the world) forever.

   Some Passages Have a Double Fulfillment

   We have carefully looked at Genesis 12:6-7, Genesis 15:18-21, and
Genesis 24:7 and saw that these passages relate very distinctly to
national Israel. On the other hand we saw that Genesis 13:14-17 and
Genesis 17 clearly relate to our salvation which finds its ultimate
fulfillment in the New Heaven and New Earth.

   But before we leave these promises found in Genesis we must
recognize that there are passages wherein both national Israel and
God's salvation plan may be in view. We should look at each of these
passages for in so doing we will see even more clearly the distinction
between God's promises to national Israel and those that are concerned
with God's salvation plan. We will also see afresh that insofar as
these promises apply to national Israel they have been altogether
fulfilled.

   The first verses we should look at are Genesis 12:2-3. There God is
speaking to Abraham instructing him to leave his homeland, Ur of the
Chaldees, and go to a land God would show him. At the same time God
makes promises to Abraham:

   And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and
make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless
thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families
of the earth be blessed.

   There are three important promises in these verses which lead us to
wonder whether they could possibly relate both to national Israel and
to God's salvation plan. These promises are:

   1) I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth
thee.

   2) In thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

   3) I will make of thee a great nation.

   The first promise we should look at is, I will bless them that bless
thee, and curse him that curseth thee. Does this promise relate in any
sense to national Israel? When we study the experiences of Israel we
find no indication of this promise being applied to national Israel.
Israel was badly treated by many nations - Egypt, Canaan, Moab,
Assyria, and Babylon. All of these nations continued to exist after
this mistreatment of Israel, sometimes with great glory. For example,
in 70 A.D. Israel was destroyed by Rome. Yet Rome continued as a great
nation for hundreds of years after this destruction of Israel.

   This promise is found only in two other places in the Bible. The
first is in Genesis 27:29 where we read of Isaac pronouncing a blessing
on his son Jacob. He declares:

   Let people serve thee, and nations bow down to thee: be lord over
thy brethren, and let thy mother's sons bow down to thee: cursed be
every one that curseth thee, and blessed be he that blesseth thee.

   The phrase, "be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother's sons
bow down to thee" points us to the Lord Jesus Christ. He is the One
believers bow down to. He is the One who is Lord. Thus we can know that
this promise is directed to those who have become followers of Christ,
who have become citizens of God's Kingdom - the Israel of God. They are
the nation wherein God will bless those who bless them.

   The second and only other place this promise is found is in Numbers
24:9. Wicked Balaam has been employed by the nation of Moab to curse
Israel. But God would not permit this to happen. Repeatedly, as Balaam
spoke, blessings flowed from his mouth rather than curses. In verses
7-9 Balaam prophesies:

   He shall pour the water out of his buckets, and his seed shall be in
many waters, and his king shall be higher than Agag, and his kingdom
shall be exalted. God brought him forth out of Egypt; he hath as it
were the strength of an unicorn: he shall eat up the nations of his
enemies, and shall break their bones, and pierce them through with his
arrows. He couched, he lay down as a lion, and as a great lion: who
shall stir him up? Blessed is he that blesseth thee, and cursed is he
that curseth thee.

   A careful examination of these verses show that Christ is in view.
He is the One who poured out the waters (the Gospel, John 14:4) so that
His seed (the believers) are in many waters (the nations of the world,
Revelation 17:1). He is the One whose Kingdom is exalted. He is the One
who was called out of Egypt (Matthew 2:15). In Numbers 24:17 Balaam
continues the prophecy and speaks even more plainly of the coming
Christ as he prophesies:

   I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh:
there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of
Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the
children of Sheth.

   Christ is the Star, the day star that arises in our hearts (2 Peter
1:19), the bright and morning star Revelation 22:16). Christ is the
Sceptre because He is the One who rules as King of kings and Lord of
lords. Indeed, the One whom God has in view as He declares, "Blessed is
he that blesses Thee, and cursed is he that curseth Thee" can be only
Christ Himself.

   We have discovered, therefore, that the promise we are looking at in
Genesis 12:3 does not apply to national Israel. Rather it applies to
Christ and His Kingdom of believers in Him. Those who bless Christ are
the citizens of His Kingdom, those who are coming to salvation. They in
turn receive the blessing of God because they have become saved. Those
who curse Christ and His Kingdom are the unsaved of the world who are
under the dominion of Satan. Unless they become saved, they will remain
under the curse of God forevermore.

   That this promise relates to believers in Christ is also seen when
we look at a second promise in Genesis 12:2-3. In it God declares "in
thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." National Israel is in
view only in the sense that they produced the Christ. But it is Christ
Himself who brings blessing to all families of the earth. These
blessings flow through the nation of believers who bring the Gospel to
the world. Christ and His children are the seed of Abraham who bring
blessing to the world. Thus, our conclusion that this second promise
relates to God's salvation plan agrees entirely with the conclusion we
came to concerning the first promise.

   This means that the third promise found in Genesis 12:2-3 must also
relate to God's salvation plan. Remember that in this promise God
declared that He would make of Abraham a great nation. The great nation
that God made of Abraham is the nation of believers that is found
throughout the world. While it is true that national Israel became a
great nation, this is not the focus of Genesis 12:2-3. Only God's
salvation plan and the Israel of God can be in view.

   In summary, then, while Genesis 12:2-3 might have incidental
reference to national Israel, its first and chief focus is on God's
salvation plan wherein God will have a people saved by the blood of
Christ.

   We should now look at a second passage wherein a promise is made
that might relate to national Israel. It also was made to Abraham and
is recorded in Genesis 15:5. There we read:

   And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven,
and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto
him, So shall thy seed be.

   This promise was made also to Abraham. In it God is promising that
Abraham's seed would be as the stars of the heaven. We will see that it
may have a two-fold fulfillment. In Deuteronomy 1:10 Moses is speaking
to ancient Israel in the wilderness. He declared to them:

   The Lord your God hath multiplied you, and, behold, ye are this day
as the stars of heaven for multitude.

   Thus God is assuring us that the promise of Genesis 15:5 insofar as
national Israel is concerned has been fulfilled. But this reference to
the seed of Abraham becoming as the stars of Heaven for multitude also
points to the eternal seed who are believers in Christ. This can be
seen by the context in which Genesis 15:5 is found. Verse 7 states:

   And he said unto him, I am the Lord that brought thee out of Ur of
the Chaldees, to give thee this land to inherit it.

   Because this statement speaks of Abraham inheriting the land we know
that God can be pointing only to God's salvation plan which finds its
ultimate fulfillment in the New Heaven and New Earth. As we saw earlier
in our study, Abraham can inherit the land only after he has been
resurrected and his resurrection can only occur at the end of time.

   That the phrase "stars of the heaven" can refer to the believers in
Christ, is clearly seen in the declaration of Hebrews 11:12 where we
read:

   Therefore sprang there even of one, and him as good as dead, so many
as the stars of the sky in multitude, and as the sand which is by the
sea shore innumerable.

   The context of Hebrews 11 is a listing and a focus upon those who
were faithful to God. That is, it is speaking of those who were
believers in God as their Savior. Verse 12 is therefore indicating that
God's promises made in Genesis 15:5, insofar as they relate to God's
salvation plan, are being fulfilled.

   We must conclude therefore that while Genesis 15:5 may have a double
fulfillment because of the reference in verse 7 to Abraham inheriting
the land, the primary focus is on God's salvation plan. Insofar as it
applies to national Israel, it has been completely fulfilled. Insofar
as God's salvation plan is concerned, it is being fulfilled as people
are saved throughout time.

   Genesis 18:18 is another verse we should examine briefly. It reads
as follows:

   Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation,
and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him?

   In this verse we find promises almost identical to two of the
promises we previously looked at in Genesis 12:2-3. Remember, the two
promises: And I will make of thee a great nation; and in thee shall all
families of the earth be blessed.

   When we looked at Genesis 12:2-3 we saw that the primary focus was
on God's salvation program. We can know therefore that Genesis 18:18 is
also focused primarily on the same program. In Gensis 22:17-18 God
expands the same promises introducing a new element as He speaks again
to Abraham. These verses state:

   That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will
multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is
upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies;
And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because
thou hast obeyed my voice.

   The four promises that stand out in these verses are:

   I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven

   as the sand which is upon the sea shore

   thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies

   in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed

   The first promise concerning the stars of heaven could have the same
double fulfillment as in the similar phrase found in Genesis 15:5, and
for the same reasons. Nevertheless, while there is the possibility of
incidental focus on national Israel, the chief focus is on God's
salvation program.

   The phrase "as the sand of the sea shore" also has the same possible
double fulfillment. Let's see why this is so. In I Kings 4:20 we read:

   Judah and Israel were many, as the sand which is by the sea in
multitude, eating and drinking, and making merry.

   This statement proves that insofar as national Israel was concerned,
the promise of Genesis 22:17 has been fulfilled. But in Hosea 1:10 God
promises:

   Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the
sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass,
that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people,
there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God.

   In Hosea 1:10 God is using the phrase "the sand of the sea" in
connection with Israel. But in Romans 9:26 God is explaining why the
Gentiles are beginning to believe in Christ. The believers were not of
the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles . . .

   As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not
my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And it shall come to
pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my
people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.
(Romans 9:25-26)

   Thus God is quoting Hosea 1:10 to prove that it was always God's
plan that the ultimate, eternal Israel (the Israel of God) that God
would produce, would consist of people of all the nations of the world.
And in Hosea 1:10 He speaks of this vast company of believers as"the
sand of the sea."

   Remember, too, when we looked at Hebrews 11:12 we saw that the
believers were "as the sand which is by the sea shore innumerable." In
this verse we also are made to understand that Genesis 22:17-18 is also
pointing to God's salvation plan.

   This is also required by the context of Genesis 22:17-18, especially
as we look at the last promise which states, "in thy seed shall all the
nations of the earth be blessed."

   This last promise is a repeat of Genesis 12:3 and Genesis 18:18. It
is in Christ that all the nations of the earth are blessed. National
Israel is involved only insofar as they are the nation which produced
the Christ. He was of the tribe of Judah and in the flesh a descendant
of David and Abraham.

   But that leaves one other promise in Genesis 22:17-18 that we must
consider: thy seed shall possess the gate of the enemies.

   Thy Seed Shall Possess the Gates of the Enemy

   Nowhere in the Bible do we find this same phrase repeated. However,
it is a phrase that indicated that Israel would have victory over their
enemies. To possess the gate of the city was to control or rule the
city. And God did give national Israel victory after victory over their
enemies. Therefore, we can readily see that this promise was fulfilled
insofar as national Israel may have been concerned.

   But this promise has yet another fulfillment. It is primarily
pointing to God's salvation plan. In Luke 1:71-74 Zacharias is praising
God as he contemplates that the Savior is coming. He joyfully declares:

   That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all
that hate us; To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to
remember his holy covenant. The oath which he sware to our father
Abraham, That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of
the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, . . .

   To be saved from the enemies is the equivalent of possessing the
gate of the enemy. The fact is, Zacharias speaks of the covenant made
with Abraham especially as it relates to the fact that by this covenant
there was to be freedom from the enemies. The only Old Testament
promise he could have in mind is the very one we are considering in
Genesis 22:17. In Luke 1:71-74 God is assuring us that this promise
concerning the possession of the gate of the enemy is fulfilled in
Christ. The enemy who has been vanquished by Christ's shed blood is
Satan.

   We see therefore that Genesis 22:17-18 may relate to some degree to
national Israel. Insofar as it may relate to national Israel, it has
already been fulfilled in every way. But the most important fulfillment
of this promise is in relation to God's salvation plan, and it is being
fulfilled as God saves people from every nation.

   Thy Seed are Given These Countries

   Another statement we should consider before we leave this aspect of
our study is Genesis 26:3-4. There we read:

   Sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee;
for unto thee, and unto thy seed, I will give all these countries, and
I will perform the oath which I sware unto Abraham thy father; And I
will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give
unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the
nations of the earth be blessed; . . .

   This passage records an encounter of Isaac with God's promises.
God's promise to him in verse 3, that he himself would be given these
countries, was of the same nature as God's promise to Abraham in
Genesis 17. Like his father Abraham, Isaac lived as a stranger and
sojourner in the land. The receiving of these countries as a gift did
not occur during his lifetime. Therefore, this promise can be fulfilled
only when Isaac is resurrected. Like the promises made to Abraham in
Genesis 17, it has to do with salvation. Verse 3, therefore, is not
related to national Israel. As God continues to speak to Isaac in verse
4 He makes three promises:

   1) Isaac's seed were to be as the stars of heaven.

   2) Isaac's seed were to be given all these countries.

   3) In Isaac's seed all the nations of the earth were to be blessed.

   The first promise is identical to that given to Abraham in Genesis
22:17. We saw earlier that it could have a double fulfillment - one
relating to national Israel and the other relating to God's salvation
program (the Israel of God). As we saw earlier, any relationship to
national Israel has been completely fulfilled.

   The second promise is couched in language we had not seen before in
these verses. It speaks of the seed of Isaac being given "these
countries." The word "country" is the Hebrew "erets." Normally, it is
translated "earth" or "land." Therefore, even as in verse 3, Isaac and
his seed were promised these countries (these lands), so verse 4
repeats the promise in regard only to the seed of Isaac. That is, the
seed of Isaac are to be given these lands. This promise therefore
parallels the promise found in Genesis 15:18-21 wherein God promised to
Abraham's seed the land of "the Kenites, the Kenizites . . . and the
Jebusites." We saw that that promise was entirely fulfilled for
national Israel. Insofar as this promise of Genesis 26:4 is concerned
with national Israel, it too has been entirely fulfilled.

   But this second promise of Genesis 26:4 is also intimately
associated with God's salvation plan. Christ and His believers are the
seed who are given the lands - that is, the whole world as the New
Heaven and New Earth. This promise, too, therefore has a double
fulfillment.

   The third promise of Genesis 26:4 is similar to the same promise
made to Abraham in Genesis 22:18. National Israel is the seed who
produced the seed, Jesus, in Whom all of the nations of the world are
blessed.

   We learn therefore that Genesis 26:3-4, like some of the other
verses we have examined, could have a double fulfillment in some of its
phrases. For national Israel, which serves as a type or figure of the
Israel of God, these promises have been entirely fulfilled. For the
believers in Christ, who are totally identified with God's salvation
plan, these promises are being fulfilled.

   Jacob's Ladder to Heaven

   We will look at one final passage that is similar to those we have
been considering. It is Genesis 28:13-14 where God speaks to Jacob as
he is fleeing from Esau. Jacob dreams of a ladder that reaches to
Heaven and the angels are ascending and descending on it. God then
promises Jacob in verses 13-14:

   And, behold, the Lord stood above it, and said, I am the Lord God of
Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land whereon thou liest,
to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; And thy seed shall be as the
dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to the west, and to the
east, and to the north, and to the south: and in thee and in thy seed
shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

   Verse 13 is almost identical to the promises made to Abraham in
Genesis 17. The land is to be given to Jacob as well as to his seed.
Inasmuch as Jacob dwelt in the land of Canaan without ownership of the
land, this promise can be fulfilled only after Jacob is resurrected on
the last day. Therefore it relates entirely to God's salvation program.
It will be fulfilled in its entirety in the New Heaven and the New
Earth.

   The promise of verse 14 that "in thee and thy seed shall all the
families of the earth be blessed", of course, relates only to national
Israel in the sense that they produced the Christ through whom all the
nations of the earth are blessed. It, too, therefore is pointing to
God's salvation program.

   The promise in the first half of verse 14 that declared that "thy
seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to
the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south "can be
understood by examining the New Testament commentary on this phrase. In
Luke 13:28-29 we read:

   There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see
Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of
God, and you yourselves thrust out. And they shall come from the east,
and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall
sit down in the kingdom of God.

   In this declaration Jesus is indicating that those who are blood
descendants of national Israel will be cast out of the kingdom (cf.,
Matthew 8:11,12) while there will be those of the four points of the
compass who will be found in the kingdom. Jesus clearly is speaking of
those who will be saved. They will come from every part of the world.

   We can know therefore that Genesis 28:13-14 is not concerned with
national Israel. Like the promises recorded in Genesis 17 these
promises are focused altogether on God's salvation program.

   Angels Ascending and Descending

   In this connection we might briefly look at the angels ascending and
descending on the ladder of which Jacob dreamed in Genesis 28:12. This
same language is used by Jesus in John 1:51:

   And he saith unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Hereafter ye
shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending
upon the Son of man.

   Comparing these two passages we quickly discover that the ladder of
Jacob's dream is the Lord Jesus Christ. But what does it mean that the
angels are ascending and descending on Him? We will understand this
dream only if we realize that both in the Hebrew and in the Greek the
word that is translated "angel" may also be translated "messenger." And
when we understand that it is messengers ascending and descending
rather than angels, then we can know what the teaching of Jacob's dream
as well as Jesus' words to Nathaniel in John 1:51 signify. Those who
believe on the Lord Jesus Christ are the messengers of God to carry the
Gospel message to the world. We ascend into Heaven - that is, we become
a citizen of the kingdom of Heaven - by believing on Christ. In fact,
Ephesians 2:6 speaks of those who have become saved as being seated
with Christ in the heavenlies. We ascend to Heaven on Christ. But
before we can remain eternally in the glorious presence of Christ we
must serve for a time as ambassadors, as messengers of Christ to this
present world. So the messengers descend from Heaven on Christ - that
is, on the authority of Christ - to bring the Gospel message to the
world. Obviously, the messengers do not literally go to Heaven for a
few moments at the time they are saved. God uses this picture only to
show that our citizenship has been changed by salvation, and our
commission to bring the Gospel comes from Christ.

   Can you see then how Genesis 28:13-14 follows? Because the
messengers are sent forth after they are saved, people will be coming
into the body of Christ from every nation of the world. This is the
great and wonderful truth God gave to Jacob as he dreamed. And it is
the glorious truth Jesus is anticipating as He speaks to Nathaniel in
John 1. Indeed, Genesis 28:13-14 can be seen to be a beautiful promise
that finds its fulfillment in our Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ.

   A Brief Summary of What We have Learned Thus Far

   It would be well at this time to summarize what we have learned thus
far. We have learned first of all that God made a promise to national
Israel that its people would be given the physical, material land of
Israel. Abraham himself was not to be included in this promise.

   It would be given to them unconditionally. That is, there were no
requirements they would have to meet to be given the land. They were
not promised they could remain in the land unconditionally. Rather they
were told they would be destroyed from the land if they did not remain
faithful to God. The land itself was to be of such a size that it would
even include the land of the Hittites which was located far to the
north of present day Israel.

   We learned, secondly, that God has been entirely faithful to His
promises. God assures us that Israel was given the land in accord with
all of His promises and commitments. We also learned that because of
the unfaithfulness of Israel, the people were repeatedly destroyed from
the land.

   Thirdly, we learned that God made a second series of promises
concerning the land. In these promises the inheritors of the land were
to be not only the seed of Abraham but they would include Abraham
himself. Moreover the land would be given as an eternal possession.
These promises did not have national Israel in view at all. Rather,
they have in view all who believe in Christ as Savior. This includes a
remnant chosen by grace from national Israel as well as people from
every other nation of the world. We discovered that the land that was
in view was ultimately the New Heaven and New Earth which is given only
to those who are saved. Abraham would inherit this on the last day when
he as well as all believers are to be resurrected. We also learned that
we enter that land at the moment we are saved for we become citizens of
Heaven. Upon death we go home - to Heaven. The New Heaven and New Earth
is an expansion of what we now call Heaven.

   We learned, too, that the seed of Abraham in the first instance is
Christ. But because Christ is the head of all who believe in Him, the
seed ultimately includes all who are saved through the shed blood of
the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, the covenant God made with Abraham in
Genesis 17 was a covenant of redemption. It was not related to physical
descent but to those who have become the seed of Abraham by believing
in the Lord Jesus Christ.

   We also were guided by the Scriptures to realize that a few of the
statements setting forth God's promise may have a double fulfillment.
Insofar as their application to national Israel is concerned they have
already been completely fulfilled. Insofar as these promises relate to
God's salvation plan, they are being fulfilled as the elect are being
saved from every nation. In this sense they will be altogether
fulfilled when the New Heaven and New Earth becomes a reality.

   We also discovered the immense importance of interpreting Scripture
with Scripture. Only by letting Romans 4 and Galatians 3 guide us were
we able to understand Genesis 17. What a pity that many theologians
fail to do this. If this is not done there is no possibility of coming
to truth.

   Genesis 17 - The Watershed of Biblical Truth

   The fact is that Genesis 17 proves to be one of the most crucial
chapters in the entire Bible. It is the crossroad from which doctrines
travel which are concerned with the future of national Israel, the
return of Christ, and the end of the world. It is also the fulcrum that
determines our understanding of the meaning of baptism and the nature
of the kingdom of God. If Genesis 17 were carefully studied in the
light of everything in the Bible that might possibly relate to it, then
I believe giant strides would be taken toward a true understanding of
the salvation program God has planned for this world. Moreover, the
Biblical teachings concerning the future of national Israel and the
details concerning the events culminating with the return of Christ
would be far more easily grasped.

   On the other hand, if one attempts to understand and explain Genesis
17 without the benefit of Romans 4 and other New Testament passages
that relate to it, he will be proceeding down both an eschatological
path and a salvation path that will take him farther and farther from
Biblical truth.

   Pre-Millenial Doctrine Rests on a Wrong Foundation

   May I take the liberty at this time to make reference to pre-
millenial theology? I do not do so to put anyone down but to warn
concerning truth. And the pre-millenial teaching is widely held today.
It offers many conclusions concerning the return of Christ and the
future of the nation of Israel that I am afraid are altogether
unbiblical. One must wonder how it can be that the pre-millenial
doctrines are so widely held, while they are, I believe, so unbiblical.
I believe the whole problem begins with a misunderstanding of Genesis
17.

   Sadly, when I view the literature produced by the pre-millenial
writers, I find they explain Genesis 17 without any reference at all to
Romans 4. Based on their understanding of Genesis 17 they speak of an
Abrahamic Covenant that does not relate at all to God's salvation
program for the world.

   Dear reader, you may test this. If you examine the writings of three
of the most eminent and trusted pre-millenial theologians today you
will discover this sad fact. Dr. Dwight Pentecost has written a very
comprehensive book entitled Things to Come* on the future of national
Israel and the return of Christ. On pages 69, 72, 73, 75, 76, 80, 85,
95, 291, 439, and 480 he has made references to Genesis 17. He sees in
Genesis 17 the fundamental reason that God must still bring national
Israel to its land and lavish salvation blessings upon them. But not
once in his book does he make reference to Romans 4 as a commentary or
as an explanation of Genesis 17. He does make incidental reference to
Romans 4:2 (page 270), 4:3 (page 531), and 4:25 (page 196). But none of
these references relate to Genesis 17.

   _______________

   *J. Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1958).

   Likewise, Dr. Charles C. Ryrie has written a book entitled The Basis
of the Premillenial Faith*, in which he makes substantial reference to
Genesis 17 on pages 50, 53, 55, 56, and 57. He does so because he
believes this covenant, which he calls the "Abrahamic covenant",
promises to modern Israel future national blessings. But while he makes
extensive reference to Genesis 17, not one sentence in the entire book
refers to Romans 4.

   Similarly Dr. John Walvoord has written numerous books on subjects
relating to Christ's return. But again, references to Romans 4 are
noticeably lacking. For example, in his book Israel in Prophecy** he
has made references to Genesis 17 on pages 25, 26, 33, 39, 48, 49, 62,
and 80. He does so for the same reasons that Dr. Ryrie and Dr.
Pentecost do. On the other hand not a single reference is made to
Romans 4. It is indeed regrettable that scholars of such high
reputation as these men would so grossly violate the Biblical principle
of interpreting Scripture with Scripture.

   _____________

   *Dr. Charles C. Ryrie, The Basis of the Premillenial Faith,
(Neptune: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1953).

   **Dr. John Walvoord, Israel in Prophecy, (Grand Rapids: Zonderzan
Publishing House, 1978).

   Pre-millenial scholars will argue that in our study of Genesis 17 we
have spiritualized Scripture. Frequently they contend that the chief
difference between their understanding of the Bible, and the
understanding of those who hold that the eternal seed of Abraham are
all believers in Christ, is that the pre-millenialists literalize
Scripture while the others spiritualize Scripture. Thus they argue that
Genesis 17 may refer only to the physical land of Canaan and to
national Israel.

   The fact is, however, that those who hold the pre-millenial view do
not hesitate to spiritualize Scripture when it suits their purpose. For
example, when the Bible speaks in Revelation 13 of a dragon with seven
heads and ten horns they do not hesitate to teach that the ten horns
are in actuality ten European nations of today. They are correct in
their understanding that the ten horns are not to be understood as
literal horns, but they are incorrect in their understanding of what
they do represent. Later on, we will show that the ten horns represent
the rule of Satan during the final tribulation period. Under no
circumstance will the Bible allow a conclusion relating to modern day
political activity. But even though the pre-millenialists' conclusion
is faulty, nevertheless they prove that they themselves spiritualize
certain passages of the Bible when the context demands, even as the
a-millenialists do.

   Moreover, the pre-millenialist contends that the a-millenialist
never looks at prophecies concerning future events in a literal
fashion. This contention also is without truth. As we go on in this
study we will come to many passages which can be understood only in the
most literal fashion. For example, when the Bible declares in Matthew
24:29-31 that Christ will return immediately after the tribulation we
will show that this can be understood only literally.

   Indeed, the problem of differences between the pre-millenialist and
the a-millenialist is not literal versus spiritual interpretation.
Rather, it has to do with the care that is taken to allow the whole
Bible to be used in interpreting the Scripture at issue.

   Because these eminent pre-millenial scholars have not understood
Genesis 17 in the light of the Romans 4 commentary, their conclusions
concerning Genesis 17 are altogether faulty. consequently, because they
have not understood Genesis 17 correctly, all that follows in their
teaching concerning God's promises to national Israel and concerning
the return of Christ will be faulty. Therefore, I believe that anyone
who holds the pre-millenial view should rethink and restudy his whole
position beginning with Genesis 17. Wonderfully, God has given us the
Bible as the ultimate authority. Therefore, no matter how far any of us
have strayed from truth, we can come to truth by making sure that any
doctrine we hold is in harmony with everything the Bible teaches.

   But now another question must be faced. The nation of Israel was
called Israel because the people were the physical seed of Jacob, whose
name became Israel at the time he wrestled with God at the river
Jabbock (Genesis 32:24-28). Does the Bible also regard as Israel all
those who are believers in Christ from all the nations? This is an
important question because its answer will help us understand many
difficult Bible passages that apparently speak of national Israel but
cannot be fully understood until we see that they speak of the whole
body of believers as they have come from every nation. In our next
chapter we will look at the word "Israel" very carefully.

   CHAPTER 5 - ISRAEL

   We are studying the question of national Israel. We have seen that
very key passages like Genesis 17 which superficially seem to relate to
national Israel actually do not relate to Israel at all. Rather, we
have seen that they relate to all who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ
regardless of which political nation they come from. But how then are
we to understand the word Israel? Doesn't it always relate to national
Israel? Or does it? In this chapter we want to make a careful study of
the word "Israel". This in turn will help us to understand many
puzzling and frequently misunderstood Old Testament passages.

   It was Jacob, the grandson of Abraham, who was first called Israel.
Let us look at him to see how he relates to what we have already
learned. Since he was in the direct line from Abraham to Christ we
would expect that the same promises that were given to Abraham would
also apply to him.

   And indeed this is so. At the time Jacob is leaving his parents to
seek a wife in Padanaram, Isaac declares to Jacob in Genesis 28:3-4:

   And God Almighty bless thee, and make thee fruitful, and multiply
thee, that thou mayest be a multitude of people; And give thee the
blessing of Abraham, to thee, and to thy seed with thee; that thou
mayest inherit the land wherein thou art a stranger, which God gave
unto Abraham.

   This promise, like that made to Abraham in Genesis 17, speaks of
Jacob becoming a multitude of people; also, according to this promise,
he would inherit the land wherein he lived as a stranger. Moreover, do
you remember that in Genesis 28:12-14 we find recorded that as Jacob
was sleeping, God visited him? The Bible declares:

   And he dreamed, and behold a ladder set up on the earth, and the top
of it reached to heaven: and behold the angels of God ascending and
descending on it. And, behold, the Lord stood above it, and said, I am
the Lord God of Abraham thy father, and the God of Isaac: the land
whereon thou liest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed; And thy
seed shall be as the dust of the earth, and thou shalt spread abroad to
the west, and to the east, and to the north, and to the south: and in
thee and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.

   We find a commentary on these verses in Matthew 8:11-12 and in Luke
13:28-29 where Christ declares that the sons of the kingdom (national
Israel) would be cast out, while many others from every direction would
come in. These verses read as follows:

   And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and
shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of
heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer
darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. (Matthew
8:11-12)

   There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see
Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of
God, and you yourselves thrust out. And they shall come from the east,
and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall
sit down in the kingdom of God. (Luke 13:28-29)

   Furthermore, forty years after Jacob went to seek a wife, as he was
returning to the land of Israel, God appeared to him in Genesis
35:10-12:

   And God said unto him, Thy name is Jacob: thy name shall not be
called any more Jacob, but Israel shall be thy name: and he called his
name Israel. And God said unto him, I am God Almighty: be fruitful and
multiply: a nation and a company of nations shall be of thee, and kings
shall come out of thy loins; And the land which I gave Abraham and
Isaac, to thee I will give it, and to thy seed after thee will I give
the land.

   Jacob has become Israel. Israel means "Prince of God." He too has
been promised the land. He too will be the father of many nations We
have seen that all of this finds its fulfillment in the Lord Jesus
Christ. Indeed, all of the promises that were given to Abraham apply
also to Jacob. But while Abraham was not called Israel (even though he
was the beginning of that nation) Jacob was called Israel.

   And his physical seed, the twelve tribes, were called Israel. We
find this to be true all through the Bible. But what about his
spiritual seed, all those who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? Does
the Bible regard them, too, as Israel?

   Logically, if the physical seed of Jacob are called Israel because
Jacob, their physical progenitor, was called Israel, we should likewise
be able to assume that the spiritual seed of Jacob, the believers in
Christ, should also be called Israel. Let us see how the Bible directs
us on this question, for it is our authority.

   Christ Ministers to a Gentile Woman. Is She Israel?

   In Matthew 15 the Bible describes a visit of the Lord Jesus to Tyre
and Sidon. This is a land outside of Israel. There He ministers to a
woman of that area. Mark 7:26 speaks of her as "Greek, a
Syro-phoenician by nation." Matthew 15:22 declares that she is "a woman
of Canaan." Under no circumstances was she a blood descendant of
Abraham.

   As our Lord is dealing with this non-Israelite, this Gentile, He
declared to her, " I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house
of Israel." This very significant passage is a forceful declaration
that Christ was sent only to the house of Israel. As we read this
pronouncement of the Lord Jesus, it seems we must conclude that Jesus
was sent only to the nation of Israel. Surely the phrase "the house of
Israel" must refer to national Israel alone.

   But is this a correct conclusion? If Christ was sent only to the
lost sheep of the house of Israel what is He doing ministering to this
non-Israelite, this Gentile woman? Is Jesus violating His own rules? Of
course, this cannot be.

   Nevertheless His actions puzzle us. Not only does He at this time
minister to this heathen woman, but on another occasion He ministers to
another non-Jew, a Samaritan woman. He deliberately addressed a
Samaritan woman and declared the way of salvation to her. We read in
John 4:7:

   There cometh a woman of Samaria to draw water: Jesus saith unto her,
Give me to drink.

   He not only spoke to her of the way of salvation but He even spent
two days in the city of the Samaritans so that many Samaritans believed
on Him. We read in John 4:39-41:

   And many of the Samaritans of that city believed on him for the
saying of the woman, which testified, He told me all that ever I did.
So when the Samaritans were come unto him, they besought him that he
would tarry with them: and he abode there two days. And many more
believed because of his own word;

   But these Samaritans were not Jews. This is shown by the language of
John 4:9 which declares:

   Then saith the woman of Samaria unto him, How is it that thou, being
a Jew, askest drink of me, which am a woman of Samaria? for the Jews
have no dealings with the Samaritans.

   How can all of this be if Jesus was sent only to the house of
Israel_that is, if indeed the house of Israel is to be understood only
as national Israel?

   All Who Believe in Christ are Israel

   To complicate matters even further we read in John 1:29, "The next
day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of
God, which taketh away the sin of the world."

   But the world includes far more than national Israel. If Jesus were
sent only to national Israel, why does John the Baptist introduce Him
as the Savior of the world? Is it possible we are to understand that
the phrase, "the house of Israel" is referring to all believers? Surely
this appears to be so.

   We have already seen as we examined Genesis 17, Romans 4, and
Galatians 3 that God had prophesied in the Old Testament that Abraham
would be the father of a multitude of nations. We saw that this promise
was focused on the Lord Jesus becoming the Savior of Gentiles as well
as of Jews. We saw that this promise was repeated to Jacob whose name
was changed to Israel. Therefore the conclusion that the term "the
house of Israel" would include Gentiles as well as Jews is entirely in
agreement with the promises that Abraham was to be the father of a
multitude of nations.

   We can see, therefore, why Jesus ministered to Gentiles such as the
Syro-phoenician woman and the Samaritans. They, too, were the lost
sheep of the house of Israel. Only by understanding this wonderful
truth does Christ's statement, "I was not sent but to the lost sheep of
the house of Israel" have any integrity.

   But haven't we missed something? Isn't there another verse in the
Bible that clearly teaches that the lost sheep of the house of Israel
cannot be Gentiles or Samaritans? The verses in question are Matthew
10:5-6 which declare:

   These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not
into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter
ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

   Surely these verses are putting into opposition the house of Israel
on the one hand and the Gentiles and Samaritans on the other.

   But let us look at these verses more carefully:

   go not into the way of the Gentiles. into any city of the Samaritans
enter ye not. go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

   As we look at these phrases notice that the main modifiers of the
verb "go" or "enter", are "the way", "into any city", and "the lost
sheep." The phrase "of the Gentiles" modifies the term "the way"
describing a kind of way the disciples were not to go into, or to
become involved with.

   But the phrase "the way" has particular meaning in the Bible. We
read in John 14:6 that Jesus said, "I am the way." In Acts 9:2 the
Bible declares that the believers in Christ were of "the way."(cf. Acts
19:9, 23, 24:22). Thus the term "the way" signifies a spiritual path.
When Jesus commanded the disciples not to go into the way of the
Gentiles, He was effectively commanding them not to become involved in
the spiritual paths of the heathen. They were to remain true followers
of the way of Christ.

   That this conclusion is accurate can be seen when we look again at
the Syro-phoenician woman. To minister to her, Christ had to leave the
land of Israel and go into the country of Tyre and Sidon. If the phrase
"the way of the Gentiles" meant that the disciples were not to go where
the Gentiles lived, then the Lord Jesus was violating this command by
going with his disciples to the land of Tyre and Sidon.

   And if this command meant that the disciples were not to bring the
Gospel to the Gentiles, then Christ was violating this principle also
as He ministered to the Syro-phoenician woman. On the other hand, if
the phrase "the way of the Gentiles" is understood to mean that the
disciples were not to become involved with the heathen religions, then
there is no contradiction or violation as Christ goes to Tyre and Sidon
to minister to the Syro-phoenician woman.

   Likewise, when we examine the phrase "the city of the Samaritans" we
will see that this refers to the spiritual city or the religion
practised by the Samaritans. Let us see why this is so.

   Frequently the Bible refers to the believers as the city of God or
as the holy city. In Isaiah 52:1 the believers are referred to as the
"holy city." So, too, in Revelation 21:2 we read:

   And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God
out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

   The bride of Christ consists of all the believers in the world.
Believers are, therefore, the "holy city." Likewise in Isaiah 60:14 we
read, "they shall call thee, the city of the Lord." This chapter is
dealing with the Savior who would come. He is therefore the City of the
Lord.

   We see, therefore, that the term "the city" can refer to a religion
or to a body of believers who are under the lordship of someone. But
the city of the Samaritans would have reference to a wrong gospel, a
Samaritan religion. The disciples were not to become involved with the
congregation or with the religion of the Samaritans. Thus the term "the
city" has the same meaning as the term, "the way."

   That this is an accurate and correct conclusion can be seen when we
read of Christ's activities with the Samaritans as recorded in John 4.
In John 4:5 we read that Jesus came to a city of Samaria. In verse 8
the Bible informs us that the disciples were gone away "into the city"
to buy bread. And in verses 39-41, as we discovered earlier, we read
that He spent two days with the Samaritans.

   All of this activity would have been a complete violation of the
command "into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not", if the city of
the Samaritans is to be understood to mean a literal, material city.

   But when we understand this phrase to mean the gospel or religion of
the Samaritans, then there is complete harmony among all of the verses.

   We now can see why in Matthew 10:5-6, Jesus on the one hand spoke of
"not going" or entering into the "way" of the Gentiles, or the "city"
of the Samaritans, while on the other hand he spoke of "going" to the
lost sheep of the house of Israel. He was telling the disciples not to
become involved with the religions of the Gentiles or the Samaritans.
Rather they were to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. That
is, they were to faithfully proclaim the true Gospel of salvation so
that those whom God planned to save from every nation of the world
might hear the Gospel and be saved. As we have already seen in studying
our Lord's declaration set forth in Matthew 15:24 concerning the lost
sheep of the house of Israel, the house of Israel refers to all
believers. So, too, in Matthew 10 the house of Israel refers to all
believers.

   Moreover, we can be very secure in the conclusion that all believers
are called Israel when we realize that the Bible is its own dictionary,
defining its own terms. God has assumed the right to assign the name
Israel to whomever He pleases. And as we have seen, He definitely wants
us to understand that the term Israel refers to all believers. It is
entirely within God's prerogative to give a meaning to the term
"Israel" other than that of Jacob whose name was changed to Israel, or
that of the ten tribes that were the nation called Israel after the
division of the 12 tribes following the death of Solomon, or that of
the whole nation of Israel who were blood descendants of Abraham. The
Bible itself teaches us that at times, Israel can also be a reference
to the whole body of believers.

   Christ, Too, is Sometimes Called Israel

   The Bible assigns the name Israel to another personality who is
intimately identified with all believers. That personality is the Lord
Jesus Christ Himself. He too is called Israel. Once we know this we
will have added assurance as to how we are to understand why the Bible
refers to all believers as the house of Israel. For all believers are a
spiritual house (I Peter 2:5) and the chief cornerstone of that house
is Christ (I Peter 2:6). These verses are as follows:

   Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy
priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by
Jesus Christ. Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold,
I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that
believeth on him shall not be confounded.

   From these verses, therefore, we learn that the house of believers
is the house of Christ. And if Christ is Israel then it necessarily
follows that the believers are the house of Israel. Moreover, if Christ
is the head and we the church are His body, then if He, the head, is
Israel, it surely follows that we who are His body are Israel.

   But first we should show that sometimes the Bible does speak of
Christ as Israel.

   In Hosea 11:1 we read:

   When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of
Egypt.

   In this verse we learn that someone called Israel as a child was
loved by God. He was the Son of God and he was called out of Egypt.
This is most interesting. Who is this individual? The Bible gives us a
clear answer. In Matthew 2 we read of Mary and Joseph with the young
child Jesus fleeing from Herod. In this context the Bible declares in
Matthew 2:14-15:

   When he arose, he took the young child and his mother by night, and
departed into Egypt: And was there until the death of Herod: that it
might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
Out of Egypt have I called my son.

   Here God is quoting from Hosea 11:1 with the language, "Out of Egypt
have I called my son." In other words, God is instructing us that the
prophecy of Hosea 11:1 was fulfilled when Jesus was taken by His
parents into Egypt. That is, Jesus, before He would go to Nazareth to
grow up, before He would begin His official work as the Messiah, was
called out of Egypt. But Hosea 11:1 insists that this Son is Israel.
Thus Christ is called Israel. And in coming as the child, Israel, out
of Egypt, He is paralleling the experience of national Israel which
came out of Egypt.

   We see therefore that the name "Israel" in the Bible can also refer
to Christ Himself.

   In this connection we might also look briefly at Isaiah 49:1-3 where
we read:

   Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The Lord
hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made
mention of my name. And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in
the shadow of his hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in
his quiver hath he hid me; And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O
Israel, in whom I will be glorified.

   This passage which speaks of the Lord's servant called Israel, who
has a mouth like a sharp sword and in whom God is glorified, can refer
only to Christ. Do you recall how He comes at Judgment Day with a sharp
sword protruding from Him mouth (Revelation 19:15)?

   Do you recall that the name Israel means "Prince of God?" No
individual can bear that name more accurately than Christ Himself, who
is frequently called a Prince in the Bible (cf. Prince of Peace).

   We have established that in the Bible all believers in Christ may
sometimes be referred to as Israel, and that sometimes Christ Himself
may be referred to as Israel. And this in turn agrees precisely with
the Biblical truth that all believers are the seed of Abraham who was
the father of Israel. As we proceed in our study we are seeing that
every detail is fitting into place.

   All Believers In Christ Are Jews

   But now we might begin to wonder. We have seen that in certain parts
of the Bible all believers may be considered to be Israel just as
certainly as the nation of Israel is called Israel in other parts of
the Bible. We have seen that this truth is reinforced by the language
of Romans 4 and Galatians 3 where all believers are called the seed of
Abraham.

   But are there other passages that point to the fact that insofar as
God is concerned all believers in Christ are the Israel of God? And if
there are, do these passages help us to understand Old Testament
passages which speak of a future glory for Israel? Indeed there are,
and as we examine some of them we will learn more conclusively than
ever that God always anticipated a nation, an Israel, that was far more
glorious than the political nation, national Israel. Let us look first
of all at Romans 2:28-29 where God declares:

   For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that
circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is
one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and
not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.

   In these verses God is teaching first of all that in God's view a
Jew is not someone who has been circumcised, that is, one who is a
blood descendant of Abraham. This is very significant. While in many
parts of the Bible we are taught that the Jews were those of the nation
of Israel, in this passage God is teaching that from God's vantage
point, Jews are only those who have become saved. To have one's heart
circumcised is Biblical language indicating salvation. This was already
commanded in Deuteronomy 10:16: "Circumcise therefore the foreskin of
your heart, and be no more stiffnecked."

   And in Deuteronomy 30:6 God indicated that He would accomplish this
kind of circumcision:

   And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of
thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all
thy soul, that thou mayest live.

   This statement clearly identifies with salvation as seen by
Colossians 2:11:

   In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without
hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the
circumcision of Christ: .

   All Believers are Circumcised

   But now the question might be raised: couldn't it be that in Romans
2:28-29 God is speaking only of the saved Jews within national Israel?
The Bible answers this question in Philippians 3:3:

   For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and
rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

   This passage clearly points to the fact that all believers are the
circumcision. This is already taught in Colossians 2:11-13:

   In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without
hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the
circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are
risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath
raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the
uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him,
having forgiven you all trespasses; . . .

   Clearly the circumcision that God recognizes is that of those whose
sins have been cut off by the blood of Jesus Christ. They are therefore
the Jews of Romans 2:28-29.

   This truth that the circumcision God recognizes involves all who
believe in Christ as Savior is in harmony with the teaching of Genesis
17. Do you recall that the sign of the promises, of the Covenant, made
to Abraham and his seed was circumcision? In Genesis 17:14 God declares
concerning this sign:

   And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not
circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken
my covenant.

   In this warning God is emphasizing that circumcision is a
requirement for these promises to become realized in the life and
experience of the inheritor of the land. Is God thus teaching that
physical circumcision is a requirement for salvation? For we must
remember that we previously learned that the promises of Genesis 17
find their fulfillment in salvation.

   Yes, circumcision is a requirement for salvation. But it is not
physical circumcision. It is not an act which we perform. Rather it is
the circumcision of our hearts. And it is an operation performed by
God, Himself. Do you recall Deuteronomy 30:6?

   And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of
thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all
thy soul, that thou mayest live.

   Can you see how beautifully Colossians 2:11 agrees with Deuteronomy
30:6?

   In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without
hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the
circumcision of Christ: .

   Small wonder then that in Philippians 3:3 God declares that "we are
the circumcision which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ
Jesus."

   How harmoniously, how beautifully, all of the Bible is fitting
together.

   Now we can see, too, why Genesis 17:14 declares:

   And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not
circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken
my covenant.

   Those who are covenant breakers, who have not been circum- cised,
are those who have not been circumcised in their hearts. That is, they
have not become saved. Thus they will be cut off. To be cut off is
language that relates to eternal damnation.

   Christ was a Jew

   It should not be surprising that the Bible speaks of all believers
as Jews. Jesus our head was a Jew. He was of the tribe of Judah. And if
He is a Jew, then we who have become adopted into His family are also
Jews. We, too, through Him have become identified with the tribe of
Judah and the nation of Israel. We must not lose sight of the truth
that the identification of believers in Christ as Jews is just as real
and substantive as that for blood descendants of Abraham, who are
called Jews. It is just that God has given a much more meaningful and
eternal meaning to the word "Jew" or to the word "Israel" when He is
referring to those who have become saved than when He refers to
national Israel.

   In Galatians 6:15-16 the Bible makes further reference to Israel.
There we read:

   For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor
uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to
this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and* upon the Israel of God.

   In this passage God is highlighting the truth that those who are
saved are to be called "the Israel of God." The "new creature" of verse
15 is "the Israel of God" of verse 16.

   We have discovered, therefore, the tremendous fact that there is
more than one Israel in the Bible. To look blindly at each verse of the
Bible that speaks of Israel as speaking only of national Israel is to
deny a great amount of Biblical truth. While, indeed, the Bible very
frequently does speak of national Israel, it also speaks of another
Israel that is every bit as real and substantive as national Israel.

   That Israel is the Israel of God. It is the Israel made up of every
believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. It is an Israel that is eternally
glorious. It is an Israel the members of which have become sons of God.
It is an Israel that is added to every time someone becomes saved. It
is the whole house of Israel that our Lord came to seek and to save. It
is the Israel that God has repeatedly in view as He develops His
magnificent plan of salvation.

   But the question still persists. Aren't there other passages in the
Bible that speak of a glorious future for national Israel? In the next
chapter we will look at additional scriptures that many theologians
believe anticipate such a future for national Israel.

   __________________________

   *The conjunction "and" which is the Greek "kai" is not properly
copulative in this sentence. It is intensive and, therefore, the
translation should be "even upon the children of God." This agrees with
the context for it is only those who have trusted in Christ who walk
according to God's rules and have God's peace upon them.

   CHAPTER 6 - GOD'S GLORIOUS ETERNAL ISRAEL

   We began this study wondering about national Israel and its future.
Very quickly in the beginning of Chapter 1 we saw that God had made
certain promises to national Israel concerning the land. We also saw
that these promises were completely fulfilled.

   But we discovered that other promises were made to Abraham as well
as to his seed. These promises emphasized the land as an everlasting
inheritance. When we continued to probe into the Biblical evidence
concerning these promises we found they always related to salvation.
They had only national Israel in view insofar as there is a remnant out
of national Israel that together with the saved Gentiles constitutes
the house of Israel our Lord came to save.

   And everywhere we turned we found further confirmation of this grand
and wonderful truth. The fact is, we are beginning to see that while
God dealt with national Israel in history, nevertheless He normally had
in view in His promises the Israel of God - the Israel made up of every
child of God.

   In this chapter we will continue to look at significant Old
Testament passages which appear to relate to national Israel, and
indeed, in the pre-millenial system of doctrine are used as proof texts
to support the idea of a glorious future for national Israel. But when
we look at them in the light of the New Testament commentary, they do
not relate to national Israel at all. Rather, they all point to the
Israel of God which consists of every one who believes in Christ as
Savior.

   In Romans 9 we find information that relates to Old Testament
passages that apparently speak of national Israel but actually show
that the Israel in which God is interested consists of Gentiles as well
as believing blood descendants of Abraham. We read in Romans 9:23-26:

   And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels
of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath
called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? As he saith
also in Osee (Hosea), I will call them my people, which were not my
people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And it shall come to
pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my
people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.

   In this very informative declaration God is showing that the
prophecies of Hosea anticipated the inclusion of the Gentiles in the
body of believers. But when we read the quotations as they are found in
Hosea and which are quoted also in Romans 9, we are astounded to find
that they make no mention of Gentiles. The context in which these
verses is found in the book of Hosea seems to speak only of national
Israel. Verse 25 of Romans 9 quotes Hosea 2:23, which reads as follows:

   And I will sow her unto me in the earth; and I will have mercy upon
her that had not obtained mercy; and I will say to them which were not
my people, Thou art my people; and they shall say, Thou art my God.

   And verse 26 of Romans 9 quotes Hosea 1:10:

   And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto
them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of
the living God.

   Not only does Hosea 1:10 speak specifically of Israel but in the
same context the next verse refers to Judah as well as Israel and
indicates that the time is coming when these two Old Testament nations
would again be one people with one head.

   Moreover, when we carefully read all of the first two chapters of
Hosea we find no reference at all to Gentiles. The context appears to
be altogether focused on national Israel. While they have become a
divided people because of their sins and in fact have come under severe
condemnation, nevertheless, God apparently is prophesying that they
will again become God's own people. But let us never forget the Bible
is its own interpreter. It is its own dictionary. It provides its own
commentary. While the first two chapters apparently are speaking of
national Israel, God very clearly shows us in Romans 9 that He was not
speaking of national Israel that would again become God's people.

   Rather He was speaking of a nation of people which would consist of
believing Gentiles as well as believing Jews. Before we are saved we
are not the people of God. But when we have become saved, we have
become the people of God. We have become the sons of the living God.

   Once we understand these wonderful truths we can see why in Hosea
2:19-20 God declares:

   And I will betroth thee unto me for ever; yea, I will betroth thee
unto me in righteousness, and in judgment, and in lovingkindness, and
in mercies. I will even betroth thee unto me in faithfulness: and thou
shalt know the Lord.

   In other words, in these two chapters of Hosea, God is prophesying
the marvelous truth that in the coming Messiah (typified by Jezreel in
these chapters) salvation would come to Judah and Israel. Christ would
be their head.

   And in Romans 9:25-26 God is showing that the Israel, the Judah, who
would be saved included Gentiles as well as a believing remnant from
national Israel.

   Significantly in I Peter 2 God speaks of those who have believed in
Christ and uses language of Hosea 2:23. Note I Peter 2:9-10:

   But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation,
a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who
hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in
time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had
not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

   Thus in these verses, too, God is underscoring the truth that all
believers, whether Gentile or Jew, are to be identified with the Israel
of Hosea 2.

   The importance of what we are learning from Romans 9 as it teaches
God's intention concerning the language of Hosea 1 and 2 cannot be
underestimated. It truly is an outstanding disclosure. For by this
means God has shown us that when the Old Testament speaks of a future
glory for Judah or Israel He has in view not national Israel but the
Israel of God. It is the Israel made up of all believers in the Lord
Jesus Christ.

   Romans 9 - A Commentary on Isaiah

   God further develops this kind of understanding as He declares in
Romans 9:27-29:

   Esaias (Isaiah) also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of
the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be
saved: For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness:
because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth. And as Esaias
said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been
as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrah.

   We must remember that these verses, like Romans 9:25-26, are being
used to prove that God had always anticipated that the Gentiles would
be saved right along with a believing remnant from national Israel. The
next verse (v. 30) underscores this:

   What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after
righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness
which is of faith.

   We know therefore, that in these verses God has given to us a
commentary on the original Old Testament passages from which they are
quoted. Verses 27 and 28 are a quotation from Isaiah 10:22,23 which
declares:

   for though thy people Israel be as the sand of the sea, yet a
remnant of them shall return: the consumption decreed shall overflow
with righteousness. For the Lord God of hosts shall make a consumption,
even determined, in the midst of all the land.

   In that context God states in Isaiah 10:20-2l:

   And it shall come to pass in that day, that the remnant of Israel,
and such as are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again stay
upon him that smote them; but shall stay upon the Lord, the Holy One of
Israel, in truth. The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob,
unto the mighty God.

   Since we know from Romans 9 that verses 22 and 23 of Isaiah 10 have
an Israel in view that includes Gentiles as well as Jews, we know
therefore, that the "remnant of Jacob", the "remnant of Israel" has in
view the body of believers who will come to the Lord Jesus Christ.
These would include both blood descendants of Abraham who have believed
in Christ, as well as Gentiles, who have believed in Christ. God is
indeed opening up our understanding concerning His intentions with the
language of the Old Testament. Returning to Romans 9:29 we discover
that this verse is a quotation from Isaiah 1:9 which promises:

   Except the Lord of hosts had left unto us a very small remnant, we
should have been as Sodom, and we should have been like unto Gomorrah.

   Again we must remember that since Romans 9 is discussing an Israel
made up of Gentiles as well as Jews, the first chapter of Isaiah is
also anticipating an Israel, that would be a body of believers made up
of Gentiles and Jews. This accords so beautifully with Isaiah l:18.

   Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your
sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red
like crimson, they shall be as wool.

   It helps us also to see therefore, that Isaiah 1:25-27 is focused on
the whole body of believers that would come forth as a result of God's
redemptive work through Christ. These verses read as follows:

   And I will turn my hand upon thee, and purely purge away thy dross,
and take away all thy tin: And I will restore thy judges as at the
first, and thy counsellors as at the beginning: afterward thou shalt be
called, The city of righteousness, the faithful city. Zion shall be
redeemed with judgment, and her converts with righteousness.

   "The faithful city", "the city of righteousness", and "Zion" are
references to the whole body of believers that are to be redeemed by
the Lord Jesus Christ as He came to satisfy God's judgment on their
behalf. This city of believers is to consist not only of the Gentiles
but also of believers from national Israel. No wonder, therefore, that
Romans 9:6-8 declares:

   Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are
not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed
of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be
called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are
not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted
for the seed. For this the word of promise, At this time will I come,
and Sarah shall have a son.

   In these verses God sets forth the same truth that we discovered in
Romans 2:28-29. The Israel that God is especially concerned with does
not consist of those who are blood descendants of Abraham. Rather it
consists of those who are the children of the promise. The children of
the promise are those who believe in Christ as Savior whether they are
blood descendants of Abraham or whether they are Gentiles. This is seen
clearly by the language of Romans 4:16-17 where the promised seed are
shown to include people of every nation. These verses state:

   Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the
promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the
law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the
father of us all. (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many
nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the
dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.

   An Understanding of the Old Testament Requires

   The New Testament

   We are beginning to see that a careful reading of the New Testament
is giving us a considerably different understanding of the Old
Testament than that which we might have if we read the Old Testament
without the benefit of the New Testament commentary. We should realize
by now that it is imperative that we do not come to conclusions
concerning Old Testament teaching without the benefit of the New
Testament explanation. To do so is to violate a basic Biblical
principle that we are to compare spiritual things with spiritual (I
Corinthians 2:13). To do so can only lead to the consequence of very
faulty doctrines.

   For example, the Jews of Jesus' day did not have the New Testament.
Their whole knowledge of the character and nature of the coming Messiah
was based on the Old Testament. They had great difficulty, therefore,
in understanding many aspects of the nature of God's salvation plan
which are extremely clear to us who have the New Testament as well as
the Old Testament. While the Old Testament declared that the Messiah
was to be a blood sacrifice, the disciples themselves did not
understand at all Jesus' crucifixion . . . that is, until after it had
become an historical event. Likewise, if we attempt to understand the
Old Testament passages that speak of future glory for Israel or future
events of any kind without carefully studying the New Testament verses
that relate to them, we are bound to come up with wrong doctrine.
Therefore, it is so imperative that we carefully examine the New
Testament before we try to understand the Old Testament.

   The New Testament Church was Thoroughly Anticipated

   in the Old Testament

   But let us return to the book of Romans. Let us see how God teaches,
as He makes reference to Old Testament promises, that He always had
planned to save Gentiles as well as Jews. And as we search out the Old
Testament passages referred to in the New Testament we will begin to
see that the Old Testament spotlight is not on national Israel but on
the whole body of believers whether they are Jew or Gentile. In other
words the spotlight is on the church which came into existence at
Pentecost and continues to the present day.

   In Romans 15 the apostle Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit, makes a number of references to Old Testament prophecies which
showed that God intended to save Gentiles as well as Jews. In Romans
15:8-9 we read:

   Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for
the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers: And
that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy; as it is written,
For this cause, I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing
unto thy name.

   This is a quotation from Psalm 18. Psalm 18:49 declares:

   Therefore will I give thanks unto thee, O Lord, among the heathen
and sing praises unto thy name.

   We are assured, therefore, by the Bible that Psalm 18 is prophesying
of the Lord Jesus Christ as He came as the Messiah. But it is also
speaking of the peoples who would believe on Him, peoples who would
include the Gentiles as well as the Jews. Therefore, we know that
verses 48 and 50 also speak of the salvation which would be provided by
Christ. These verses read as follows:

   He delivereth me from mine enemies: yea, thou liftest me up above
those that rise up against me: thou hast delivered me from the violent
man. (Psalm 18:48)

   Great deliverance giveth he to his king; and sheweth mercy to his
anointed, to David, and to his seed for evermore. (Psalm 18:50)

   These verses speak of deliverance from enemies and of mercy to David
and his seed. They are anticipating the salvation to be provided by
Christ whereby we are delivered from the enemy Satan and receive the
mercy of God. We can anticipate that when other Bible passages use
these same phrases, they too, may ordinarily be expected to be speaking
of salvation in Christ. Thus, for example, we read in Luke 1:68-75 of
Zacharias speaking of deliverance from enemies as he anticipated the
birth of Christ who would bring salvation. In the beautiful statement
he declared:

   Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed
his people, And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house
of his servant David; As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets,
which have been since the world began: That we should be saved from our
enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; To perform the mercy
promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; The oath
which he sware to our father Abraham, That he would grant unto us, that
we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him
without fear, In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of
our life.

   We are beginning to see how beautiful and cohesive the Bible is.

   His People - All Believers in Chirst

   Returning to Romans 15 we read in the next verse, verse 10, another
quotation from the Old Testament which God is assuring us also relates
to His program to include Gentiles in the body of Christ:

   And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people.

   This verse is a quotation from Deuteronomy 32:43 which reads:

   Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood
of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will
be merciful unto his land, and to his people.

   It is noteworthy that this verse, which we can now understand has
its fulfillment in the New Testament church which God established from
Gentiles and Jews, speaks of "his land" and "his people." We know from
Matthew 1 that Jesus came to save "His people" from their sins. We know
from Romans 11:1 that God has not rejected "His people." And we know
from John 6:37,39 that Christ's people are those who have been given to
Him by the Father. John 6 emphasizes that this includes all believers,
and, therefore, both Jews and Gentiles. But so does Deuteronomy 32:43
teach this inasmuch as we know from the Romans 15:10 commentary that
Gentiles are included in salvation. Do you recall that Zacharias in
Luke 1:68 stated, "for he hath visited and redeemed his people?" Again
we see the cohesiveness and harmonious character of the Scriptures.

   Of great interest is the phrase in Deuteronomy 32:43, "He will be
merciful unto His land." We see in this that the land is completely
related to God's program of salvation. Earlier in our study we learned
the land that was promised to Abraham and his seed was not the material
land of Canaan but the land that is given to all believers. It is the
New Earth which continues eternally and which is completely related to
salvation. God will have mercy not only on those who believe on Him but
also on the creation itself which will become the New Heaven and New
Earth. Later in our study we will see that the phrase "his land" has
also a wider meaning than creation itself.

   Continuing on in Romans 15 we find that the next verse, verse 11,
which also ties in the Gentiles with the body of believers, is a
quotation from Psalm 117. Romans 15:11 states:

   And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye
people.

   By this verse God shows us that Psalm 117 is also anticipating the
wonderful salvation God would provide to all the nations through the
Lord Jesus. Psalm 117 tells us:

   O praise the Lord, all ye nations: praise him, all ye people. For
his merciful kindness is great toward us: and the truth of the Lord
endureth for ever. Praise ye the Lord.

   Isaiah 11 Has the Salvation of the Gentiles in View

   The next verse of Romans 15:12 is another tremendous clue to a
correct understanding of the Old Testament. In it God emphasizes:

   And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that
shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust.

   This is a quotation from Isaiah 11. Verse 10 of Isaiah 11 declares:

   And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand
for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his
rest shall be glorious.

   Romans 15:12 has assured us that this verse is speaking of the
phenomenon immediately following the cross, whereby the Gentiles would
begin to flow into the rest provided by the root of Jesse. The root of
Jesse is Jesus. The rest which He provides is rest from our efforts to
try to become right with God by our own labour. Rather we are to rest
in the finished work of Christ who paid for our sins. Thus we are
guided by God to understand that the language of Isaiah 11 is pointing
to the cross and the church that would begin immediately following our
Savior's ascension. We know, therefore, that the language of Isaiah
11:6-8, which is part of the context of Isaiah 11:10, must also be
entirely related to God's salvation program. These verses give us the
information:

   The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie
down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling
together; and a little child shall lead them. And the cow and the bear
shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion
shall eat straw like the ox. And the sucking child shall play on the
hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the
cockatrice' den.

   If we try to look at this passage in a very literal, material way we
must understand that the cross would bring about a tremendous
modification to animal behavior. But we know that has not happened. Nor
is it taught elsewhere in the Bible. We must realize therefore this
must be symbolical language. Let us spend a moment to unravel this.

   Salvation Signifies the Curse of Sin has Been Removed

   In the Garden of Eden before sin entered the world the animals were
herbivorous; that is, they ate no meat. Neither was there any enmity
between animals or between man and animals. And man was at peace and in
harmony with God. But because of man's sin, death and enmity entered
the world. Man became estranged from God and became the slave of Satan
who came into the garden as a serpent.

   But when we become saved the curse of sin is removed. We are again
at peace with God. It as if we are again in the Garden of Eden where
"the wolf dwells with the lamb and the leopard lies down with the kid"
(a baby goat), "and the calf and the young lion together And the lion
eats straw like the ox." The believer is pictured as a child (remember
Matthew 18:3 - "except we become as little children", etc.). It plays
on the hole of the asp and puts his hand on the cockatrice's den. Both
the asp and the cockatrice are poisonous reptiles typifying Satan, over
whom the believer has triumphed in Christ.

   Thus these verses when rightly understood agree precisely with the
conclusion the Bible has led us to: namely, that the cross and the New
Testament believers are in view.

   This salvation comes to the believer because Christ went to the
cross to pay for our sins. This salvation comes to its ultimate
fulfillment in the New Heaven and New Earth. Therefore, as God
discusses the conditions in the New Heaven and New Earth in Isaiah
65:17-25, He uses the very same figure, as He declares in verse 25:

   The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat
straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They
shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountains, saith the Lord.

   Even as in Isaiah 11, literal animals are not in view. Rather, God
is emphasizing that salvation brings about the wonderful condition that
the curse of sin has been removed.

   Returning to Isaiah 11 we see, moreover, that the second verse is
very similar to other verses in Isaiah which the New Testament assures
us are also pointing specifically to Christ who came as Messiah. Verse
2 records:

   And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom
and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of
knowledge and of the fear of the Lord; . . .

   We might note how similar this language is to that of Isaiah 42:1-4
which reads:

   Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul
delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him; he shall bring forth
judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his
voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break, and
the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment
unto truth. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set
judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.

   But Isaiah 42 is quoted in Matthew 12:18-21 where God declares:

   Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; by beloved, in whom my soul
is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew
judgment to the Gentiles. He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall
any man hear his voice in the streets. A bruised reed shall he not
break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth
judgment unto victory. And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.

   In Matthew 12:17 the Bible solemnly informs us that Isaiah 42 was
fulfilled when the Messiah came:

   That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet,
saying, . . .

   Therefore we are certain that Isaiah 11 as well as Isaiah 42 are
prophecies that find their fulfillment in Christ's coming as the
Messiah and in the fact that Gentiles, as well as a remnant from
national Israel, make up the Israel of God. Note the language of Isaiah
11:12:

   And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble
the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from
the four corners of the earth.

   Here God speaks of assembling the outcasts of Israel and gathering
the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth. The context
surely indicates that they are gathered together to be saved. And
salvation comes to all who believe on Christ whether of national Israel
or of any other nation. But in this passage all of these who have
believed are looked upon as Israel or as Judah. This conclusion is in
perfect harmony with everything we have already discovered in our study.

   Israel and Judah can Refer to All who Believe in Christ

   We can easily see why the believers in Christ are called Judah.
Jesus, our head, was of the tribe of Judah. He is therefore intimately
associated with Judah. Thus, since we who believe on Him are citizens
of the kingdom of Christ, we too may be called Judah. The fact is, the
citizens of national Israel were called Jews because they were
identified with Judah. Since, as we saw earlier, we who believe in
Christ are called Jews, we may be called Judah as well.

   While we are speaking of Isaiah and the beautiful prophecies found
therein relating to the plan of salvation as it has unfolded in this
world beginning with the cross, we might also look at Luke 4:17-21,
where we find the account of Jesus reading from the Old Testament:

   And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And
when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,
The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to
preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the
brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of
sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach
the acceptable year of the Lord. And he closed the book, and he gave it
again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were
in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to say unto them,
This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

   This Scripture is a quotation from Isaiah 61:1-2, which promises:

   The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath
anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to
bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the
opening of the prison to them that are bound; To proclaim the
acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to
comfort all that mourn; . . .

   Isaiah 61 anticipates God's Wonderful New Testament Salvation Program

   Some theologians observe that when our Lord read from Isaiah He read
only the first half of verse 2. They believe that this implies that the
last half of verse 2, together with the rest of Isaiah 61, will not
have fulfillment until some future time. This conclusion is quite
erroneous. Let us see why. When we look at other verses in Isaiah 61 it
can be seen that they also relate to Jesus as the Savior, and to the
New Testament body of believers, who came not only as a remnant from
national Israel but also from the Gentiles.

   A few examples from Isaiah 61 will show this. Verse 2 speaks of a
day of vengeance. The day of vengeance is Judgment Day, when God's
wrath will be poured out on the unsaved. The last day of this earth's
existence is Judgment Day. But so was the cross Judgment Day. It was as
real and awful as the final Judgment Day. For it was at the cross that
Jesus suffered the wrath of God, the equivalent of an eternity in Hell,
on behalf of all who believe on Him. Therefore, we know that the
phrase, "the day of vengeance of our God" can point with certainty to
the cross.

   This truth that the "day of vengeance" can point to the cross is
further seen in Isaiah 35. The whole chapter is gloriously prophesying
concerning the coming of Christ. In the heart of this chapter is verse
4, in which God declares:

   Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not:
behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompense;
he will come and save you.

   God came in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ to provide the
recompense (the payment) for our sins. God came with vengeance as He
poured out His wrath on Christ for our sins. And all of this occurred
because He came to save us. Indeed, "the day of vengeance" is a phrase
that rightfully can point us to the cross. Moreover, the last phrase of
Isaiah 61:2 declares, "to comfort those who mourn." The Lord Jesus
quoted these words in the Beatitudes as He declared in Matthew 5:4:
"Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted."

   The Beatitudes have in view those who have placed their trust in the
Lord Jesus Christ. "Those who mourn" refers to those who weep as they
see their sins and the wrath of God they so rightly deserve. But God
comforts us by bringing us salvation. Isaiah 40:1,2 speaks dramatically
to the fact that those who have been comforted are those who have been
saved. There God declares:

   Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God. Speak ye
comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is
accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she hath received of
the Lord's hand double for all her sins.

   Those whose iniquity has been pardoned are only those who have been
saved. Thus we can be certain that the last phrase of Isaiah 61:2, "to
comfort those who mourn" is also speaking of the grand event of Christ
being our Savior (cf. Isaiah 40:1,2).

   As we look further at Isaiah 61 we will see even more evidence that
this chapter is focused on the coming of Jesus as our Savior. Verses 4
and 5 declare:

   And they shall build the old wastes, they shall raise up the former
desolations, and they shall repair the waste cities, the desolations of
many generations. And strangers shall stand and feed your flocks, and
the sons of the alien shall be your plowmen and your vinedressers.

   This prophecy, together with similar language found in other places,
such as in Jeremiah 30:18 and especially Amos 9:11, is referred to in
Acts 15:16. There the New Testament church is grap- pling with the
problem of the Gentiles becoming believers. As the leaders of the
church gather together in Jerusalem to study this phenomenon, the
apostle James, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, declares in
Acts 15:16-18:

   After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of
David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof,
and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the
Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the
Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works from
the beginning of the world.

   Since these verses speak to the question the church in Acts 15 was
facing, that is, the question of Gentiles becoming saved, we can know
that the language used in Acts 15:16 which spoke of rebuilding the
tabernacle and its ruins must be a word picture depicting the building
of the church from people of every nation. By this declaration we are
informed that the Old Testament language promising the rebuilding of
David's tabernacle or raising up the former desolations does not point
to the rebuilding of a material, physical city or tabernacle. Rather it
points to the building of the house of God or the city of God. That
house or city is the body of believers. This conclusion also harmonizes
perfectly with all the other conclusions we have been led to in this
study.

   Returning to Isaiah 61 we can now see why verse 9 promises:

   And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their
offspring among the people: all that see them shall acknowledge them,
that they are the seed which the Lord hath blessed.

   Verse 9 therefore must also be speaking of the salvation that was
brought by Christ as He died for our sins.

   Thus we see wherever we look in Isaiah 61 a relationship to that
which was accomplished because our Savior went to the cross.

   Isaiah 49 Prophesies God's Salvation Program

   Before we leave Isaiah we might look also at Acts 13. As Paul and
Barnabas are bringing the Gospel they observe in Acts 13:47:

   For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a
light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the
ends of the earth.

   This statement is a quotation from Isaiah 49:6, wherein God had
promised:

   It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up
the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also
give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation
unto the end of the earth.

   Isaiah 49 is a dramatic passage presenting the coming Messiah as the
suffering servant. Note verse 2, which declares:

   And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword; in the shadow of his
hand hath he hid me, and made me a polished shaft; in his quiver hath
he hid me; . . .

   We remember, of course, Revelation 19:15, where God teaches that
when Christ comes on the clouds of glory He will have a sharp sword
protruding from His mouth. That sword is the Word of God. Isaiah 49:2
therefore is speaking of Christ coming as the Word of God. As we have
already seen, verse 6 teaches us that His coming was to bring salvation
to the world.

   Verse 3 of Isaiah 49 goes on to declare that this servant is Israel:

   And said unto me, Thou art my servant, O Israel, in whom I will be
glorified.

   Remember we determined earlier in our study that Israel means Prince
of God. Christ is the Prince of God. Therefore, we are not surprised to
see that He is called Israel in this verse.

   Because Christ is also called Israel by God, we find that it
logically follows that verse 6 speaks of the believers who will come to
Him as being not only the Gentiles who will come to His light but also
as the "tribes of Jacob" and as "the preserved of Israel." This accords
with the earlier passages we studied which speak of the body of
believers as Israel. But it also conveys the additional information
that the body of believers may be called Jacob insofar as God's
definitions are concerned. Moreover this language also suggests that
Christ is sometimes called Israel in the Bible but He may also at times
be called Jacob. Even as the believers are the preserved who belong to
Israel (Christ), so too they are the tribes of Jacob; that is, they are
the tribes who belong to Jacob (Christ). Later we will see the
significance of this as we look at the meaning of Jeremiah 30:7 which
discusses "Jacob's trouble."

   We have spent considerable time and effort looking at some of the
New Testament statements that help us understand Old Testa- ment
prophecies. There are many other words, phrases, and verses we could
look at to further develop this study.

   But as we study any part of the Bible we must remember that it is
imperative that we understand the Old Testament prophecies in the light
of New Testament information or commentary. This is vital if we are to
be certain we have obtained a true perspective of the Scriptures. Those
who have failed to follow adequately this principle have arrived at
warped conclusions concerning national Israel and concerning the very
nature of salvation.

   I believe the chief reason the pre-millenial view of Christ's return
can be proven to be unbiblical in so many ways is that it has as its
foundation an entirely wrong interpretation of these Old Testament
verses which we have been studying. They have inter- preted these
verses which speak of a future for Israel without allowing the New
Testament's teachings to be brought to bear on them.

   We have discovered that when we diligently apply the principle of
comparing Scripture with Scripture we find that God's defini- tion of
such terms as Jew, Israel, Jacob and Judah can apply not only to
national Israel, but also to Jesus Himself. Moreover, they can apply to
the body of believers, which consists of both saved Jews and saved
Gentiles. This information puts us on guard as we read either the Old
Testament or the New Testament. When any of these words are used we
must carefully examine the immediate con- text as well as the whole
Bible to try to discover who or what is in view. Is it national Israel
that is in view or is it the whole body of believers, or is it Jesus
Himself?

   We have also begun to learn that such passages as Genesis 17, which
tells us of God's covenant with Abraham and his seed, are concerned
altogether with God's salvation program. Moreover this conclusion is
supported by a whole host of Biblical references. It is the grand theme
that permeates the Bible. Amazingly, every passage we looked at, except
the few which we examined at the beginning of Chaper 1, were
immediately concerned with the salva- tion Christ came to provide.

   CHAPTER 7 - WE VISIT EZEKIEL 37

   Now that we have begun to understand how we are to proceed with
studying Old Testament prophecies, let us look at a passage such as
Ezekiel 37, which speaks of a future blessing for Israel and Judah.
This chapter is heavily used by pre-millenial theologians as evidence
that God has promised a glorious future for national Israel. Therefore,
utilizing the principle that all Scripture is to be interpreted by all
Scripture, we wonder whether their conclusions are accurate. Therefore,
a study of this chapter should prove interesting and also important.

   Which Israel and which Judah are in view in Ezekiel 37? Is it
national Israel, as many theologians of today believe? Or is it the
Lord Jesus Christ? Or is it the whole body of believers which became
the New Testament church? Let us look carefully at this chapter,
examining it in the light of anything else we can find in the Bible.

   Ezekiel 37 is divided into two sections. The first fourteen verses
are concerned with the resurrection of the house of Israel, and the
placing of them in their land. Verses 15-28 deal with the bringing of
Judah and Israel into their land so that they are one kingdom ruled
over by David forevermore. Let us examine each of these two prophecies.

   The Valley of Dry Bones

   Ezekiel 37 opens with the information that Ezekiel, the prophet of
God, is brought to a valley which is full of dry bones. It is a picture
of death. It is a picture of hopelessness. There is no evidence of any
kind of life.

   But then God tells Ezekiel in verses 3-6:

   And he said unto me, Son of man, can these bones live? And I
answered, O Lord God, thou knowest. Again he said unto me, Prophesy
upon these bones, and say unto them, O ye dry bones, hear the word of
the Lord. Thus saith the Lord God unto these bones; Behold, I will
cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live: And I will lay
sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with
skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that
I am the Lord.

   Ezekiel then prophesied (to prophesy is to declare the Word of God)
to these dead bones and they came together and flesh came upon them and
they were covered with skin. But no breath was in them.

   So I prophesied as I was commanded: and as I prophesied, there was a
noise, and behold a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his
bone. And when I beheld, lo, the sinews and the flesh came up upon
them, and the skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them
(Ezekiel 37:7-8).

   Thereupon Ezekiel was commanded to prophesy to the wind (ruach -
which is the normal Hebrew word for spirit or breath):

   Come from the four winds, O breath (Hebrew: ruach), and breathe upon
these slain that they may live.

   So he prophesied:

   and the breath (Hebrew: ruach) came into them and they lived and
stood upon their feet, an exceeding great army.

   God now proceeds to tell Ezekiel in verses 11-14:

   Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of
Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we
are cut off for our parts. Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus
saith the Lord God; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and
cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of
Israel. And ye shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your
graves, O my people, and brought you up out of your graves, And shall
put my spirit in you, and ye shall live, and I shall place you in your
own land: then shall ye know that I the Lord have spoken it, and
performed it, saith the Lord.

   Who is the Whole House of Israel?

   Immediately questions begin to multiply. Who is the whole house of
Israel? What is the land of Israel that is in view?0 < m&a >  3                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 H     G`              K=
  NSWR29 ZIP           N'  NTICHRIZIP           O!  NTS    ZIP           P$F  POLOGY ZIP           R%  POSTASYZIP           T)  POSTLESZIP           U,  RMOR   ZIP           W-!                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  om sin, as in the purifying rites of Bacchus
and Pluto (see Hislop, The Two Babylons); DRUNKEN DANCING accompanies
the "worship service" (see Exodus 32 and comments).
  
To make sure that you miss the truth of the passage entirely, the
Taylor paraphrase (The "Living"--go play with yourself, Buster--Bible)
mistranslates the last verse to read:  "he is monarch of all that he
sees," instead of "he is a KING over all the children of PRIDE." This
deft twist of the wrist, which Taylor in his naivete calls "a
paraphrase" (and which buyers of the propaganda accept as a
"paraphrase"), leaves the modern Christian facing a passage that deals
with no creature known to God, man, or the devil.  Taylor's Leviathan
can stand up (v 25), but he is not in the deep (v 31), and he is not
in the "sea" (v 31).  But he moves like a steam roller (v 30), and he
has flesh (v 23), yet no one can capture him (v 9) or get at him with
a spear, harpoon, or iron javelins (vv 7 and 29).
  
("Crocodile," your Aunt Harriet's can opener!)
  
Crocodiles ARE caught with spears, they can be captured, and skinned
(and sometimes eaten); they are not without "fear," and plenty of
natives "stir them up" (v 10) to get their hides, their eggs, or just
run them off from the laundry at the river's edge.  Taylor's
"Leviathan" is a Disneyland joke.
  
And here we shall end comment on the greatest chapter in the Bible on
Satan.  There is not as much material in Ezekiel 28, Revelation 13, or
Isaiah 14 as there is here; so, we may expect the destructive critics
of the Reformation text (Christian universities and colleges first) to
either reject the text, alter the text, confuse the text, or
misinterpret the text, and then cover up for the Devil so he can slip
through undetected.  God said that He would NOT "conceal his parts,
nor his power, nor his comely proportion" (v 12), but they are
concealed by the deceitful, slovenly, infidelic works of Conservative
and Orthodox scholars who are always mouthing off about "the
fundamentals of the faith."
  

  
CHAPTER FORTY-TWO
  

  
42:1-6 THEN Job answered the Lord, and said, I know that thou canst do
everything, and that no thought can be withholden from thee.  Who is
he that hideth counsel without knowledge?  therefore have I uttered
that I understood not; things too wonderful for me, which I knew not. 
Hear, I beseech thee, and I will speak:  I will demand of thee, and
declare thou unto me.  I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: 
but now mine eye seeth thee.  Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in
dust and ashes.
  
You've got to hand it to Job; he does "gird up his loins like a man,"
and he does answer (v 4).  The only catch is that this time he lets
his soliloquy of Chapter 31 drop like a hot rock.  Not one word that
breathes of "self" passes Job's lips in this final speech, nor does
Job waste any breath pointing out the hypocrisy and inconsistencies of
his "comforters." Face to face with the Supreme One, to whom "everyone
of us will give account," Job accounts for himself (Rom.  14:12)
exactly as you and I will.  In spite of the efforts of Liberals (and
Conservatives and Fundamentalists) to "cool" his confession, Job says
the right thing (see v 6) in the right way, and God Himself bears
witness to it in verse 7.
  
"I know thou canst do everything" (v 2).  {Cf.  Ps.  145 and 1 Chron. 
28.}
  
"Who is he that hideth counsel...?" (v 3).  Job repeats the Lord's
question of 38:2 and explains, "I uttered that I understood not;
things too wonderful for me, which I knew not" (v 3).  And this is
what Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar should have chimed in with on the
spot; all three of them had said plenty "without knowledge."
  
"I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear; but now mine eye
seeth thee" (v 5).  Job is looking at the Theophany who appeared to
Abraham (Acts 7:2), Manoah (Judg.  13:3), and Jacob (Gen.  32:24). 
This is no "astronaut" (it's spelled right!) speaking out of a flying
saucer.  The UFO "humanoids" (and the literature on ancient
civilizations and mysteries) are as unlike the Angel of the Lord (or
Christ) as Charles Addams' cartoons are unlike Thoreau's Walden.  If
Jesus Christ were a "humanoid" from outer space, He was the most
critical, negative visitor this earth ever had (see Matt.  23 and John
9).  He professed to have come this way for warfare and division (Luke
12:51) and would only save people who trusted Him as much as they
trusted God.  Furthermore, He stated flatly that there wasn't any
point in wasting money on helping poor folks out when you could give
the money to Him (John 12:8).  (My how "characteristic" of the
"helpful humanoids" who keep popping up to show men how to "live
together peaceably!") Imagine a UFO occupant telling you that bigger
and better wars are on the way (Matt.  24), that you should get
yourself a weapon for personal defense (Luke 22), and that the only
hope for this planet lay in the finished blood atonement of a JEW! 
Ever read about any "Venusian," "Atlantean," or "Lemurian" who talked
that way?!  Christ mentions His "Father" over fifty times in His
discourses, and these discourses take up less than fifty pages; you
never heard a UFO occupant spend five minutes talking about HIS
"father"!!  When one of God's real "men from outer space" shows up--
see Genesis 16:9 for example--he doesn't ask where the power supply
is; he just butchers 185,000 men (without a "ray gun" or chemicals)
and goes on about his business (2 Kings 19:35).
  
"Wherefore I abhor MYSELF, and repent in dust and ashes" (v 6).  Atta
boy, Job!  Sock it to 'em!  Sock it to these "positive thinking," "I'm
okay, you're okay, we're all okay," girls!  Lay it on 'em Job!  Phase
out these goody-goody "youth conflict, dynamic tension" kiddies who
are always getting you to "find yourself," and "have faith in your
fellow man." Put it on 'em Job--abhor YOURSELF!
  
This is the classical example of contrition; it is not sorrow for SIN,
it is sorrow for SELF.  It is not sorrow for what we have done, but
for what we ARE (2 Cor.  7:10).  When Balaam.  Saul, Pharaoh, and
Judas say, "I have sinned," it means no more than "Oops, I got
caught!" But when David and the Prodigal Son say it, the angels start
a jubilee in Heaven (Luke 15, Ps.  51).  "Godly sorrow" (2 Cor.  7:10)
is sorrow for BEING WRONG, nor just DOING WRONG.  No Catholic,
Communist, Campbellite, or Charismatic will ever fully understand this
great Biblical truth, for all of them leave a certain margin for SELF
in their plans for salvation--both for the salvation of individuals
and the salvation of "society." As proof of this, let us examine some
of the last 35 trays full of garbage that have been served up to the
Christian as "Bible versions."
  
1.  The Dodd Version (NEB):  "Therefore I melt away."
  
2.  Jehovah's Witness Version (NWT):  "I make a retraction."
  
3.  Dean Weigle Version (RSV):  "I despise myself."
  
4.  New Apostate Version (New ASV):  "Therefore I retract." (Observe
how this translation--recognized by John R.  Rice and Bob Jones, III--
has adopted the Arian reading of the Jehovah's Witness Bible, The New
World Translation.)
  
5.  The Old Apostate Version (ASV, 1901):  Margin--"loathe my words."
  
6.  J.  F.  and Brown:  "I abhor the rash speeches." (You see, the
matter is as we have stated it.  J.  F.  and Brown cannot imagine Job
abhoring what he IS, only what he has SAID.)
  
7.  Little Red Riding Hood:  "I am sorry I spoke so hastily."
  
8.  Charlie Brown:  "Sorry 'bout that."
  
9.  The Great New, Brand Spanking New, NEW Authorized Revised Common
Standard Ecumenical International, Federal New, NEW NEW AMERICAN
STANDARD VERSION:  "I realize that my isolated orientation developed a
sectarian mentality with no adhesive factor to sensitize the expanded
world view with its renewed emphasis on the deversifiability of a
cruciform ethic, where a scientific break-through could give a
significant thrust to relationable structures in the blankety, blank,
blank, blank..."
  
Anything but the truth.
  
The word "ABHOR" (AV, 1611) is too strong for the stomachs of the
modern Fundamentalists and Conservatives, for the word means
"something detested with extreme repugnance." And when did any modern
revisor (saved or lost), feel that way about himself when confronted
with the Authority of the Holy Bible?  Job looks at himself like a man
would look at the rotting body of a dead frog, and that is the "look"
which puts a man in line with Job 15:16--right on target.  It isn't
"man is the measure of all things"; it is "I am a man of UNCLEAN LIPS"
(Isa.  6).  It isn't "worthy of the noble name of MAN"; it is "depart
from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord" (Luke 5:8).  It isn't "I think
therefore I am"; rather it is "Lord, what wilt thou have ME to do?"
(Acts 9).  Get it straight.  Not one of those wilfully ignorant, self-
deceived idiots from Socrates to Sartre had any more idea where he (or
you) was headed (or how to get there) than a blind bollweevil in a
blizzard.  There is more real power in an ounce of negative truth than
15,000 tons of "positive thinking" where that positive thinking is the
self-induced hallucination of a Bible-rejecting Pharisee.  Now Job is
in a position where God can bless him!  And the Almighty never fails
to meet His own obligations (Gen.  18:18)!
  
42:7-17 And it was so, that after the Lord had spoken these words unto
Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled
against thee, and against thy two friends:  for ye have not spoken of
me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.  Therefore take
unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job,
and offer up for yourselves a bunt offering; and my servant Job shall
pray for you:  for him will I accept:  lest I deal with you after your
folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like
my servant Job.  So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and
Zophar the Naamathite went, and did according as the Lord commanded
them:  the Lord also accepted Job.  And the Lord turned the captivity
of Job, when he prayed for his friends:  also the Lord gave Job twice
as much as he had before.  Then came there unto him all his brethren,
and all his sisters, and all they that had been of his acquaintance
before, and did eat bread with him in his house:  and they bemoaned
him, and comforted him over all the evil that the Lord had brought
upon him:  every man also gave him a piece of money, and every one an
earring of gold.  So the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than
his beginning:  for he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand
camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she asses.  He had
also seven sons and three daughters.  And he called the name of the
first, Jemima; and the name of the second, Kazia; and the name of the
third, Kerenhappuch.  And in all the land were no women found so fair
as the daughters of Job:  and their father gave them inheritance among
their brethren.  After this lived Job an hundred and forty years, and
saw his sons, and his son's sons, even for four generations.  So Job
died, being old and full of days.
  
Verse 10 is the key to proper interpretation of the passage, and since
not one Fundamental or Conservative scholar ("godly" or otherwise)
ever paid any attention to what the Biblical text said where it
crossed his "training," they quite naturally missed the greatest
prophetic truth in the entire passage:  Job's children were
resurrected.
  
Verse 10 placed the Book of Job "smack dab" down on Psalm 126:4,
Zephaniah 2:7; 3:20, Amos 5:27, and Jeremiah 33:7, 11, 26.  That is,
it does if you believe in the scriptural method of comparing
"spiritual things with spiritual" (1 Cor.  2:13) instead of comparing
scripture with nineteen centuries of scholarly fungus.  If you believe
in ravaging the text and tearing it to pieces with the murderous
scholarship of the "recognized authorities," then, of course, you can
never find the cross-reference to Truth.  One must never forget that
real Bible students who really DO "take their Bible studies seriously"
never waste five minutes with the slime and algae of the Revision
Committees (any and all, since 1800) when trying to find Biblical
Truth.  The Revision committee of 1881-1884 knew nothing of Pre-
millennial truth, though Darby and Moody were preaching these truths
while the committee was at work destroying the Receptus of the
Reformation, from which the truths were revealed.  The Revision
committee of 1901 knew nothing about the corruption of the Alexandrian
text, although Burgon and Scrivener had been documenting it publicly
for thirty years.  The Revision committee of 1952 (RSV) knew nothing
about Daniel's Seventieth Week, although Scofield and Larkin had
expounded it world-wide before 1930.  The Revision committees of 1959-
1970 (New ASV) knew nothing about Tribulation salvation, the Mark of
the Beast, the chapter and verse system of the AV, the seven
resurrections, the three raptures, or the doctrine of the Kingdom,
although Bible believers had been preaching and teaching these truths
ten to thirty years before the committee sat down at the table to
undermine the truth of God.  What little Bible the Lockman Foundation
and the faculty at Bob Jones University knows, they got from Larkin
and Scofield, who published all of their works before 1940 and most of
them before 1920.  And the same may be said of any group of
professional hucksters engaged in making a living by changing the
Authorized Text.  They have no knowledge of anything that anyone
needs, and if they needed it, anyone could find it without consulting
the "pros" for anything.  All the Bible they know they got from Bible
believers who preceded them anywhere from ten to 500 years.  You will
find nothing in any book John R.  Rice ever wrote (aside from personal
illustrations of practical experience in the ministry--which any
minister has) that was not clearly presented by one to ten writers
fifty years before Rice was converted.  You may read the entire set of
books by Kenneth Wuest from cover to cover, and you will not find ONE
doctrinal truth stated from ANY Greek text (or study) that is not
clearly stated by Peiters and Scofield fifty to sixty years before
Wuest wrote his first book.  You may read any set of books by any
"recognized" Fundamental scholars since 1930, and you will only be
reading the work of a man who God has showed nothing to since Larkin
and Scofield got their mateiral (1890-1930) from a King James 1611
Authorized Version.  It is true that occasionally Larkin and Scorield
(as Spurgeon and Torrey) yielded to the pressure of the "godly
brethren," who always were around to tempt them to sin against the
Bible.  Once in awhile you will find an isolated quotation from an RV
(or a reference to the "Greek") in the writings of these men; this was
done in a moment of weakness ("ALL have sinned!") when they wanted to
be "accepted" as Bible scholars.  But these men got their revelations
from the same place that Carey, Goforth, Livingstone, Brainerd,
Edwards, Wesley, Tennant, Finney, Sam Jones, Bob Jones, Sr., Frank
Norris, Billy Sunday, and Peter Cartwright got theirs:  A King James
1611, Authorized Version.
  
And if you want to put one of these man-pleasing, manfollowing,
copycats on the spot, just ask him this:  "Sir, would you please show
me one thing--just ONE--you have learned from your studies of the
'original languages' that I can't find in a dime store King James
Bible?" And then watch him hit the skids!  All you asked for was ONE;
surely he can show you ONE!  Just ONE will do.  (All a linguist does,
if he is Orthodox, is use the "original language" to prove what any
Bible believer already knows, or can find out by reading a man who
didn't refer to the "originals.")
  
"My wrath is kindled against thee..." (v 7).  The speech is aimed at
Eliphaz, but it includes his two buddies:  "For ye have not spoken of
me the thing that is right, as my servant JOB hath" (v 7).  In the
first place, Job did say, "I have sinned" (7:20), and none of his
comforters said that about themselves one time in 38 chapters.  It is
true that The New English Bible, The "Living" Bible, the RSV, and the
grossly corrupt ASV (old or new) have all altered Job 7:20 so that Job
did NOT "speak that which was right," but changing Job 7:20 to read
"if I have sinned," or "if I sinned," etc., doesn't relieve the
evangelical apostates of their responsibility to God.  Job DID say, "I
have sinned," and that was the right thing to say.  The irresponsible
Fundamentalists who slapped the truth out of Job's mouth sinned
without saying it themselves, but "be sure yor sin will find YOU out."
He did say, "I abhor myself," and that was the right thing to say. 
What the new versions--"in the modern, updated English"--say Job said,
is what he did NOT say, and till heaven and earth pass away God will
not write His Book like Machen, Cheyne, Warfield, Keil, Robertson,
Delitzsch, Olson, Weniger, Bauer, Hort, Aland, Metzger, Thieme,
Origen, Gesenius, and Walvoord THINK it should be written.  {We have
never referred to Robertson, Warfield, Machen, and Hort as
"unbelievers" or "liberals" in regard to John 3:16, but since the
apostasy within the body of Christ has always been carried on by saved
people who "love the Lord," (to quote one destructive critic of the
AV), who are "loyal to verbal inspiration" (to quote another two-faced
hypocrite), we are not really concerned with "liberals" or "Neo-
evangelicals" at all; what we have to deal with in the last half of
this century is puffed-up, bloated, egotistical, SAVED stuffed-shirts
who think they are smart enough to correct God's Book simply because
they have been exposed to nineteen centuries of scholarly trash.  What
we have to deal with is men like A.  T.  Robertson, Warfield, Wuest,
Hort, Machen, etc., who became deluded, self-deceived dupes in the
hands of Satan, as he sought to overthrow biblical Authority--not the
"fundamentals." These men trained the faculties who trained the
faculties who are now training young men for a full-time ministry of
correcting and repudiating the words of God.  They were tools for the
greatest apostasy the world has ever seen, and nothing that the
Catholics or Liberals pulled off between 1582 and 1980 could match it. 
We may say, without fear of anyone (or consideration of anyone's
feelings), that these "Conservatives" did more to destroy the
character and manhood of American Christianity than the National
Council of Churches, the Communist Party, and the Roman Catholic
Hierarchy.  Their damage to the minds and ministries of 50,000 young
preachers (1890-1980) is simply incalculable, and it will never be
computated accurately until the Judgment Seat of Christ.}
  
"Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams..." (v 8). 
The reader will observe that the requirement places the time element
(see comments on date of writing in the Preface) back to Gentile
worship before the Law.  Numbers 23:1 and 14 shows that Balak and
Balaam recognized the sacrifice of Job 42:8 as the standard sacrifice. 
"Lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of
me the thing which is right, like my servant Job" (v 8).  Then, Job
was right all along, even when he was wrong.  He was wrong (v 3), in
that, he had tried to justify himself and had tried to put God "down"
for dealing with him unfairly, but Job was right on three counts which
his buddies had all missed:
  
1.  He was right in assuming that in this life the wicked do not
always get paid back in full.
  
2.  He was right in assuming that the same things can befall a saint
which befall a rascal.
  
3.  He was right in assuming that since man was a sinner, he needed a
"daysman" or "mediator" to stand for him in the presence of God.
  
"So Eliphaz...did according as the LORD commanded them:  and the LORD
also accepted Job" (v 9).  That is, the Lord accepted Job's petition
on their behalf.  This time Job, himself, got to be the "daysman," or
mediator (v 8).  Since Abraham did this same thing in Genesis 20:17,
we are again reminded of the patriarchal setting of the Book, and once
again, we should make a mental note that if some brilliant grammarian
(with access to "more ancient manuscripts," etc., etc.) pokes his head
through the bushes and tells us that "light from the Dead Sea Scrolls
shows, blah, blah, blah, that Job took place after the time of Moses,"
we should give him the raspberry and send his way a token greeting of
No.  6 squirrel shot.
  
And now, again (for the "umpteenth time"), the fat hits the fire.
  
"And the LORD turned the captivity of Job..." (v 10).
  
With two dozen clear indications that the Book of Job is a future
prophecy (see Preface), the ravening critics of the AV--fundamentalist
foremost--draw out their bloody butcher knives, hatchets, frog
stickers, shivs, daggers, and meat cleavers and begin to hack and
mutilate the Holy Bible like killing was going out of style.  The
truth must not get through!  Forward to the fray!  Quick!  Produce the
"verbally inspired, God-breathed originals" so that no one can find
out the truth!  Get rid of Biblical truth at any cost!
  
1.  "And the Lord restored the fortunes of Job" (Lockman Version,
miscalled "The New ASV").
  
2.  "And the Lord turned Job to repentance" (Jerome's Vulgate).
  
3.  "The literal use of this phrase is common, the metaphorical use of
it uncommon.  Still it is so simple a metaphor.  It signifies, as
Professor Lee remarks:  'a restoration to former happy circumstances'"
(The Pulpit Commentary, p 663).
  
4.  "...turned back the captive condition" (Jehovah's Witness Version: 
NWT).
  
5.  "The Lord restoreth his wealth and happiness" (Taylor Version: 
TLB).
  
6.  "The Lord restored the fortunes..." (Dean Weigle Version:  RSV).
  
7.  "So the Lord restored Job's fortunes..." (Dodd Version:  NEB).
  
Quite naturally, the compromising Amplified Bible (sometimes used by
Oliver Greene) has the Reformation reading and the Communist reading
together in the same verse; that is, the AV text has been adulterated
with the RSV text by putting them together in the same verse. 
Typical.
  
Now the question we need to ask ourselves is this:  "Since when should
the opinions of Dr.  Rawlinson (The Pulpit Commentary) or Dr.  Lee be
taken seriously since neither man believed two-thirds of the Old
Testament?" What are either of these rascals doing making a "METAPHOR"
out of a Biblical prophecy that deals with the Doctrine of the Second
Advent?  It's like Berkhof and Kuyper (plus Shedd, Dabney, Hodge,
Strong, Gill, and Calvin) telling us that the "first resurrection"
(Revelation 20:4-6) is not a bodily, physical resurrection, isn't it? 
Do you know what Paul did to Hymaneaus for teaching that the "first
resurrection" was PAST because it was not a bodily resurrection?  Did
you ever look it up?  Robertson, Machen, Wilson, and Warfield all
taught that the first resurrection was SPIRITUAL only.  Did you see
what the Holy Spirit said about this recognized "scholarship" in 1 and
2 Timothy?  Do you think any of us who really "take our Bible studies
seriously" would go to any man who has been delivered to Satan to get
a "qualified opinion"?  And do you think any of us who believe that
Book are stupid enough to worry about "slandering the dead" or
slandering "the sainted memory of these 'giants' of the faith"?  Why
worry about a sinner who slandered the King James Bible every day of
his life?  These two-faced punks who worry so much about "the due
reverence to the dead," have never failed to slander and vilify the
translators of the AV 1611 asnd the men who defend it (Hills, Ray,
Fuller, Burgon, etc.).  A little "double standard" there, eh Doctor?
  
Verse 10 says "TURNED THE CAPTIVITY," and it says this after 42
chapters, matching the 42 months of the second half of Daniel's
Seventieth Week (see Dan.  9 and Rev.  12, 13), and after seven days
and nights (Job 2:13), matching the seven year period (Dan.  9:25)
where Satan (Job 1, 2) will be persecuting Israel in the land of Edom,
in Uz (Lam.  4:21).  The Book of Job was preceded by a Book describing
the return of the Jews to Palestine and the rebuilding of the Temple
(Ezra and Nehemiah); it is followed by the King Messiah of whom David
(Ps.  1, 2) was a type.  With this much prophetic information
available in an English text which any sixth grade reader could read--
without referring once to any Hebrew or Greek text used by any
scholar--hw do we explain the irrational attack on the verse and then
the blindness which follows it at verse 13?
  
("Crocodile," your aching back!)
  
Psalm 14:7 and 126:1 are the divinely appointed, infallible
authorities for properly interpreting the verse, and what any Hebrew
or Greek scholar may think the verse says can be classified under "N. 
T."--non-essential trivia.
  
Job is a type of Israel:  Cast off, persecuted, rejected, restored,
converted, and blessed.
  
Any system of Bible study, promoted by anyone, that denies that (or
tends to obscure it) is SATANIC.  And if you are gullible enough to
think that Satan could not deceive Christian scholars (like the men
who taught the men who wrote the textbooks used in Christian
universities and colleges (any of them), you have been hoodwinked by
the master deceiver (Rev.  12:9).  No Roman Catholic or Communist ever
got that far into Biblical theology to worry about altering Job 42:10. 
Only Fundamentalists and Conservzatives were anxious to cover up the
truth on that verse; the Catholics and Communists would change any
verse on no other grounds than the desire to replace the Authorized
Text.
  
Verses 11 and 12 point far beyond the oppressed saint on the ash heap
in Uz; they point out the great prophecies of Isaiah 2, 11, and Amos
9, and scores of other prophetic passages which were discounted by
Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Warfield, Machen, Calvin, and Moulton as
"figurative metaphors."
  
"...they bemoaned him and comforted him" (v 11).  {Cf.  Isa.  40:1;
49:13, Jer.  31:13, and Zech.  1:17.}
  
"...every man also gave him a piece of money" (v 11).  Compae this
with the wealth the Jews will have in the Millennium following the
Tribulation:  Romans 11:15, 23, Isaiah 2:1-4; 66:10-14, 2 Chronicles
9:1-12, etc.  With passage after passage confirming the great
prophetic typology found in Job, Biederwolf, Umbreit, Steiger, Roesch,
Starke, Briggs, Welhausen, Riehm, Pusey, Tuch, Zahn, Vincent, Strong,
Swete, Rosenmuller, Oosterzee, Duhm, Schulten, Kalisch, Keil, Kurtz,
Hitzug, Weiss, Trench, Paulus, Plummer, Cheyne, Davidson, Oehler,
Gunkel, Gratz, Dillman, Bleek, Bahr, Osiander, Schults, Semler,
Riddle, Moulton, Reinke, Tischendorf, Westcott, Hort, Driver,
Kennicott, Horton, Knobel, Lowth, and Bennett go sailing by the
passage like a regatta in a 60-mile-an-hour wind--hot air and all. 
They, and their "kin," represent 5,000 books by 1,000 authors, through
1,000 years of Church history, with nothing in them on the passage
apart from what any Christian layman could find in his own language: 
Nothing else except pure unadulterated BALONEY.
  
"So the LORD blessed the LATTER END of Job" (v 12).  This is the
fifteenth warning that the Book of Job is a future prophecy:  Compare
Numbers 24:14, Hosea 3:5, Daniel 10:14, Jeremiah 23:20, and James 5.
  
"He had also seven sons and three daughters" (v 13).  At verse 13(!)
we see why there was such a concerted rush by the Catholics,
Conservatives, Liberals, Fundamentalists, Neo-evangelicals, and
Atheists to get rid of verse 10.  For as sure as Job's ten children
vanished in Chapter 1, they show up again in Chapter 42!  To get rid
of this Biblical Truth as quickly (and as neatly) as possible, Taylor
(TLB) inserts "seven MORE sons" and "three MORE daughters" into the
passage.  In spite of God's warning to Kenneth Taylor (see Prov. 
30:6), he has added in his notes that (p.  44) Job now has TWENTY
children.
  
By whom, brother Taylor?
  
Where was Job's wife?
  
I said, "WHERE WAS JOB'S WIFE?"
  
Do you remember "Lot's wife"?  Didn't Jesus Christ tell you to
remember "Lot's wife"?
  
How could any man who "took his Bible studies seriously, etc."
overlook the fact that Job and Lot are both types of Tribulation
saints?  And if they were, what would their WIVES be doing bearing
children at the end of the Tribulation?  When a commentator or revisor
ignores the Bible's own dictionary for types, he develops a sort of
"Disneyland exegesis" like Kenneth Taylor's.
  
Quickly, will someone come to brother Taylor's aid and help him get
rid of the truth?!  Ah yes!  Dr.  Rawlinson (The Pulpit Commentary, p. 
664) is on hand!  he is "a good man" who "loves the Lord, etc.," and
surely he will not mislead us!  "We need not suppose however that
either the round numbers or the exact duplicity are historical."
(Rawlinson) Ahh, so!
  
But the, on the other hand--are you listening?  All of you stuffed
shirts who think that The Pulpit Commentary was the word of
"scholars"--"we need not suppose that any writer in The Pulpit
Commentary knows what he's talking about when he attacks the history
of the inspired account on the grounds of his own stupidity."
  
(There are two ways to look at everything, aren't there?  I thought
you would agre.  There is nothing like being broadminded, is there?)
  
Job had ten more children, did he, and then lived 140 years after
that, did he?  Look at verse 16.  This would put Job at 190 years old
if he was 50 when God restored him.  That is, ten children before he
was 50 and then ten more, without a wife, after he was 50.  Now tell
us something!  In Job's time, Isaac lived to be 180, but he never
married till he was 40 years old, and then he had two children in the
next 140 years.  Are we to suppose that Job's wife--who told him to
curse God and die, and then never showed up again!--had twenty
children, ten of them after Job was 50?  One a year till he was 60? 
One every two years till he was 70?  It took a miracle to give Abraham
a child after he was 90, and Isaac had no children after he was 60. 
Aren't our commentators stretching things a little to make us think
that the same woman who told Job to curse God and die came back to him
and added ten more tax exemptions to his family before he got to be
70?  And if that doesn't stretch your credulity, aren't you just as
capable of believing the following:
  
1.  There is a resurrection of dead saints at the end of the
Tribulation.
  
2.  This resurrection includes the dead of Israel (Ezek.  37:1-12).
  
3.  Job believes in a resurrection in the "latter day" (Job 19:24).
  
4.  Christ's resurrection had an addenda on it which pictures this
resurrection (Matt.  27:52, 43).
  
5.  Israel gets her dead back later (Isa.  26:17-19).
  
6.  Abraham, the father of the nation of Israel, believed that he
would get his dead son back again (Gen.  22:5, John 8:56).
  
Job got 'em back (v 13)!
  
The reason, then, for the exact number (seven and three) is
"simplistic" (cliche by socialistic educators, 1970-1980) in the
extreme:  These are the children whom Job lost in Chapter One.  The
fact that the names of the daughters are given in verse 14 caused the
expositors to reject the mass of evidence given above, for it is
either assumed that Job would not have renamed the first three
daughters, or it is assumed that the names are different names--not
the original ones.  But neither of these assumptions could counter-
balance the testimony of Ezekiel, John, Genesis, Isaiah, and Matthew
where they deal with a Post-tribulation resurrection (Matt.  24:31)
and rapture of Tribulation saints (Ezek.  37).  Job 42 is the exact
duplicate of these matters, including the restoration of Israel and
their subsequent Millennial blessings.
  
Plainly, and scripturally, Job got his children back from the dead. 
And nothing more is ever said about Job's wonderful "help mate." She
wound up with Lot's wife.  Like Lot's wife (Gen.  19:26), she seems to
have "turned aside after Satan" (1Tim.  5:15), and Lot and Job finish
their trips alone.  Lot finishes as a widower with daughters while Job
finishes as a widower with sons and daughters and then grandsons (v
16).  Longevity is one of the characteristics of the Millennium (Isa. 
65) since many of the Edenic conditions will be restored (Isa.  2; 11;
33, Amos 9:13, Rom.  8:18-22).  "The right of the firstborn" (Deut. 
21:17) belongs to Israel as the "first born son" (Exod.  4:23) of
Jehovah, and the right of the firstborn guarantees a "double portion"
(Deut.  2:17), so that is exactly what Job gets (v 10).  The
commentators and revisors who made the Book ninety percent
"figurative" or "metaphorical" must now suddenly take the phrase
"twice as much" (v 10) literally, after altering the first half of the
same verse!  But Job did NOT get back two wives; he didn't even get
back the shrew he had; therefore, to say that "twice as much" refers
to people is stretching the text to accommodate the unbelief of the
scholar in the typology so clearly presented in the Book of Job.
  
"So Job died" (as they will in the Millennium) "being old and full of
days" (v 17).  As a little girl said in Sunday School:  "All of God's
stories have happy endings." The unhappy endings are found in the
historical narratiges of those who follow science, education, money,
humanism, sex, religion, philosophy, or the devil to their own
destruction.  "The end of the wicked" (see comments under Prov.  4:14;
10:6; 10:24,25; 15:9, and 11:10, 23) is easily predictable:  It is
outer darkness and a lake of fire.  Where a man repents as Job did and
accepts God's revelation as superior to his own wisdom--at the same
time accepting God's judgment against himself as a sinner--the end is
also predictable:  A new heaven and a new earth, and an eternity with
a Sinless Saviour in New Jerusalem (see Rev.  21; 22, and comments).
  
And though the screams of wounded and dying Christians will yet echo
up over the highways and skyscrapers of America, and though the groans
and cries of tortured saints may resound off the walls of jails and
hospitals in the next few years, the end is predictable:  new
Jerusalem.  The worst thing that can happen to a child of God is
GLORY, in the end, or the "final analysis." In the "end" Job comes out
healthy, wealthy, successful, honored, blessed, and happy.  The man
who cried out in his misery:  "Oh my God, though you SLAY ME, yet will
I trust in thee!" lived to see the day when he cried:  "Oh my God, how
good Thou hast been to me!" The man who spit out:  "Leave me alone
till I swallow down my own spit!" survived to proclaim:  "Bless the
Lord, oh my soul, and all that is within me bless His holy name!"
  
"For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy
to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us...for our
present light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a
far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory...for we are more than
conquerors through Him that loved us!" (2 Cor.  4:17 and Rom. 
8:18,37).
  
The great Book (which is quoted more than sixty times in the Bible)
teaches us seven great lessons, and the plain, simple-minded, ordinary
Christian can learn all of them without referring to any version by
anyone other than the King James 1611 AV.
  
1.  We learn that "all those who live godly" shall suffer persecution.
  
2.  We learn that God uses Satan to glorify himself.
  
3.  We learn that the best of men are sinners.
  
4.  We learn that some things cannot be explained apart from
supernatural revelation.
  
5.  We learn that God's ways are not our ways, nor His thoughts our
thoughts.
  
6.  We learn that "all things work together for good to them that love
God."
  
7.  We learn that God will be merciful and loving to any sinner who
forsakes his own righteousness and accepts God's righteousness.
  
And thus we shall close the covers of the Book of Job and leave our
nomadic friend from Selah, Petra, in Uz, strolling through his
pastures, chatting with his friends, playing with his grandchildren,
offering sacrifices for his sons "lest they curse God in their
hearts," and maintaining his integrity--this time without trusting in
it!  As the ancient scroll rolls together, Job's "hedge" (Job 1:10)
has been rebuilt by the One who planted it, and in the portals of
eternity when the Adversary approaches, he is warned:  "No deal.  Lay
off him.  He has been tried and tested.  You'll have to pick on
someone else."
  
"Behold, we count them happy which endure.  Ye have heard of the
patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is
very pitiful, and of tender mercy" (James 5:11).
  
And it would seem like a shame to add one more critical note to such a
sublime ending, but lest we should "rest on our laurels" or be "at
ease in Zion" may we not forget that the corrupt Alexandrian
manuscripts promoted to the seat of authority by Stewart Custer (Bob
Jones University), Roberston (Louisville, Southern Baptist Seminary),
Machen (Princeton and Westminster), Wuest (Moody Bible Institute),
Afman (Tennessee Temple), and John R.  Rice (Sword of the Lord: 
Recommendation on New ASV) have deliberately violated Proverbs 30:6,
exactly the way Kenneth Taylor violated it (see v 13) by adding
fifteen words to the book of Job.  These words are so obviously
fraudulent that not even the idolators who worshipped Sinaiticus and
Vaticanus dared to copy out their text at this point.  The text of the
Septuagint here reads as follows:  "It is written that he will rise
again with those whom the Lord raises up."
  
Nothing of the kind is "written" or "has been written" or ever will be
"written" by the Author of the book of Job.  This final scribal
blooper is just as spurious as the depraved Greek text it came from--
the Greek text used for the International Bible and The New American
Standard Bible, and Taylor's paraphrase.  If 100% of the "godly"
Christian scholars recommended this text, they would still be
recommending a depraved counterfeit of God's truth.
  
"Crocodile," your bridge-work.
90CTXT           *>	  ICR0490 TXT           l>&+  f the faith."
  

  
CHAPTER FORTY-TWO
  

  
42:1-6 THEN Job answered the Lord, and said, I know that thou canst do
everything, and that no thought can be withholden from thee.  Who is
he that hideth counsel without knowledge?  therefore have I uttered
that I understood not; things too wonderful for me, which I knew not. 
Hear, I beseech thee, and I will speak:  I will demand of thee, and
declare thou unto me.  I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: 
but now mine eye seeth thee.  Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in
dust and ashes.
  
You've got to hand it to Job; he does "gird up his loins like a man,"
and he does answer (v 4).  The only catch is that this time he lets
his soliloquy of Chapter 31 drop like a hot rock.  Not one word that
breathes of "self" passes Job's lips in this final speech, nor does
Job waste any breath pointing out the hypocrisy and inconsistencies of
his "comforters." Face to face with the Supreme One, to whom "everyone
of us will give account," Job accounts for himself (Rom.  14:12)
exactly as you and I will.  In spite of the efforts of Liberals (and
Conservatives and Fundamentalists) to "cool" his confession, Job says
the right thing (see v 6) in the right way, and God Himself bears
witness to it in verse 7.
  
"I know thou canst do everything" (v 2).  {Cf.  Ps.  145 and 1 Chron. 
28.}
  
"Who is he that hideth counsel...?" (v 3).  Job repeats the Lord's
question of 38:2 and explains, "I uttered that I understood not;
things too wonderful for me, which I knew not" (v 3).  And this is
what Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar should have chimed in with on the
spot; all three of them had said plenty "without knowledge."
  
"I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear; but now mine eye
seeth thee" (v 5).  Job is looking at the Theophany who appeared to
Abraham (Acts 7:2), Manoah (Judg.  13:3), and Jacob (Gen.  32:24). 
This is no "astronaut" (it's spelled right!) speaking out of a flying
saucer.  The UFO "humanoids" (and the literature on ancient
civilizations and mysteries) are as unlike the Angel of the Lord (or
Christ) as Charles Addams' cartoons are unlike Thoreau's Walden.  If
Jesus Christ were a "humanoid" from outer space, He was the most
critical, negative visitor this earth ever had (see Matt.  23 and John
9).  He professed to have come this way for warfare and division (Luke
12:51) and would only save people who trusted Him as much as they
trusted God.  Furthermore, He stated flatly that there wasn't any
point in wasting money on helping poor folks out when you could give
the money to Him (John 12:8).  (My how "characteristic" of the
"helpful humanoids" who keep popping up to show men how to "live
together peaceably!") Imagine a UFO occupant telling you that bigger
and better wars are on the way (Matt.  24), that you should get
yourself a weapon for personal defense (Luke 22), and that the only
hope for this planet lay in the finished blood atonement of a JEW! 
Ever read about any "Venusian," "Atlantean," or "Lemurian" who talked
that way?!  Christ mentions His "Father" over fifty times in His
discourses, and these discourses take up less than fifty pages; you
never heard a UFO occupant spend five minutes talking about HIS
"father"!!  When one of God's real "men from outer space" shows up--
see Genesis 16:9 for example--he doesn't ask where the power supply
is; he just butchers 185,000 men (without a "ray gun" or chemicals)
and goes on about his business (2 Kings 19:35).
  
"Wherefore I abhor MYSELF, and repent in dust and ashes" (v 6).  Atta
boy, Job!  Sock it to 'em!  Sock it to these "positive thinking," "I'm
okay, you're okay, we're all okay," girls!  Lay it on 'em Job!  Phase
out these goody-goody "youth conflict, dynamic tension" kiddies who
are always getting you to "find yourself," and "have faith in your
fellow man." Put it on 'em Job--abhor YOURSELF!
  
This is the classical example of contrition; it is not sorrow for SIN,
it is sorrow for SELF.  It is not sorrow for what we have done, but
for what we ARE (2 Cor.  7:10).  When Balaam.  Saul, Pharaoh, and
Judas say, "I have sinned," it means no more than "Oops, I got
caught!" But when David and the Prodigal Son say it, the angels start
a jubilee in Heaven (Luke 15, Ps.  51).  "Godly sorrow" (2 Cor.  7:10)
is sorrow for BEING WRONG, nor just DOING WRONG.  No Catholic,
Communist, Campbellite, or Charismatic will ever fully understand this
great Biblical truth, for all of them leave a certain margin for SELF
in their plans for salvation--both for the salvation of individuals
and the salvation of "society." As proof of this, let us examine some
of the last 35 trays full of garbage that have been served up to the
Christian as "Bible versions."
  
1.  The Dodd Version (NEB):  "Therefore I melt away."
  
2.  Jehovah's Witness Version (NWT):  "I make a retraction."
  
3.  Dean Weigle Version (RSV):  "I despise myself."
  
4.  New Apostate Version (New ASV):  "Therefore I retract." (Observe
how this translation--recognized by John R.  Rice and Bob Jones, III--
has adopted the Arian reading of the Jehovah's Witness Bible, The New
World Translation.)
  
5.  The Old Apostate Version (ASV, 1901):  Margin--"loathe my words."
  
6.  J.  F.  and Brown:  "I abhor the rash speeches." (You see, the
matter is as we have stated it.  J.  F.  and Brown cannot imagine Job
abhoring what he IS, only what he has SAID.)
  
7.  Little Red Riding Hood:  "I am sorry I spoke so hastily."
  
8.  Charlie Brown:  "Sorry 'bout that."
  
9.  The Great New, Brand Spanking New, NEW Authorized Revised Common
Standard Ecumenical International, Federal New, NEW NEW AMERICAN
STANDARD VERSION:  "I realize that my isolated orientation developed a
sectarian mentality with no adhesive factor to sensitize the expanded
world view with its renewed emphasis on the deversifiability of a
cruciform ethic, where a scientific break-through could give a
significant thrust to relationable structures in the blankety, blank,
blank, blank..."
  
Anything but the truth.
  
The word "ABHOR" (AV, 1611) is too strong for the stomachs of the
modern Fundamentalists and Conservatives, for the word means
"something detested with extreme repugnance." And when did any modern
revisor (saved or lost), feel that way about himself when confronted
with the Authority of the Holy Bible?  Job looks at himself like a man
would look at the rotting body of a dead frog, and that is the "look"
which puts a man in line with Job 15:16--right on target.  It isn't
"man is the measure of all things"; it is "I am a man of UNCLEAN LIPS"
(Isa.  6).  It isn't "worthy of the noble name of MAN"; it is "depart
from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord" (Luke 5:8).  It isn't "I think
therefore I am"; rather it is "Lord, what wilt thou have ME to do?"
(Acts 9).  Get it straight.  Not one of those wilfully ignorant, self-
deceived idiots from Socrates to Sartre had any more idea where he (or
you) was headed (or how to get there) than a blind bollweevil in a
blizzard.  There is more real power in an ounce of negative truth than
15,000 tons of "positive thinking" where that positive thinking is the
self-induced hallucination of a Bible-rejecting Pharisee.  Now Job is
in a position where God can bless him!  And the Almighty never fails
to meet His own obligations (Gen.  18:18)!
  
42:7-17 And it was so, that after the Lord had spoken these words unto
Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled
against thee, and against thy two friends:  for ye have not spoken of
me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.  Therefore take
unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job,
and offer up for yourselves a bunt offering; and my servant Job shall
pray for you:  for him will I accept:  lest I deal with you after your
folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like
my servant Job.  So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and
Zophar the Naamathite went, and did according as the Lord commanded
them:  the Lord also accepted Job.  And the Lord turned the captivity
of Job, when he prayed for his friends:  also the Lord gave Job twice
as much as he had before.  Then came there unto him all his brethren,
and all his sisters, and all they that had been of his acquaintance
before, and did eat bread with him in his house:  and they bemoaned
him, and comforted him over all the evil that the Lord had brought
upon him:  every man also gave him a piece of money, and every one an
earring of gold.  So the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than
his beginning:  for he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand
camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she asses.  He had
also seven sons and three daughters.  And he called the name of the
first, Jemima; and the name of the second, Kazia; and the name of the
third, Kerenhappuch.  And in all the land were no women found so fair
as the daughters of Job:  and their father gave them inheritance among
their brethren.  After this lived Job an hundred and forty years, and
saw his sons, and his son's sons, even for four generations.  So Job
died, being old and full of days.
  
Verse 10 is the key to proper interpretation of the passage, and since
not one Fundamental or Conservative scholar ("godly" or otherwise)
ever paid any attention to what the Biblical text said where it
crossed his "training," they quite naturally missed the greatest
prophetic truth in the entire passage:  Job's children were
resurrected.
  
Verse 10 placed the Book of Job "smack dab" down on Psalm 126:4,
Zephaniah 2:7; 3:20, Amos 5:27, and Jeremiah 33:7, 11, 26.  That is,
it does if you believe in the scriptural method of comparing
"spiritual things with spiritual" (1 Cor.  2:13) instead of comparing
scripture with nineteen centuries of scholarly fungus.  If you believe
in ravaging the text and tearing it to pieces with the murderous
scholarship of the "recognized authorities," then, of course, you can
never find the cross-reference to Truth.  One must never forget that
real Bible students who really DO "take their Bible studies seriously"
never waste five minutes with the slime and algae of the Revision
Committees (any and all, since 1800) when trying to find Biblical
Truth.  The Revision committee of 1881-1884 knew nothing of Pre-
millennial truth, though Darby and Moody were preaching these truths
while the committee was at work destroying the Receptus of the
Reformation, from which the truths were revealed.  The Revision
committee of 1901 knew nothing about the corruption of the Alexandrian
text, although Burgon and Scrivener had been documenting it publicly
for thirty years.  The Revision committee of 1952 (RSV) knew nothing
about Daniel's Seventieth Week, although Scofield and Larkin had
expounded it world-wide before 1930.  The Revision committees of 1959-
1970 (New ASV) knew nothing about Tribulation salvation, the Mark of
the Beast, the chapter and verse system of the AV, the seven
resurrections, the three raptures, or the doctrine of the Kingdom,
although Bible believers had been preaching and teaching these truths
ten to thirty years before the committee sat down at the table to
undermine the truth of God.  What little Bible the Lockman Foundation
and the faculty at Bob Jones University knows, they got from Larkin
and Scofield, who published all of their works before 1940 and most of
them before 1920.  And the same may be said of any group of
professional hucksters engaged in making a living by changing the
Authorized Text.  They have no knowledge of anything that anyone
needs, and if they needed it, anyone could find it without consulting
the "pros" for anything.  All the Bible they know they got from Bible
believers who preceded them anywhere from ten to 500 years.  You will
find nothing in any book John R.  Rice ever wrote (aside from personal
illustrations of practical experience in the ministry--which any
minister has) that was not clearly presented by one to ten writers
fifty years before Rice was converted.  You may read the entire set of
books by Kenneth Wuest from cover to cover, and you will not find ONE
doctrinal truth stated from ANY Greek text (or study) that is not
clearly stated by Peiters and Scofield fifty to sixty years before
Wuest wrote his first book.  You may read any set of books by any
"recognized" Fundamental scholars since 1930, and you will only be
reading the work of a man who God has showed nothing to since Larkin
and Scofield got their mateiral (1890-1930) from a King James 1611
Authorized Version.  It is true that occasionally Larkin and Scorield
(as Spurgeon and Torrey) yielded to the pressure of the "godly
brethren," who always were around to tempt them to sin against the
Bible.  Once in awhile you will find an isolated quotation from an RV
(or a reference to the "Greek") in the writings of these men; this was
done in a moment of weakness ("ALL have sinned!") when they wanted to
be "accepted" as Bible scholars.  But these men got their revelations
from the same place that Carey, Goforth, Livingstone, Brainerd,
Edwards, Wesley, Tennant, Finney, Sam Jones, Bob Jones, Sr., Frank
Norris, Billy Sunday, and Peter Cartwright got theirs:  A King James
1611, Authorized Version.
  
And if you want to put one of these man-pleasing, manfollowing,
copycats on the spot, just ask him this:  "Sir, would you please show
me one thing--just ONE--you have learned from your studies of the
'original languages' that I can't find in a dime store King James
Bible?" And then watch him hit the skids!  All you asked for was ONE;
surely he can show you ONE!  Just ONE will do.  (All a linguist does,
if he is Orthodox, is use the "original language" to prove what any
Bible believer already knows, or can find out by reading a man who
didn't refer to the "originals.")
  
"My wrath is kindled against thee..." (v 7).  The speech is aimed at
Eliphaz, but it includes his two buddies:  "For ye have not spoken of
me the thing that is right, as my servant JOB hath" (v 7).  In the
first place, Job did say, "I have sinned" (7:20), and none of his
comforters said that about themselves one time in 38 chapters.  It is
true that The New English Bible, The "Living" Bible, the RSV, and the
grossly corrupt ASV (old or new) have all altered Job 7:20 so that Job
did NOT "speak that which was right," but changing Job 7:20 to read
"if I have sinned," or "if I sinned," etc., doesn't relieve the
evangelical apostates of their responsibility to God.  Job DID say, "I
have sinned," and that was the right thing to say.  The irresponsible
Fundamentalists who slapped the truth out of Job's mouth sinned
without saying it themselves, but "be sure yor sin will find YOU out."
He did say, "I abhor myself," and that was the right thing to say. 
What the new versions--"in the modern, updated English"--say Job said,
is what he did NOT say, and till heaven and earth pass away God will
not write His Book like Machen, Cheyne, Warfield, Keil, Robertson,
Delitzsch, Olson, Weniger, Bauer, Hort, Aland, Metzger, Thieme,
Origen, Gesenius, and Walvoord THINK it should be written.  {We have
never referred to Robertson, Warfield, Machen, and Hort as
"unbelievers" or "liberals" in regard to John 3:16, but since the
apostasy within the body of Christ has always been carried on by saved
people who "love the Lord," (to quote one destructive critic of the
AV), who are "loyal to verbal inspiration" (to quote another two-faced
hypocrite), we are not really concerned with "liberals" or "Neo-
evangelicals" at all; what we have to deal with in the last half of
this century is puffed-up, bloated, egotistical, SAVED stuffed-shirts
who think they are smart enough to correct God's Book simply because
they have been exposed to nineteen centuries of scholarly trash.  What
we have to deal with is men like A.  T.  Robertson, Warfield, Wuest,
Hort, Machen, etc., who became deluded, self-deceived dupes in the
hands of Satan, as he sought to overthrow biblical Authority--not the
"fundamentals." These men trained the faculties who trained the
faculties who are now training young men for a full-time ministry of
correcting and repudiating the words of God.  They were tools for the
greatest apostasy the world has ever seen, and nothing that the
Catholics or Liberals pulled off between 1582 and 1980 could match it. 
We may say, without fear of anyone (or consideration of anyone's
feelings), that these "Conservatives" did more to destroy the
character and manhood of American Christianity than the National
Council of Churches, the Communist Party, and the Roman Catholic
Hierarchy.  Their damage to the minds and ministries of 50,000 young
preachers (1890-1980) is simply incalculable, and it will never be
computated accurately until the Judgment Seat of Christ.}
  
"Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams..." (v 8). 
The reader will observe that the requirement places the time element
(see comments on date of writing in the Preface) back to Gentile
worship before the Law.  Numbers 23:1 and 14 shows that Balak and
Balaam recognized the sacrifice of Job 42:8 as the standard sacrifice. 
"Lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of
me the thing which is right, like my servant Job" (v 8).  Then, Job
was right all along, even when he was wrong.  He was wrong (v 3), in
that, he had tried to justify himself and had tried to put God "down"
for dealing with him unfairly, but Job was right on three counts which
his buddies had all missed:
  
1.  He was right in assuming that in this life the wicked do not
always get paid back in full.
  
2.  He was right in assuming that the same things can befall a saint
which befall a rascal.
  
3.  He was right in assuming that since man was a sinner, he needed a
"daysman" or "mediator" to stand for him in the presence of God.
  
"So Eliphaz...did according as the LORD commanded them:  and the LORD
also accepted Job" (v 9).  That is, the Lord accepted Job's petition
on their behalf.  This time Job, himself, got to be the "daysman," or
mediator (v 8).  Since Abraham did this same thing in Genesis 20:17,
we are again reminded of the patriarchal setting of the Book, and once
again, we should make a mental note that if some brilliant grammarian
(with access to "more ancient manuscripts," etc., etc.) pokes his head
through the bushes and tells us that "light from the Dead Sea Scrolls
shows, blah, blah, blah, that Job took place after the time of Moses,"
we should give him the raspberry and send his way a token greeting of
No.  6 squirrel shot.
  
And now, again (for the "umpteenth time"), the fat hits the fire.
  
"And the LORD turned the captivity of Job..." (v 10).
  
With two dozen clear indications that the Book of Job is a future
prophecy (see Preface), the ravening critics of the AV--fundamentalist
foremost--draw out their bloody butcher knives, hatchets, frog
stickers, shivs, daggers, and meat cleavers and begin to hack and
mutilate the Holy Bible like killing was going out of style.  The
truth must not get through!  Forward to the fray!  Quick!  Produce the
"verbally inspired, God-breathed originals" so that no one can find
out the truth!  Get rid of Biblical truth at any cost!
  
1.  "And the Lord restored the fortunes of Job" (Lockman Version,
miscalled "The New ASV").
  
2.  "And the Lord turned Job to repentance" (Jerome's Vulgate).
  
3.  "The literal use of this phrase is common, the metaphorical use of
it uncommon.  Still it is so simple a metaphor.  It signifies, as
Professor Lee remarks:  'a restoration to former happy circumstances'"
(The Pulpit Commentary, p 663).
  
4.  "...turned back the captive condition" (Jehovah's Witness Version: 
NWT).
  
5.  "The Lord restoreth his wealth and happiness" (Taylor Version: 
TLB).
  
6.  "The Lord restored the fortunes..." (Dean Weigle Version:  RSV).
  
7.  "So the Lord restored Job's fortunes..." (Dodd Version:  NEB).
  
Quite naturally, the compromising Amplified Bible (sometimes used by
Oliver Greene) has the Reformation reading and the Communist reading
together in the same verse; that is, the AV text has been adulterated
with the RSV text by putting them together in the same verse. 
Typical.
  
Now the question we need to ask ourselves is this:  "Since when should
the opinions of Dr.  Rawlinson (The Pulpit Commentary) or Dr.  Lee be
taken seriously since neither man believed two-thirds of the Old
Testament?" What are either of these rascals doing making a "METAPHOR"
out of a Biblical prophecy that deals with the Doctrine of the Second
Advent?  It's like Berkhof and Kuyper (plus Shedd, Dabney, Hodge,
Strong, Gill, and Calvin) telling us that the "first resurrection"
(Revelation 20:4-6) is not a bodily, physical resurrection, isn't it? 
Do you know what Paul did to Hymaneaus for teaching that the "first
resurrection" was PAST because it was not a bodily resurrection?  Did
you ever look it up?  Robertson, Machen, Wilson, and Warfield all
taught that the first resurrection was SPIRITUAL only.  Did you see
what the Holy Spirit said about this recognized "scholarship" in 1 and
2 Timothy?  Do you think any of us who really "take our Bible studies
seriously" would go to any man who has been delivered to Satan to get
a "qualified opinion"?  And do you think any of us who believe that
Book are stupid enough to worry about "slandering the dead" or
slandering "the sainted memory of these 'giants' of the faith"?  Why
worry about a sinner who slandered the King James Bible every day of
his life?  These two-faced punks who worry so much about "the due
reverence to the dead," have never failed to slander and vilify the
translators of the AV 1611 asnd the men who defend it (Hills, Ray,
Fuller, Burgon, etc.).  A little "double standard" there, eh Doctor?
  
Verse 10 says "TURNED THE CAPTIVITY," and it says this after 42
chapters, matching the 42 months of the second half of Daniel's
Seventieth Week (see Dan.  9 and Rev.  12, 13), and after seven days
and nights (Job 2:13), matching the seven year period (Dan.  9:25)
where Satan (Job 1, 2) will be persecuting Israel in the land of Edom,
in Uz (Lam.  4:21).  The Book of Job was preceded by a Book describing
the return of the Jews to Palestine and the rebuilding of the Temple
(Ezra and Nehemiah); it is followed by the King Messiah of whom David
(Ps.  1, 2) was a type.  With this much prophetic information
available in an English text which any sixth grade reader could read--
without referring once to any Hebrew or Greek text used by any
scholar--hw do we explain the irrational attack on the verse and then
the blindness which follows it at verse 13?
  
("Crocodile," your aching back!)
  
Psalm 14:7 and 126:1 are the divinely appointed, infallible
authorities for properly interpreting the verse, and what any Hebrew
or Greek scholar may think the verse says can be classified under "N. 
T."--non-essential trivia.
  
Job is a type of Israel:  Cast off, persecuted, rejected, restored,
converted, and blessed.
  
Any system of Bible study, promoted by anyone, that denies that (or
tends to obscure it) is SATANIC.  And if you are gullible enough to
think that Satan could not deceive Christian scholars (like the men
who taught the men who wrote the textbooks used in Christian
universities and colleges (any of them), you have been hoodwinked by
the master deceiver (Rev.  12:9).  No Roman Catholic or Communist ever
got that far into Biblical theology to worry about altering Job 42:10. 
Only Fundamentalists and Conservzatives were anxious to cover up the
truth on that verse; the Catholics and Communists would change any
verse on no other grounds than the desire to replace the Authorized
Text.
  
Verses 11 and 12 point far beyond the oppressed saint on the ash heap
in Uz; they point out the great prophecies of Isaiah 2, 11, and Amos
9, and scores of other prophetic passages which were discounted by
Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Warfield, Machen, Calvin, and Moulton as
"figurative metaphors."
  
"...they bemoaned him and comforted him" (v 11).  {Cf.  Isa.  40:1;
49:13, Jer.  31:13, and Zech.  1:17.}
  
"...every man also gave him a piece of money" (v 11).  Compae this
with the wealth the Jews will have in the Millennium following the
Tribulation:  Romans 11:15, 23, Isaiah 2:1-4; 66:10-14, 2 Chronicles
9:1-12, etc.  With passage after passage confirming the great
prophetic typology found in Job, Biederwolf, Umbreit, Steiger, Roesch,
Starke, Briggs, Welhausen, Riehm, Pusey, Tuch, Zahn, Vincent, Strong,
Swete, Rosenmuller, Oosterzee, Duhm, Schulten, Kalisch, Keil, Kurtz,
Hitzug, Weiss, Trench, Paulus, Plummer, Cheyne, Davidson, Oehler,
Gunkel, Gratz, Dillman, Bleek, Bahr, Osiander, Schults, Semler,
Riddle, Moulton, Reinke, Tischendorf, Westcott, Hort, Driver,
Kennicott, Horton, Knobel, Lowth, and Bennett go sailing by the
passage like a regatta in a 60-mile-an-hour wind--hot air and all. 
They, and their "kin," represent 5,000 books by 1,000 authors, through
1,000 years of Church history, with nothing in them on the passage
apart from what any Christian layman could find in his own language: 
Nothing else except pure unadulterated BALONEY.
  
"So the LORD blessed the LATTER END of Job" (v 12).  This is the
fifteenth warning that the Book of Job is a future prophecy:  Compare
Numbers 24:14, Hosea 3:5, Daniel 10:14, Jeremiah 23:20, and James 5.
  
"He had also seven sons and three daughters" (v 13).  At verse 13(!)
we see why there was such a concerted rush by the Catholics,
Conservatives, Liberals, Fundamentalists, Neo-evangelicals, and
Atheists to get rid of verse 10.  For as sure as Job's ten children
vanished in Chapter 1, they show up again in Chapter 42!  To get rid
of this Biblical Truth as quickly (and as neatly) as possible, Taylor
(TLB) inserts "seven MORE sons" and "three MORE daughters" into the
passage.  In spite of God's warning to Kenneth Taylor (see Prov. 
30:6), he has added in his notes that (p.  44) Job now has TWENTY
children.
  
By whom, brother Taylor?
  
Where was Job's wife?
  
I said, "WHERE WAS JOB'S WIFE?"
  
Do you remember "Lot's wife"?  Didn't Jesus Christ tell you to
remember "Lot's wife"?
  
How could any man who "took his Bible studies seriously, etc."
overlook the fact that Job and Lot are both types of Tribulation
saints?  And if they were, what would their WIVES be doing bearing
children at the end of the Tribulation?  When a commentator or revisor
ignores the Bible's own dictionary for types, he develops a sort of
"Disneyland exegesis" like Kenneth Taylor's.
  
Quickly, will someone come to brother Taylor's aid and help him get
rid of the truth?!  Ah yes!  Dr.  Rawlinson (The Pulpit Commentary, p. 
664) is on hand!  he is "a good man" who "loves the Lord, etc.," and
surely he will not mislead us!  "We need not suppose however that
either the round numbers or the exact duplicity are historical."
(Rawlinson) Ahh, so!
  
But the, on the other hand--are you listening?  All of you stuffed
shirts who think that The Pulpit Commentary was the word of
"scholars"--"we need not suppose that any writer in The Pulpit
Commentary knows what he's talking about when he attacks the history
of the inspired account on the grounds of his own stupidity."
  
(There are two ways to look at everything, aren't there?  I thought
you would agre.  There is nothing like being broadminded, is there?)
  
Job had ten more children, did he, and then lived 140 years after
that, did he?  Look at verse 16.  This would put Job at 190 years old
if he was 50 when God restored him.  That is, ten children before he
was 50 and then ten more, without a wife, after he was 50.  Now tell
us something!  In Job's time, Isaac lived to be 180, but he never
married till he was 40 years old, and then he had two children in the
next 140 years.  Are we to suppose that Job's wife--who told him to
curse God and die, and then never showed up again!--had twenty
children, ten of them after Job was 50?  One a year till he was 60? 
One every two years till he was 70?  It took a miracle to give Abraham
a child after he was 90, and Isaac had no children after he was 60. 
Aren't our commentators stretching things a little to make us think
that the same woman who told Job to curse God and die came back to him
and added ten more tax exemptions to his family before he got to be
70?  And if that doesn't stretch your credulity, aren't you just as
capable of believing the following:
  
1.  There is a resurrection of dead saints at the end of the
Tribulation.
  
2.  This resurrection includes the dead of Israel (Ezek.  37:1-12).
  
3.  Job believes in a resurrection in the "latter day" (Job 19:24).
  
4.  Christ's resurrection had an addenda on it which pictures this
resurrection (Matt.  27:52, 43).
  
5.  Israel gets her dead back later (Isa.  26:17-19).
  
6.  Abraham, the father of the nation of Israel, believed that he
would get his dead son back again (Gen.  22:5, John 8:56).
  
Job got 'em back (v 13)!
  
The reason, then, for the exact number (seven and three) is
"simplistic" (cliche by socialistic educators, 1970-1980) in the
extreme:  These are the children whom Job lost in Chapter One.  The
fact that the names of the daughters are given in verse 14 caused the
expositors to reject the mass of evidence given above, for it is
either assumed that Job would not have renamed the first three
daughters, or it is assumed that the names are different names--not
the original ones.  But neither of these assumptions could counter-
balance the testimony of Ezekiel, John, Genesis, Isaiah, and Matthew
where they deal with a Post-tribulation resurrection (Matt.  24:31)
and rapture of Tribulation saints (Ezek.  37).  Job 42 is the exact
duplicate of these matters, including the restoration of Israel and
their subsequent Millennial blessings.
  
Plainly, and scripturally, Job got his children back from the dead. 
And nothing more is ever said about Job's wonderful "help mate." She
wound up with Lot's wife.  Like Lot's wife (Gen.  19:26), she seems to
have "turned aside after Satan" (1Tim.  5:15), and Lot and Job finish
their trips alone.  Lot finishes as a widower with daughters while Job
finishes as a widower with sons and daughters and then grandsons (v
16).  Longevity is one of the characteristics of the Millennium (Isa. 
65) since many of the Edenic conditions will be restored (Isa.  2; 11;
33, Amos 9:13, Rom.  8:18-22).  "The right of the firstborn" (Deut. 
21:17) belongs to Israel as the "first born son" (Exod.  4:23) of
Jehovah, and the right of the firstborn guarantees a "double portion"
(Deut.  2:17), so that is exactly what Job gets (v 10).  The
commentators and revisors who made the Book ninety percent
"figurative" or "metaphorical" must now suddenly take the phrase
"twice as much" (v 10) literally, after altering the first half of the
same verse!  But Job did NOT get back two wives; he didn't even get
back the shrew he had; therefore, to say that "twice as much" refers
to people is stretching the text to accommodate the unbelief of the
scholar in the typology so clearly presented in the Book of Job.
  
"So Job died" (as they will in the Millennium) "being old and full of
days" (v 17).  As a little girl said in Sunday School:  "All of God's
stories have happy endings." The unhappy endings are found in the
historical narratiges of those who follow science, education, money,
humanism, sex, religion, philosophy, or the devil to their own
destruction.  "The end of the wicked" (see comments under Prov.  4:14;
10:6; 10:24,25; 15:9, and 11:10, 23) is easily predictable:  It is
outer darkness and a lake of fire.  Where a man repents as Job did and
accepts God's revelation as superior to his own wisdom--at the same
time accepting God's judgment against himself as a sinner--the end is
also predictable:  A new heaven and a new earth, and an eternity with
a Sinless Saviour in New Jerusalem (see Rev.  21; 22, and comments).
  
And though the screams of wounded and dying Christians will yet echo
up over the highways and skyscrapers of America, and though the groans
and cries of tortured saints may resound off the walls of jails and
hospitals in the next few years, the end is predictable:  new
Jerusalem.  The worst thing that can happen to a child of God is
GLORY, in the end, or the "final analysis." In the "end" Job comes out
healthy, wealthy, successful, honored, blessed, and happy.  The man
who cried out in his misery:  "Oh my God, though you SLAY ME, yet will
I trust in thee!" lived to see the day when he cried:  "Oh my God, how
good Thou hast been to me!" The man who spit out:  "Leave me alone
till I swallow down my own spit!" survived to proclaim:  "Bless the
Lord, oh my soul, and all that is within me bless His holy name!"
  
"For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy
to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us...for our
present light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a
far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory...for we are more than
conquerors through Him that loved us!" (2 Cor.  4:17 and Rom. 
8:18,37).
  
The great Book (which is quoted more than sixty times in the Bible)
teaches us seven great lessons, and the plain, simple-minded, ordinary
Christian can learn all of them without referring to any version by
anyone other than the King James 1611 AV.
  
1.  We learn that "all those who live godly" shall suffer persecution.
  
2.  We learn that God uses Satan to glorify himself.
  
3.  We learn that the best of men are sinners.
  
4.  We learn that some things cannot be explained apart from
supernatural revelation.
  
5.  We learn that God's ways are not our ways, nor His thoughts our
thoughts.
  
6.  We learn that "all things work together for good to them that love
God."
  
7.  We learn that God will be merciful and loving to any sinner who
forsakes his own righteousness and accepts God's righteousness.
  
And thus we shall close the covers of the Book of Job and leave our
nomadic friend from Selah, Petra, in Uz, strolling through his
pastures, chatting with his friends, playing with his grandchildren,
offering sacrifices for his sons "lest they curse God in their
hearts," and maintaining his integrity--this time without trusting in
it!  As the ancient scroll rolls together, Job's "hedge" (Job 1:10)
has been rebuilt by the One who planted it, and in the portals of
eternity when the Adversary approaches, he is warned:  "No deal.  Lay
off him.  He has been tried and tested.  You'll have to pick on
someone else."
  
"Behold, we count them happy which endure.  Ye have heard of the
patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is
very pitiful, and of tender mercy" (James 5:11).
  
And it would seem like a shame to add one more critical note to such a
sublime ending, but lest we should "rest on our laurels" or be "at
ease in Zion" may we not forget that the corrupt Alexandrian
manuscripts promoted to the seat of authority by Stewart Custer (Bob
Jones University), Roberston (Louisville, Southern Baptist Seminary),
Machen (Princeton and Westminster), Wuest (Moody Bible Institute),
Afman (Tennessee Temple), and John R.  Rice (Sword of the Lord: 
Recommendation on New ASV) have deliberately violated Proverbs 30:6,
exactly the way Kenneth Taylor violated it (see v 13) by adding
fifteen words to the book of Job.  These words are so obviously
fraudulent that not even the idolators who worshipped Sinaiticus and
Vaticanus dared to copy out their text at this point.  The text of the
Septuagint here reads as follows:  "It is written that he will rise
again with those whom the Lord raises up."
  
Nothing of the kind is "written" or "has been written" or ever will be
"written" by the Author of the book of Job.  This final scribal
blooper is just as spurious as the depraved Greek text it came from--
the Greek text used for the International Bible and The New American
Standard Bible, and Taylor's paraphrase.  If 100% of the "godly"
Christian scholars recommended this text, they would still be
recommending a depraved counterfeit of God's truth.
  
"Crocodile," your bridge-work.
90CTXT           *>	  ICR0490 TXT           l>&+  l, from the
Divine viewpoint it was simple:  The sun can do it, because the earth
declines North and South between March 21st and December 22nd so that
the sun's rays reach the Arctic and the Antarctic continents. 
Furthermore, the earth is like a seal turning against the sun, which
represents clay; a steel roller, rolling over wax on an envelope, will
leave the imprint everywhere on the wax.  Every inch of the steel
roller is exposed to the wax, and, thus, every mile of this earth is
exposed to the sun as it rotates in passing.  Since none of the Bible
readers for the last 3,000 years were able to believe this passage in
Job, none of them believed Galileo (1546-1642) when he began to talk
like a Bible believer instead of a Roman Catholic.
  
"...and they stand as a garment" (v 14).  The reference was to the
ends of the earth (v 13), and the "ends" in the context, are the
Northern and Southern extremities.  We should not be surprised, then,
to find an Aurora Borealis standing "as a garment" (v 14) at the ends
of the earth.  One can tone down the interpretation and say that as
the earth turns against the sun, the spreading rays of the morning
light make the things on the earth "stand out" like a beautiful
garment draped on something However, "their light" (v 15) is a
reference to the dayspring (v 12) and the sun (v 14).  We are i
exegetical trouble, and before we alter the text to match our
stupidity (see the Septuagint here), let us notice the "broken arm" of
verse 15.  You see, the Antichrist has a bad RIGHT ARM (Zech.  11:17)
because he is a Syrian Jew from Moab (Jer.  48:25) when he gets the
"deadly wound" (Rev.  13) that puts out his RIGHT EYE (Zech.  11:17). 
{Man, did you hear the howl of protest that went up, just then, from
the faculty members of Moody Bible Institute, Fuller Theological
Seminary, Dallas Theological Seminary, Bob Jones University, and
Pensacola Christian College?  Don't those dudes get upset when you
find something deep in the scripture that they couldn't find in the
"original text"?  But you can't really blame them.  After all, they
have been occupied (according to their own profession) in trying to
show you revelation from the word of God, and being unable to do it--
because God would show them nothing--they must feel pretty miserable
to see "new light" continually coming on the Bible, without any
relationship to them or their books, studies, abilities, or talent.}
This matter is mentioned in Psalm 10:15, Jeremiah 48:25, Ezekiel
30:21, 22, 24, and Zechariah 11:17.  Furthermore, we slammed through
verse 12 a little too quickly, in view of the fact that the literal
sun (Ps.  19:3-6) is a type of the bridegroom Who is the "Sun of
righteousness" (Mal.  4:1-3) at the Advent.  After all, the
"dayspring" (v 12) is "from on high" in Luke 1:78, and He comes "To
give light to them that sit in darkness and the SHADOW OF DEATH!"
(Lev.  1:79).  (Ahhh!  There it is!) This explains the statement in
the context (Job 38:13):  "That it might take hold of the ends of the
earth, that the WICKED might be shaken out of it" (v 13).  We are back
on Secnd Advent passages again.  The rising sun of our passage is the
one found in Nahum 3:17, Psalm 83:11, and James 1:11.  So, we read,
"from the WICKED their light is withholden" (see Acts 9:4-7 for the
mid-tribulation appearance of the Lord God to Israel).
  
9.  Can you withhold the sunlight from the wicked and bust their arms
at the same time (v 15)?  All of them?  (Don't forget Job 40:12!)
  
38:16-35 Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea?  or hast thou
walked in the search of the depth?  Have the gates of death been
opened unto thee?  or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death? 
Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth?  declare if thou knwest
it all.  Where is the way where light dwelleth?  and as for darkness,
where is the place thereof, That thou shouldest take it to the bound
thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof? 
Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born?  or because the number
of thy days is great?  Hast thou entered into the treasures of the
snow?  or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, which I have
reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and
war?  By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind
upon the earth?  Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of
waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder; To cause it to rain on
the earth, where no man is; on the wilderness, wherein there is no
man; To satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of
the tender herb to spring forth?  Hath the rain a father?  or who hath
begotten the drops of dew?  Out of whose womb came the ice?  and the
hoary frost of heaven, who hath genered it?  The waters are hid as
with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.  Canst thou bind the
sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?  Canst thou
bring forth Mazzaroth in his season?  or cant thou guide Arcturus with
his sons?  Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven?  canst thou set the
dominion thereof in the earth?  Canst thou lift up thy voice to the
clouds, that abundance of waters may cover thee?  Canst thou send
lightnings, that they may go and say unto thee, Here we are?
  
The greatest non-commercial quiz program ever presented for "week-day
morning viewers" continues, with no "Jackpot prize," but only the
right to repent and apologize.  The "panel of experts" this time is
one man, and, so far, he has missed nine out of nine.  (Almost like
watching the League of Nations and the United Nations, isn't it?)
  
10.  "Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea...?" (v 16). 
Several of Harry Rimmer's friends (see comments under 38:1-4) missed
this one and insisted there were no springs of water in the "sea," but
there are.  It is true that there were not discovered, for certain,
until after 1910, but when one is fickle and naive enough to follow
"the latest scientific discoveries," he will always be 100 to 1,000
years behind Biblical knowledge.  After all, Biblical knowledge is
advanced revelation; "scientific discoveries" are belated confirmation
of non-essential matters.  There have been no "scientific discoveries"
in the last 2,000 years that have prolonged life for anyone but the
rich, or have made life more tolerable for anyone but the rich. 
America still eats seventy-five percent of the world's food, though
she constitutes six percent of her population.  You have money while
you honor the Bible (see England, Germany, America, etc.); you lose
your shirt (Africa, Asia, China, India, Russia, Mexico) when you honor
the Vatican text of the New ASV, or the multiple "gods" of the Orient. 
"Scientific discoveries" have nothing to do with any of it; never have
and never will.
  
11.  "Hast thou WALKED in the search of the depth?" (v 16).  No, not
even Dr.  Bebee did that.  In 1969, Piccard and Walsh touched down at
35,000 feet below sea level, in the submarine "Trieste," while
exploring the Mariana Trench.  (The Mariana Trench is out by Saipan
and Guam.) The pressure on the sphere was equal to the weight of five
battleships.  They found fish at this level, living in temperatures of
38 degrees.  Do you think that Walsh or Piccard got out and WALKED
(see the text) around?  Well, Job didn't either.  Science, since Job,
batted .000 in 2,000 innings on that one.
  
12.  "Have the gates of death been opened unto thee?" (v 17).  They
were not opened to the faculty at Wheaton or the "translators" of the
Lockman Foundation.  In the ridiculous New ASV, promoted by these
Bible-insulting institutions, one will find the scriptural "gates of
Hell" (Matt.  16:18) privately interpreted to be "the powers of
death":  This is the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church
(see any work by the Knights of Columbus on the passage).  Reading
"POWERS" (or "power") for "GATES" is the standard Roman Catholic
dogma.  Actually (according to the highly scientific King James text),
Hell has gates and bars, keys and oors, and an inner earth location
(if we are to believe Jonah 2:1-9 and Revelation 1:18).  The "doors of
the shadow of death" (v 17) are connected with this place, and we will
stop here while we are still in the running, for once we are caught
between the depths of the sea (v 16) and the breadth of the earth (v
18) where darkness dwells (v 19), and a "death" that has gates which
can open (Rev.  9:11), we are coming close to a "hollow earth"
doctrine, and the kiddies at Piedmont, Dallas, Moody, Wheaton,
Pillsbury, Fuller, Gordon-Conwell, and Westminster will hardly be able
to keep pace with the "original text" no matter how "scientific" they
are.  With a possible "sun" INSIDE the earth (hello, Apollos!) and
maybe even rivers that cannot issue out of the two poles (ah yes!  Job
38:8 and 9)--we will stop before all the scripture babies (any
translator or revisor on any Bible committee since 1800) fall off of
the church bus.  We have not seen the "gates of death," and the
"doors" have not been opened to us, although there are several eye
witnesses who have claimed revelations that we will temporarily omit
from this Commentary.  Suffice it to say that the Bermuda Triangle and
the UFOs are underworld phenomena, not terrestrial phenomena or
celestial phenomena.
  
13.  "Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth?" (v 18).  Well, no
one in Job's day had, although we know now that the earth is about
24,811 miles in circumference around the poles, and about 24,894
around its equator.  The oceans cover more than 139,000,000 million
square feet (70.8%) of the earth's total surface area, to an average
depth of 12,500 feet.
  
14.  "Where is the WAY where light dwelleth?" (v 19):  Not "the PLACE"
as we find it in the absurd "newer translations." The word "way" was
mistranslated to mean "place" in the ASV, New ASV, RSV, New RSV, Good
News, New English Bible, and the International Bible (and other
apostate corruptions) because it is "verbotten" in the Scholars Union
for the King James Bible to be more accurate in scientific matters
than any scientist of Job's time (or Columbus' time, or King James'
time).  You see, light is always moving, and has no real "place,"
unless that place is third heaven (see Gen.  1:3-4 and comments), for
"the light dwelleth with HIM" (Dan.  2:22).  Light does not "dwell" (v
19) anywhere on earth.  The reading, therefore, of the ASV (1901) and
the New ASV (1963) is an attempt to make God--God is speaking to Job,
remember!?--comply with the "scientific brains" of 1800 B.C.  God is
not supposed to have enough sense to word the question the way it is
worded in the Bible.  {In a great Evangelistic Conference in
Indianapolis, Indiana, where a number of "celebrites" met, a notice
was sent out which stated that no one in the conference could
advertise or sell RSV, The Living Bible, Good News for Modern Man, or
the translation by Phillips.  Oddly enough, no mention was made of the
ASV (1901), which is the Greek text of the RSV, nor was any mention
made of the New ASV (1963)--which is the Greek text for "Good News."
The thinking behind all of this lying double-tongued, two-faced flim-
flam was that if Liberals are connected with a translation, it is "of
the devil," no matter what text it came from.  To cover up for this
bunch of Bible-denying reprobates, John R.  Rice wrote personal
letters to prove that no Christian layman had any business
investigating any Greek text to find out where ANY of the newer
translations came from.  You couldn't be any more dishonest and
inconsistent if you were a Black KKK.}
  
15.  "As for darkness, where is the place thereof...?" (v 19).  Now
darkness has a place; it can be located, so the question is "where"
does darkness stay?  Until men got out into outer space no one could
prove it, but late in the twentieth century, Job's question is
answered.
  
16.  Can you take darkness to its boundaries and "know the paths to
the house thereof?" (v 20).  Well, you can't if it is the "land of
darkness" spoken of by Job in Job 10:21 and 22.  Furthermore, the
boundary would be the bottom of the sea of glass we spoke of in 37:22
and 38:13-15, if it were a reference to the darkness of outer space. 
If the direction is UP (never mind the silly note in the New Scofield
"Bible" under 2 Corinthians 12:1-4), the boundary is North.  If the
direction is DOWN, then we are back in the hollow earth again, so we
have to climb out before the astronauts find some opening in the North
end!
  
17.  "Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born?" (v 21). 
Obviously not, if you know about outer and inner darkness, you
wouldn't have gotten the information because you were there, back in
Genesis 1:2-4; you were NOT there.
  
18.  "Or because the number of thy days is great?" (v 21).  Obviously
not.  Job was older when he died than your great-grandfather, and he
didn't know the answer.  If you had to put your finger on a map of the
universe and take "darkness to the bound thereof," (vv 19-20) where
would you stop pointing?
  
19.  "Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow?" (v 22). 
There are some there, you know; Dr.  Schutt says that there are $8.14
worth of nitrates, ammonia, and albuminoid in an acre of ground that
has been covered with one inch of snow.
  
20.  "The treasures of the hail, which I have reserved against the
time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?" (vv 22-23).  If
you were as ignorant as Kenneth Taylor or C.  H.  Dodd (TLB and NEB),
you might think that the hail was only for things like Joshua 10:11,
and although this is true for the battle and war of Revelation 11:19
(which Dodd and Taylor forgot!), one must never forget that the "small
hoar frost" (Exod.  16:14), which melted when the sun came up (Exod. 
16), will be dumped out again (Mic.  7:14 and comments) in the
Tribulation (Rev.  12) to Israel so that they can eat without taking
the "mark" (Lam.  5:9).  {Ah the unsearchable riches of the
Elizabethan English!  How superior its archaiv words are to "living
bibles" and how infallible are its revelations when contrasted with
"reliable translations"!}
  
Still, snow and hail in the "day of battle and war" can turn a victory
into a retreat and a defeat into a massacre.  Readers of Stalingrad
(Heinz Schroeder), The Siege of Leningrad (Ballantine Books), and This
Kind of a War (Fehrenbach) know what snow can do to (or for) an army. 
When the five German divisions around Dmitrevka, Karpovka, Goroditche,
Nov-Alexeyevka, and Baburkin were overrun (November 15, 1942) by
Russian tanks, streams of wounded soldiers had to escape eastward to
Pitomnik and Gumrak.  It had been snowing for weeks and the
temperature was eighteen below zero.  The wounded crawled yard by yard
till they froze to death, or were hauled by their comrades on
tarpaulins, boards, and ammunition cases.  It began to snow again, and
many of the lorries broke down on the road.  Fourteen thousand men
fell on that road, frozen by the icy wind; their life's blood
congealed upon gangrenous wounds and their bodies were crushed beneath
the wheels of fleeing vehicles:  Frozen bones crack like glass.  In
the night snow storm, the drivers could often not see a man (dead or
alive) until their front tires hit him.  Wounded men, screaming and
cursing, tried to hang on to the tail gates of the lorries that passed
them, but they were already full of wounded so that the "boarders"
were either hammered off the tailgates, or the boarders succeeded in
pulling wounded men out of the trucks who froze to death on the road.
  
The battalions that passed over the road to Pitomnik made six miles in
twelve hours; those who survived often passed piles of dead, huddled
together in a frozen ball, twenty to thirty men, with their blood-
soaked bandages, blankets, and uniforms frozen into a solid mass. 
Many a man that night, or the next day, pulled off a boot and his foot
with it; the frozen lower extremity had broken off at the ankle.  When
two planes landed at Pitomnik to "evacuate" the wounded, it began to
snow again; the wounded, trying to get a seat on the planes trampled
each other and half of them were wounded again; twenty of them were
killed in the stampede.  Some moved faster than others, bursting
through the ranks of those with "leg and foot injuries." Those
trampled down into the snows did not scream anymore, but those who
were unable to get into the plane after they got there were screaming;
rifle butts were used by the guards to clear paths to the planes, but
when the guards fought their own way to the doors, they threw away
their weapons and jumped in.  With cabin doors still open and forty
men in a plane (that would hold twenty), the Junkers would take off. 
Those trying to hang on to the wings and tails of thh planes were
hurled off into the path of stretchers where other wounded still lay
on the ground.  One wretched soul retained his grasp on the icy wheels
of a plane until it was 200 feet in the air and then he fell.
  
When the last plane left the Gumrak airport (November 19, 1943) headed
for Germany, 24 men were pushed into a cabin built to hold sixteen
men, while nine men were left outside in the snow (fifteen below
zero).  To get room for the nine men still left outside they had to
throw out cannisters, stretchers, lighting equipment, ammunition,
bandages, and dressings.  At this point, one Lance Corporal, standing
in the door of the plane, jumped out and said to a wounded man, "Bot
my arms are broken chum, but you can't even walk." He gave his place
to the man on the ground and they picked that cripple up and put him
into the plane, leaving his "substitute" on the field.  The machine
was so full they had to hook a belt through the door handles for two
men to hold, because the door could not be closed.  When that plane
took off, a single, lonely soldier sat in the snow at Gumrak with the
collars of his two overcoats turned up and a scarf knotted over his
face.  The pilot said that he had never seen a more lonely man than
that Lance Corporal, sitting in the snow, head raised, staring at the
sky while his salvation departed from him; it was the last plane that
ever left Stalingrad for Germany.  He could not even wave to the plane
because his arms were broken.  That pilot took off, circled the field
(wasting valuable gasoline), and flew over, dipping his wings in a
salute to that remarkably brave and unselfish German.  There is no
other case in military history where an aircraft circled to salute one
enlisted man.
  
"WHO CAN STAND BEFORE HIS COLD?" (Ps.  147:17).
  
The Russian tanks at Stalingrad (financed by Communists in America)
were able to grind several thousand German soldiers into the ice,
because, with temperatures in the twenty to forty degree below zero
area, no one could "dig in." Not even a grenade or a mortar shell
could "dig" a trench in ground that was frozen eight feet down.  So,
when the tanks came over, they often just hunted down one man at a
time.  Did you ever try to run on icy ground, covered with eight
inches of snow, while you were dressed in boots and overcoat and
carrying forty to sixty pounds of equipment?  Many of the men they
chased were wounded, and suffering from frostbite, and scores of them
had fevers of 102 degrees or more, and many of them did not have
winter uniforms.  The snow "reserved against...the day of battle and
war" (v 23) is often the undoing of an army.  Out of 500,000 men who
marched to Moscow under Napoleon (1812), only 25,000 returned.  The
snowstorms and sub-zero weather of Russia killed ten times as many men
as were killed by bullets in any battle Napoleon fought in Russia.  A
cloud comes on the sky and the air gets chilly; one of the soldiers
feels a snowflake on his cheek.  Soon the plumes of the officers are
decked with white.  The horses begin to find it hard to pull the
supply trains; men begin to fall under fatigue; they lie down in
drifts and never rise again.  The snow keeps coming; it blinds the
eyes, it stings the faces, it blocks the vision of the enemy, it clogs
the feet of the infantry, it prevents accurate fire on targets, and it
covers those who lay down in it to rest.  The victor of Jena and
Austerlitz must surrender to the snow.
  
"Who can stand before HIS cold?" (Ps.  147:17).
  
Robert Gautchie survived 58 days on a frozen lake near the Arctic
circle (1975), in a stranded plane, with nothing to eat but raw frozen
fish that could only be thawed out by draining fluid and gasoline from
the plane.  Every other day he would pace out letters (SOS) 150 feet
high (from the air) on the snow-covered ice, but in less than two
hours the snow drifts would cover them up.  He saw four planes go over
in fifty days, and not one of them spotted the flares he shot up.  His
transmiter would not work nor would his emergency "Sarah set"--a
portable radio used to contact the Royal Canadian Air Force.  With
frostbitten toes and gangrene setting in, Gautchie was picked up on
the 58th day by a "Beaver" which had been delayed three and one half
hours in its flight to a small camp.  At exactly 6:10 a.m., the co-
pilot of that plane "happened" to see sunlight reflecting off of the
windshield of the stranded plane; thirty minutes sooner, or later, and
he would have missed it, as the Arctic sun never rose high enough to
shine directly on the plane.  They landed and picked up a man who
later lost five toes and had to go through weeks of hospitalization. 
Gautchie's "survival secret" was simple:  He had a Christian wife
praying for him at home, and she had gone on praying thirty days after
the RCAF had given up the search!
  
Did you know that only 39 tanks out of 104, in the German 204th Panzer
Regiment (Battle of Stalingrad), could move on the morning of November
10, 1942 when some kind of a "breakout" could still have been made? 
Do you know what put 65 tanks out of commission?  Well the tank pits
were covered with straw, and in the severe cold the rats had nested in
this straw and had entered the tanks and chewed up the rubber
insulation on the wiring.  Several tanks caught fire from short
circuits and sparking, and the ones that didn't couldn't be started. 
If that weren't enough, the Panzer Regiment had no "track sleeves" for
winter operations, so the tanks slithered from one side of the icy
roads to the other.
  
If you doubt that snow and hail can influence the battlefield, talk to
the ragged remnant of 1950-1953 who fought in the Korean "police
action"; ask them how it went.  Ask some of those Marines who made
that frozen, bloody trek from the Changjin Reservoir to Hungnam
(November 30-December 11, 1950).  Combat in the "cold" has penalties
and tortures of its own that no other form of combat has:  Frostbitten
fingers that cannot load the clip; frozen gun barrels that will not
fire the shell; fluid in vehicles that freezes and sticks the
mechanism together; frozen toes and feet that eventually kill the man
who walks on them; frostbitten ears that hurt when you try to thaw
them out until you could scream; snow blindness that prevents you from
seeing an enemy fifty feet away; clothes that stick to the ground
overnight; dead bodies you can't bury because you can't turn the soil
over; food you can't eat because you can't thaw it out; glasses that
steam up from sweat and then freeze; fingers that cannot pull the
trigger; stiff limbs that cannot react in time to dodge the bayonet or
the knife, and miserable nights so cold that you cannot sleep even
though you are too tired to stand up.
  
The worst damage done to the "flotilla" at Bikini Atoll was done by
falling HAILSTONES, which were created by Atomic fission.  In the
winter of 1959, upstate New York was "hub cap deep to a ferris wheel"
in snow.  In 1888 (March), snow stopped traffic in Brooklyn, New York,
Washington, and Richmond.  On a winter day in Chicago (1962), the
traffic moved at 11.7 mph.  You say, "What made the difference?" Well,
about ten inches of snow.
  
Curly Hollinger (Bay Minette, Alabama) was captured by the German 14th
Army when he was fighting with the 45th Division at the Anzio
Beachhead (February 16, 1944).  The 45th was holding a line from
Padiglione to the Anzio-Albano Road, and they took the head-on charge
of the German 715th Infantry Division, the 114th Light Infantry
Division, and the 3rd Panzer Grenadier Division.  For the next few
weeks Curly marched North with the POWs.  It got colder, and it began
to snow.  He caught pneumonia.  As he marched in a ragged line of
prionsers, he saw men hanging on fences who had their bellies ripped
open with bayonets.  He saw prisoners grabbing raw food by the
roadside, and then they would start vomiting and writhing in pain;
some of them died.  On a cold snowy night, they stopped to sleep
outdoors on the road.  Curly lay down in a snow drift with his head
full of mucous and a temperature of about 103 degrees.  He lay down to
die, knowing he would never survive that night.  The snow covered him
up and more snow fell.  When he plowed his way out of his "burrow" the
next morning, he was well!  {An examination of snowfalls in Siberia
show that it is nearly eighty degrees warmer under the snow than above
it; Alpine plants have been known to perish in the mild winter of
England for lack of enough snow to keep them warm.  Absolute Zero is
460 degrees below fahrenheit, while the boiling point of water is
about 212 degrees above the freezing point.  Just think!  If the
freezing point had been four percent lower than 32 degrees it would
rain at six degrees above zero!  Ain't "evolution" wonderful?}
  
21.  "By what way is the light PARTED, which scattereth the east wind
upon the earth?" (v 24).  It can be "parted" with a prism of a
"spectroscope," but God did not let any sinner find that out till long
after He put the question to Job.  To make sure that the Bible does
not hint at anything in the future, the "new" translations (as old as
Hell) have stated that the verse doesn't read this way, but should say
"where is the path to, etc.," (see ASV, New ASV, etc.).  Again (see
note under verse 19), this is quite typical of the bloated, puffed up
egotists of 1880-1980, who fancy that the sun rises and sets on
"modern science." If the reader doubts it, let him examine the remarks
of Dr.  Jan Lever--a born again Christian who believes in the
"Fundamentals."
  
"We can never derive from scripture exact physical, astronomical and
biological knowledge." In reference to Genesis, Dr.  Lever says that
it has no "concrete contact" with any investigation into physical
life, and that the Scriptures do not "impart to us scientific data."
In line with the modern Conservatives and Fundamentalists of the
Laodicean church, Lever says that the Bible is not a "scientific
treatise" about God's acts, and therefore Genesis cannot convey
anything to us about nature in "scientific terms," etc.  Neither did
anything Lever ever read, wrote, said, or saw.  "SCIENTIFIC" means
truth that is known to be truth.  The Bible is the only SCIENTIFIC
TREATISE on life; there are no others.
  
Now the format above (cited from Creation and Evolution, pp.  21, 56,
121, 139, and 214) is the standard format for fifty "bastions of
Orthodoxy" in the United States.  It is really just Kant's old rag-bag
about "faith" being in one bracket and "science" being in the other,
so that "us intellectuals who deal with FACTS can always get the
upper-hand over you dumb, Bible believing people who only deal in
FAITH." Well, we deal with more facts than "science" has access to, at
least where those facts deal with the practical, major, historical
issues.  If "science" is slow in catching up to the Bible, that is
their problem, but if you think for a minute that any of us are stupid
enough to respect the "scholarship" or the "valid data" of men who
have enough FAITH to believe in Ice Ages, Miocene, Pleistocene,
Pliocene, Oligocene, and Eocene ages (or "periods"--don't confuse the
issue with invented terminology), you are "Giganticopethicus Blacki!"
(See Koenigswald, Anthropology Papers, American Museum of Natural
History, 1952, pp.  295-325).
  
You see, the whole trend of Christian Education (above the high school
level) is to get you to respect the OPINIONS of these deluded asses
(or their friends), or at least take note of their learning and
intellectual achievements.  If this can be done, the leaven has been
inserted (Matt.  13:33), and it will not be long before you will be
consulting these rascals for advice.  Shortly after that, you will be
propagating their views at the expense of the Word of God.  Don't ever
doubt it for a minute; no man who ever "respected" the Biblical
scholarship of Trench, Hort, Westcott, Vinecent, Gregory, Tischendorf,
Lachmann, Schaff, Robertson, Nestle, Aland, Metzger, or Wuest, ever
got off again with believing the Bible was the final authority:  He
substituted Christian Education for the final authority.  The less
respect the Bible believer has for men who think they are smart enough
to correct the Book, the better off he will be and the better off his
church and his nation will be.  And don't give us this unholy gass
about "at least we should give these men the respect due to their
standing, because of their vast research and vast labours in..." In
WHAT, sonny?  I said, "In WHAT?" Research in WHAT?  Isn't the truth of
the matter that you are simply awed by a vocabulary you don't
understand, and it was invented so you wouldn't understand it?  What
is THIS, for example--hieroglyphics?  
Upper Cretaceous, Eocene, Creodonta, Condylarthra, Amblypoda,
Taeniodonta, Fissipeda, Ungulata, Edentata, Hyracoidea, Probosecidea,
Cetacea, Zeuglodontia, Pangolins, Aardvarks, Litoptenra, Typotheria,
Entelodon, Mysidae, Toxodontia, Pyrotheria, Embrithopoda, Anamniota,
Lymnaeidae, Cypraeidae, Rudista, Sirenia, Miohippus, Perissodactyla,
Artiodactyla, Sinanthropusx, Erinaceus, Meganthropus, Ephippidae,
Palaeodictyoptera, Nasions, Parahippus, Nuculidae, Halichoerus,
Pithecanthropidae, Palaeosimia, Hylapithecus, Xenopithecus, Naricas,
Myriopoda, Velutinae, Palinuridae, Myxophyceae, Diplopoda, Pauropoda,
Chilopoda, etc., etc., etc.
  
Now, as you were saying:  "...vast researches in..." IN WHAT?
  
Don't you get the message yet?  "Have ye yet no understanding?"
  
The men who invented these names to match the Disneyland figments of
their depraved imaginations thought that "LEVIATHAN" (Job 41:1) was a
crocodile.  So did Custer, Westcott, Hort, and Dr.  A.  T.  Robertson.
  
Do you get the message yet?
  
The men who memorized the list you just read thought "BEHEMOTH" (Job
40:15) was a hippopotomus!  So did Vincent, Trench, Schaff, and
Tischendorf.
  
Now when will you get it through your thick, stupid, unbelieving head
that the last 50,000 scholars who corrected the King James Bible--from
ANY field of human endeavor (science, philosophy, physics, biology,
paleontology, archaeology, religion, psychiatry, or socialism)--spent
the majority of their time trying to make an ASS out of you and a
CLOWN out of God!?
  
Now tie that down.  Keep it where you can look at it.  And when some
educated idiot begins to hound you about "Brother Ruckman," or "Pete
Ruckman," being "disrespectful of scholarship," etc., ask him: 
"DISRESPECTFUL OF WHAT?" Or, to practise what some of these meatheads
preach, put yourself in my shoes for awhile and consider that after a
proper amount of time studying the theories and findings of Sir Albert
Seward, Walcott, Metzger, Gregory, Raymond, Barrett, Cayeux, Lawson,
E.  S.  Moore, Darwin, E.  S.  Moore, Pompecki, C.  E.  Van Grundy, R. 
S.  Baseler, G.  Stiasny, Daly, W.  K.  Brooks, Grabau, Bradley,
Lamark, Laley, Lyell, Huxley, Nietsche, De Vries, Bateson, Rhodes,
Goldschmidt, Simpson, Medawar, Lysenko, Tobias, Price, Zuckerman,
Popper, Heisenberg, Schwindwolf, Einstein, Bergson, Reichenbach,
Russell, Davies, Schilder, Morris, Nelson, Rommer, Smith, Pattern,
Nuttal, and Newman (where they speak of evolution and creationism),
and then carefully studying Rimmer, Larkin, Pember, Scofield, Stam,
Bullinger, Ironside, Pieters, Pentecost, Wuest, Nee, Thieme, Vincent,
Trench, Pettingill, Joe Smith, Russell, Rutherford, M.  E.  White,
Armstrong, Robertson, Gregory, Davis, Burgon, Dake, Miller, Scrivener,
Westcott, Hort, Dollinger, Lightfoot, Ellicott, Newell, Alford,
Farrar, Eusebius, Schaff, Newman, Gesenius, Lange, Henry, Clarke,
Keil, Welhausen, Graf, Barnhouse, Newell, Weiss, Seiss, Baxter,
Cronin, Darby, Morgan, Kant, Astruc, Plato, Socrates, Leibnitz,
Aristotle, Dewey, Hegel, Bacon, Descartes, Tillich, Kierkegaard,
Brunner, Barth, Rauschenbusch, Schleirmacher, and Zen Buddhism (where
they speak of the scriptures, or philosophy or "reality"), how would
you feel if some nut tried to convince you that because he knew that
"man" was neither truly "nidifugous or nidicolous" that he was
"scholarly?" What would you do?  Laugh or go to sleep?  I mean, the
very idea of some amateur like the faculty members of Dallas, or the
University of Chicago, trying to impress us when they alter the King
James Text!  Who are you trying to impress, sonny, someone as green
and naive as you are?
  
I mean, after giving careful attention to most of the literature on
Astronomy and Abnormal Psychology, and much of the literature on
chemistry, geology, and archaeology, plus the esoteric literature on
UFOs, space ships, ESP, TM, the wisdom of the Rosicrucians, black
magic, demonism, Satanism, clairvoyance, the cults, the Sutras,
Shastas, Puranas, Tripitaka, and the Koran, plus the handbooks on
masonry, carpentry, hunting, fishing, boating, camping, and survival,
plus the literature on World War I and II, the Civil War, the Korean
War, the Vietnam War, the campaigns of Alexander, Baibars, Hannibal,
Napoleon, Saladin, Frederick, and Gustavus Adolphus, plus the
literature by Shaw, Lord, Leckie, Remarque, Heinrich, Critchell,
Mailer, Jones, Catton, Cope, Craig, Woulk, Cochester, Michene,
Laurence, Middleton, Yank Magazine, Churchill, Bowman, Stiles, Van
Praag, Casey, the Ballatnine Series, Myrer, Shirer, Wyeth, West,
Dawes, Henderson, Goss, Freeman, Mauldin, Pyle, Forsyth, Poert,
Hinman, Trobrian, Pullen, Lewis, Wallace, Livermore, Bowman, Lamb,
Bulwer, Garrett, and Hemingway, plus the literature on Karate, Judo,
close combat, hand-to-hand fighting, infantry weapons and tactics,
plus the literature on drawing, popular and classical music, art
techniques, sculpture, opera, symphony, and the theologies of Calvin,
Anselm, Aquinas, Chafer, Strong, Berkhof, Dabney, Kuiper, Hodge, and
O'Leary, and then plowing through 42 Bible commentaries and forty
church histories numbering over 200 volumes, plus six different Greek
Testaments, what do you think a man like ME is going to do when some
naive, superstitious muttonhead says, "We should RESPECT the labors of
these men because of their untiring efforts to..." To do WHAT, doctor? 
Make mud pies?  String beads?  Cut out paper dolls?
  
Why, children, if that King James Bible cannot thoroughly correct any
20,000 writers who ever wrote about ANYTHING mentioned above (directly
or indirectly), I wouldn't waste time to break in the binding on it.
  
If the combined faculty members of the ten highest rated universities
in the world were to combine their knowledge and enforce it with a
World Court, they could no more compete with a King James Bible (when
it comes to Absolute Truth) than a cockroach could compete with a
German Shepherd in taking care of a bank.  Truth is not about to yield
to some half-baked upstart who thinks that brick-and-mortar monuments
are greater than the Eternal Truth of God's Eternal word.  Where
30,000 authors alter the Book, you alter them.  Do it at once and do
it without regard for their training, background, upbringing,
breeding, scholarship, or education.  "Respect" is out of the
question.  If they want our respect, let them keep their defiled,
unbelieving hands off of our Book.
  
Now the "light" of verse 24 is said to "scatter the east wind upon the
earth" (v 24).  {Cf.  Job 28:26.} For this reason Clarke, and others,
take it to be lightning which scatters the "eastern storm" (Ibid., p. 
171).  If the verse is taken in this fashion, no one knows the "way"
the light is parted, for no one knows why lightning takes the zig-zag
form it takes.  (No, you don't get rid of it by, "Oh the plus and
minus charges, etc.").  There isn't an electrician alive who can tell
what causes positive and negative charges.  You say, "Magnetism." And
what is "magnetism," doctor?  No, don't tell us!  It's like "GRAVITY,"
isn't it?  {You see, it is as we have stated the matter.  You invent
words to impress people with, and just so the word can't be found in
the Bible, it will do.  Imagine these hucksters and hamsters who make
their living by substituting "reliable translations" for the word of
God, telling us that we should "respect their scholarship" of the
scholarship of some linguistic specialist, simply because he had a
reputation for "accredited, scientific, validated research!" The
theory of evolution is nothing but philosophical speculation; the
depraved fantasy of heathen imagination.  The theories of Westcott and
Hort, used to justify Aland and Metzger's text at Bob Jones
University, are the same brand.  There is less evidence that the "best
Greek" text was used by the ASV and the New ASV or that they were
"reliable" manuscripts, than the evidence presented by Haeckel on
"embryonic recaptiulation."}
  
22.  "Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of
waters...to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth" (vv 25,
27).  Since Adam Clarke cannot see "how the overflowing or torrents of
water can be said to ascend any other way than by evaporation" (Ibid.,
p.  171), he limits the passage to a regular cloud and a regular
rainstorm.  Since we are never particularly concerned with Bible
rejectors who "can't see how," or who "see how," we shall look beyond
the obvious application of the next two verses and understand that the
"overflowing of the waters" occured TIDALLY in the time of Noah (see
The Genesis Flood, Whitcomb, and The Ice Age Epoch, Patten), and
COSMICALLY (Gen.  1:2) when the earth sank through space!  {No, there
is no "Gap theory" in Genesis 1:2 and 2 Pet.  3:6 is no more the flood
of Noah's day than your bird pond.}
  
A way is created for the "lightning of the thunder" as we have
remarked under Job 37.  The "desolate and waste ground" (v 27) does
have tender herbs, and it does bud, even in the desert.  In the
deserts of Africa, one will find the blue Kleina; in the deserts of
Mexico, one will find the Mexican Sedum.  In addition, the desert is
often covered with a carpet of brilliant colored flowers right after a
rain:  White daisies, purple Nama, yellow Eriophyllum, and the blooms
from barrel cactus, hedgehog cactus, and beavertail cactus.
  
Furthermore, the thunder and lightning do "cause it to rain" (v 26),
for the explosion for the gases (hydrogen and oxygen) is instrumental
in breaking up cloud formations.  And all of this is still beside the
point, the original question was "WHO" (v 25) did these things?  No
modern materialist or atheis could answer the question, for his
question would assume at the start--from the standpoint of a
"reactionary bigot"--that the only proper question could be:  "WHAT
hath divided..." (v 25).  But consider!  What is the point, anyway, in
decorating the whole surface of the earth and the bottoms of the seas
with myriads of plants, microbes, marine animals, flowers, shurbbery,
insects, and rocks?  Is there a man reading this, who spends any time
in hunting, who has not found beautiful plants and shrubs (or tiny
animals) outside, on the "backside of the boon docks," where no human
eye would see them once every 500 years, or more?  Lie down on your
face sometime, out in the woods; lie down in some wild grass or dead
leaves, and take a good look at the activity that God sees every day
in 20,000,000 places that no man has looked at ONCE (see v 39 and
comments).  If you had to take care of all the "critters" that God
takes care of every 24 hours, wouldn't you be ready for the funny
farm?  The question is:  "WHO takes care of these animals and plants?"
The question is not:  "WHAT takes care of them?" (But Darwin, Hegel,
Freud, Marx, Huxley, Sartre, Einstein, and Heidegger (and the United
Nations) never could get it right, and they never will.)
  
God Almighty, the creator of the world (Heb.  1:2-4) and the "Father
of lights" (James 1:17), waves His hand in Infinity (Ps.  147:4), and
showers forth 10,000 galaxies that His creatures could not find in
5,000 years of recorded history.  He breathes on the ocean expanses
(Gen.  1:20) and the swarms of living creatures spawn forth from it
until 500 oceanographers, working eight hours a day for 100 years,
haven't been able to catalogue all of them yet.  He creates bright red
fish whose scales camouflage them from nothing--see the ridiculous
teaching of any evolutionist on "environmental adaption." He created
animals that can't move fast enough to escape their prey, and some of
them have no hard "coverings," inky clouds, sharp teeth, or claws, or
even poisonous auras.  A man who talks about the "survival of the
fittest" and "progressive evolution" is not a man to whom any
"respect" should be shown, at least no more than you would show to a
12-year-old newsboy.  Be polite but don't get carried away with a lot
of bunko.  And while speaking of respect, we all agree (I am sure!)
that we should respect one another enough to not force each other to
go to schools we don't want to go to--don't "we"?  And we all agree
that we should "respect" one another enough not to curse and tell
dirty jokes on the job in front of men who are offended by either--
don't we?  And of course we all "agree" (you just betcher booties,
"we" do!) that we should "respect" one another enough to let Bible
believing preachers get as much TV and radio time as Catholic priests
and Liberals--don't "we"?  And in dealing with such kind, loving,
polite, broad-minded, tolerant people, are we to "respect" the
scholarship of any man who believes the prune juice that James, Dewey,
Russell, Marx, Sartre, Ramm, Heidegger, Darwin, and Tillich dished
out?  Oh, com'on, man!  Get off it!  God has made thousands of animals
(birds, fishes, and mammals) who have horns to handicap them running
through the woods (deer), bright colors so they can be seen and shot
better (birds), and no teeth or hard shells so they can be eaten
better (shad minnows and shrimp), and the ones who survived the
longest (400,000,000 to 800,000,000 years, according to Einstein--give
or take a few hundred million) had no teeth, no shells, no camouflage,
and no means of locomotion to carry them two feet in an hour. 
(Amoebas aren't exactly "highly complex" forms of "higher life.")
  
What is this fish doing with a fishing pole growing out of his head,
where he can dangle "bait" before a smaller fish?  What is this silly
looking thing doing with warts and moles all over his body, which is
as soft and slimy as a wet pollywog?  What is this wretched thing I
pull up on my line that is half snake and half eel?  Every time he
shows up the white trout (weak fish) leave!  What is this ribbon-like
thing I pull up, with teeth like a Tyranosaurus and a silver hide (no
scales) that shimmers and shines in the sun like a sword blade?  You
say, "The Ichthyologists tell us..." Yea, but WHO made the thing and
WHY?  I don't care if you classify and reclassify your Phyla, Sub-
phyla, and species in your "Taxonomy" until you look like a
computerized zoo, you can't tell me that "mother nature" did all that
stuff just so each species would "fit" its environment or be "adapted"
to its habitat.  And if good old motehr nature did, wouldn't she be a
dunce?  Boy, you talk about wasting resources!  You talk about
extraneous "redundancy!" If 35 birds can all live in the same
temperate zone, and all 35 of them eat the same type of food in that
zone, what is the point in coloring thirty of them differently, unless
someone likes "color" and gets a kick out of a "variegated palette?"
Hasn't it ever struck some of you that the real purpose behind the
myriads of variations existing in the flora, fauna, and animal life is
to demonstrate an Almighty hand that can do anything?  Now there is a
thought!  God says, "Whattchee here!  BLAM!" There it is (Gen.  1)! 
And you could no more reduplicate it (Job 40:10) than you could get by
the White Throne Judgment in your own righteousness.  Tell us doctor,
why the pepsis wasp has to have a dead tarantula for an incubator
before she lays her eggs?  There are pepsis wasps all over the desert,
yet there are over 2,000,000 people in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas
who have never seen one lay an egg.  What were all of these variations
for?  To look at?  Who looks at them?
  
23.  "Hath the rain a FATHER?  or who hath begotten...?" (v 28).  The
answer of the natural scientist (and we do mean "natural") to this
question is:  "The rain does not have a 'father,' and no one 'begat'
the 'dew.'" Professing themselves to be wise (Rom.  1), the
materialists took the very information which God let them find (Rom. 
1) and then used it to prove that God had no part in it (1 Cor. 
1:21).  "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" (Rom. 
1:22).  Nor do the modern Christian Educators manage much better.  In
their zeal to add 2,000,000 dollars to the last 3,000,000, they uphold
their school as the final authority, and professing themselves to be
wise (1 Cor.  3:19,20), theri scholars take the very information which
God lets them find (Luke 10:21) and use it to prove that God had no
part in it (Ps.  12).  But it is God who "giveth the dew of heaven"
(Gen.  27:28), and the "dew of heaven FROM ABOVE" (Gen.  27:39) is
never to be set aside by such flippant remarks as "The AV Bible is
wrong; dew comes from the ground." (See Exod.  16:13, 15, and
comments.) When God says that "the HEAVENS shall give their dew"
(Zech.  8:12), He is not to be set aside simply because some
nincompoop (whose "scholarship" is supposed to be respected) doesn't
like the King James Bible.  Three concurrent sources of dew are
recognized (American Encyclopedia, Vol.  9, p.  44), and the first of
these is the "condensation of the moisture of the ATMOSPHERE." And not
only that, but God has a way of using His words the way He wants to
use them, since He is the author of all real scientific truth, and He
ALONE wrote the only "scientific" text book in print which never has
to be altered to match "the findings of science." "Dew," in the Bible,
is used throughout to stand for drops of condensed vapor, and these
drops can occur in clouds (Prov.  3:20) or foggy atmospheres (Ps. 
133:3) or as dew that comes from plants on the ground (Isa.  26:19). 
Never alter the AV text with Hebrew or Greek simply to match the
demands of some half-batty Fundamentalist who is worried about what
educated people will think of him if he doesn't attack the Bible.
  
24.  "Out of whose womb came the ice?  and the hoary frost of heaven?"
(v 29).  Answer:  "The expressions are figurative, and cannot be
answered by refering to a PERSON.  The question should be:  "WHAT
causes ice and frost?" (See how it is done?) But this doesn't get
around the question, for notice what follows:  "The waters are hid as
with a stone and the FACE OF THE DEEP is frozen" (v 30).  Since not
one scientist--including any saved scientist in California engaged in
research in "Catastrophic Geology"--ever even located "THE FACE OF THE
DEEP" (see Gen.  1:2-3 and comments), how could an unsaved sinner
answer the question?  The saved scientists (Morris, Rimmer, etc.) will
not believe the first four verses in Genesis, so how in the world
could they begin to answer a question concerning ICE that was
connected with the "Deep"?  If the "ice" (v 29) is the ice deposited
around the "Van Allen" belts from outer space (see Patten, Ibid.), no
scientists (saved or lost) before 1960 could have answered the
question if the question had been "WHAT causes ice to come...etc!"
  
That isn't all.  Why doesn't water obey the laws of expansion and
contraction?  Why does it expand under cold and contract under heat
when the other elements do not?  A man says, "Well, the atomic
structure of the chemical elements (H2O) is of such a nature that..."
Yes, but you are not going to tell us why there is so much variety
(see above).  Why not have everything expand and contract on the same
principles?  How did "mother nature" get so fickle and capricious that
she decided to have water follow one law and lead another one?  And
what is Venus doing spinning the wrong way on her axis (clockwise)? 
Why can't the moon turn on its axis?  Now, the scientists have a lot
of pretty little "pat answers" on these things which they derive from
"laws." However, these same fools (Rom.  1:22) will flatly reject
their own laws when these laws clearly indicate that "progressive
evolution" or "spontaneous generation" are pipe dreams.  The first and
second Law of Thermodynamics (adopted by all Evolutionists) would
forbid any evolutionist from believing in evolution.  So, what do they
do when they find a scientific law that goes against their theories? 
They annul the law and go on looking for "facts" to support the
"THEORY"!  But, you understand, you are to trust these birdbrains when
they give you an answer based on "the laws of physics" dealing with
planetary motions and celestial phenomena!  How do you know that God
just didn't jam the whole works in Genesis 1:2, and again in Genesis
6?  Like He will do AGAIN in Revelation 19 and 20?
  
"The face of the deep" for example, "is FROZEN" (v 30), because it is
at absolute zero (460 degrees below zero), to form a crystalized
"firmament" (Rev.  4, 14) with the properties of fire (Rev.  15:2). 
Nor do we ever have to make any allowances or "adjustments" about
these matters, although science will constantly demand them of us as
she "progresses" with "ever new discoveries" of "hidden, blah, blah,
blah, etc." The King James Bible will state the scientific FACT, and
if you catch up with it in a lifetime, you will be doing better than
average, and if you don't, it won't change one letter to meet the
demands of some reactionary bigot who thinks a Greek or Hebrew lexicon
is more accurate.  Surgeons did everything but jail a physician in
Vienna, back in 1850, for teaching that germs stay on a surgeon's
hands if he doesn't wash them in running water (Lev.  14).  If they
had caught up (not "back to") the King James 1611 Bible in 1860, they
would not have talked like a bunch of bigoted, narrow-minded, archaic
jackasses, and they would have saved ninety percent more of their
patients.  Back to the Bible or back to the jungle:  Take your pick. 
"Back to the Catholic Greek text of Vaticanus" (see any text put out
by Aland, Metzger, Bob Jones, Westcott, Hort, Wuest, or Nestle) is not
a third option.  Vaticanus was written in Africa by an African church
(Latin) for African scholars (Augustine and Origen), and it is as
close to the "JUNGLE" as you can get without disappearing into the
vines.
  
25.  "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades or loose the
bands of Orion?" (v 31).  The pleiades are seven stars in the
Constellation of Orion; they make their appearance in the Spring. 
Orion is the "giant" of the constellations, and it can be seen off and
on from October to January.  The question God asks Job is simple: 
"Can you make spring stay all through summer and can you take off the
bonds of winter from nature?" No man can.  No man ever has, and no man
ever will.  And whether you "air-condition" all summer to "bind the
sweet influences" (v 31), or whether you heat electrically all winter
to "loose the bands" (v 31), you will run out of energy, your electric
bill will double every five years, your body will get filled with
poisons from not sweating, your land and crops will lie under snow in
the winter and drought in the summer, and you are a blank fool to
think you can trifle with God (or the Book of Job) just because you
imagine that "science" has done anything since Cain killed Abel (see
Gen.  3-4 and comments).
  
Orion appears on the Southern horizon and slightly Westward throughout
the winter.  Bullinger wrongly marks the "strong one" as the "coming
Prince," referring to Jesus Christ, but this is grossly in error. 
"Scorpio," for example is not "the Redeemer's conflict," and a crab
("Cancer") no more represents the "Messiah's position held fast"
(Ibid., p.  18) than it represents the underground passages of the
Chase National Bank.  The stars which make up Canis Minor no more
represent "the victorious, conquering Redeemer" (Bullinger, Ibid., p. 
18) than they represent the John Birch Society.  Crabs and dogs are
unclean animals (Lev.  11), according to the infallible definition
given by the Creator of dogs and crabs.  The Lord Jesus Christ, in His
suffering and Atonement, is likened to a worm (Ps.  22) and a serpent
(John 3), but never to dogs or crabs; "dogs" attack Him when he is
dying (Ps.  22:16).  Get your Bible straight.
  
Kesil (Orion) also means "the FOOL," so the typology is indisputable;
the Redeemer was never a "fool," but there is a fool and a "foolish
man" in Job 5:2, 3, Proverbs 17:12, 24; 18:2, 6, 7, Luke 12:20, and
Zechariah 11:15 (check out that last one!) who could well be a giant
(Gen.  6:2-6), and he might even be GIGANTOPETHICUS BLACKI.  {If the
last reference is a little obscure, consult your nearest university
anthropology professor or biology professor--preferably one who is a
member of the NEA and well read on current hallucinations.} The giants
have been here before; they were FOOLS when they were here, and any
reader of the infallible text knew that in 1700, 1750, 1800, 1850, and
1900, before any atom was split, before any trips were made to the
moon, and long before Velikovsky or Van Daniken were old enough to
make guesses regarding any history of the earth.  You don't go forward
with science; you go BACKWARD.  Furthermore, "Orion" will be bound
literally (see Rev.  20:1-2), and you could not "loose his bands" if
you had access to the lost wisdom of Atlantis, the hidden wisdom of
the Martians, ESP, TM, an astrological computer, and an I.Q.  of 170. 
Nor could you loose the bands of the "giants" who are now bound in
"chains of darkness" (1 Peter 2:4); nor could your professors (saved
or lost) find any of those cross-references in any Greek or Hebrew
text unless we showed them where they were.  "The bands of Orion," the
mighty hunter (see Gen.  10:9), is a reference to scientific fact so
far beyond the reach of the contents of the Library of Congress, at
this point (1974), that you would waste your time trying to find the
material.
  
26.  "Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season?" (v 32).  The
reference is probably to the twelve signs of the Zodiac (Virgo, Libra,
Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricornus, Aquarius, Pices, Aries, Taurus,
Gemini, Cancer, and Leo).  Most commentators suppose that the Hebrew
scribe has erred and written "resh" for "lamed" in the Hebrew--
Mazzaluth (Gesenius, Ibid., p.  462).  In this case, the meaning would
be:  "Can you bring forth each one of the signs of the Zodiac out of
his 'house' at the time he is due, or can you make the sun pass
through this 'house' or dwelling place, at each season?" However, this
is something much deeper than this in the passage, for Orion (v 31) is
so clearly a picture of the Antichrist that only Biederwolf, Payne,
Pember, Larkin, Kirban, Lindsay, Von Daniken (keep on, make your own
list) could miss it.  Sticking with the Bible text, we would have
this:  "Can you bring forth the constellations of the Zodiac in HIS
season--Lucifer's!" (Notice how the Vulgate jumps at this
interpretation and writes the word "Lucifer" down in verse 32.) The
modern Massoretic Bible has translated the possessive as "their"
seasons, to match the interpretation given by most commentators. 
However, the Hebrew is "etho"--the third person SINGULAR, masculine. 
In view of the events which will take place in Isaiah 13 and
Revelation 6 (and 16:1-10), the "Mazzaroth" will NOT come in their
seasons, nor will they be even visible at times during the reign of
Orion, the mighty hunter.
  
27.  "Canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?" (v 32).  Arcturus is
Ursa Major ("The Big Bear"), which includes what we call "the Big
Dipper." This constellation is also called "the bier," in Arabic, and
the three stars which comprise the handle of the Big Dipper are
called, "the daughters of the beir." Here, the expression "his sons"
(v 32) is supposed to refer to these three stars, but again, we are
dealing with more than Arabic roots or even astronomy.  Any man who
spotted the BEAR of Daniel 7 and the BEAR of Revelation 13 and the
BEAR of Amos 5:19 knows better than to "wish upon a star" and think
positive thoughts about "bears!" When the Lord says that He will tear
Israel to pieces like a "bear bereaved of her whelps," He is talking
about somebody's "sons," and they are not "the sons of God," in the
sense of John 1:12.  The "ranging BEAR" of Proverbs 28:14 comes on the
scene, connected with a Lion, four times (Prov.  28:15, Dan.  7:5,
Rev.  13:2, and 1 Sam.  17:35).  Not in one instance is anything
expressed "positively" about "redemption" (Bullinger, Ibid.) or
"sharing your religious experience." A ranging bear is about as
constructive and "helpful" as a forest fire.
  
28.  "Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven?" (v 33).  No, not even if
you have waded through LaPlace, Kepler, Newton, Copernicus, Patten,
Einstein, Price, Nelson, Velikovsky, and the "pulps." The landings on
the moon did not solve one important question for mankind that wasn't
solved in the Book of Proverbs and Job.  The "findings of lunar rock"
didn't contribute one iota of evidence for evolution (of any kind),
although that was why the $25,000,000,000 was spent in the first
place.  Outside of providing philosophical food for speculative
fanatics--grant that some of them make a good living off of it!--there
has been no discovery (or discoveries) by anyone, for 3,000 years,
that have enabled man to know the ORDINANCES of heaven.  In 1978 they
are still guessing origins of the solar system, the origins of life on
earth, the origins of stars, the composition of stars, the origin of
the universe, and "life on other planets." The best astronomer you
know doesn't know enough about the "heavens" to tell you how to get to
any star in them, or what to do after you get there.
  
You don't know why Venus goes one way and Mars goes another.  You
don't know why our atmosphere turned out differently than those of
Neptune and Pluto.  You don't know what happened to Vulcan or Typhon. 
You don't know if the stars have been up there for 400,000,000,000
years, and if you had to prove it by the speed of light, you could no
more prove it than prove that Uranium proves the age of this earth. 
If you had seen Adam (Gen.  2), you would have sworn on a stack of
"living bibles" that it had taken that man thirty years to arrive in
the condition you saw him, and you would have been just as wrong as if
you had stated the earth was 1,000,000,000 years old.  God made
everything in the universe so that it had the appearance of age; Adam
was born "growed."
  
You don't know why some Nebulas are dark and others are not; you don't
know where the empty place over the North is; you don't know why stars
represent angels (and vice versa); you don't know how creatures move
up and down in outer space (Eph.  6) without UFOs of any kind, and you
don't know how God can know everything that is happening on this
earth, down to the activity of sparrows (Matt.  10:31), while at the
same time, He is keeping track of galaxies beyond the reach of your
telescope.
  
And if you DID understand the physical ordinances of heaven, would you
know the moral and spiritual ordinances?
  
29.  "Canst thou set the dominion thereof IN THE EARTH?" (v 33).  Five
hundred million Roman Catholics have been praying "thy Kingdom come,
thy will be done ON EARTH as it is in HEAVEN" (Matt.  6:10) through
ten centuries of killing, torturing, burning, and murdering Bible
believers; did the dominion ever come?  These silly Post-
millennialists (all Communists and Socialists) who believe man can
bring in a perfect kingdom by his own self-effort, have been talking
about "bringing in the Kingdom" ever since the great Bible-rejecting
evolutionist St.  Augustine keeled over and sank in the fog of Neo-
Platonism.  Did you ever bring it in?  "His truth is marching on," is
it?  You "had a dream," did you (M.  L.  King, Jr.)?  Can you set the
dominion thereof on the EARTH?  You say, "We're working on it!" So did
Napoleon, Marx, Charlemagne, Angela Davis, Alexander, Pope Urban,
Louis XIV, Pepin, Bloody Mary, Castro, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin,
Roosevelt, Mao Tse Tung, Ho Chi Mihn, and Abbie Hoffmann.  You say,
"Pete Ruckman, you are being sarcastic; not all of those people
thought..." Well, that shows what a greenhorn YOU are, doesn't it? 
Every man and woman in that list had a plan for improving world
conditions; every one of them was sincere in his belief that his plans
would make the world a better place to live in, and every one of them
honestly believed that killing, lying, stealing, and swearing falsely
was perfectly justifiable if it attained the god ends which they had
in mind.  No unsaved leader (religious, political, military,
scientific, or educational) ever looked at matters any differently.
  
You say, "We shouldn't despair!  Don't give up hope!  If we can just
all 'get together'..." And make the black people white?  And the white
people black?  And the Catholics Protestant and the Protestants
Catholic?  And all the men womanly?  Right?  Isn't that about it? 
Make the Orientals Occidental, and the Occidentals Oriental?  Right? 
Make the poor folks rich and the rich folks poor, the adults juvenile
and the juveniles adult, and then call evil good and good evil,
and...!
  
Are THOSE the "ordinances of HEAVEN" (v 33)?  Can you prove it?
  
There isn't a religious or political leader (living or dead) who could
answer either of Job's questions in the affirmative (Job 38:33).  {See
The Sure Word of Prophecy, 1970.}
  
30.  "Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that abundance of
waters may cover thee?" (v 34).  If you could, there are 200,000,000
people waiting to pay you your own price.  When the good old Communist
FDR brought the beer back in, the wind blew western Oklahoma and
western Kansas into the dust bowl.  On one of those vast wastes, in
the Dakotas (1933), which used to be a farm, a gruesome sign was
erected.  It said:  "You gave us BEER, now give us WATER." FDR
couldn't give them water, neither can you.  When God turns off the
spigot of His water courses in the Great Tribulation (James 5:17), you
can lift your voice to Venus and back by means of "teleframus-
flimstratographic-ionized-electroscopic-lasernontics," and you will
still breathe dust (1 Kings 17:7).  "Science" has never solved one
major problem man ever had, and it never will; science is a clown. 
Science has "proved conclusively" that if your grandfather and your
great-grandfather had no children, you won't have any either.  At its
best, science has been able to improvise a few gadgets to keep some
rich people alive a few weeks longer, and allow some rich people to
move about more than they would have.  At its worst, science has been
responsible for more destructive, violent killing nonsense than any
medium on earth outside of the news media and religion, and both of
these sources tend to make a god out of "science."
  
31.  "Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee,
Here we are?" (v 35).  Ben Franklin (1706-1790) and A.  G.  Bell
(1847-1922) finally got around to it, but you'll have to admit that 26
centuries is a pretty good "lag" behind "scientific fact." Tamed
electricity finally produced a telephone where someone could "say unto
thee, Here we are," but Job couldn't answer the question any more than
Franklin or Bell could answer the question God put to Job in verse 4: 
What is "electricity"?  "Well, you see, when the magnet turns inside
the coil of wire, the electrons..."
  
"But, I mean what is that MAGNETISM you keep talking about?"
  
"Well, magnetism is kind of like GRAVITATION!"
  
So, we always come in where we go out and vice versa.  The modern
attitude is "Well, it works, and look at all we have done with it
(pragmatism), so who cares how it comes about?" Well, how did the
human race get along for 5,000 years without it?  Is there any
evidence that Dollinger and Eusebius had any more trouble with their
eyes, while writing their histories, than La Tourette or Newman?  Is
there any more evidence that Nathaniel Bedford Forrest and Charlemagne
were any punier than Larry Csonka or General Patton because of their
lack of automobiles?  What proof is there that John Wesley and Charles
Wesley were more carnal than Billy Graham or Dave Wilkerson, even they
didn't have radio and TV?  If Ohn (1878-1854), Faraday (1791-1867),
Morse (1791-1872), Marconi (1874-1937), Edison (1847-1931), and
Steinmetz (1865-1923) had never messed with the stuff, could you have
had an Atom bomb?  Cancer through TV tube rays?  Intercontinental
ballistic missiles?
  
A friend of mine was black as a cinder after 3,000 volts hit him while
he was painting a roof on a church.  A man in Dayton, Ohio, had his
arms melted and welded to his sides by a jolt; he was left for dead,
leaning on a tree, and a nurse got him "alive" again after four hours
work on him.  A man shocked in Cincinnati had his hair blown clear
through his hat, and one hand and one foot blown off his arm and leg. 
A man here in Pensacola got 440 volts through his body, and it looked
like someone had gone across his body with an acetylene welding torch. 
But look at electricity "positively!"
  
Think how much better things are now when you can work all night long
and keep a plant running 24 hours a day!  Look how this has helped
anti-pollution and conservation of "energy!" And think how much better
it is to wait six to eight hours after the sun has gone down before
going to bed and then paying $100.00 a month to cook your toast, wash
your clothes, dry your hair, fry your bacon, argue with the telephone
operator, carve your turkey, sue the power company, beat your eggs,
and scratch your back!  And what would we do without dead batteries,
blown fuses, busted light switches, headlights that go out, tail
lights that don't work, back-up lights that don't shine, radios that
short-circuit your ignition, telephone companies that double your
rates every five years, light bulbs that last two months, and
flashlights for "emergencies" that go dead every time an emergency
shows up?  And if you are going to tell the whole truth about it, why
not point out the beautiful destructive properties of radio pulse,
echo techniques, Loran, electronic jamming, proximity fuses,
electrical predictors, gyroscope lead computing devices, electronic
computers, peizoelectric effects on quartz crystal, radio sonobuoys,
homing torpedoes, guided missiles, and atomic fission--all made
possible through "man's vast researches into electricity by the
inductive scientific method!"
  
Don't kid us.  Men died in their twenties, thirties, forties, and
fifties in the seventeenth and eighteenth century; they still do. 
There have been as many men in America (between twenty and fifty)
killed on the highway since 1920 as there were men (between twenty and
fifty) who died of pneumonia and TB between 1800 and 1850.  Don't kid
us; kid your head-shrink.  You live longer now because you pay a
bigger hospital bill for it.  Half the gadgets they treat you with
work on ELECTRICITY.  Don't kid us.  If you can harness the lightning
and make it run and say, "Here we are" (v 35), you are to be commended
for getting one question out of 31 correct.  "Progress" was not a
point in question.
  
38:36-41 Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts?  or who hath given
understanding to the heart?  Who can number the clouds in wisdom?  or
who can stay the bottles of heaven, When the dust groweth into
hardness, and the clods cleave fast together?  Wilt thou hunt the prey
for the lion?  or fill the appetite of the young lions, When they
couch in their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait?  Who
provideth for the raven his food?  when his young ones cry unto God,
they wander for lack of meat.
  
32.  "Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts...understanding to the
heart?" (v 36).  Well, mother nature didn't and Darwin didn't, and you
didn't and evolution didn't and education has never done much more
than make a smart crook out of a dumb one.  Wisdom is knowing how to
use what you know, and understanding is knowing how it is related to
God (see 28:28).  Wisdom goes to the inward parts of animals while
understanding (see Prov.  1:2, 5 and comments) goes to the heart of
man.  Where God deprives an animal of wisdom (see Job 39:17), a
disaster follows, and where God deprives a man of understanding (Prov. 
6:32), a disaster follows.  Neither education, talent, training,
religion, science, or sacraments can supply these essential
ingredients.  Illustrations (from nature) about the imparted wisdom
found in the animal creation would take ten text books of 800 pages
each to document.  Spiders "instinctively" know how to construct webs,
fish "instinctively" know when and where to lay eggs, birds
"instinctively" know where to fly and where to land, sick animals know
"instinctively" what to chew on and where to hide out, and the
activity of BEES and ANTS is of such a nature that man has to be half
insane to observe them and come to the conclusion that "instinct" is
anything but IMPARTED WISDOM.
  
33.  "Who can number the clouds in wisdom?" Nobody.  You can't even
number the stars (Jer.  31:35), but God has them all numbered and
named (Ps.  147:4).  The stars are fairly stationary compared to the
clouds, and many of them are visible in fixed positions for many
nights at a time.  With clouds it is otherwise; they form and
disintegrate in a matter of minutes or hours.  Some of them move
swiftly, some sit like a ball of cotton in the air for fifteen minutes
without moving a hundred yards, some of them pile up to 50,000 feet,
while others evaporate as they are forming, some of the cloud banks
cover 3,000,000 square miles, and sometimes they come three and four
layers thick.  Nobody can "number the clouds" but God, for by the time
you calculated the number of the clouds, the number would have
changed.  The only way you could "number" them would be by having
automatic arithmetical computers, operating by radar and laser, set up
to cover every square mile of land on the surface of the earth:  They
would all have to report to a central control station within two
minutes, and they would have to be able to report the separate clouds
that make up a thunderhead, and the number of clouds in the layers
above the cloud immediately over the path of the radar.  Don't try it;
it won't work.
  
34.  "Who can stay the bottles of heaven...and the clods cleave fast
together?" (vv 37, 38).  Nobody, because at the end of a three and a
half year drought, it is going to pour rain (Hos.  6:3, Prov.  16:15,
Ps.  68:9, 1 Kings 18:44, 45) after it has rained "cats and dogs
and...babies" (Ps.  11:6, Exod.  9:34, Luke 17:29, and S.  of Sol. 
2:11).  You see the "bottles of heaven" (v 37) were real bottles (Rev. 
16:1-10) and when "it rains, it POURS!"
  
35.  Last question in this chapter, Job!  "Wilt thou hunt the prey for
the lion...provideth for the raven his food?" (vv 39-41).  No, you
won't.  From the king of beasts to the avenger of the birds, God is in
charge.  The young lions (v 39) cannot rush and leap on the prey yet,
so they "crouch in their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait"
(v 40).  If God doesn't send a meal by their hiding place, they go
hungry.  And from the very first time that the law of "tooth and claw"
was given (Gen.  9:3), until the lion and leopard "lie down" with the
calf and the ox (Isa.  11:3-9), the rule in nature is, "dog eat dog."
Some other animal is the prey.  As beautiful as she is, and as full of
displays of God's power and glory as she is, "mother nature" is like a
weeping bride, standing alone at an altar, waiting for a marriage that
has not yet been consummated (literally, you rascal:  Look at Hosea
2:19.  You can't reject that exposition just because you don't know
enough about God's word to think clearly).
  
The ravens "Cry unto God" (v 41) for the corn and scraps, and God
feeds them according to Matthew 6:26.
  

  

  
CHAPTER THIRTY-NINE
  

  
39:1-4 KNOWEST thou the time when the wild goats of the rock bring
forth?  or canst thou mark when the hinds do calve?  Canst thou number
the months that they fulfil?  or knowest thou the time when they bring
forth?  They bow themselves, they bring forth their young ones, they
cast out their sorrows.  Their young ones are in good liking, they
grow up with corn; they go forth, and return not unto them.
  
Having gone from the king of the beasts to the scavenger of the birds,
the Lord now reviews things from the scavenger of the beasts (v 1) to
the king of the birds (v 27).  There are ten animals listed in this
chapter.  Counting the two already mentioned (the lion and the raven)
in the previous chapter, and the two in Chapters 40 and 41, there are
14 "beasts" listed:  However, two of these are plainly SPIRITUAL
beings similar to the "beasts" of Revelation 4:7 and Ezekiel 1:10.
  
On goes the questioning, but we will no longer list the questions by
number, for it is apparent by now that the average college graduate in
America could not possibly get half of them right.  If he got ten out
of the first 35, he could consider himself a genius; nobody bats .300
when God starts asking the questions:  See for example Mark 2:9, 25;
3:4,23; 7:18,19, and 8:18.
  
"Knowest thou the time...?" (v 1).  All the follows shows that Job is
being asked about the gestation periods for wild goats and hinds (v
2).  If you asked the first 5,000 college graduates (in Europe or
America) this question tomorrow, you would do good to get fifty
answers right:  One out of 100 would be an excellent response, if you
could get it.  Ordinary goats run about 147 to 155 days, ewes run
about 145 to 152, while the large animals (mares, cows, asses) run
anywhere from 279 to 372 days.  The wild goats and "hinds" bow
themselves when "they bring forth their young ones" (v 3), and they
"cast out their sorrows" in the sense of Genesis 3:16, where the human
species brings forth children "in sorrow." They are relieved from
their burden and the pain, when the "young one" is brought forth. 
{Observe "young un," and "you UNS" in the Southland, compared with the
German "unser" and "uns." The German words mean "our," so it has been
used for a plural in the old Southland dialect:  "We uns don't look at
it that way."}
  
"They grow up...go forth...return not..." (v 4).  This refers to the
fact that the offspring of wild animals learn how to "make it on their
own" after awhile, and they go out and set up their own "families."
  
39:5-8 Who hath sent out the wild ass free?  or who hath loosed the
bands of the wild ass?  Whose house I have made the wilderness, and
the barren land his dwellings.  He scorneth the multitude of the city,
neither regardeth he the crying of the driver.  The range of the
mountains is his pasture, and he searcheth after every green thing.
  
We have commented on the wild ass before, under Exodus 13:13 and Job
11:12, which see.  Wild asses are still found in South Tartary,
Persia, Syria, and the islands of the Archipelago.  Some of them still
run in the deserts of Libya and Numidia, although civilization (since
1918) has cut into their ranks considerably.  At the time God speaks
to Job, there are herds of wild asses in Syria and Arabia and North
Africa.  Now the wild ass not only runs without a bridle ("who hath
loosed the bands") but his nature is so uncontrollable that you cannot
break him in until he has been ridden.  Verses 6 and 7 are self-
explanatory and any "mule skinner" who has had to handle the fifteen
to twenty foot whip can testify that the wild ass "REGARDETH NOT the
crying of the driver" (v 7).  Stories are numerous.
  
A Yankee wants to know why a southern Darky is hitting a mule in the
face with a two-by-four, to get him to pull a cart.  "Well, fust,"
says the dark one, "you gots to get his attenchun!" A Yankee, appalled
at the beating a Negro is giving a stubborn mule, says to him, "I say,
my good man, don't beat him like that!  Talk to him!" Whereupon the
Negro goes up to the head of the beast, and leaning on a lamppost by
the curb, says, "My name's Willie Roosevelt, what's yours?"
  
"Stubborn as a mule" (see Prov.  26:9 and comments) is as proverbial
as "clear as crystal" or "hot as fire." One farmer finally builds a
fire under a mule who refuses to pull a load; the mule takes five
steps forward and stops again and the fire burns up the wagon and its
load.  The old "twenty mule teams" took a driver with an arm like a
jackhammer and a vocabulary like a thirty-year Navy man.  One of those
old mule skinners (1880) got converted:  The week following his public
profession, a crowd gathered to see him start a balky team.  They were
betting odds of five to one that the "old words" would come out of his
mouth before he got the team in motion.  After ten minutes of
hollering "Giddap!" and two minutes of enraged silence, the Christian
team driver suddenly bawled:  "Alleluia!  Alleluia!" and a team
accustomed to "%&*?%*!!" began to move.
  
The classic illustration is where a preacher in Colorado buys him a
"religious horse" that has been taught to stop on "Alleluia" and go on
"Praise the Lord." On the first trial run up the mountain things go
fairly well, although the preacher says "Whoa" and "Giddap" several
times before getting the hang of the thing.  About half way up a 1,000
foot ledge, the horse shied at a snake and galloped madly toward the
rim of a cliff.  In vain the preacher hollered:  "Whoa, there boy,
stop!  WHOAA!" Within a foot of the precipice, the preacher suddenly
remembered and hollered, "Alleluia!!" The horse stopped dead in his
tracks.  The preacher mopped his brow and said (gratefully), "Praise
the Lord!"
  
(Verse 8 is self-explanatory.)
  
39:9-12 Will the unicorn be willing to serve thee, or abide by thy
crib?  Canst thou bind the unicorn with his band in the furrow?  or
will he harrow the valleys after thee?  Wilt thou trust him, because
his strength is great?  or wilt thou leave thy labour to him?  Wilt
thou believe him, that he will bring home thy seed, and gather it into
thy barn?
  
Now the animal in question has a "single horn" (unicorn, v 9) which is
probably a reference to something like a rhinoceros; however, before
confining the horse-like animal of legend (with the long curled horn
on his forehead) to the coats of arms and armory in Europe, let us
"look well toour going." For a moment let us stop over here where we
left these Devonian, Silurian, Cretaceous, Jurassic, Oligocene,
Eocene, Miocene, and Carboniferous Crackerheads, and see if they could
be credulous enough to believe in a real "unicorn." Here is old
"Notharctus" with a racoon's tail and a rat's head, mounted on a
monkey's body with a lemur's feet.  Here is good old "uintatherium"
with elephants' feet, a rhinoceros' body (rhinoceri?  rhinoceroses? 
rhinocerisis?), and a lion's tail!  But we are told that the most
striking thing about the Uintatherium was "its SIX HORNED skull, with
two horns on the end of the nose." Now if you are dupe enough to
believe in that animal on the basis of a cartoon picture drawn by a
dialectical materialist, how is it you have so much trouble with a
"unicorn?" But believe you me, "Uinthaterium" was a conservative
character alongside good ol' "Syndyoceras"!  "Syndyoceras" (Cindy-
circus?) has two thin goat horns above his eyes and then a y-shaped
horn on the end of his nose.  And if you are still not amused, try
good ol' Tainilabis or Ctenacodon or Zalabmdalestes or Ptiolodus or
Solenodon.  Or if that isn't good enough to qualify for Disneyland,
try Barlambda, Corphodon, Phenacondus, and Tetracaenodon.  If the TV
tube blows or you get snowed in (some winters), I'll guarantee you
that Dinicuts, Hoplophoneus, Patriofelis, Brontotheirium, Oredonts,
Illingocerus, Prosynthetoceras, Moropus, Teleocerus, and Megatherium
are as good as any cartoons in Mad Magazine or Cracked Magazine:  some
crowd.
  
Now you understand that we are to "respect" the "brilliant
scholarship," or the "unquestioned scholarship" or the "erudite
scholarship" of these poor, deluded fanatics (Rom.  1:2-23), and at
the same time we are to pretend that a Horse never lived with a spike
on his snoot!  Now think about that eight or nine years.  Let it sink
in good.  Here are a bunch of blinded, Bible-rejecting fools who think
that the monstrosities in nature, produced by radio active bombardment
from outer space (or disarranged genes, or volcanic activity on the
earth) are proof that whole races of "missing link" animals and
missing link men lived between 1,000,000 to 600,000,000 years ago. 
The foundation of modern science is the fossil remains of a destroyed
creation (Gen.  1:1; 6-8) which rejected the preached word of God (2
Peter 2:5).  Ape-men and men-apes (as weasel-dogs, cat-bears, and
deer-goats) only prove that the genes, chromosomes, and cell
structures of scores of creatures were radically affected by
beastiality and atmospheric changes in "the days of Noah."
  
Why would we find giant MEN on the earth ("In those days," Gen.  6)
and not find giant sloths, giant tigers, giant sharks, giant bears,
and giant buffaloes?  The "sons of God" could handle the forces of
energy (Dan.  11:38), for they were present on creation's morning (Job
38:4, 7), and they could produce any number of permutations which
would be found later by monkey-men looking for a monkey ancestry.  You
can make a monkey out of any unsaved man if you just wave a few words
in front of his face like Cryptozoic, Precambrian, Permian, Triassic,
Mesozoic, Paleozoic, Pleistocene, Triceratops, and Prosynthetoceres. 
Unsaved men (as Eve) think such a vocabulary comes from superior
knowledge.  But any fool can make up a list if he knows a little Latin
and Greek, and if he runs out of Latin and Greek, he can always use
German or Japenese.  The following list of "pre-historic" animals is
just as "authentic" and "reliable" as the last ten lists you studied
in the text books published for Columbia University.
  
1.  Gehendondecobisa:  German-Spanish-Pampangan for "He goes where I
don't like it."
  
2.  Gutbehomothmakakalaleka:  German-Hebrew-Tagalog for "Good animal
that takes it easy."
  
3.  Akathartosaurus:  Greek-Latin for "Unclean dinosaur."
  
4.  Sehrrachabacaballo:  German-Hebrew-Spanish for "The very large
horse."
  
5.  Eingrossekuova Avecquerenim:  German-Greek-French-Hebrew for "A
large dog with horns."
  
Make up your own list.  PhDs these days are no competition, and MAs
wouldn't give a cockroach a run for his money.  Make up your own list
and then charge some teenage kid (that doesn't have any better sense)
$2,000 a semester to make him memorize the list.  When the kid
"graduates," he'll think he knows as much as Albert Einstein, when
neither he nor Albert had the sense that God gave to a Welsh Peat
digger.
  
"Will the UNICORN be willing to serve thee...?" (v 9).  You don't find
many tame rhinoceroses (rhinoceri, rhinocerisis, rhinoceroses?) eating
out of a crib (v 9) after plowing a field (v 10).  If you left your
work up to him (v 11), you might as well leave it to a wild water
buffalo.  People who count on a rhinoceros to plow their fields (v 10)
don't "bring home" any seed, and they will gather nothing into the
barn (v 12).
  
39:13-18 Gavest thou the goodly wings unto the peacocks?  or wings and
feathers unto the ostrich?  Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and
warmeth them in dust, And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, or
that the wild beast may break them.  She is hardened against her young
ones, as though they were not her's:  her labour is in vain without
fear; Because God hath deprived her of wisdom, neither hath he
imparted to her understanding.  What time she lifteth up herself on
high, she scorneth the horse and his rider.
  
The peacock and the ostrich are included in one section, and since the
commentators cannot see the similarity between the birds, they
immediately alter "PEACOCKS" to "ostriches" (see any edition of the
atrocious ASV recommended by Bob Jones University), and, then, seeing
that this alteration destroys the sense of the verse, they alter
"feathers" into "hawk" or "pelican" (Adam Clarke, Ibid., p.  177). 
The "Living"--Lord have mercy on Thy people!--Bible says that the
ostrich "flaps her wings grandly," while the Septuagint (300-500 A.D.)
has flown a stork in on the formation at verse 13.  The Amplified
Bible (Lockman Foundation) has inserted "but are they the pinion and
plummage" to the wreckage of verse 13, after altering the "peacocks"
to an "ostrich." The word for "PEACOCKS" in the Hebrew is a PLURAL;
therefore to reduce it to one ostrich (ASV, New ASV, RSV, New RSV, and
all other Communist and Catholic "Bibles") is fudging a little.  But
this gang of Bible-perverting, Bible-denying, Bible-rejecting, Truth-
despising Fundamentalists would never hesitate to translate a plural
as a singular, while complaining in the same breath of the AV
translators doing the same thing.  Situation normal.  {Since we have
not mentioned the New Scofield Reference "Bible" for some time, we
might take note here that it has made twenty changes in the Authorized
Text in the last three chapters while still professing to be "The
Authorized Version." And who could fool with this kind of perversity
without being a crook at heart to start with?  The insertion of the
"wild ox" at verse 10 for "unicorn" (New Scofield Reference Bible) is
quite typical of John Rice's "Fundamentalism" which bends over
backwards to meet the demands of "modern scientific investigations"
and "provable data." Some of these faculty members at Columbia,
Maranatha, Mid-South, Wheaton, Fuller, and San Francisco are so afraid
that scientists and "scholars" will think they are old fashioned
bigots that they would sell your Bible down the river in ten seconds
to prove they are "well read" and "highly knowledgeable."} Wild oxen
do NOT have one horn, and the Bible text said "UNICORN." But as far as
that goes, most of the rhinoserosi (see?  ssis?) have two horns, one
behind another.  The lame alibi that this means only a "buffalo" or
only a "rhinoceros" will not do at all, for the text says in Isaiah
34:7 that "THE UNICORNS shall come down with them." I wonder what
Isaiah 34 is talking about?  Doyou suppose that in a passage which
dealt with the Advent (v 2), the destruction of the Antichrist's
armies (v 3), the catastrophic signs which accompany both (v 4) when
the Lord goes from Edom (v 5) up the King's highway with His sword (v
6) and turns Edom into a Lake of fire (vv 9 and 10) for the Millennium
(Matt.  13:42), that the UNICORN (v 7) and the BULLOCK (v 7) are
references to four-legged animals?!
  
Wanna bet?
  
If the Bible speaks of a DRAGON (see Job 41:1 and comments) with TEN
horns, who are you to put in a "wild ox" (NSRB) simply because you
never really believed the Book to start with?  Is that the kind of
"dedicated scholarship" we Christians are supposed to "respect"? 
Well, sonny, why don't you go out in the front yard and play in the
traffic so we won't have to step on you every time we try to get some
truth from God's word?
  
The peacock does have "goodly wings" and the ostrich does NOT.  All
the ostrich has is "wings and feathers" (v 13) exactly as the text
states it.  And the reason for mentioning both animals is obvious to
any reader of the Encyclopedia Britannica (or Americana), although it
might be a little "obscure" to Dummelow, Clarke, Bullinger, Lange,
Heavenor, Line, and the Lockman Foundation.  You see, peacocks (as
ostriches) lay their eggs in "the dust" (v 14), and the peacocks
ground-nest, on the ground, is no better than the rampart of earth
that surrounds an ostrich nest of twenty to fifty eggs.  Furthermore,
neither animal is a high flyer like the hawk and the eagle mentioned
right in the same chapter (vv 26 and 27).  God obviously has picked
two extremes among our feathered friends to show us, again, the
variety of His wisdom and power.  The peafowl (Genus Pavo from the
Sub-family Pavoninae) is called "PEACOCK" from the "eyes" on the tail
coverts, which are the peacock's chief glory.  A peacock, as a
pheasant, can fly, but you normally do not think of flocks of peacocks
"heading south for the winter." Neither peacocks nor ostriches major
in flying.
  
"Which leaveth her eggs in the earth, and warmeth them in dust" (v
14).  All that follows is true.  Since God has "deprived her of
wisdom" (see comments under 38:36), "she is hardened against her young
ones as though they were not her's" (v 16).  Most of the eggs an
ostrich lays are stolen and eaten by animals, or they are crushed by
heavy objects.
  
When an ostrich runs from a horseman her paces are 25 feet apart, and
it often takes a relay of fresh horses to catch one.  "She scorneth
the horse and his rider" (vv 17 and 18).  Xenophon says that Cyrus
offered a thousand ducats or a hundred camels for a horse that could
equal the speed of an ostrich.  To make up for his inability to soar
in the heavenlies, the ostrich majors in sprinting, and to make up for
his inability to compete with the swallows and the doves, the peacock
struts a wardrobe that would make Liberace look like one of the
world's "worst dressed men." Fausset's note that it should have been
"goodly tail feathers" instead of "wings" (if the correct text was on
the peacock), and his subsequent alteration of the text to match the
fanatics at Oxford, Westminster, and York (1800-1869) is not to be
taken seriously.  The words for "wing" in the Old Testament (Hebrew: 
eber, ebrah, gaph, kanaph, and tsits) are the only words used to
describe the appendages on a bird.  The word for tail (Hebrew:  zanab)
is never used for a bird, but only for snakes (Exod.  4:4), foxes
(Judg.  15:4), Leviathan (Job 40:17), and scorpions (Rev.  9:10). 
Birds and fowls only have wings in the Bible since the tail is counted
as a third wing, exactly as the horizontal stabilizer and the tail
flaps on an airplane perform the same function as a wing.  (When in
doubt, you know what.)
  
But, again, we are dealing with more than ostriches running around in
Africa or peacocks flying around in India.  Observe:  "her labor is in
vain without fear" (v 16).  Now how do you suppose one-hundred percent
of the commentators failed to notice that this was also said of Satan
in Job 41:9?  "The hope of him is IN VAIN," and he is "MADE WITHOUT
FEAR" (Job 41:33)?  In view of the fact that a woman who cares nothing
about her offspring is mentioned in connection with the Devil (Rev. 
17:1-9), and in view of the fact that ninety-five percent of the
commentators called the ostrich a "stork" (see margin of ASV, 1901),
how did they miss the two STORK-WINGED WOMEN of Zechariah 5:9 who set
Babylon up on her base (Zech 5:11) in preparation for Revelation 17:1-
9?  I mean, after all of this pious gas about "interpreting scripture
with scripture" (see pamphlet published by the board of the NSRB) and
"stating clearly" what the scriptures say (Ibid.), and then admitting
that they modified the Authorized Text so that it would be "more
accurate" (Ibid.) and in line with what they thought (!), how did
Wilbur Smith, Walvoord, Feinberg, English, MacCrae, and company think
for a minute that they were engaged in anything but destructive
criticism of the word of God?  And what is this "horse and rider" (v
18) doing when we know that one "horse and rider" (Exod.  15:1) is the
Antichrist and the other one is the Lord Jesus Christ (Rev.  19:11)? 
Why would any Christian in his sound mind (2 Tim.  1:7) consult
Gesenius, Garstang, Wooley, Ramsay, Keil, Delitzsch, Harkavy, Peake,
Budde, Duhm, or ANY of their friends for correct "interpretation,"
when the Scriptures have already interpreted themselves independently
of the "unquestioned scholarship" of any "change agent" disguised as a
Christian "scholar?"
  
Now do you know how these Bible-perverting Christian agnostics get
away with their devilment?  It's really quite simple:  When they got
saved (if they are saved at all!), they got saved through reading (or
the teaching or preaching of) a King James Bible, and where there is
an exceptional conversion through the preaching or reading of an ASV
or an RV (or a Douay Rheims for that matter)you can find the plan of
salvation in any translation if you plow through enough muck), the new
convert never questioned the authority of the word until he was taught
to by critics who were taught by critics, who were taught by critics,
who learned from critics, who taught critics.  At the root of all
Conservative scholarship in 1980--where it corrects the Authorized
Text--is NOT the enlightening power of the Holy Spirit.  To the
contrary, it is the PHILOSOPHICAL THEORIES of unsaved British and
German Deists (1700-1900).  Now the saved scholars on these
Conservative faculties know some things about the Bible that are true
(who doesn't!?), but the amazing thing about this is that noen of them
ever know anything about the Bible that some other man didn't know
BEFORE them, who believed and accepted the AV (1611) as it stood.  For
example, the faculty members of Pensacola Christian College or San
Francisco Theological Seminary or Clearwater College might be able to
find the Virgin Birth, the Pre-Millennial coming, the Bodily
Resurrection, or the doctrine of Scriptural Inspiration from any
Bible, but what saved sinner who believed the King James Bible
couldn't find the same things in it 100 to 300 years before the other
English "bibles" how up?  What was the purpose in putting out 45
translations in "clearer language" to make the scripture "easier to
understand" when the men who translated them couldn't figure out
ANYTHING that ANYONE couldn't figure out from the 1611 text!?  All
Catholics and Episcopalians between 1200-1800 believed in the Virgin
Birth and the Bodily Resurrection and the Last Judgment.  There is
nothing NEW or "revealing" about the last 500 works printed on these
matters by Hebrew or Greek scholars.  The "Fundamentals" were all
known (and professed) in 325 A.D.  before the Vatican Manuscript (ASV,
New ASV RSV, New RSV, etc.) was ever written.  Belief in the
"fundamentals" never guaranteed that any Christian would be a Bible
BELIEVER.
  
Now, since 325 A.D., the Lord has given His body a great deal of light
from the scripture, and the modern faculty can obtain this knowledge
and make use of it, but the catch is this:  The light which God gave
on Salvation by faith came through a Syrian Receptus Greek text and a
rude, crude, nasty, negative Hell raiser--Martin Luther.  The light
which God gave on Holiness, He gave through the King James Bible in
the hand of a man who did not even believe in Eternal Security--John
Wesley.  The light which God gave on Pre-millennialism, He gave
through Bible students who were studying the English text of 1611--
Cronin, Darby, and the Plymouth Brethren.  The light God gave on
Dispensationalism, He gave through Larkin, Pember, Scofield, and Stam. 
No Greek text is necessary to follow the teaching of one man in the
list.  The light which God gave on the modern Sunday School and
"visitation" came through Spurgeon and J.  Frank Norris; neither man
had to appeal to ANY Greek text to back up any teaching concerning
either kind of work.  And the light which God is now giving on the
Authority of the Authorized Text (given to men like J.J.  Ray, Hills,
Fuller, Pickering, Bynum, Clarke, Cimino, Evans, and Bonam) He is
withholding from the Hebrew and Greek professors of every Christian
college and Christian university in the United States and Europe.  He
does not need any Greek text to back the teaching of any man just
listed.  So what happens?  A young sucker who has just been saved and
called to preach, is not quite mature enough in the Lord to recognize
the presence of the "old man" in himself, still clamouring for
"recognition." He is quietly ushered into a classroom of a "bastion of
orthodoxy" that "stands without apology for the absolute authority of
The Bible," and there he has the Authority of God Almighty (in his own
life!) knocked slap out of his hands by con-men who can pass off as
Bible believers because they have read the material we just listed!
  
Now that's the "lay of the land," boys and girls:  If you had a dollar
for every advanced revelation (that was TRUE) which God gave to a
Greek or Hebrew scholar, since 1700, you wouldn't have enough money to
take a cab down to the corner store and back.  Young men make a
terrible mistake when they assume that because a professor has read
Gordon, G.  C.  Morgan, Halley, Pember, Maxwell, Nee, Murray, Pink,
Sauer, Larkin, Pieters, Darby, Stam, Bullinger, Sam Jones, Bob Jones,
Frank Norris, Spurgeon, and Edward Hills that God gave him this
knowledge through understanding an original language; God never did. 
God never has, and He never will.  The Author of scripture is the
Revealer of scripture (Deut.  29:29) and the Preserver of scripture
(Ps.  12:6-7) and the Interpreter of scripture (Luke 24:45); so, any
fool, with a grade school education, can get more real truth from the
Author of the scriptures in five minutes than he can from any Greek or
Hebrew Lexicon published by anyone with fifty years of formal
education behind them.
  
39:19-25 Hast thou given the horse strength?  hast thou clothed his
neck with thunder?  Canst thou make him afraid as a grasshopper?  the
glory of his nostrils is terrible.  He paweth in the valley, and
rejoiceth in his strength:  he goeth on to meet the armed men.  He
mocketh at fear, and is not affrighted; neither turneth he back from
the sword.  The quiver rattleth against him, the glittering spear and
the shield.  He swalloweth the ground with fierceness and rage: 
neither believeth he that it is the sound of the trumpet.  He saith
among the trumpets, Ha, ha; and he smelleth the battle afar off, the
thunder of the captains, the the shouting.
  
Now there follows a picture of the battle of Armageddon (see Matt. 
24:28, Luke 17:37, and compare with Job 39:30) where the "horse and
his rider" (see Exod.  15:1 and comments) meet with disaster (Rev. 
19:11-18).  This horse "paweth in the valley" (v 21), and the valley
of "decision" (Joel 3:14) is so apparent in every line that only the
faculty members who stoppedf with Larkin, Pember, Scofield, DeHaan,
Weniger, Coynebeare, Ramsay, Luther, Calvin, Baxter, Kirban, Wuest,
Thieme, Berkhof, Schaffer, and Unger could miss it.
  
The animal described is the famous war horse of a thousand battles. 
The description is that of a beast who is eager to get into the thick
of the battle and is absolutely fearless in combat (vv 21, 22, 23,
24).  The remarkable thing about the passage is its truthfulness, for
the horse, by nature, is sensitive, skittish, shy, and nervous.  The
horse, trained for combat, assumes something of the dual nature found
in German Shephards; the German Shephard is so sensitive that he will
crouch and lower his ears if his master glares at him, and, yet, he is
so tough that he will run through machine gun fire to deliver a
message (I've seen this--1944).  A German Shephard is so sensitive
that his eyes will follow the slightest movement in a room from the
opening of a book to the adjusting of a tie, but the same dog will
stalk a burglar at night and leap for his throat and tear his jugular
vein out.  A horse that you can't get to leave the hay in the barn
will take off like a runaway locomotive when he feels like it. 
Secretariat, Gallant Fox, Sea Biscuit, Whirlaway, and Twenty Grand--
and don't forget old "Man O'War!--didn't gallop:  They flew!
  
The men who rode with Nathaniel Bedford Forrest (1821-1877) said that
every charge was like a steeple-chase.  Somehow or another, the horses
don't seem to care any more about the consequences of the charge than
the rider.  The Death Valley riders of Balaclava (1854), the charge of
the Scot Grays at Waterloo (1815), the annihilation of Ney's Calvary
in the sunken ditch at Ohain (1815), the madcap raids of Jeb Stuart
and Colonel Mosby (1862-1865), and the thundering tons of metal during
the Hundred Years War (1338-1453) tell us, again and again, that the
horse can thirst for killing, death, mutilation, and wounds exactly as
a man like Richard the Lion-Hearted or Alexander the Great.  Every
major battle fought on this earth from 2000 B.C.  till World War I
used cavalry, and in World War II Cossack riders were still charging
their mounts blindly into automatic weapons fire.  What possesses a
horse to charge into a hail of arrows shot from 100-pound bows (Crecy,
1346) or steel darts fired from crossbows or kneeling pikemen with
their weapons braced or counter-charging horses of other horsemen is a
great mystery.  Mohammed had five horses out of 3,000 that turned to
charge an enemy who had attacked his troops at a water hole.  The
thoroughbred Arabian steed is supposed to have been sired from those
five horses.  When the barbarian Celts overran western Europe (2500-
1200 B.C.), they came on horseback.  When the waves of Hittites and
Elamites, Sumerians, and Chaldeans attacked each other (2500-1000
B.C.), they used the horse.  When Thutmose, III, conquered Syria and
part of Mesopotamia (1496 B.C.), the horse was there, right in the
thick of it.  When David and Joab went out to fight, they fought with
horses, chariots, and cavalrymen (1050-1000 B.C.).  When the Aryans
invaded India and destroyed the Indus Valley (1500-500 B.C.), they
came with their horses.  When the legions of Rome and the armies of
Alexander swept across Europe and Asia Minor like a scourge, they
brought their cavalrymen with them (600-100 B.C.).  When the Teutonic
tribes invaded western Europe, and the Saxons, Thuringians, Slavs,
Alemanni, Franks, Lombards, Goths, Visigoths, Vandals, and Huns were
running all over each other (and everybody else), the horses were
doing most of the running (200-600 A.D.).  Cyrus, Artaxerxes, Xerxes,
and Darius sported some of the finest cavalry in the world (550-330
B.C.), and time would fail to read the epitaphs of the bravest soldier
of them all--the cavalry charger.  As a Negro said, when asked what
the name of his horse was:  "Ah doan really know, but we jus' calls
him 'Jim'."
  
When the Crusaders rode them (100-1200 A.D.), they were so weighed
down with armour they could hardly make ten miles an hour at top
speed.  When the Saracens rode them, they cut Europeans out of the
herd like a quarter horse doing his job on the range.  When the
Germans marched them into battle, they put kettledrums on either side
of their shoulders (see v 19) and wrote tunes for the horses by which
they could canter, trot, and gallop.  In the classic charge, before
World War I, the trooper lay down on the mane of the horse and thrust
a saber straight over the horse's head.  When he hit the enemy lines,
he went in like a 1200 pound guided missile, at 35 miles an hour--iron
hoofs, steel stirrups, and blade.  Horses have completed a charge when
their rider had been unhorsed, or shot off, a mile back in the charge. 
When they finally captured Field Marshall Ney (Waterloo, June 18,
1815), he had already had four horses shot out from under him and he
was riding the fifth one, with saber slashes all over his own boots,
gun powder all over his face, and one eye put out completely.  Rising
in the sitrrups of that noble animal, the "bravest of the brave"
roared, "Come and see how a Field Marshall of France can die on the
battlefield!!" (he "saith among the trumpets, Ha Ha...!")
  
Many years after Waterloo the people who lived near the stables of the
Duke of Wellington were treated to an unusual (but regular) sight;
every time a thunderstorm came up, the retired war horses in the
pasture would group automatically and wheel into line, pawing the
ground (v 21), and shaking their manes (v 19).  Like Eleazer, the son
of Dodo the Ahohite (2 Sam.  23:10), they had been in the battle for
so long, and their discipline was so exact that their "hands cleaved
to the sword." If those horses had been flat on their sides, crippled,
and dying, they would have tried to kick themselves to their feet.
  
Well, God gave the horse strength (v 19), so you still measure power
today by "horse power!" (Whether or not you believe the AV Bible at
this point is immaterial.  The AV will set the pace, and you will keep
up by the grace of God, if you are able.) The neck of the horse is
"clothed...with thunder," not only in the poetic sense (see any
shallow commentator), but by the scientific, absolute, infallible,
literal, provable FACT that some horses are FIRE (2 Kings 2:11; 6:17),
and literal THUNDER attends the thunder of their hoofs (Rev.  10:3-7). 
{Yes, we know some of you can't believe that, but after four years of
"higher" Christian education, how could some of you ever believe
ANYTHING about the Bible again that wasn't given to you on a silver
spoon by a wet nurse?}
  
The substitution of "locust" for "grasshopper" (see any atrocious
corruption since 1800--ASV, New ASV, RSV, New RSV, International,
etc.) is gaffing the act again.  The faculties at Pensacola Christian
College and BJU who kidded you into thinking that "arbeh" (Heb.)
always meant "locust," took for granted that you wouldn't check them
out anyway--so, we did:  The Arbeh, here, is "specially of a
particular kind, probably the GRYLLUS GREGARIOUS of Leviticus 11:22"
(Delitzsch, Ibid., p.  75).  Well, the "gryluss gregarious" of
Leviticus 11:22 is an "chagab" (Heb.)--a GRASSHOPPER.  {See
exhaustiive comments in The Bible Believer's Commentary on The Minor
Prophets, Joel 1:4.} You see, in all of this we are to assume that the
poor dumb, stupid, AV translators did not have the "benefit of recent
archaeological discoveries" (see puff sheet for the RV or the New
Scofield Bible:  Same crew, same regatta), so you are to discard their
writings, and instead accept the "unquestioned scholarship" of "godly
men whose opinions are to be respected for their..." (See any of the
baloney pritned by John R.  Rice.)
  
The idea in the verse is:  "Can you scare the horse so that he will
jump like a grasshopper?" Well, a horse will jump like that when
something rolls between his legs.  He will also jump like that at a
flying piece of paper or a leaf, or at the sound of a rattlesnake, but
you will not make a war horse jump like a grasshopper by threatening
him.  He will jump when he is told to jump, and where he is told to
jump, at the command of his trainer.  "The glory of his nostrils is
terrible" (v 20), especially if they are breathing FIRE (2 Kings 2:2). 
{Virgil counterfeited this expression in one of his pagan,
mythological works by saying, "and in his nostrils rolls collected
fire"--cited by Clarke, Ibid., p.  179.}
  
Verses 21-24 are self-explanatory.  "The sound of the trumpet" (v
24)-- again points forward to the trumpet of Numbers 10:1-9 and
Revelation 11:15.  The "Horse laugh" of verse 25 is just as "living"
today as it was when it was penned in 1611, for, after all, the King
James Bible always sets the pace for any translation.  The battle can
be "smelled" (v 25) by its blood (Isa.  9:5) or its engines (Isa. 
9:5) or its smoke (Josh.  8:20).  "The thunder of the captains" (v 25)
has been heard on every battlefield since Cain killed Abel, and to
this thunder has been added the thunder of muskets, muzzle loaders,
cannons, artillery pieces, buzz bombs, rockets, land mines, granades,
bangalore torpedoes, tank guns, mortars, pistols, automatic rifles,
rifles, machine guns, and machine pistols.  A horse will still charge
right through the whole mess if his rider drives him that way!
  
39:26-30 Doth the hawk fly by thy wisdom, and stretch her wings toward
the south?  Doth the eagle mount up at thy command, and make her nest
on high?  She dwelleth and abideth on the rock, upon the crag of the
rock, and the strong place.  From thence she seeketh the prey, and her
eye behold afar off.  Her young ones also suck up blood:  and where
the slain are, there is she.
  
The hawk does not fly by "THY wisdom" for she flies by God's wisdom. 
She stretches out her wings and flies "towards the south" (v 26) in
the autumn, for the hawk (as the stork, crane and swallow:  Jer.  8:7)
knows her "appointed times."
  
"Doth the eagle mount up at thy command, and make her nest on high?"
(v 27).  Not normally; You can train falcons and eagles to mount up on
command if you have brought up the bird in captivity and chained it,
but they don't do it naturally.  "She dwelleth and abideth on the
ROCK, upon the crag of the ROCK" (v 28).  With Selah, Petra, in the
land of Uz, right before their faces (in the Hebrew text), one hundred
percent of the Conservative and Fundamental scholars sail right by the
Secvond Advent reference like they were lost in a fog.  Adam Clarke is
so anxious to erase any references to the Second Advent that he cites
Matthew 24:28 and then says quickly, "It is likely...that this was a
PROVERBIAL MODE of expression..."
  
Well, it is a "mode of expression" at least 30,000 times more
accurate, hostircally, than any of the men who taught Adam Clarke. 
{Revelation 19:17 and 18 is the fulfillment of Job 39:29 and 30. 
Clarke missed the reference (as did Matthew Henry and Dummelow)
because he followed the private interpretation of the Roman Catholic
Popes--Post-millennialism.}
  
The word "sela" (Heb.) is the "Rock," as found in Psalms 18:2; 31:3;
40:2; 42:9; 71:3, and 78:16.  (Notice the "Rock" in Exodus 17:6 and 1
Cor.  10:4.) The word indicates the name of a city in Edom, called
"Petra." It is in the valley of Wady Musi between the Dead Sea and the
Gulf of Aquaba, and it was called "Joktheel" by Amaziah after 822 B.C. 
"Sela" is in Uz, where Job lived, and it is to this place (Sela
Hammehlekoth:  "the rock of escapes, or separations") that Israel will
"fly" (Matt.  24:20) in the Tribulation (Rev.  12:14).  The musical
notation "Selah" in the Psalms (Ps.  49, 50, 52, 55, 57, 59, 60, 62,
67, 68, 75, 76, 77, 81, 82, etc.) is simply the substitution of "He"
for "Ayin" (Heb.) in the last radical of "Sela." Wherever this word
(Selah) occurs in the Psalms, there will be found a reference to the
Second Advent of Christ within four verses of it.  {No, don't run to
Delitzsch, Keil, Gesenius, Driver, Ewald, Briggs, Davidson, Bathgen,
Duhm, Davies, Kay, Kimchi, Oehler, Nowack, Hengstenberg, or Kittel for
help:  They are helpless.  Where the Authorized Text of the Protestant
reformation is rejected for the lifetime researchers and studies of
Post-reformation CRITICS, God lowers the blinds, turns out the lights,
shuts off the gas, closes down the store, and lets the pump lose its
prime.  If 20,000 born again, "dedicated, godly scholars" with an
accumulated backlog of 200,000 years of education (in Christian
institutions), could not locate Job 39:26-30 prophetically and would
deny that YOU could because of your "lack of education," they would be
just as wrong and just as wicked as any 20,000 Christ-rejecting
Atheists in the Soviet Union.  When God blinds the Conservative (or
Orthodox) scholar because that scholar has rejected Revelation, that
scholar has no business telling you (or anyone else) anything about
the word of God.  You will find that anything he knows is already in
print by a man who believed the word of God, and what he doesn't know,
he cannot find out, for he has rejected the source of revealed truth.}
  
The eagle and the hawk of Job (vv 26, 27) are present at Armageddon,
flying from Selah, Petra, in Edom.  "Where the slain are, there is
she" (v 30).  The eagle does not normally feed her young with carrion,
so she takes her "young 'uns" (v 30) with her and they suck the blood
out of the wounded and dying of the United Nations World Liberation
Army (Rev.  19:17, 18) which was "dedicated to the preservation of
humanity and the freedom of all men everywhere, etc., etc." The hawk
and the eagle here are females, as are the bloodsucking daughters of
the LEECH (see Prov.  30:15 and comments).  Therefore, the ostrich and
the peacock (with the hawk and the eagle and the horse) are all
indirect references to things present at the Second Advent and the
outcome of the battle of Armageddon.  The words are spoken to Job by
the Author of Scripture; they are recorded without error by Elihu, and
they are preserved to this day as God intended for you to read them. 
If the "majority of Conservative change agents" don't like it, they
can go chew oats.
  

  
CHAPTER FORTY
  

  
40:1-5 MOREOVER the Lord answered Job, and said, Shall he that
contendeth with the Almighty instruct him?  he that reproveth God, let
him answer it.  Then Job answered the Lord, and said, Behold, I am
vile; what shall I answer thee?  I will lay mine hand upon my mouth. 
Once have I spoken; but I will not answer:  yea, twice; but I will
proceed no further.
  
You can well imagine the state that Job is in by now; he has been
asked more than forty questions, and he couldn't get an answer in
edgewise.  Now the Lord says to him:  "Shall he that contendeth with
the Almighty instruct him?" (v 2).  Job's answer is the only answer a
man could give under these conditions, and this answer will pop up so
many times at the White Throne Judgment you will think that
50,000,000,000 people got "Xeroxed."
  
"Behold I am VILE..." (v 4).  That's it, Job!  That's the ticket! 
There is nothing like negative thinking to get the true picture! 
Never mind Kenneth Taylor and all of the Campfile Girls trying to tone
down your vileness to "I am nothing." Never mind the ASV and the
girlies at BJU trying to slip you through with "I am of small
account." Never mind the NEB and the freaks of the "Gay Liberators"
saying that you "carry no weight." Just sack the whole bunch of
effeminate apostates into one freezer bag.  Never mind the New ASV
fixing up Philippians so that nothing comes out "vile." Never mind the
RSV doing the same thing, to set the pace for the faculty at Bob Jones
University.  Just stack the whole pile of rotten junk in one garbage
can and tell the Disposal Unit to put it back where God left the
Septuagint of 350 A.D.  and the ASV of 1901:  In Gehenna, the city
dump.
  
"What shall I answer thee?" (v 4).  A man can't answer one out of a
thousand (Job 9:3), and God has only put about 45 on Job so far!  "I
will not answer...I will proceed no further" (v 5).  And that is how
it always turns out.  When Isaiah hits the Lord head-on, he suddenly
begins to holler about his own unclean lips instead of God's mistakes. 
When Peter sideswipes the Lord (Luke 5:8), he suddenly decides that
"Two cannot walk together except they be agreed" (John 6:68), so Peter
decides that the trouble is with himself.  When Daniel bumps into the
Angel of the Lord, he falls flat on his face, and when Moses gets his
fuel injection (Exod.  33:18), he is stumbling all over himself to get
on the right side (Exod.  34:9).  You don't alter "vile" to "nothing"
or "small account" when you've had a personal encounter with God
Almighty.  That stuff is for psychopathic amateurs who think that The
Alpha and Omega was an "astronaut" in a "flying saucer." If you ever
get the glimpse that Moses, David (Ps.  51:5), Paul (Acts 9:5, 6),
Isaiah, or Job got, you will settle for "vile" and be thankful you
didn't have to "update" the word to "CURSED" (Matt.  25:41).  Job is
through talking.  He has become one of the most interested listeners
in the entire Bible, so the Lord proceeds:
  
40:6-14 Then answered the Lord unto Job out of the whirlwind, and
said, Gird up thy loins now like a man:  I will demand of thee, and
declare thou unto me.  Wilt thou also disannul my judgment?  wilt thou
condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?  Hast thou an arm like God? 
or canst thou thunder with a voice like him?  Deck thyself now with
majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty.  Cast
abroad the rage of thy wrath:  and behold every one that is proud, and
abase him.  Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and
tread down the wicked in their place.  Hide them in the dust together;
and bind their faces in secret.  Then will I also confess unto thee
that thine own right hand can save thee.
  
Now Job's real trouble is brought forward and presented by the One who
"searcheth all hearts" and "understandeth all the imaginations of the
thoughts" (1 Chronicles 28:9).  The master psychiatrist, whose x-ray
vision pierces heaven, earth, and hell (Ps.  139:1-2), gives His
comment on Job's "sins" (Heb.  4:12, 13), and for 52 verses Eliphaz,
Bildad, Zophar, and Elihu have no further contributions to make.  The
Judge of all the Earth (Gen.  18:25) "who will render to every man
according to his deeds" (Rom.  2:6), always judges "according to
truth" (Rom.  2:2), and Job's fig leaf (see Chapter 31) has no more
covered his self-righteousness than the original model (Adam's
"apron") covered Adam's nakedness.
  
"Gird up thy loins now like a man..." (v 7); like a man about to enter
combat (Eph.  6:10, 1 Kings 20:11), or a man called upon to do a hard,
dirty task (Jer.  1:17, John 13:4).  Job has challenged God (see Rom. 
9:20), so God now challenges Job.  He puts four questions to Job that
no man on earth could answer in the affirmative, and whether that man
was a contemporary of Job (1800 B.C.) or a contemporary of Rockefeller
(1980 A.D.), he could not answer one of the questions with a "Yea."
  
"Wilt thou also disannul my judgment...?"
  
"Wilt thou condemn me, that THOU mayest be righteous?"
  
Well, the Pharisees tried it (Matt.  22:15), Pilate and Herod tried it
(John 19:9), but can it really be done?  Could any sinner, of any
degree of attainment, overrule God in a contest of "judging right and
wrong" ("Values Clarification" if you are an unregenerate socialist.)
Unable to even detect the "proud" (v 11), how on this earth could any
man "abase" them (v 11) and "bring them low" (v 12)?  How do you
"tread down the wicked in their place" (v 12) when you can't even find
them, let alone their "places?" If the FBI (1930), the CIA (1970), the
Gestapo (1940), the NKVD (1950), and the secret police (1960) never
got all of them located, how can YOU do it?  God can do it!  And the
Lord Jesus Christ (Matt.  23:12, Luke 14:11) states that it will be
done as smoothly and as naturally as the law of gravity.  {See lengthy
comments in The Bible Believer's Commentary on Proverbs, Prov.  15:3.}
  
Job's problem is self-righteousness (see Rom.  10:1-4).
  
Every sinner who ever pitted the Golden Rule or the Ten Commandments
against Christ's finished Blood Atonement should know something of
Job's "problem." Every Catholic, Charismatic, Communist, and
Campbellite who fled to James 2:24 or the Second Commandment (in order
to reject the grace of God), should understand Job's position.  Every
sinner who ever tried to sneak into New Jerusalem through Acts 2:38
and the "Sermon the Mount" should know what is going on; Job is
righteous, but he is SELF-RIGHTEOUS.  This is the righteousness which
the Holy Spirit calls "filthy rags"  in Isaiah 64:6.  Paul called it
religious "dung," even though the New ASV (recommended by Bob Jones
University) fixed the word up so that it wouldn't hurt its "testimony"
too much.
  
Job is a perfect picture of:  The sinner in Hell, the Jew in the
Tribulation, Christ suffering the wrath of God and (finally) the
living sinner himself, covered with the filthy rags of his own self-
righteousness, talking about "living it," and "doing good to his
fellowmen." Job is the President of the United States, the United
Nations, and the Soviet Union, and he is Pope, priest, king, and
"chairman" of every major nation in the world.  All Communists,
Catholics, and Capitalists are counting on their "lives" to justify
their deeds.
  
"Hast thou an arm like God?" (v 9).  Well, if you cannot turn dust
into lice, water into blood, seas into dry land, and kill all the
firstborn in a country in one night (see Exod.  6:6, and 15:6), you
aren't "armed" properly.  The "stretched out" arm of God (Deut 4:34;
5:15) stretches out so far that it becomes an arm of flesh (John
12:38) on this earth (Luke 1:51), and then it heals sick people, casts
out demons, gives sight to the blind, speech to the dumb, hearing to
the deaf, power to the impotent, and then tops the performance off by
hauling dead people out of caskets (Luke 7:14) and cemeteries (John
11).
  
"Hast THOU an arm like God?"
  
Science, philosophy, education, and religion--the great tragic
buffoons of history--do not have an arm like God.
  
The 500 greatest minds who ever lived on this earth could not do (with
their combined labours and discoveries), in 4,000 years, what the "arm
of God" (John 12) accomplished in one year of His earthly ministry.
  
"Canst thou thunder with a VOICE like him?" (v 9).  Of course not; not
even the man-made thunder of a Cobalt Bomb or a 4-megaton
"firecracker" can match the thunder of God, for the thunder of God
says something (see 37:1-5), and the greatest linguist in the world
cannot decipher that celestial code (Rev.  10) apart from the direct
revelation of the Holy Spirit (Job 26:14).
  
"Deck now thyself with majesty..." (v 10).  What a thing to say to a
sick man on an ash heap who is covered with running sores and worms
(Job 1,2)!  "Array now thyself with glory and beauty" (v 10).  Talk
about sarcasm!  Talk about sheer meanness and "rubbing it in." If Job
thought that his three friends were hard on him, he changed his mind
about here.  What a contrast there is between the most righteous man
on earth (in this case, Job) and the Man Christ Jesus (1 Tim.  2:1-
10)!  Arrayed in garments that smell of myrrh, aloes, and cassia,
annointed with the "oil of gladness" above His fellows, the chiefest
of Ten Thousand is altogether "Lovely" (S.  of Sol.  6, Ps.  45), and
in His pre-incarnate glory which He had before the world began (John
17:24), He was pavilioned in splendor and girded with praise; on
creation's morning He put on the Universe like a King dons his robes
(Heb.  1:12), and decked Himself not only with Majesty (v 10) and
Strength (Ps.  93:1) but with Honour (Ps.  104:1) and the Light (Ps. 
104:2).  The universe is a demonstration of God's ability as a Tailor,
and before he folds it up as a "garment" (Heb.  1:12), He will return
to this battleground clothed with a garment and a vesture dipped in
blood (Rev.  19:13), annihilate His enemies, and then sit down in
BEAUTY (Zech.  11:7, 10) on the throne of His GLORY (Matt.  25:31)!
  
What a challenge for a worm-covered sinner!
  
"Clothe yourself!"
  
You can't do it.  Every stitch of clothing you have on this minute
came from a plant or an animal.  No man can grow his own clothes. 
Education, social image, political status, worldly honour, social
recognition, income, and I.Q.  have no bearing on the problem at all;
no man can grow his own clothing.  Solomon (in all his glory) could
not produce what a lily of the field could produce (Matt.  6:28, 29),
and imagine a self-righteous sinner like YOU, for example (or any of
your acquaintances), thinking for a minute that you are going to
compete with God when it comes to glory, beauty, and righteousness!
  
"...everyone that is proud, and abase him" (v 11).  {See Dan.  4:37
and the comments under Proverbs 16:18 and 19:23.} "Bring him low,"
like God brought Nebuchadnezzar when he was brought to his knees on
the front lawn.  "Bind their faces," like Lazarus' face was bound with
bandages when they "wound him up" (see Acts 5:6).  "Hide them in the
dust together," like Moses slew the Egyptian overseer and hid him in
the sand.  "THEN will I also confess unto thee that thine OWN RIGHT
HAND can SAVE thee" (v 14).
  
"Salvation is of the Lord" and "Salvation is of the Jews" (Jonah 2:9,
John 4:22); it has no sourc ein a Gentile "do-gooder" trying to batter
down the gates of New Jerusalem with Ecumenical Socialism and a
"golden rule," or "Living" Bible.  All you have to do in this age to
gain heaven by works is keep Deuteronomy and Leviticus to the letter,
and worship at Jerusalem, live a sinless life, die for every other
sinner in the world, and then pull yourself up out of the grave by
your bootstraps three days after they bury you:  Simple, isn't it? 
And to hear some of you Charismatics, Communists, and Catholics talk,
one would surmise that you thought you could pull it off without a
hitch!  Until you do, don't be surprised if some of us Bible Believing
people fail to take you seriously when you preach about your
"religion" or "sharing your experience." You have your right to be
heard, but not to be taken seriously by anyone who knows the Word of
God.
  
Now it would seem to be a waste of time, at this point, to backtrack
in our exposition and pick up the "majority of qualified scholars"
whose "unquestioned loyalty to the Bible, etc., etc.," equipped them
to "so forth and so on." These Madison Avenue quacks whose eternal
theme song is "recognized scholarship," "godly, dedicated scholars,"
"erudite scholarship," and "unquestioned loyalty" remind us of the so-
called "infallible" bishops of Rome when it comes to "loyalty" to the
Bible.  We not only question their "loyalty," we question their
scholarship, their sources, their motives for attacking the AV, and
their penchant for open, deliberate, and continual LYING.  Just
because a saved sinner slips into the flock talking about the "Virgin
Birth" and the "verbal inspiration of the originals," it doesn't mean
that he has any calling (or any right) to talk about "loyalty to the
Bible." After all, the Devil never attacked either of the above
doctrines when he first spoke:  When he first spoke, he questioned
something that God had SAID.  He questioned what God said to someone
who had heard Him say it.  There was no discussion of some
"fundamental" that Neo-evangelicals or "Liberals" were attacking; no,
that's just the straw dummy that modern Fundamentalists erect to cover
their own hatred for the AV's authority.  There was no discussion over
"how" the originals were "inspired." Satan is a realist, and he is no
more concerned about unavailable "original" manuscripts than he is
about last year's soybean crop.  When we speak about the "unquestioned
loyalty" of Robertson, Trench, Thayer, Vincent, Gregory, Farrar,
Cheyne, Sanday, Driver, Lightfoot, Ellicott, Hort, Westcott, Thieme,
Wuest, Rendall, Salmon, Machen, Warfield, Nestle, Aland, and Metzger
to the "word of God," we are talking about the cover-up work of the
meanest bunch of destructive critics the world has even seen; no
atheist or papist coul step into their shoes for 24 hours.  And this
is evident by the fact that neither Rome nor Communism were able to
replace the Authorized Version; Christian scholarship did it (1880-
1980 A.D.).  We not only "question" the scholarship of these
egotistical upstarts (and their "loyalty" to the word), we also
question their sincerity, their methods, their attitude, and their
duplicity through 100 years of deliberate falsification of the truth
and intentional substitution of their bungling researches for the
Authority of the living words of the living God.  As Billy Sunday so
aptly put it:  "Where the Bible says one thing and scholarship says
another, scholarship can go plumb to the devil." Exactly.
  
1.  The archaic ASV of 1901--recommended for fifty years by every
Fundamental scholar in the country--has written "cavilleth" for
"contendeth" in verse 2.  The Hebrew word ("yakach"), translated as
"reproveth" (v 2), is a Hiphil, singular, masculine participle.  It
has been mistranslated as "argueth" by the clumsy, infidelic revisors
of the ASV (1901), whose "unquestioned loyalty to the word of God,
etc.," is about as unquestioned as Genesis 3:1.  The bungling ASV
committee (all composed of orthodox Conservatives) translated the same
word as "reprove" in Job 6:25, 26 and 13:10, and then as "rebuke" in 2
Kings 19:4, and then as "judge" in Isaiah 11:3.  {You say:  "But the
translators thought it best to bring out the sense of..." Sure, kid,
we know.  So did the translators in 1611.  They just had God's
blessing on them and the 1901 committee didn't.}
  
Now we would not make so much of these matters if these blind critics
("recognized scholars") had kept their yaps shut in regard to the
Authorized Text, but if there is one main thing these inconsistent
hypocrites yapped about from 1800-1900, it was the "lack of uniform
translation" of the Hebrew and Greek words in the AV (1611), wasn't
it?  Yes, it was.  Well, how does the kettle call the pot "black" when
the kettle (New ASV, for example) translated articles where there were
none in any manuscript (see 1 Pet.  1-2), translated the same Greek
word three different ways (see Acts 1, 14), left out articles that
were in all the texts (see Luke 4-6), and then invented words that are
found in NO Greek text (1 Cor.  13)?
  
May we humbly suggest that until Johnson, Gleason, Weniger, Custer,
McClain, Panosian, Cheyne, Olson, Lehman, Kantzger, Binton, Anderson,
Culbertson, Baxter, Smith, Muntz, Wedge, Coder, Feinberg, Robertson,
Wuest, and English know what they are talking about, they would do
well to keep their mouths shut?
  
2.  The NEB (Dodd Version) inserts "to be stubborn" into verse 1,
which is found in no Hebrew text.  Then it tones the "vile" down to
"carry no weight" (v 4), and then coyly removes the Biblical terms
"condemn," "righteous" and "judgment" from verse 8.
  
3.  The scholars Budde and Duhm don't like verses 1-12, so they make
twelve changes in as many verses.
  
4.  The Amplified Bible naturally adds over forty words to the
passage.
  
5.  Bullinger offers a "new metrical version" to replace the AV
(1611).
  
6.  The Jehovah's Witnesses follow the Arian Bible of 1901 (ASV) and
tones Job's "vileness" (v 4) down to where he can appear almost
respectable, even if he cannot "array" himself with "glory and
beauty." The words "majesty" and "excellency" have been run off the
boards and replaced with "superiority and highness," which is a very
crummy substitution.
  
7.  Since the Hebrew word for "answered" has been used in verse 1
("annah"), Adam Clarke decides the whole passage has been misplaced,
so he tells us that it should be on the end of the Book of Job,
following Job 41.  To perform this double amputation on the AV text,
Dr.  Clarke (whose "loyalty to the word of God is unquestioned, etc.,
etc.") cites a certain Dr.  Heath briefly:  Dr.  Heath says we are to
subjoin the 15th verse of the 42nd chapter to the end of the 39th
chapter, and then place the first fourteen verses of the 40th chapter
after the sixth verse of the 42nd chapter, and things will be "hunky-
dory." But why stop now with such "unquestioned loyalty to the word of
God?" Why not place the first fifteen verses of Chapter 20 after the
last ten verses of Chapter 30, and then take the middle five verses of
Chapter 4 and place them after the first ten verses of Chapter 22, and
then...!  I mean if our "loyalty" is "unquestioned," what is to
prevent us from just tearing the grand old Book all to pieces and
reassembling it after any fashion and make it our own book?  Who would
"question" our "loyalty" if we were "recognized"?
  
8.  A.  R.  Fausset (Commentary, p.  98) says that "answer" (v 5)
should be "not plead against." {The Hebrew word "anah" means "answer"
in Gen.  18:27; 23:10,14; 31:14,36; 40:18; 45:3, Exod.  4:1; 15:21;
19:8, Num.  11:28; 22:18; 32:31, Deut.  1:14, 41; 21:7, Josh.  1:16;
7:20, 1 Sam.  1:15, 17; 9:8, 12, 19, 21, and the other 95 passages.}
  
9.  The "Living" Bible (Taylor's Version) makes a number of changes
which are not worth discussing.
  
But Job 40:1-4 doesn't really test the metal of our destructive
critics (Fundamentalists foremost), nor does it reveal their true
colors.  If one really wants to see the unholy apostates leading the
stumbling parade of blasphemous nonsense (from Origen to Custer), one
must read what now follows:
  
40:15-24 Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass
as an ox.  Lo now, his strength is in his loins, and his force is in
the navel of his belly.  He moveth his tail like a cedar:  the sinews
of his stones are wrapped together.  His bones are as strong pieces of
brass; his bones are like bars of iron.  He is the chief of the ways
of God:  he that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. 
Surely the mountains bring him forth food, where all the beasts of the
field play.  He lieth under the shady trees, in the covert of the
reed, and fens.  The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the
willows of the brook compass him about.  Behold, he drinketh up a
river, and hasteth not:  he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into
his mouth.  He taketh it with his eyes:  his nose pierceth through
snares.
  
Now students of Manuscript Evidence who have given careful attention
to the works of Burgon, Miller, Hills, Clarke, Scrivener, Mauro,
Miller, and the Trinitarian Bible Society of London are familiar with
the "apostolic succession" of blunders that proceed automatically from
one Christian college (or university) to another one.  By taking a
man's word for something without checking it--especially if that man
is a "godly" man whose scholarship is "you know what"--an accumulation
of errors has been incorporated into Christian education and
Conservative scholarship with such zeal and earnestness that when one
tries to shed light on them he finds himself the target of every type
of villification and misrepresentation known to Christendom.  The new
International Version and the New ASV both represent the accumulation
of nineteen centuries of pure, unadulterated tripe.
  
At Job 40:15, the Conservative and Fundamental scholars (independent
Pre-millennial Baptists included) take the word of the unsaved
commentators to be superior to the word of God, and without checking
ANY Hebrew text (which they talk about so much), they blandly tell us
that the "behemoth" of the passage is a "crocodile" or a
"hippopotamus" (see the New ASV or the NSRB, and match them up with
the worst liberal translation you can find:  They are in agreement). 
Not even the Jehovah's Witnesses made that gross of an error (see
NWT).
  
Dummelow says that BEHEMOTH is an elephant.  The Pulpit Commentary
says that it is a HIPPOPOTAMUS (along with The Amplified Bible). 
Fausset says that BEHEMOTH is the "water ox." George Williams,
speaking for Cornelius Stam and The New English Bible, says that the
BEHEMOTH is a crocodile and that the "obscurities" in the AV can be
cleared up with the RV (1881-1884).  {The RV of 1881-1884 was the most
corrupt piece of apostate trash that ever cursed the Body of Christ;
it made 36,000 changes in the correct text, and the text it finally
used was an unpublished text smuggled into the revision committee by
two men who never even professed to believe in the verbal inspiration
of ANY text (see True or False?  by David Otis Fuller).}
  
The Wycliffe Commentary (as tactfully and as politely as an English
dandy) quietly dismisses the correct identification of the animal as
"this MYTHICAL interpretation" (Meredith Kline).  Recognize the
footprints?  Mythology?  Legend?  (Evidently an Orthodox Conservative
can get his education off of the same assembly line that produced
Astruc, Juene, DeWette, Graf, Wellhausen, and Strauss.)
  
But the "BEHEMOTH" of our text is no more a mythical monster (or a
crocodile, or hippopotamus, or elephant) than Lassie.
  
"Behemoth" is God's own scientific description of the beast of
Revelation 13 and Daniel 7--the Antichrist; and no amount of knowledge
of "original languages" would enable any scholar (Liberal, Orthodox,
or Fundamentalist) to find either reference, in nineteen centuries of
study, from any translation of any manuscript, if that scholar had set
himself up as a competent ("qualified") judge of God's Book. 
Robertson could not find the cross references in Sinaiticus; Gregory
could not find them in the Septuagint; the ASV (1901) committee could
not find them in Nestle's Text, and Driver, Delitzsch, Gesenius, and
Keil (Hebrew scholars) could not find them in any Hebrew text,
although Job was written in Hebrew.  And if all the faculty members of
every Christian college and university in America and Europe had the
"God breathed originals" in front of their faces, they could no more
locate "Behemoth" than they could locate the source of their blindness
and confusion.
  
Linguistic ability never enabled any sinner (saved or lost) to
understand the Bible, where that sinner thought he was smart enough to
correct God Almighty.
  
The Hebrew word here is the feminine plural of "bahemah," for "beasts"
or "cattle." "Behemoth" is a PLURAL animal:  "animals." As three
ANIMALS that make up this "animal" (sing.) are given in Daniel 7 and
Revelation 13.  And to the everlasting shame and confounding of the
faculties at Bob Jones, Piedmont, Northwestern, Mid-South, Pillsbury,
Northeastern, Columbia, Lynchburg, Wheaton, Hyles-Anderson, BIOLA, and
San Francisco, let it be noted that not one Greek or Hebrew scholar
(living or dead), in 100 years of attacking the AV text, was ever able
to locate this simple, primary, elementary, prophetic truth.  When we
say that Origen could not read third grade Greek in his own native
tongue, we are not "overstating" anything.  There are 500,000 Greek
speaking, Greek preachers on earth, today, who can no more understand
Revelation 11-13 than they can skin themselves alive with a
marshmallow.
  
God likened His Son to a LAMB; He likens the counterfeit of His Son to
a LEOPARD, but it is a LION--BEAR--LEOPARD with seven heads (Rev. 
13:2); it is "BEHEMOTH" in 1611 English, without the aid or assistance
of any lexicon or grammarian, and without the assistance of any
depraved dingbat who thinks that thirty years of formal education
equips him to pose as a Biblical scholar, when he is nothing but a
dead orthodox linguist.  God likened His Son to a Worm (Ps.  22:6), a
Serpent (John 3:14), a Lion (Rev.  5:5), and a Lamb (1 Pet.  1:19). 
Why shouldn't the Son of Perdition be likened to a Lion, a Bear, and a
Leopard?
  
"Hippopotamus" your father's moustache.
  
"Crocodile," your foot!
  
"He eateth grass as an OX" (v 15).  When God cursed the serpent in
Genesis 3, He classified him with cattle (Gen.  3:14); for, he was a
Horned Cherub originally (Ezek.  10:14) with a split hoof (Ezek.  1:7)
before he fell (Ezek.  28:14).  Observe how Daniel 4:33 puts the
greatest type of Antichrist in the Old Testament into this same
position:  The position of an OX.
  
So here, as in Genesis 1:3-7 (see The Bible Believer's Commentary on
Genesis), the monstrous conceit and unbelief of the "recognized
scholars" sweeps over their revisions and commentaries like a wave of
hysteria.  They cannot and will not take a chance on "scientists"
making fun of them, so they must (like any dialectical materialist)
convert "Behemoth" into something for the kiddles to feed at the zoo. 
In spite of the fact that "science" (per se) has proved to be nothing
but a money-making clown for 25 centuries.  the foolishness goes right
on.  Aside from furnishing jobs for people engaged in making a living,
"science" (with the accumulated findings of 25 centuries from seven
continents) has never accomplished anything for mankind but the
following two minor items:
  
1.  It has enabled some men to live more comfortably, if they could
afford certain luxuries.
  
2.  It has prolonged life a few more days, if certain materials were
available.
  
And aside from that, there is no "scientific evidence" on earth, in
hell, or in heaven that Ampere, Archimedes, Fahrenheit, Priestley,
Ochoa, Berzelius, Thieme, Cavendish, Descarte, Urey, Riemann,
Leeuwenhoek, Newton, Einstein, Kepler, Galileo, Winer, Landau,
Compton, Davy, Dewar, Bibbs, Hubble, Janssen, Franklin, Lawrence
Harriot, and Pascal (plus every major scientist alive today), with
their combined talents, discoveries, inventions, and theories,
accomplished anything more than the two items above.  The 30,000 top
brains of the philosophers and scientists combined (with the
accumulated results of their experiments) have never solved one major
problem of mankind in the history of the universe:  The problems of
disease, death, proverty, religious disunity, war, famine, and
political strife are just as contemporary and perennial as they were
when Noah got out of the ark.  Correction:  They are more so; Noah
only had seven sinners to deal with.
  
And should we Bible believing people bow down and kiss the toes of
this insipid, silly, commercial "Baal?" To blazes with "science"
unless it is the knowledge of God (see comments under Proverbs 1:1-15)
or the knowledge of His Word.
  
You see, the defining of "BEHEMOTH" as a crocodile or hippo was due to
the fact that the modern scholars (any critic of the AV) had already
altered 1 Timothy 6:20 (see the International Version or the New ASV)
so that the warning against "SCIENCE"--FALSELY so called (see AV
text)--went unheeded.  "Behemoth" is not a physical beast that you can
see; God made him and God sees him, exactly as the "LEVIATHAN" of the
next chapter.
  
"His force is in the navel of his belly" (v 16).  Naturally, for his
belly is WHITE; the leopard is an integrated animal (see comments on
Revelation 13), so the "Japheth part" of him is his BELLY.  "His bones
are as strong pieces of brass; his bones are like BARS OF IRON" (v
18).  {See comments under Cain and Tubalcain, in Gen.  4:22.} Now
these are some bones that can only be pierced to the marrow (Heb. 
4:12) by the sword (Heb.  4:12) of the One who made Behemoth, so we
are not surprised to find these words:  "He that made him can make HIS
SWORD to approach unto him" (v 19).  Quite naturally (and normally, if
you are acquainted with the bungling stupidity of the modern
translations) the RV committee tells us that it should hav been "He
(God) furnishes the rhinoceros with a sword." ("Rhinoceros" your Aunt
Harriet!)
  
"He is the CHIEF of the ways of God" (v 19).  Then he is kin to the
Leviathan of Chapter 41 who is "a king over all the children of pride"
(41:34).  These "kings" and "chiefs" control "princes" (Dan.  10:20)
and "rulers" (Eph.  6:11, 12) in the heavenly places (Isa.  24:21),
and they are represented by ANIMALS (see Dan.  7:4-6, Ezek.  19:2;
28:2, Luke 13:32).  ("Hippopotamus" your crab apples!) Behemoth is
Beast Number 13 in the list God has just given:  Goats, Hinds, Wild
Asses, Unicorns, Peacocks, Ostriches, Horses, Grasshoppers, Hawks,
Eagles, Lions, and Ravens--Chapters 38 and 39).  No one who "took his
Bible studies seriously or conscientiously" (apostate cliche used by
those who promote the New ASV and The Amplified Bible), could miss the
import of Mr.  13:  He is described in Revelation 13, with his number
in 2 Chronicles 9:13 and Ezra 2:13.
  
Now since God has used real animals many times to picture spiritual
things (see 1 Cor.  9 for ministers and Isaiah 40:31 for prayer
warriors), we may say that there are some animals on this earth who
might TYPIFY Behemoth.  Verses 20-22 could refer to some animal that
is LIKE the behemoth, but he certainly could be no matchmate since no
animal "drinketh up a river, and hasteth not" (v 23), nor has anyone
ever caught any hippo or crocodile swimming up and down the Jordan
River.  The commentators, in their fanatical rage against the AV,
evidently forgot that the river Jordan at the time of Job (note
present tense:  "he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan...") hadn't
floated crocodiles (or hippos) since Noah led them into the ark.
  
Again, one must never forget that TREES in the Bible (Job 40:21,22 and
Ezek.  31:18) are not always as leafy as they look (Ezek.  31:3), and
the "field" (Job 40:20) is not always in a stadium; "the field is the
WORLD" (Matt.  13:38).  Again, we must not forget that the dragon in
Revelation 12:3 casts a flood out of his MOUTH (Rev.  12:15) which he
got from somewhere, and when he got it, the Jordan River was SWELLING
(Jer.  12:5).  Furthermore, this flood (Dan.  9:26) is a literal flood
of water (Rev.  12:6), and only a miracle prevents the escaping
remnant of Israel (Matt.  24:22) from drowning (Cf.  Exod.  10-15 and
comments).  We are plainly on supernatural grounds when dealing with
Behemoth and Leviathan, and when we get on these grounds, the failure
of Conservative and Fundamental scholarship is so glaring and so
pitiful that we are not only led to question their "loyalty to the
Bible," we are going to be led to disregard their profession of faith
in it.  They are not Bible Believers:  They are destructive critics. 
Observe how every new translation on the market made a question out of
verse 24 (ASV, New ASV, RSV, New RSV, International, Phillips, etc.)
because there is a perfect agreement between Fundamental scholarship
and Liberal infidelity where the authority of the Bible is concerned. 
There is no interrogative "he" (Hebrew) before verse 24 in any Hebrew
manuscript known to man.  The verse was made into a question (v 24) to
match Job 41:2, 18, since no revisor or translator since 1800 had any
more idea of what he was dealing with in Job 40:15 than a five-year-
old Hottentot field-stripping a Swiss watch.  Observe how C.  H.  Dodd
(a rank Liberal) has made both Behemoth and Leviathan refer to the
same animal by changing the word "Leviathan" to "whale!" (The NEB
should be called "The Play Pen Bible.")
  

  
CHAPTER FORTY-ONE
  

  
41:1-11 CANST thou draw out leviathan with an hook?  or his tongue
with a cord which thou lettest down?  Canst thou put an hook into his
nose?  or bore his jaw through with a thorn?  Will he make many
supplications unto thee?  will he speak soft words unto thee?  Will he
make a covenant with thee?  wilt thou take him for a servant for ever? 
Wilt thou play with him as with a bird?  or wilt thou bind him for thy
maidens?  Shall the companions make a banquet of him?  shall they part
him among the merchants?  Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? 
or his head with fish spears?  Lay thine hand upon him, remember the
battle, do no more.  Behold, the hope of him is in vain:  shall not
one be cast down ever at the sight of him?  None is so fierce that
dare stir him up:  who then is able to stand before me?  Who hath
prevented me, that I should repay him?  whatsoever is under the whole
heaven is mine.
  
Having "blown it" in the previous exposition, the majority of
"recognized scholars" go right on "without the foggiest."
  
1.  ASV (1901):  Leviathan is the crocodile.
  
2.  New ASV:  Leviathan is a crocodile.
  
3.  The New English Bible:  Leviathan is a whale.
  
4.  RSV:  Leviathan is a crocodile.
  
5.  Adam Clarke (Post-Millennial):  Leviathan is a crocodile.
  
6.  Williams (Pre-Millennial):  Leviathan is a crocodile.
  
7.  Dummelow (A-Millennial):  Leviathan is a crocodile.
  
8.  The Pulpit Commentary (Post-Millennial):  Leviathan is a
crocodile.
  
9.  J.  F.  and Brown:  Leviathan is a crocodile.
  
10.  The Wycliffe Commentary:  Leviathan is a crocodile.
  
11.  The Lockman Foundation (Amplified Bible):  Leviathan is a
crocodile.
  
12.  Mickey Mouse:  Leviathan is Snoopy.
  
13.  Pogo:  Leviathan is the Wizard of Id.
  
Having sampled the best brains of every branch of Conservative,
Orthodox, and Fundamental scholarship (plus the Liberals), let us take
the only proper course of action which one should take in view of the
"scholarly agreement" of those listed above:  Let's just throw all of
their scholarship out of the window and pretend they never posited an
opinion in the first place.
  
After all, where 100% of the godly scholars agree in correcting God,
the best policy to follow is just to ignore their godliness and their
scholarship.  So, for awhile, let us put the kiddies on the shelf, and
let us pretend that 300 years ago God told it "like it was" and gave
it to us "as it is," and that we have the revealed truth of God in our
hands; consequently, we have access to information denied to 100% of
the scholars who think otherwise.  Since this chapter is the longest
chapter in the Bible on the person and work of Satan, we should have
known from the start that the best brains of Christendom couldn't
"hack it." They couldn't cut Genesis One rightly, so why should they
cut the deck right here?
  
1.  The being described is "king over all the children of PRIDE" (v
34).
  
2.  Unlike the "crocodile (that's a "crock!"), he is "made without
FEAR," and, unlike the crocodile, he beholds "all high things" (vv 33
and 34).
  
3.  Unlike the crocodile, Leviathan has more than one HEAD (Rev. 
12:1-6, Ps.  74:14); in this respect he matches the dragon of
Revelation 12.
  
4.  But all doubt is dispelled about Leviathan's identification when
Isaiah tells us (in good old 1611 Elizabethan English!) that
"Leviathan" is a DRAGON and a SERPENT (Isaiah 27:1).
  
("Crocodile" your bunsen burner!)
  
When the deluded scholars)any on the New Scofield Board or the Lockman
Foundation, or any other Fundamental or Orthodox group--try their hand
at converting Satan into a "crocodile," or a "whale," they give out
with the most pitiful expositions heard on this earth since Cain let
out with his first yell.  Recognizing that a white whale is a type of
Satan (see Ps.  104:26, Moby Dick, Jonah 2:1, etc.), any fool could
tell that the Leviathan of Job 41 is moving out beyond the solar
system.  For the purpose of expounding the passage as a unit, we shall
print the remaining verses.
  
41:12-34 I will not conceal his parts, nor his power, nor his comely
proportion.  Who can discover the face of his garment?  or who can
come to him with his double bridle?  Who can open the doors of his
face?  his teeth are terrible round about.  His scales are his pride,
shut up together as with a close seal.  One is so near to another,
that no air can come between them.  They are joined one to another,
they stick together, that they cannot be sundered.  By his neesings a
light doth shine, and his eyes are like the eyelids of the morning. 
Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out.  Out
of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron.  His
breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his mouth.  In his
neck remaineth strength, and sorrow is turned into joy before him. 
The flakes of his flesh are joined together:  they are firm in
themselves; they cannot be moved.  His heart is as firm as a stone;
yea, as hard as a piece of the nether millstone.  When he raiseth up
himself, the mighty are afraid:  by reason of breakings they purify
themselves.  The sword of him that layeth at him cannot hold:  the
spear, the dart, nor the habergeon.  He esteemeth iron as straw, and
brass as rotten wood.  The arrow cannot make him flee:  slingstones
are turned with him into stubble.  Darts are counted as stubble:  he
laugheth at the shaking of a spear.  Sharp stones are under him:  he
spreadeth sharp pointed things upon the mire.  He maketh the deep to
boil like a pot:  he maketh the sea like a pot of ointment.  He maketh
a path to shine after him; one would think the deep to be hoary.  Upon
earth there is not his like, who is made without fear.  He beholdeth
all high things:  he is a king over all the children of pride.
  
Having read the passage, let us now ask the reader a question:  "What
would any 'godly' Christian think Leviathan was if he read the passage
and compared it with what God said it meant in Revelation 13, Psalm
74, and Isaiah 27?" That is:  "What would any 'godly' scholar think if
he had enough sense to read a third grade English grammar?" (And I
meant "third grade" exactly as I said it.)
  
Second question:  "Why is it that everyone of these 'godly' Bible
wreckers missed the right interpretation when any fool could have
spotted it without any knowledge of Greek or Hebrew?"
  
Third question:  "How does a knowledge of the original languages and
an orthodox view about 'verbal inspiration' help any student
understand the Bible if the professionals who had this training cannot
understand a passage as simple and as rudimentary as Job 41?"
  
The Pulpit Commentary glories with "The last application (crocodile)
is NOW almost universally accepted by ALL scholars."
  
All right then, we can be perfectly safe in discarding it immediately.
  
1.  Leviathan is a water animal of the serpentine, reptilian, or
amphibious class (vv 15, 31).
  
2.  Leviathan has seven heads (Rev.  12:1-16), and he is RED, not
green, gray, or dark green (as a crocodile) or gray, brown, or white
(as a whale).
  
3.  Leviathan can whip anyone, anytime, anywhere (v 8), although he
has "no hope" (v 9).
  
4.  If you could see Leviathan (v 9), you would faint (2 Kings 6:17).
  
5.  Nobody can stand before Leviathan; so, how will they stand before
the Creator who made him (v 10)?
  
6.  Nothing but the word of God can sunder his scales (v 17), or reach
his bones (Heb.  4:12, 13), and that is why Christ uses the Sword of
the Spirit (Luke 4:1-8) in dealing with him.
  
7.  Leviathan is like a real Chinese dragon--firebreathing and all (vv
18-21).
  
8.  Leviathan is worshipped by those who raise him up (Job 3:8--ah,
the unsearchable riches of the Elizabethan text!), with self-
mutilation (v 25, Cf.  1 Kings 18:28).
  
9.  You cannot fight Leviathan with carnal weapons (2 Cor.  10:4), for
he is a spiritual being (vv 26-29).
  
10.  His followers, who are like him (John 8:40-44), smoke cigarettes
(v 19), and kindle the coal by inhaling (v 21) the material they will
inhale in Hell (Rev.  14:10-11).  {Ah, the unsearchable riches of the
archaic, outdated, "hard to understand," Mid-victorian Reformation
text!  How profound are its corrections on the "original manuscripts,"
and its judgments past finding out on the New Scofield Reference
Bible!!}
  
11.  The "deep" of verse 31 is not the Jordan River, or the
Mediterranean Sea, nor is it your kitchen sink.  The "deep" of verse
31 is the deep of Genesis 1:1-3 and the deep of Job 38:30, and if you
are going to learn about the "deep things of God" (1 Cor.  2:10),
revealed only by the Holy Ghost (1 Cor.  1-2), you are going to have
to dump Hackett, Keil, Delitzsch, Dummelow, Clarke, Kline, Budde,
Peake, Robertson, Cheyne, Mahcen, Davis, Warfield, Alford, Wordsworth,
Souter, Schaff, and Wuest like you would dump out a sack of rotten
potatoes.
  
12.  The "deep" (v 32) is not "upon earth" (v 33), and where the
credulous "scientists" of 1492 put their dragon in the Atlantic Ocean,
the credulous dupes ("scientists") of 1980 LEFT HIM:  wrong place. 
Leviathan is in the waters over your head, beyond the solar system
(see extended criticism of C.  I.  Scofield and his followers in The
Bible Believer's Commentary on Genesis, Gen.  1:1-6).  When in doubt,
always throw 100% of the scientists out so that they can fellowship
with 100% of the modern Fundamentalists you just pitched out.
  
Leviathan is a detailed description of Satan as God sees him.
  
Leviathan is no more a "crocodile" or a "whale" than Adam's house cat.
  
And if thirty years of "Christian Education" would make your teacher
think that Leviathan was a "crocodile," you'd better leave that kind
of "education" alone.  Any education that would cover up for the
Devil, in the greatest chapter in the Bible about the Devil--is
inspired by the Devil, no matter what scholar or school does the cover
up work.  "Rebellion is...WITCHCRAFT" (1 Sam.  15:23).  Rebellion
against the written authority of the Holy Bible, on the grounds that
the "warlock" is smarter than the Author of the Bible, is
"WITCHCRAFT." "Fundamentalist Witchcraft" and "Liberal Witchcraft" and
"Neo-evangelical witchcraft" are no different than Voodoo Witchcraft
or Black Magic.
  
A number of questions are asked Job in regard to the one who brought
the first accusation against him back in Job 1:9.
  
"Canst thou draw out leviathan with a hook?" (v 1).  No, you can't,
although the animal described is plainly aquatic.  "Or his tongue with
a cord which thou lettest down?" (v 1).  No one can "go fishing" for
the Devil with a hook on the end of a line, let down over the side of
a ship.  "Canst thou put an hook into his nose?" (v 2), like a ring is
put through the nose of a bull?  "Or bore his jaw through with a
thorn?" (v 2).  Here, the thorn is used as an augur to drill a hole
that a line or chain can be passed through; the most common modern
form known by any farmer is the "fish stringer" that is run through
the lower jaw (or the gills) of a fish that has been caught.  "Will he
make many supplications unto thee?" (v 3).  No, the devil has never
had to go in supplication to anyone--not even God.  You will notice
that in Satan's conversations with the Almighty, there is never any
cringing or cowering or begging (v 24).  (Like Lord Byron said on his
death bed:  "Shall I sue for mercy?  No!  Come, come, let us be a man
to the end!") Leviathan is "made without fear" (v 33), and those women
who listen to him are made the same way (see Job 39:16 and comments). 
"Will he speak soft words unto thee?" (v 3).  He didn't plead with
Eve, and he didn't plead with Christ, and he won't plead with you. 
Any "soft words" from Satan come through Liberal preachers, Catholic
priests, and Fundamental scholars in the form of Romans 16:18 and 2
Peter 2:18, but he never "pleads" with anyone.  "Will he make a
covenant with thee?" (v 4).  He will Israel (Isa.  28:18 and Dan. 
11:32), and that covenant will be worth about as much as the NATO pact
or the SALT agreements or any treaty signed by Russia or the USA in
the last 70 years.  From 1400 to 1945 there were 8,000 treaties signed
between nations, and one of them held good for any longer than four
years on the average.  "Wilt thou take him for a servant for ever?" (v
4).  God can, and as surely as Nebuchadnezzar was the Lord's
"servant," so Satan will only have the power of Romans 13:1-4 under
the permissive will of his Master (Dan.  11:31-36).  You might put
some aquatic or marine animals in a bowl or an aquariuim and keep
them, but not Leviathan!  "Wilt thou play with him as with a bird?" (v
5).  You can with gold fish, minnows, canaries, parakeets, parrots,
and doves, but you cannot do so with "Leviathan." Men can play with
crocodiles; they have been known to jump into the water with them and
wrestle them, but you won't jump into Satan's "pond" for a wrestling
match unless you are as stupid as those who are trying it at Houston
Space Center (Jude 9)!  "Or wilt thou bind him for thy maidens?" (v
5).  No, but God will:  Look at Revelation 20:1--which is done for the
sake of the Virgin Bride, the restored wife (Hosea 2), the concubines
(S.  of Sol.  6), and the "virgins without number" (S.  of Sol.  6:8)! 
Ah, what a light that 1611 sheds on the Greek and Hebrew lexicons!
  
"Shall the companions make a banquet of him?" (v 6).  Not Job's
companions, but Elijah's companions will!  Leviathan is given for
"MEAT to the people inhabiting the wilderness" (Ps.  74:14) when the
events of Exodus 15-20 will take place again (Mac.  7:14) in the
Tribulation (Rev.  12:13-17).  The manna is connected with Leviathan's
heads (see Exodus 16:14 and comments).  (Ah, what light the 1611 AV
sheds on the obscure mumblings of Jean Dixon and Edgar Cayce and the
gurus of Rama Krishna!)
  
"Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons...or...fish spears?" (v
7).  No, because of verses 26-29, he is marine, he is aquatic, he is
reptilian, he is serpentine, and he is amphibious, but you cannot land
him or gaff him with any method known by any fisherman, ancient or
modern.  Of the 3,000 Fundamental and Conservative infidels who
wrested the text to their own destruction, Martin Luther is perhaps
the only "faithful man" to be found, for the familiar hymn (written by
Martin) states:  "And armed with cruel hate, on EARTH IS NOT HIS
EQUAL!" ("Ein Feste Burg").  This line is from Job 41:33, and Martin
was close enough to the devil in his dealings with papists to
understand the text; he never mistook Leviathan for a moment to be a
"crocodile."
  
"Crocodile" your C.  B.  antenna!
  
The description given is that of a fire- and smoke-breating, seven-
headed dragon, moving up and down through the universe, and leaving a
Milky Way (v 32) behind him.  The "sea" of verse 31 has no more
reference to the Mediterranean, or the Sea of Galilee, than it does to
Evil Knievel's Grand Canyon rocket (Cf.  Ps.  77:19, Ezek.  32:6, Rom. 
10:7, etc.).  The thirteen words in verse 34 point directly to the
King of Terrors himself and tell Job that if he is trusting in his own
righteousness, the "king of the children of PRIDE" (v 34) is his daddy
(John 8:44)!!
  
What a compliment to a whale or a "crocodile!"
  
In closing our comments on the passage, we will point out more red
light to the Bible believer:  That is, the radical fanaticism of the
lunatic fringe (the new translations) in covering up the Roman
Catholic act of "penance" (done for Satan) in the passage.  Verse 25,
in the God-given, God-preserved, God-honoured Text (AV, 1611), says
that "By reasons of BREAKINGS they purify themselves," indicating the
masochism and self-mutilation of the black-robed Baalite priesthood of
1 Kings 18, who worshipped the Queen of Heaven (Jer.  44:19) with
priests called "father" (Judg.  17:10).  The Pro-Roman versions
(anything published since 1800) have altered this verse (v 25) to the
following:
  
1.  The Dodd Version (NEB):  "bewildered at the lashings of his tail."
  
2.  The Taylor Version (The Living Bible):  "terror grips them."
  
3.  The Lockman Foundation (Amplified):  "because of terror and
crashing they are beside themselves."
  
4.  The Apostate's Version (New ASV):  "because of the crashing they
are bewildered."
  
5.  The Dean Weigle Version (RSV):  "at the crashing they are besides
themselves." {Observe the ecumenical agreement here between Bob Jones
University and the National Council of Churches; they both recommended
the same corruption.}
  
6.  The Jehovah's Witness Version (NWT):  "due to consternation they
get bewildered."
  
7.  Adam Clarke:  "No version, either ancient or modern appears to
have understood this verse, nor is its true sense known" (Clarke's
Commentary, p.  190).  But, Adam!  Since you changed the order of the
verses (see 40:1 and comments) and got rid of the devil before you got
into the chapter, why would anyone with any sense (who believed the
Bible) think your opinion about the matter was worthy of
consideration?  After all, didn't the ASV, New ASV, RSV, and the New
RSV simply follow the corrupt Alexandrian Septuagint written 200 years
after Paul died?  Yes, they did.  Origen's corrupt African
manuscripts--which contain the Apocrypha as part of the Old
Testament--read:  "When he turns himself he terrifies all the
quadrupeds of the earth." Umbreit says "they flee away bewildered." J. 
F.  and Brown say "they wander from the way." Dummelow says that the
"deer are afraid that slip among the broken places." The Pulpit
Commentary winds up our funny farm with "terror dances before him."
  
Well, how about this:  "When a whale thrashes his tail swimming down
to the Dead Sea, and blows frost out of his nose, all the antelopes
dancing with the crocodiles slap the pedal to the floor board."
  
See how it's done?  You just make a "do-it-yourself Bible."
  
You see how it's done?  If you don't understand the passage you:
  
1.  Pretend the AV (1611) is "obscure."
  
2.  Pretend that some Hebrew or Greek text is "clearer."
  
3.  Then when you can't expound the Hebrew or the Greek as it stands
(in ANY text), you invent a reading that is clear to YOU and then tell
the stupid Christian that "no one can understand the passage." Did you
get that "NO ONE?" That is, when a Greek or Hebrew scholar can't
master what a Boy Scout could handle, then "no one can understand the
passage!" How is that for egotistical crackpot fanaticism?"
  
The reference plainly is to Communist Catholics in the United Nations
(1980-199) under the Antichrist (Rev.  13, 17) mutilating themselves
to purify themselves from sin, as in the purifying rites of Bacchus
and Pluto (see Hislop, The Two Babylons); DRUNKEN DANCING accompanies
the "worship service" (see Exodus 32 and comments).
  
To make sure that you miss the truth of the passage entirely, the
Taylor paraphrase (The "Living"--go play with yourself, Buster--Bible)
mistranslates the last verse to read:  "he is monarch of all that he
sees," instead of "he is a KING over all the children of PRIDE." This
deft twist of the wrist, which Taylor in his naivete calls "a
paraphrase" (and which buyers of the propaganda accept as a
"paraphrase"), leaves the modern Christian facing a passage that deals
with no creature known to God, man, or the devil.  Taylor's Leviathan
can stand up (v 25), but he is not in the deep (v 31), and he is not
in the "sea" (v 31).  But he moves like a steam roller (v 30), and he
has flesh (v 23), yet no one can capture him (v 9) or get at him with
a spear, harpoon, or iron javelins (vv 7 and 29).
  
("Crocodile," your Aunt Harriet's can opener!)
  
Crocodiles ARE caught with spears, they can be captured, and skinned
(and sometimes eaten); they are not without "fear," and plenty of
natives "stir them up" (v 10) to get their hides, their eggs, or just
run them off from the laundry at the river's edge.  Taylor's
"Leviathan" is a Disneyland joke.
  
And here we shall end comment on the greatest chapter in the Bible on
Satan.  There is not as much material in Ezekiel 28, Revelation 13, or
Isaiah 14 as there is here; so, we may expect the destructive critics
of the Reformation text (Christian universities and colleges first) to
either reject the text, alter the text, confuse the text, or
misinterpret the text, and then cover up for the Devil so he can slip
through undetected.  God said that He would NOT "conceal his parts,
nor his power, nor his comely proportion" (v 12), but they are
concealed by the deceitful, slovenly, infidelic works of Conservative
and Orthodox scholars who are always mouthing off about "the
fundamentals of the faith."
  

  
CHAPTER FORTY-TWO
  

  
42:1-6 THEN Job answered the Lord, and said, I know that thou canst do
everything, and that no thought can be withholden from thee.  Who is
he that hideth counsel without knowledge?  therefore have I uttered
that I understood not; things too wonderful for me, which I knew not. 
Hear, I beseech thee, and I will speak:  I will demand of thee, and
declare thou unto me.  I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: 
but now mine eye seeth thee.  Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in
dust and ashes.
  
You've got to hand it to Job; he does "gird up his loins like a man,"
and he does answer (v 4).  The only catch is that this time he lets
his soliloquy of Chapter 31 drop like a hot rock.  Not one word that
breathes of "self" passes Job's lips in this final speech, nor does
Job waste any breath pointing out the hypocrisy and inconsistencies of
his "comforters." Face to face with the Supreme One, to whom "everyone
of us will give account," Job accounts for himself (Rom.  14:12)
exactly as you and I will.  In spite of the efforts of Liberals (and
Conservatives and Fundamentalists) to "cool" his confession, Job says
the right thing (see v 6) in the right way, and God Himself bears
witness to it in verse 7.
  
"I know thou canst do everything" (v 2).  {Cf.  Ps.  145 and 1 Chron. 
28.}
  
"Who is he that hideth counsel...?" (v 3).  Job repeats the Lord's
question of 38:2 and explains, "I uttered that I understood not;
things too wonderful for me, which I knew not" (v 3).  And this is
what Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar should have chimed in with on the
spot; all three of them had said plenty "without knowledge."
  
"I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear; but now mine eye
seeth thee" (v 5).  Job is looking at the Theophany who appeared to
Abraham (Acts 7:2), Manoah (Judg.  13:3), and Jacob (Gen.  32:24). 
This is no "astronaut" (it's spelled right!) speaking out of a flying
saucer.  The UFO "humanoids" (and the literature on ancient
civilizations and mysteries) are as unlike the Angel of the Lord (or
Christ) as Charles Addams' cartoons are unlike Thoreau's Walden.  If
Jesus Christ were a "humanoid" from outer space, He was the most
critical, negative visitor this earth ever had (see Matt.  23 and John
9).  He professed to have come this way for warfare and division (Luke
12:51) and would only save people who trusted Him as much as they
trusted God.  Furthermore, He stated flatly that there wasn't any
point in wasting money on helping poor folks out when you could give
the money to Him (John 12:8).  (My how "characteristic" of the
"helpful humanoids" who keep popping up to show men how to "live
together peaceably!") Imagine a UFO occupant telling you that bigger
and better wars are on the way (Matt.  24), that you should get
yourself a weapon for personal defense (Luke 22), and that the only
hope for this planet lay in the finished blood atonement of a JEW! 
Ever read about any "Venusian," "Atlantean," or "Lemurian" who talked
that way?!  Christ mentions His "Father" over fifty times in His
discourses, and these discourses take up less than fifty pages; you
never heard a UFO occupant spend five minutes talking about HIS
"father"!!  When one of God's real "men from outer space" shows up--
see Genesis 16:9 for example--he doesn't ask where the power supply
is; he just butchers 185,000 men (without a "ray gun" or chemicals)
and goes on about his business (2 Kings 19:35).
  
"Wherefore I abhor MYSELF, and repent in dust and ashes" (v 6).  Atta
boy, Job!  Sock it to 'em!  Sock it to these "positive thinking," "I'm
okay, you're okay, we're all okay," girls!  Lay it on 'em Job!  Phase
out these goody-goody "youth conflict, dynamic tension" kiddies who
are always getting you to "find yourself," and "have faith in your
fellow man." Put it on 'em Job--abhor YOURSELF!
  
This is the classical example of contrition; it is not sorrow for SIN,
it is sorrow for SELF.  It is not sorrow for what we have done, but
for what we ARE (2 Cor.  7:10).  When Balaam.  Saul, Pharaoh, and
Judas say, "I have sinned," it means no more than "Oops, I got
caught!" But when David and the Prodigal Son say it, the angels start
a jubilee in Heaven (Luke 15, Ps.  51).  "Godly sorrow" (2 Cor.  7:10)
is sorrow for BEING WRONG, nor just DOING WRONG.  No Catholic,
Communist, Campbellite, or Charismatic will ever fully understand this
great Biblical truth, for all of them leave a certain margin for SELF
in their plans for salvation--both for the salvation of individuals
and the salvation of "society." As proof of this, let us examine some
of the last 35 trays full of garbage that have been served up to the
Christian as "Bible versions."
  
1.  The Dodd Version (NEB):  "Therefore I melt away."
  
2.  Jehovah's Witness Version (NWT):  "I make a retraction."
  
3.  Dean Weigle Version (RSV):  "I despise myself."
  
4.  New Apostate Version (New ASV):  "Therefore I retract." (Observe
how this translation--recognized by John R.  Rice and Bob Jones, III--
has adopted the Arian reading of the Jehovah's Witness Bible, The New
World Translation.)
  
5.  The Old Apostate Version (ASV, 1901):  Margin--"loathe my words."
  
6.  J.  F.  and Brown:  "I abhor the rash speeches." (You see, the
matter is as we have stated it.  J.  F.  and Brown cannot imagine Job
abhoring what he IS, only what he has SAID.)
  
7.  Little Red Riding Hood:  "I am sorry I spoke so hastily."
  
8.  Charlie Brown:  "Sorry 'bout that."
  
9.  The Great New, Brand Spanking New, NEW Authorized Revised Common
Standard Ecumenical International, Federal New, NEW NEW AMERICAN
STANDARD VERSION:  "I realize that my isolated orientation developed a
sectarian mentality with no adhesive factor to sensitize the expanded
world view with its renewed emphasis on the deversifiability of a
cruciform ethic, where a scientific break-through could give a
significant thrust to relationable structures in the blankety, blank,
blank, blank..."
  
Anything but the truth.
  
The word "ABHOR" (AV, 1611) is too strong for the stomachs of the
modern Fundamentalists and Conservatives, for the word means
"something detested with extreme repugnance." And when did any modern
revisor (saved or lost), feel that way about himself when confronted
with the Authority of the Holy Bible?  Job looks at himself like a man
would look at the rotting body of a dead frog, and that is the "look"
which puts a man in line with Job 15:16--right on target.  It isn't
"man is the measure of all things"; it is "I am a man of UNCLEAN LIPS"
(Isa.  6).  It isn't "worthy of the noble name of MAN"; it is "depart
from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord" (Luke 5:8).  It isn't "I think
therefore I am"; rather it is "Lord, what wilt thou have ME to do?"
(Acts 9).  Get it straight.  Not one of those wilfully ignorant, self-
deceived idiots from Socrates to Sartre had any more idea where he (or
you) was headed (or how to get there) than a blind bollweevil in a
blizzard.  There is more real power in an ounce of negative truth than
15,000 tons of "positive thinking" where that positive thinking is the
self-induced hallucination of a Bible-rejecting Pharisee.  Now Job is
in a position where God can bless him!  And the Almighty never fails
to meet His own obligations (Gen.  18:18)!
  
42:7-17 And it was so, that after the Lord had spoken these words unto
Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled
against thee, and against thy two friends:  for ye have not spoken of
me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.  Therefore take
unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job,
and offer up for yourselves a bunt offering; and my servant Job shall
pray for you:  for him will I accept:  lest I deal with you after your
folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like
my servant Job.  So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and
Zophar the Naamathite went, and did according as the Lord commanded
them:  the Lord also accepted Job.  And the Lord turned the captivity
of Job, when he prayed for his friends:  also the Lord gave Job twice
as much as he had before.  Then came there unto him all his brethren,
and all his sisters, and all they that had been of his acquaintance
before, and did eat bread with him in his house:  and they bemoaned
him, and comforted him over all the evil that the Lord had brought
upon him:  every man also gave him a piece of money, and every one an
earring of gold.  So the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than
his beginning:  for he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand
camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she asses.  He had
also seven sons and three daughters.  And he called the name of the
first, Jemima; and the name of the second, Kazia; and the name of the
third, Kerenhappuch.  And in all the land were no women found so fair
as the daughters of Job:  and their father gave them inheritance among
their brethren.  After this lived Job an hundred and forty years, and
saw his sons, and his son's sons, even for four generations.  So Job
died, being old and full of days.
  
Verse 10 is the key to proper interpretation of the passage, and since
not one Fundamental or Conservative scholar ("godly" or otherwise)
ever paid any attention to what the Biblical text said where it
crossed his "training," they quite naturally missed the greatest
prophetic truth in the entire passage:  Job's children were
resurrected.
  
Verse 10 placed the Book of Job "smack dab" down on Psalm 126:4,
Zephaniah 2:7; 3:20, Amos 5:27, and Jeremiah 33:7, 11, 26.  That is,
it does if you believe in the scriptural method of comparing
"spiritual things with spiritual" (1 Cor.  2:13) instead of comparing
scripture with nineteen centuries of scholarly fungus.  If you believe
in ravaging the text and tearing it to pieces with the murderous
scholarship of the "recognized authorities," then, of course, you can
never find the cross-reference to Truth.  One must never forget that
real Bible students who really DO "take their Bible studies seriously"
never waste five minutes with the slime and algae of the Revision
Committees (any and all, since 1800) when trying to find Biblical
Truth.  The Revision committee of 1881-1884 knew nothing of Pre-
millennial truth, though Darby and Moody were preaching these truths
while the committee was at work destroying the Receptus of the
Reformation, from which the truths were revealed.  The Revision
committee of 1901 knew nothing about the corruption of the Alexandrian
text, although Burgon and Scrivener had been documenting it publicly
for thirty years.  The Revision committee of 1952 (RSV) knew nothing
about Daniel's Seventieth Week, although Scofield and Larkin had
expounded it world-wide before 1930.  The Revision committees of 1959-
1970 (New ASV) knew nothing about Tribulation salvation, the Mark of
the Beast, the chapter and verse system of the AV, the seven
resurrections, the three raptures, or the doctrine of the Kingdom,
although Bible believers had been preaching and teaching these truths
ten to thirty years before the committee sat down at the table to
undermine the truth of God.  What little Bible the Lockman Foundation
and the faculty at Bob Jones University knows, they got from Larkin
and Scofield, who published all of their works before 1940 and most of
them before 1920.  And the same may be said of any group of
professional hucksters engaged in making a living by changing the
Authorized Text.  They have no knowledge of anything that anyone
needs, and if they needed it, anyone could find it without consulting
the "pros" for anything.  All the Bible they know they got from Bible
believers who preceded them anywhere from ten to 500 years.  You will
find nothing in any book John R.  Rice ever wrote (aside from personal
illustrations of practical experience in the ministry--which any
minister has) that was not clearly presented by one to ten writers
fifty years before Rice was converted.  You may read the entire set of
books by Kenneth Wuest from cover to cover, and you will not find ONE
doctrinal truth stated from ANY Greek text (or study) that is not
clearly stated by Peiters and Scofield fifty to sixty years before
Wuest wrote his first book.  You may read any set of books by any
"recognized" Fundamental scholars since 1930, and you will only be
reading the work of a man who God has showed nothing to since Larkin
and Scofield got their mateiral (1890-1930) from a King James 1611
Authorized Version.  It is true that occasionally Larkin and Scorield
(as Spurgeon and Torrey) yielded to the pressure of the "godly
brethren," who always were around to tempt them to sin against the
Bible.  Once in awhile you will find an isolated quotation from an RV
(or a reference to the "Greek") in the writings of these men; this was
done in a moment of weakness ("ALL have sinned!") when they wanted to
be "accepted" as Bible scholars.  But these men got their revelations
from the same place that Carey, Goforth, Livingstone, Brainerd,
Edwards, Wesley, Tennant, Finney, Sam Jones, Bob Jones, Sr., Frank
Norris, Billy Sunday, and Peter Cartwright got theirs:  A King James
1611, Authorized Version.
  
And if you want to put one of these man-pleasing, manfollowing,
copycats on the spot, just ask him this:  "Sir, would you please show
me one thing--just ONE--you have learned from your studies of the
'original languages' that I can't find in a dime store King James
Bible?" And then watch him hit the skids!  All you asked for was ONE;
surely he can show you ONE!  Just ONE will do.  (All a linguist does,
if he is Orthodox, is use the "original language" to prove what any
Bible believer already knows, or can find out by reading a man who
didn't refer to the "originals.")
  
"My wrath is kindled against thee..." (v 7).  The speech is aimed at
Eliphaz, but it includes his two buddies:  "For ye have not spoken of
me the thing that is right, as my servant JOB hath" (v 7).  In the
first place, Job did say, "I have sinned" (7:20), and none of his
comforters said that about themselves one time in 38 chapters.  It is
true that The New English Bible, The "Living" Bible, the RSV, and the
grossly corrupt ASV (old or new) have all altered Job 7:20 so that Job
did NOT "speak that which was right," but changing Job 7:20 to read
"if I have sinned," or "if I sinned," etc., doesn't relieve the
evangelical apostates of their responsibility to God.  Job DID say, "I
have sinned," and that was the right thing to say.  The irresponsible
Fundamentalists who slapped the truth out of Job's mouth sinned
without saying it themselves, but "be sure yor sin will find YOU out."
He did say, "I abhor myself," and that was the right thing to say. 
What the new versions--"in the modern, updated English"--say Job said,
is what he did NOT say, and till heaven and earth pass away God will
not write His Book like Machen, Cheyne, Warfield, Keil, Robertson,
Delitzsch, Olson, Weniger, Bauer, Hort, Aland, Metzger, Thieme,
Origen, Gesenius, and Walvoord THINK it should be written.  {We have
never referred to Robertson, Warfield, Machen, and Hort as
"unbelievers" or "liberals" in regard to John 3:16, but since the
apostasy within the body of Christ has always been carried on by saved
people who "love the Lord," (to quote one destructive critic of the
AV), who are "loyal to verbal inspiration" (to quote another two-faced
hypocrite), we are not really concerned with "liberals" or "Neo-
evangelicals" at all; what we have to deal with in the last half of
this century is puffed-up, bloated, egotistical, SAVED stuffed-shirts
who think they are smart enough to correct God's Book simply because
they have been exposed to nineteen centuries of scholarly trash.  What
we have to deal with is men like A.  T.  Robertson, Warfield, Wuest,
Hort, Machen, etc., who became deluded, self-deceived dupes in the
hands of Satan, as he sought to overthrow biblical Authority--not the
"fundamentals." These men trained the faculties who trained the
faculties who are now training young men for a full-time ministry of
correcting and repudiating the words of God.  They were tools for the
greatest apostasy the world has ever seen, and nothing that the
Catholics or Liberals pulled off between 1582 and 1980 could match it. 
We may say, without fear of anyone (or consideration of anyone's
feelings), that these "Conservatives" did more to destroy the
character and manhood of American Christianity than the National
Council of Churches, the Communist Party, and the Roman Catholic
Hierarchy.  Their damage to the minds and ministries of 50,000 young
preachers (1890-1980) is simply incalculable, and it will never be
computated accurately until the Judgment Seat of Christ.}
  
"Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams..." (v 8). 
The reader will observe that the requirement places the time element
(see comments on date of writing in the Preface) back to Gentile
worship before the Law.  Numbers 23:1 and 14 shows that Balak and
Balaam recognized the sacrifice of Job 42:8 as the standard sacrifice. 
"Lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of
me the thing which is right, like my servant Job" (v 8).  Then, Job
was right all along, even when he was wrong.  He was wrong (v 3), in
that, he had tried to justify himself and had tried to put God "down"
for dealing with him unfairly, but Job was right on three counts which
his buddies had all missed:
  
1.  He was right in assuming that in this life the wicked do not
always get paid back in full.
  
2.  He was right in assuming that the same things can befall a saint
which befall a rascal.
  
3.  He was right in assuming that since man was a sinner, he needed a
"daysman" or "mediator" to stand for him in the presence of God.
  
"So Eliphaz...did according as the LORD commanded them:  and the LORD
also accepted Job" (v 9).  That is, the Lord accepted Job's petition
on their behalf.  This time Job, himself, got to be the "daysman," or
mediator (v 8).  Since Abraham did this same thing in Genesis 20:17,
we are again reminded of the patriarchal setting of the Book, and once
again, we should make a mental note that if some brilliant grammarian
(with access to "more ancient manuscripts," etc., etc.) pokes his head
through the bushes and tells us that "light from the Dead Sea Scrolls
shows, blah, blah, blah, that Job took place after the time of Moses,"
we should give him the raspberry and send his way a token greeting of
No.  6 squirrel shot.
  
And now, again (for the "umpteenth time"), the fat hits the fire.
  
"And the LORD turned the captivity of Job..." (v 10).
  
With two dozen clear indications that the Book of Job is a future
prophecy (see Preface), the ravening critics of the AV--fundamentalist
foremost--draw out their bloody butcher knives, hatchets, frog
stickers, shivs, daggers, and meat cleavers and begin to hack and
mutilate the Holy Bible like killing was going out of style.  The
truth must not get through!  Forward to the fray!  Quick!  Produce the
"verbally inspired, God-breathed originals" so that no one can find
out the truth!  Get rid of Biblical truth at any cost!
  
1.  "And the Lord restored the fortunes of Job" (Lockman Version,
miscalled "The New ASV").
  
2.  "And the Lord turned Job to repentance" (Jerome's Vulgate).
  
3.  "The literal use of this phrase is common, the metaphorical use of
it uncommon.  Still it is so simple a metaphor.  It signifies, as
Professor Lee remarks:  'a restoration to former happy circumstances'"
(The Pulpit Commentary, p 663).
  
4.  "...turned back the captive condition" (Jehovah's Witness Version: 
NWT).
  
5.  "The Lord restoreth his wealth and happiness" (Taylor Version: 
TLB).
  
6.  "The Lord restored the fortunes..." (Dean Weigle Version:  RSV).
  
7.  "So the Lord restored Job's fortunes..." (Dodd Version:  NEB).
  
Quite naturally, the compromising Amplified Bible (sometimes used by
Oliver Greene) has the Reformation reading and the Communist reading
together in the same verse; that is, the AV text has been adulterated
with the RSV text by putting them together in the same verse. 
Typical.
  
Now the question we need to ask ourselves is this:  "Since when should
the opinions of Dr.  Rawlinson (The Pulpit Commentary) or Dr.  Lee be
taken seriously since neither man believed two-thirds of the Old
Testament?" What are either of these rascals doing making a "METAPHOR"
out of a Biblical prophecy that deals with the Doctrine of the Second
Advent?  It's like Berkhof and Kuyper (plus Shedd, Dabney, Hodge,
Strong, Gill, and Calvin) telling us that the "first resurrection"
(Revelation 20:4-6) is not a bodily, physical resurrection, isn't it? 
Do you know what Paul did to Hymaneaus for teaching that the "first
resurrection" was PAST because it was not a bodily resurrection?  Did
you ever look it up?  Robertson, Machen, Wilson, and Warfield all
taught that the first resurrection was SPIRITUAL only.  Did you see
what the Holy Spirit said about this recognized "scholarship" in 1 and
2 Timothy?  Do you think any of us who really "take our Bible studies
seriously" would go to any man who has been delivered to Satan to get
a "qualified opinion"?  And do you think any of us who believe that
Book are stupid enough to worry about "slandering the dead" or
slandering "the sainted memory of these 'giants' of the faith"?  Why
worry about a sinner who slandered the King James Bible every day of
his life?  These two-faced punks who worry so much about "the due
reverence to the dead," have never failed to slander and vilify the
translators of the AV 1611 asnd the men who defend it (Hills, Ray,
Fuller, Burgon, etc.).  A little "double standard" there, eh Doctor?
  
Verse 10 says "TURNED THE CAPTIVITY," and it says this after 42
chapters, matching the 42 months of the second half of Daniel's
Seventieth Week (see Dan.  9 and Rev.  12, 13), and after seven days
and nights (Job 2:13), matching the seven year period (Dan.  9:25)
where Satan (Job 1, 2) will be persecuting Israel in the land of Edom,
in Uz (Lam.  4:21).  The Book of Job was preceded by a Book describing
the return of the Jews to Palestine and the rebuilding of the Temple
(Ezra and Nehemiah); it is followed by the King Messiah of whom David
(Ps.  1, 2) was a type.  With this much prophetic information
available in an English text which any sixth grade reader could read--
without referring once to any Hebrew or Greek text used by any
scholar--hw do we explain the irrational attack on the verse and then
the blindness which follows it at verse 13?
  
("Crocodile," your aching back!)
  
Psalm 14:7 and 126:1 are the divinely appointed, infallible
authorities for properly interpreting the verse, and what any Hebrew
or Greek scholar may think the verse says can be classified under "N. 
T."--non-essential trivia.
  
Job is a type of Israel:  Cast off, persecuted, rejected, restored,
converted, and blessed.
  
Any system of Bible study, promoted by anyone, that denies that (or
tends to obscure it) is SATANIC.  And if you are gullible enough to
think that Satan could not deceive Christian scholars (like the men
who taught the men who wrote the textbooks used in Christian
universities and colleges (any of them), you have been hoodwinked by
the master deceiver (Rev.  12:9).  No Roman Catholic or Communist ever
got that far into Biblical theology to worry about altering Job 42:10. 
Only Fundamentalists and Conservzatives were anxious to cover up the
truth on that verse; the Catholics and Communists would change any
verse on no other grounds than the desire to replace the Authorized
Text.
  
Verses 11 and 12 point far beyond the oppressed saint on the ash heap
in Uz; they point out the great prophecies of Isaiah 2, 11, and Amos
9, and scores of other prophetic passages which were discounted by
Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Warfield, Machen, Calvin, and Moulton as
"figurative metaphors."
  
"...they bemoaned him and comforted him" (v 11).  {Cf.  Isa.  40:1;
49:13, Jer.  31:13, and Zech.  1:17.}
  
"...every man also gave him a piece of money" (v 11).  Compae this
with the wealth the Jews will have in the Millennium following the
Tribulation:  Romans 11:15, 23, Isaiah 2:1-4; 66:10-14, 2 Chronicles
9:1-12, etc.  With passage after passage confirming the great
prophetic typology found in Job, Biederwolf, Umbreit, Steiger, Roesch,
Starke, Briggs, Welhausen, Riehm, Pusey, Tuch, Zahn, Vincent, Strong,
Swete, Rosenmuller, Oosterzee, Duhm, Schulten, Kalisch, Keil, Kurtz,
Hitzug, Weiss, Trench, Paulus, Plummer, Cheyne, Davidson, Oehler,
Gunkel, Gratz, Dillman, Bleek, Bahr, Osiander, Schults, Semler,
Riddle, Moulton, Reinke, Tischendorf, Westcott, Hort, Driver,
Kennicott, Horton, Knobel, Lowth, and Bennett go sailing by the
passage like a regatta in a 60-mile-an-hour wind--hot air and all. 
They, and their "kin," represent 5,000 books by 1,000 authors, through
1,000 years of Church history, with nothing in them on the passage
apart from what any Christian layman could find in his own language: 
Nothing else except pure unadulterated BALONEY.
  
"So the LORD blessed the LATTER END of Job" (v 12).  This is the
fifteenth warning that the Book of Job is a future prophecy:  Compare
Numbers 24:14, Hosea 3:5, Daniel 10:14, Jeremiah 23:20, and James 5.
  
"He had also seven sons and three daughters" (v 13).  At verse 13(!)
we see why there was such a concerted rush by the Catholics,
Conservatives, Liberals, Fundamentalists, Neo-evangelicals, and
Atheists to get rid of verse 10.  For as sure as Job's ten children
vanished in Chapter 1, they show up again in Chapter 42!  To get rid
of this Biblical Truth as quickly (and as neatly) as possible, Taylor
(TLB) inserts "seven MORE sons" and "three MORE daughters" into the
passage.  In spite of God's warning to Kenneth Taylor (see Prov. 
30:6), he has added in his notes that (p.  44) Job now has TWENTY
children.
  
By whom, brother Taylor?
  
Where was Job's wife?
  
I said, "WHERE WAS JOB'S WIFE?"
  
Do you remember "Lot's wife"?  Didn't Jesus Christ tell you to
remember "Lot's wife"?
  
How could any man who "took his Bible studies seriously, etc."
overlook the fact that Job and Lot are both types of Tribulation
saints?  And if they were, what would their WIVES be doing bearing
children at the end of the Tribulation?  When a commentator or revisor
ignores the Bible's own dictionary for types, he develops a sort of
"Disneyland exegesis" like Kenneth Taylor's.
  
Quickly, will someone come to brother Taylor's aid and help him get
rid of the truth?!  Ah yes!  Dr.  Rawlinson (The Pulpit Commentary, p. 
664) is on hand!  he is "a good man" who "loves the Lord, etc.," and
surely he will not mislead us!  "We need not suppose however that
either the round numbers or the exact duplicity are historical."
(Rawlinson) Ahh, so!
  
But the, on the other hand--are you listening?  All of you stuffed
shirts who think that The Pulpit Commentary was the word of
"scholars"--"we need not suppose that any writer in The Pulpit
Commentary knows what he's talking about when he attacks the history
of the inspired account on the grounds of his own stupidity."
  
(There are two ways to look at everything, aren't there?  I thought
you would agre.  There is nothing like being broadminded, is there?)
  
Job had ten more children, did he, and then lived 140 years after
that, did he?  Look at verse 16.  This would put Job at 190 years old
if he was 50 when God restored him.  That is, ten children before he
was 50 and then ten more, without a wife, after he was 50.  Now tell
us something!  In Job's time, Isaac lived to be 180, but he never
married till he was 40 years old, and then he had two children in the
next 140 years.  Are we to suppose that Job's wife--who told him to
curse God and die, and then never showed up again!--had twenty
children, ten of them after Job was 50?  One a year till he was 60? 
One every two years till he was 70?  It took a miracle to give Abraham
a child after he was 90, and Isaac had no children after he was 60. 
Aren't our commentators stretching things a little to make us think
that the same woman who told Job to curse God and die came back to him
and added ten more tax exemptions to his family before he got to be
70?  And if that doesn't stretch your credulity, aren't you just as
capable of believing the following:
  
1.  There is a resurrection of dead saints at the end of the
Tribulation.
  
2.  This resurrection includes the dead of Israel (Ezek.  37:1-12).
  
3.  Job believes in a resurrection in the "latter day" (Job 19:24).
  
4.  Christ's resurrection had an addenda on it which pictures this
resurrection (Matt.  27:52, 43).
  
5.  Israel gets her dead back later (Isa.  26:17-19).
  
6.  Abraham, the father of the nation of Israel, believed that he
would get his dead son back again (Gen.  22:5, John 8:56).
  
Job got 'em back (v 13)!
  
The reason, then, for the exact number (seven and three) is
"simplistic" (cliche by socialistic educators, 1970-1980) in the
extreme:  These are the children whom Job lost in Chapter One.  The
fact that the names of the daughters are given in verse 14 caused the
expositors to reject the mass of evidence given above, for it is
either assumed that Job would not have renamed the first three
daughters, or it is assumed that the names are different names--not
the original ones.  But neither of these assumptions could counter-
balance the testimony of Ezekiel, John, Genesis, Isaiah, and Matthew
where they deal with a Post-tribulation resurrection (Matt.  24:31)
and rapture of Tribulation saints (Ezek.  37).  Job 42 is the exact
duplicate of these matters, including the restoration of Israel and
their subsequent Millennial blessings.
  
Plainly, and scripturally, Job got his children back from the dead. 
And nothing more is ever said about Job's wonderful "help mate." She
wound up with Lot's wife.  Like Lot's wife (Gen.  19:26), she seems to
have "turned aside after Satan" (1Tim.  5:15), and Lot and Job finish
their trips alone.  Lot finishes as a widower with daughters while Job
finishes as a widower with sons and daughters and then grandsons (v
16).  Longevity is one of the characteristics of the Millennium (Isa. 
65) since many of the Edenic conditions will be restored (Isa.  2; 11;
33, Amos 9:13, Rom.  8:18-22).  "The right of the firstborn" (Deut. 
21:17) belongs to Israel as the "first born son" (Exod.  4:23) of
Jehovah, and the right of the firstborn guarantees a "double portion"
(Deut.  2:17), so that is exactly what Job gets (v 10).  The
commentators and revisors who made the Book ninety percent
"figurative" or "metaphorical" must now suddenly take the phrase
"twice as much" (v 10) literally, after altering the first half of the
same verse!  But Job did NOT get back two wives; he didn't even get
back the shrew he had; therefore, to say that "twice as much" refers
to people is stretching the text to accommodate the unbelief of the
scholar in the typology so clearly presented in the Book of Job.
  
"So Job died" (as they will in the Millennium) "being old and full of
days" (v 17).  As a little girl said in Sunday School:  "All of God's
stories have happy endings." The unhappy endings are found in the
historical narratiges of those who follow science, education, money,
humanism, sex, religion, philosophy, or the devil to their own
destruction.  "The end of the wicked" (see comments under Prov.  4:14;
10:6; 10:24,25; 15:9, and 11:10, 23) is easily predictable:  It is
outer darkness and a lake of fire.  Where a man repents as Job did and
accepts God's revelation as superior to his own wisdom--at the same
time accepting God's judgment against himself as a sinner--the end is
also predictable:  A new heaven and a new earth, and an eternity with
a Sinless Saviour in New Jerusalem (see Rev.  21; 22, and comments).
  
And though the screams of wounded and dying Christians will yet echo
up over the highways and skyscrapers of America, and though the groans
and cries of tortured saints may resound off the walls of jails and
hospitals in the next few years, the end is predictable:  new
Jerusalem.  The worst thing that can happen to a child of God is
GLORY, in the end, or the "final analysis." In the "end" Job comes out
healthy, wealthy, successful, honored, blessed, and happy.  The man
who cried out in his misery:  "Oh my God, though you SLAY ME, yet will
I trust in thee!" lived to see the day when he cried:  "Oh my God, how
good Thou hast been to me!" The man who spit out:  "Leave me alone
till I swallow down my own spit!" survived to proclaim:  "Bless the
Lord, oh my soul, and all that is within me bless His holy name!"
  
"For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy
to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us...for our
present light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a
far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory...for we are more than
conquerors through Him that loved us!" (2 Cor.  4:17 and Rom. 
8:18,37).
  
The great Book (which is quoted more than sixty times in the Bible)
teaches us seven great lessons, and the plain, simple-minded, ordinary
Christian can learn all of them without referring to any version by
anyone other than the King James 1611 AV.
  
1.  We learn that "all those who live godly" shall suffer persecution.
  
2.  We learn that God uses Satan to glorify himself.
  
3.  We learn that the best of men are sinners.
  
4.  We learn that some things cannot be explained apart from
supernatural revelation.
  
5.  We learn that God's ways are not our ways, nor His thoughts our
thoughts.
  
6.  We learn that "all things work together for good to them that love
God."
  
7.  We learn that God will be merciful and loving to any sinner who
forsakes his own righteousness and accepts God's righteousness.
  
And thus we shall close the covers of the Book of Job and leave our
nomadic friend from Selah, Petra, in Uz, strolling through his
pastures, chatting with his friends, playing with his grandchildren,
offering sacrifices for his sons "lest they curse God in their
hearts," and maintaining his integrity--this time without trusting in
it!  As the ancient scroll rolls together, Job's "hedge" (Job 1:10)
has been rebuilt by the One who planted it, and in the portals of
eternity when the Adversary approaches, he is warned:  "No deal.  Lay
off him.  He has been tried and tested.  You'll have to pick on
someone else."
  
"Behold, we count them happy which endure.  Ye have heard of the
patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is
very pitiful, and of tender mercy" (James 5:11).
  
And it would seem like a shame to add one more critical note to such a
sublime ending, but lest we should "rest on our laurels" or be "at
ease in Zion" may we not forget that the corrupt Alexandrian
manuscripts promoted to the seat of authority by Stewart Custer (Bob
Jones University), Roberston (Louisville, Southern Baptist Seminary),
Machen (Princeton and Westminster), Wuest (Moody Bible Institute),
Afman (Tennessee Temple), and John R.  Rice (Sword of the Lord: 
Recommendation on New ASV) have deliberately violated Proverbs 30:6,
exactly the way Kenneth Taylor violated it (see v 13) by adding
fifteen words to the book of Job.  These words are so obviously
fraudulent that not even the idolators who worshipped Sinaiticus and
Vaticanus dared to copy out their text at this point.  The text of the
Septuagint here reads as follows:  "It is written that he will rise
again with those whom the Lord raises up."
  
Nothing of the kind is "written" or "has been written" or ever will be
"written" by the Author of the book of Job.  This final scribal
blooper is just as spurious as the depraved Greek text it came from--
the Greek text used for the International Bible and The New American
Standard Bible, and Taylor's paraphrase.  If 100% of the "godly"
Christian scholars recommended this text, they would still be
recommending a depraved counterfeit of God's truth.
  
"Crocodile," your bridge-work.
90CTXT           *>	  ICR0490 TXT           l>&+  rocodile" your C.  B.  antenna!
  
The description given is that of a fire- and smoke-breating, seven-
headed dragon, moving up and down through the universe, and leaving a
Milky Way (v 32) behind him.  The "sea" of verse 31 has no more
reference to the Mediterranean, or the Sea of Galilee, than it does to
Evil Knievel's Grand Canyon rocket (Cf.  Ps.  77:19, Ezek.  32:6, Rom. 
10:7, etc.).  The thirteen words in verse 34 point directly to the
King of Terrors himself and tell Job that if he is trusting in his own
righteousness, the "king of the children of PRIDE" (v 34) is his daddy
(John 8:44)!!
  
What a compliment to a whale or a "crocodile!"
  
In closing our comments on the passage, we will point out more red
light to the Bible believer:  That is, the radical fanaticism of the
lunatic fringe (the new translations) in covering up the Roman
Catholic act of "penance" (done for Satan) in the passage.  Verse 25,
in the God-given, God-preserved, God-honoured Text (AV, 1611), says
that "By reasons of BREAKINGS they purify themselves," indicating the
masochism and self-mutilation of the black-robed Baalite priesthood of
1 Kings 18, who worshipped the Queen of Heaven (Jer.  44:19) with
priests called "father" (Judg.  17:10).  The Pro-Roman versions
(anything published since 1800) have altered this verse (v 25) to the
following:
  
1.  The Dodd Version (NEB):  "bewildered at the lashings of his tail."
  
2.  The Taylor Version (The Living Bible):  "terror grips them."
  
3.  The Lockman Foundation (Amplified):  "because of terror and
crashing they are beside themselves."
  
4.  The Apostate's Version (New ASV):  "because of the crashing they
are bewildered."
  
5.  The Dean Weigle Version (RSV):  "at the crashing they are besides
themselves." {Observe the ecumenical agreement here between Bob Jones
University and the National Council of Churches; they both recommended
the same corruption.}
  
6.  The Jehovah's Witness Version (NWT):  "due to consternation they
get bewildered."
  
7.  Adam Clarke:  "No version, either ancient or modern appears to
have understood this verse, nor is its true sense known" (Clarke's
Commentary, p.  190).  But, Adam!  Since you changed the order of the
verses (see 40:1 and comments) and got rid of the devil before you got
into the chapter, why would anyone with any sense (who believed the
Bible) think your opinion about the matter was worthy of
consideration?  After all, didn't the ASV, New ASV, RSV, and the New
RSV simply follow the corrupt Alexandrian Septuagint written 200 years
after Paul died?  Yes, they did.  Origen's corrupt African
manuscripts--which contain the Apocrypha as part of the Old
Testament--read:  "When he turns himself he terrifies all the
quadrupeds of the earth." Umbreit says "they flee away bewildered." J. 
F.  and Brown say "they wander from the way." Dummelow says that the
"deer are afraid that slip among the broken places." The Pulpit
Commentary winds up our funny farm with "terror dances before him."
  
Well, how about this:  "When a whale thrashes his tail swimming down
to the Dead Sea, and blows frost out of his nose, all the antelopes
dancing with the crocodiles slap the pedal to the floor board."
  
See how it's done?  You just make a "do-it-yourself Bible."
  
You see how it's done?  If you don't understand the passage you:
  
1.  Pretend the AV (1611) is "obscure."
  
2.  Pretend that some Hebrew or Greek text is "clearer."
  
3.  Then when you can't expound the Hebrew or the Greek as it stands
(in ANY text), you invent a reading that is clear to YOU and then tell
the stupid Christian that "no one can understand the passage." Did you
get that "NO ONE?" That is, when a Greek or Hebrew scholar can't
master what a Boy Scout could handle, then "no one can understand the
passage!" How is that for egotistical crackpot fanaticism?"
  
The reference plainly is to Communist Catholics in the United Nations
(1980-199) under the Antichrist (Rev.  13, 17) mutilating themselves
to purify themselves from sin, as in the purifying rites of Bacchus
and Pluto (see Hislop, The Two Babylons); DRUNKEN DANCING accompanies
the "worship service" (see Exodus 32 and comments).
  
To make sure that you miss the truth of the passage entirely, the
Taylor paraphrase (The "Living"--go play with yourself, Buster--Bible)
mistranslates the last verse to read:  "he is monarch of all that he
sees," instead of "he is a KING over all the children of PRIDE." This
deft twist of the wrist, which Taylor in his naivete calls "a
paraphrase" (and which buyers of the propaganda accept as a
"paraphrase"), leaves the modern Christian facing a passage that deals
with no creature known to God, man, or the devil.  Taylor's Leviathan
can stand up (v 25), but he is not in the deep (v 31), and he is not
in the "sea" (v 31).  But he moves like a steam roller (v 30), and he
has flesh (v 23), yet no one can capture him (v 9) or get at him with
a spear, harpoon, or iron javelins (vv 7 and 29).
  
("Crocodile," your Aunt Harriet's can opener!)
  
Crocodiles ARE caught with spears, they can be captured, and skinned
(and sometimes eaten); they are not without "fear," and plenty of
natives "stir them up" (v 10) to get their hides, their eggs, or just
run them off from the laundry at the river's edge.  Taylor's
"Leviathan" is a Disneyland joke.
  
And here we shall end comment on the greatest chapter in the Bible on
Satan.  There is not as much material in Ezekiel 28, Revelation 13, or
Isaiah 14 as there is here; so, we may expect the destructive critics
of the Reformation text (Christian universities and colleges first) to
either reject the text, alter the text, confuse the text, or
misinterpret the text, and then cover up for the Devil so he can slip
through undetected.  God said that He would NOT "conceal his parts,
nor his power, nor his comely proportion" (v 12), but they are
concealed by the deceitful, slovenly, infidelic works of Conservative
and Orthodox scholars who are always mouthing off about "the
fundamentals of the faith."
  

  
CHAPTER FORTY-TWO
  

  
42:1-6 THEN Job answered the Lord, and said, I know that thou canst do
everything, and that no thought can be withholden from thee.  Who is
he that hideth counsel without knowledge?  therefore have I uttered
that I understood not; things too wonderful for me, which I knew not. 
Hear, I beseech thee, and I will speak:  I will demand of thee, and
declare thou unto me.  I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear: 
but now mine eye seeth thee.  Wherefore I abhor myself, and repent in
dust and ashes.
  
You've got to hand it to Job; he does "gird up his loins like a man,"
and he does answer (v 4).  The only catch is that this time he lets
his soliloquy of Chapter 31 drop like a hot rock.  Not one word that
breathes of "self" passes Job's lips in this final speech, nor does
Job waste any breath pointing out the hypocrisy and inconsistencies of
his "comforters." Face to face with the Supreme One, to whom "everyone
of us will give account," Job accounts for himself (Rom.  14:12)
exactly as you and I will.  In spite of the efforts of Liberals (and
Conservatives and Fundamentalists) to "cool" his confession, Job says
the right thing (see v 6) in the right way, and God Himself bears
witness to it in verse 7.
  
"I know thou canst do everything" (v 2).  {Cf.  Ps.  145 and 1 Chron. 
28.}
  
"Who is he that hideth counsel...?" (v 3).  Job repeats the Lord's
question of 38:2 and explains, "I uttered that I understood not;
things too wonderful for me, which I knew not" (v 3).  And this is
what Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar should have chimed in with on the
spot; all three of them had said plenty "without knowledge."
  
"I have heard of thee by the hearing of the ear; but now mine eye
seeth thee" (v 5).  Job is looking at the Theophany who appeared to
Abraham (Acts 7:2), Manoah (Judg.  13:3), and Jacob (Gen.  32:24). 
This is no "astronaut" (it's spelled right!) speaking out of a flying
saucer.  The UFO "humanoids" (and the literature on ancient
civilizations and mysteries) are as unlike the Angel of the Lord (or
Christ) as Charles Addams' cartoons are unlike Thoreau's Walden.  If
Jesus Christ were a "humanoid" from outer space, He was the most
critical, negative visitor this earth ever had (see Matt.  23 and John
9).  He professed to have come this way for warfare and division (Luke
12:51) and would only save people who trusted Him as much as they
trusted God.  Furthermore, He stated flatly that there wasn't any
point in wasting money on helping poor folks out when you could give
the money to Him (John 12:8).  (My how "characteristic" of the
"helpful humanoids" who keep popping up to show men how to "live
together peaceably!") Imagine a UFO occupant telling you that bigger
and better wars are on the way (Matt.  24), that you should get
yourself a weapon for personal defense (Luke 22), and that the only
hope for this planet lay in the finished blood atonement of a JEW! 
Ever read about any "Venusian," "Atlantean," or "Lemurian" who talked
that way?!  Christ mentions His "Father" over fifty times in His
discourses, and these discourses take up less than fifty pages; you
never heard a UFO occupant spend five minutes talking about HIS
"father"!!  When one of God's real "men from outer space" shows up--
see Genesis 16:9 for example--he doesn't ask where the power supply
is; he just butchers 185,000 men (without a "ray gun" or chemicals)
and goes on about his business (2 Kings 19:35).
  
"Wherefore I abhor MYSELF, and repent in dust and ashes" (v 6).  Atta
boy, Job!  Sock it to 'em!  Sock it to these "positive thinking," "I'm
okay, you're okay, we're all okay," girls!  Lay it on 'em Job!  Phase
out these goody-goody "youth conflict, dynamic tension" kiddies who
are always getting you to "find yourself," and "have faith in your
fellow man." Put it on 'em Job--abhor YOURSELF!
  
This is the classical example of contrition; it is not sorrow for SIN,
it is sorrow for SELF.  It is not sorrow for what we have done, but
for what we ARE (2 Cor.  7:10).  When Balaam.  Saul, Pharaoh, and
Judas say, "I have sinned," it means no more than "Oops, I got
caught!" But when David and the Prodigal Son say it, the angels start
a jubilee in Heaven (Luke 15, Ps.  51).  "Godly sorrow" (2 Cor.  7:10)
is sorrow for BEING WRONG, nor just DOING WRONG.  No Catholic,
Communist, Campbellite, or Charismatic will ever fully understand this
great Biblical truth, for all of them leave a certain margin for SELF
in their plans for salvation--both for the salvation of individuals
and the salvation of "society." As proof of this, let us examine some
of the last 35 trays full of garbage that have been served up to the
Christian as "Bible versions."
  
1.  The Dodd Version (NEB):  "Therefore I melt away."
  
2.  Jehovah's Witness Version (NWT):  "I make a retraction."
  
3.  Dean Weigle Version (RSV):  "I despise myself."
  
4.  New Apostate Version (New ASV):  "Therefore I retract." (Observe
how this translation--recognized by John R.  Rice and Bob Jones, III--
has adopted the Arian reading of the Jehovah's Witness Bible, The New
World Translation.)
  
5.  The Old Apostate Version (ASV, 1901):  Margin--"loathe my words."
  
6.  J.  F.  and Brown:  "I abhor the rash speeches." (You see, the
matter is as we have stated it.  J.  F.  and Brown cannot imagine Job
abhoring what he IS, only what he has SAID.)
  
7.  Little Red Riding Hood:  "I am sorry I spoke so hastily."
  
8.  Charlie Brown:  "Sorry 'bout that."
  
9.  The Great New, Brand Spanking New, NEW Authorized Revised Common
Standard Ecumenical International, Federal New, NEW NEW AMERICAN
STANDARD VERSION:  "I realize that my isolated orientation developed a
sectarian mentality with no adhesive factor to sensitize the expanded
world view with its renewed emphasis on the deversifiability of a
cruciform ethic, where a scientific break-through could give a
significant thrust to relationable structures in the blankety, blank,
blank, blank..."
  
Anything but the truth.
  
The word "ABHOR" (AV, 1611) is too strong for the stomachs of the
modern Fundamentalists and Conservatives, for the word means
"something detested with extreme repugnance." And when did any modern
revisor (saved or lost), feel that way about himself when confronted
with the Authority of the Holy Bible?  Job looks at himself like a man
would look at the rotting body of a dead frog, and that is the "look"
which puts a man in line with Job 15:16--right on target.  It isn't
"man is the measure of all things"; it is "I am a man of UNCLEAN LIPS"
(Isa.  6).  It isn't "worthy of the noble name of MAN"; it is "depart
from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord" (Luke 5:8).  It isn't "I think
therefore I am"; rather it is "Lord, what wilt thou have ME to do?"
(Acts 9).  Get it straight.  Not one of those wilfully ignorant, self-
deceived idiots from Socrates to Sartre had any more idea where he (or
you) was headed (or how to get there) than a blind bollweevil in a
blizzard.  There is more real power in an ounce of negative truth than
15,000 tons of "positive thinking" where that positive thinking is the
self-induced hallucination of a Bible-rejecting Pharisee.  Now Job is
in a position where God can bless him!  And the Almighty never fails
to meet His own obligations (Gen.  18:18)!
  
42:7-17 And it was so, that after the Lord had spoken these words unto
Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled
against thee, and against thy two friends:  for ye have not spoken of
me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.  Therefore take
unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant Job,
and offer up for yourselves a bunt offering; and my servant Job shall
pray for you:  for him will I accept:  lest I deal with you after your
folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which is right, like
my servant Job.  So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and
Zophar the Naamathite went, and did according as the Lord commanded
them:  the Lord also accepted Job.  And the Lord turned the captivity
of Job, when he prayed for his friends:  also the Lord gave Job twice
as much as he had before.  Then came there unto him all his brethren,
and all his sisters, and all they that had been of his acquaintance
before, and did eat bread with him in his house:  and they bemoaned
him, and comforted him over all the evil that the Lord had brought
upon him:  every man also gave him a piece of money, and every one an
earring of gold.  So the Lord blessed the latter end of Job more than
his beginning:  for he had fourteen thousand sheep, and six thousand
camels, and a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she asses.  He had
also seven sons and three daughters.  And he called the name of the
first, Jemima; and the name of the second, Kazia; and the name of the
third, Kerenhappuch.  And in all the land were no women found so fair
as the daughters of Job:  and their father gave them inheritance among
their brethren.  After this lived Job an hundred and forty years, and
saw his sons, and his son's sons, even for four generations.  So Job
died, being old and full of days.
  
Verse 10 is the key to proper interpretation of the passage, and since
not one Fundamental or Conservative scholar ("godly" or otherwise)
ever paid any attention to what the Biblical text said where it
crossed his "training," they quite naturally missed the greatest
prophetic truth in the entire passage:  Job's children were
resurrected.
  
Verse 10 placed the Book of Job "smack dab" down on Psalm 126:4,
Zephaniah 2:7; 3:20, Amos 5:27, and Jeremiah 33:7, 11, 26.  That is,
it does if you believe in the scriptural method of comparing
"spiritual things with spiritual" (1 Cor.  2:13) instead of comparing
scripture with nineteen centuries of scholarly fungus.  If you believe
in ravaging the text and tearing it to pieces with the murderous
scholarship of the "recognized authorities," then, of course, you can
never find the cross-reference to Truth.  One must never forget that
real Bible students who really DO "take their Bible studies seriously"
never waste five minutes with the slime and algae of the Revision
Committees (any and all, since 1800) when trying to find Biblical
Truth.  The Revision committee of 1881-1884 knew nothing of Pre-
millennial truth, though Darby and Moody were preaching these truths
while the committee was at work destroying the Receptus of the
Reformation, from which the truths were revealed.  The Revision
committee of 1901 knew nothing about the corruption of the Alexandrian
text, although Burgon and Scrivener had been documenting it publicly
for thirty years.  The Revision committee of 1952 (RSV) knew nothing
about Daniel's Seventieth Week, although Scofield and Larkin had
expounded it world-wide before 1930.  The Revision committees of 1959-
1970 (New ASV) knew nothing about Tribulation salvation, the Mark of
the Beast, the chapter and verse system of the AV, the seven
resurrections, the three raptures, or the doctrine of the Kingdom,
although Bible believers had been preaching and teaching these truths
ten to thirty years before the committee sat down at the table to
undermine the truth of God.  What little Bible the Lockman Foundation
and the faculty at Bob Jones University knows, they got from Larkin
and Scofield, who published all of their works before 1940 and most of
them before 1920.  And the same may be said of any group of
professional hucksters engaged in making a living by changing the
Authorized Text.  They have no knowledge of anything that anyone
needs, and if they needed it, anyone could find it without consulting
the "pros" for anything.  All the Bible they know they got from Bible
believers who preceded them anywhere from ten to 500 years.  You will
find nothing in any book John R.  Rice ever wrote (aside from personal
illustrations of practical experience in the ministry--which any
minister has) that was not clearly presented by one to ten writers
fifty years before Rice was converted.  You may read the entire set of
books by Kenneth Wuest from cover to cover, and you will not find ONE
doctrinal truth stated from ANY Greek text (or study) that is not
clearly stated by Peiters and Scofield fifty to sixty years before
Wuest wrote his first book.  You may read any set of books by any
"recognized" Fundamental scholars since 1930, and you will only be
reading the work of a man who God has showed nothing to since Larkin
and Scofield got their mateiral (1890-1930) from a King James 1611
Authorized Version.  It is true that occasionally Larkin and Scorield
(as Spurgeon and Torrey) yielded to the pressure of the "godly
brethren," who always were around to tempt them to sin against the
Bible.  Once in awhile you will find an isolated quotation from an RV
(or a reference to the "Greek") in the writings of these men; this was
done in a moment of weakness ("ALL have sinned!") when they wanted to
be "accepted" as Bible scholars.  But these men got their revelations
from the same place that Carey, Goforth, Livingstone, Brainerd,
Edwards, Wesley, Tennant, Finney, Sam Jones, Bob Jones, Sr., Frank
Norris, Billy Sunday, and Peter Cartwright got theirs:  A King James
1611, Authorized Version.
  
And if you want to put one of these man-pleasing, manfollowing,
copycats on the spot, just ask him this:  "Sir, would you please show
me one thing--just ONE--you have learned from your studies of the
'original languages' that I can't find in a dime store King James
Bible?" And then watch him hit the skids!  All you asked for was ONE;
surely he can show you ONE!  Just ONE will do.  (All a linguist does,
if he is Orthodox, is use the "original language" to prove what any
Bible believer already knows, or can find out by reading a man who
didn't refer to the "originals.")
  
"My wrath is kindled against thee..." (v 7).  The speech is aimed at
Eliphaz, but it includes his two buddies:  "For ye have not spoken of
me the thing that is right, as my servant JOB hath" (v 7).  In the
first place, Job did say, "I have sinned" (7:20), and none of his
comforters said that about themselves one time in 38 chapters.  It is
true that The New English Bible, The "Living" Bible, the RSV, and the
grossly corrupt ASV (old or new) have all altered Job 7:20 so that Job
did NOT "speak that which was right," but changing Job 7:20 to read
"if I have sinned," or "if I sinned," etc., doesn't relieve the
evangelical apostates of their responsibility to God.  Job DID say, "I
have sinned," and that was the right thing to say.  The irresponsible
Fundamentalists who slapped the truth out of Job's mouth sinned
without saying it themselves, but "be sure yor sin will find YOU out."
He did say, "I abhor myself," and that was the right thing to say. 
What the new versions--"in the modern, updated English"--say Job said,
is what he did NOT say, and till heaven and earth pass away God will
not write His Book like Machen, Cheyne, Warfield, Keil, Robertson,
Delitzsch, Olson, Weniger, Bauer, Hort, Aland, Metzger, Thieme,
Origen, Gesenius, and Walvoord THINK it should be written.  {We have
never referred to Robertson, Warfield, Machen, and Hort as
"unbelievers" or "liberals" in regard to John 3:16, but since the
apostasy within the body of Christ has always been carried on by saved
people who "love the Lord," (to quote one destructive critic of the
AV), who are "loyal to verbal inspiration" (to quote another two-faced
hypocrite), we are not really concerned with "liberals" or "Neo-
evangelicals" at all; what we have to deal with in the last half of
this century is puffed-up, bloated, egotistical, SAVED stuffed-shirts
who think they are smart enough to correct God's Book simply because
they have been exposed to nineteen centuries of scholarly trash.  What
we have to deal with is men like A.  T.  Robertson, Warfield, Wuest,
Hort, Machen, etc., who became deluded, self-deceived dupes in the
hands of Satan, as he sought to overthrow biblical Authority--not the
"fundamentals." These men trained the faculties who trained the
faculties who are now training young men for a full-time ministry of
correcting and repudiating the words of God.  They were tools for the
greatest apostasy the world has ever seen, and nothing that the
Catholics or Liberals pulled off between 1582 and 1980 could match it. 
We may say, without fear of anyone (or consideration of anyone's
feelings), that these "Conservatives" did more to destroy the
character and manhood of American Christianity than the National
Council of Churches, the Communist Party, and the Roman Catholic
Hierarchy.  Their damage to the minds and ministries of 50,000 young
preachers (1890-1980) is simply incalculable, and it will never be
computated accurately until the Judgment Seat of Christ.}
  
"Therefore take unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams..." (v 8). 
The reader will observe that the requirement places the time element
(see comments on date of writing in the Preface) back to Gentile
worship before the Law.  Numbers 23:1 and 14 shows that Balak and
Balaam recognized the sacrifice of Job 42:8 as the standard sacrifice. 
"Lest I deal with you after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of
me the thing which is right, like my servant Job" (v 8).  Then, Job
was right all along, even when he was wrong.  He was wrong (v 3), in
that, he had tried to justify himself and had tried to put God "down"
for dealing with him unfairly, but Job was right on three counts which
his buddies had all missed:
  
1.  He was right in assuming that in this life the wicked do not
always get paid back in full.
  
2.  He was right in assuming that the same things can befall a saint
which befall a rascal.
  
3.  He was right in assuming that since man was a sinner, he needed a
"daysman" or "mediator" to stand for him in the presence of God.
  
"So Eliphaz...did according as the LORD commanded them:  and the LORD
also accepted Job" (v 9).  That is, the Lord accepted Job's petition
on their behalf.  This time Job, himself, got to be the "daysman," or
mediator (v 8).  Since Abraham did this same thing in Genesis 20:17,
we are again reminded of the patriarchal setting of the Book, and once
again, we should make a mental note that if some brilliant grammarian
(with access to "more ancient manuscripts," etc., etc.) pokes his head
through the bushes and tells us that "light from the Dead Sea Scrolls
shows, blah, blah, blah, that Job took place after the time of Moses,"
we should give him the raspberry and send his way a token greeting of
No.  6 squirrel shot.
  
And now, again (for the "umpteenth time"), the fat hits the fire.
  
"And the LORD turned the captivity of Job..." (v 10).
  
With two dozen clear indications that the Book of Job is a future
prophecy (see Preface), the ravening critics of the AV--fundamentalist
foremost--draw out their bloody butcher knives, hatchets, frog
stickers, shivs, daggers, and meat cleavers and begin to hack and
mutilate the Holy Bible like killing was going out of style.  The
truth must not get through!  Forward to the fray!  Quick!  Produce the
"verbally inspired, God-breathed originals" so that no one can find
out the truth!  Get rid of Biblical truth at any cost!
  
1.  "And the Lord restored the fortunes of Job" (Lockman Version,
miscalled "The New ASV").
  
2.  "And the Lord turned Job to repentance" (Jerome's Vulgate).
  
3.  "The literal use of this phrase is common, the metaphorical use of
it uncommon.  Still it is so simple a metaphor.  It signifies, as
Professor Lee remarks:  'a restoration to former happy circumstances'"
(The Pulpit Commentary, p 663).
  
4.  "...turned back the captive condition" (Jehovah's Witness Version: 
NWT).
  
5.  "The Lord restoreth his wealth and happiness" (Taylor Version: 
TLB).
  
6.  "The Lord restored the fortunes..." (Dean Weigle Version:  RSV).
  
7.  "So the Lord restored Job's fortunes..." (Dodd Version:  NEB).
  
Quite naturally, the compromising Amplified Bible (sometimes used by
Oliver Greene) has the Reformation reading and the Communist reading
together in the same verse; that is, the AV text has been adulterated
with the RSV text by putting them together in the same verse. 
Typical.
  
Now the question we need to ask ourselves is this:  "Since when should
the opinions of Dr.  Rawlinson (The Pulpit Commentary) or Dr.  Lee be
taken seriously since neither man believed two-thirds of the Old
Testament?" What are either of these rascals doing making a "METAPHOR"
out of a Biblical prophecy that deals with the Doctrine of the Second
Advent?  It's like Berkhof and Kuyper (plus Shedd, Dabney, Hodge,
Strong, Gill, and Calvin) telling us that the "first resurrection"
(Revelation 20:4-6) is not a bodily, physical resurrection, isn't it? 
Do you know what Paul did to Hymaneaus for teaching that the "first
resurrection" was PAST because it was not a bodily resurrection?  Did
you ever look it up?  Robertson, Machen, Wilson, and Warfield all
taught that the first resurrection was SPIRITUAL only.  Did you see
what the Holy Spirit said about this recognized "scholarship" in 1 and
2 Timothy?  Do you think any of us who really "take our Bible studies
seriously" would go to any man who has been delivered to Satan to get
a "qualified opinion"?  And do you think any of us who believe that
Book are stupid enough to worry about "slandering the dead" or
slandering "the sainted memory of these 'giants' of the faith"?  Why
worry about a sinner who slandered the King James Bible every day of
his life?  These two-faced punks who worry so much about "the due
reverence to the dead," have never failed to slander and vilify the
translators of the AV 1611 asnd the men who defend it (Hills, Ray,
Fuller, Burgon, etc.).  A little "double standard" there, eh Doctor?
  
Verse 10 says "TURNED THE CAPTIVITY," and it says this after 42
chapters, matching the 42 months of the second half of Daniel's
Seventieth Week (see Dan.  9 and Rev.  12, 13), and after seven days
and nights (Job 2:13), matching the seven year period (Dan.  9:25)
where Satan (Job 1, 2) will be persecuting Israel in the land of Edom,
in Uz (Lam.  4:21).  The Book of Job was preceded by a Book describing
the return of the Jews to Palestine and the rebuilding of the Temple
(Ezra and Nehemiah); it is followed by the King Messiah of whom David
(Ps.  1, 2) was a type.  With this much prophetic information
available in an English text which any sixth grade reader could read--
without referring once to any Hebrew or Greek text used by any
scholar--hw do we explain the irrational attack on the verse and then
the blindness which follows it at verse 13?
  
("Crocodile," your aching back!)
  
Psalm 14:7 and 126:1 are the divinely appointed, infallible
authorities for properly interpreting the verse, and what any Hebrew
or Greek scholar may think the verse says can be classified under "N. 
T."--non-essential trivia.
  
Job is a type of Israel:  Cast off, persecuted, rejected, restored,
converted, and blessed.
  
Any system of Bible study, promoted by anyone, that denies that (or
tends to obscure it) is SATANIC.  And if you are gullible enough to
think that Satan could not deceive Christian scholars (like the men
who taught the men who wrote the textbooks used in Christian
universities and colleges (any of them), you have been hoodwinked by
the master deceiver (Rev.  12:9).  No Roman Catholic or Communist ever
got that far into Biblical theology to worry about altering Job 42:10. 
Only Fundamentalists and Conservzatives were anxious to cover up the
truth on that verse; the Catholics and Communists would change any
verse on no other grounds than the desire to replace the Authorized
Text.
  
Verses 11 and 12 point far beyond the oppressed saint on the ash heap
in Uz; they point out the great prophecies of Isaiah 2, 11, and Amos
9, and scores of other prophetic passages which were discounted by
Matthew Henry, Adam Clarke, Warfield, Machen, Calvin, and Moulton as
"figurative metaphors."
  
"...they bemoaned him and comforted him" (v 11).  {Cf.  Isa.  40:1;
49:13, Jer.  31:13, and Zech.  1:17.}
  
"...every man also gave him a piece of money" (v 11).  Compae this
with the wealth the Jews will have in the Millennium following the
Tribulation:  Romans 11:15, 23, Isaiah 2:1-4; 66:10-14, 2 Chronicles
9:1-12, etc.  With passage after passage confirming the great
prophetic typology found in Job, Biederwolf, Umbreit, Steiger, Roesch,
Starke, Briggs, Welhausen, Riehm, Pusey, Tuch, Zahn, Vincent, Strong,
Swete, Rosenmuller, Oosterzee, Duhm, Schulten, Kalisch, Keil, Kurtz,
Hitzug, Weiss, Trench, Paulus, Plummer, Cheyne, Davidson, Oehler,
Gunkel, Gratz, Dillman, Bleek, Bahr, Osiander, Schults, Semler,
Riddle, Moulton, Reinke, Tischendorf, Westcott, Hort, Driver,
Kennicott, Horton, Knobel, Lowth, and Bennett go sailing by the
passage like a regatta in a 60-mile-an-hour wind--hot air and all. 
They, and their "kin," represent 5,000 books by 1,000 authors, through
1,000 years of Church history, with nothing in them on the passage
apart from what any Christian layman could find in his own language: 
Nothing else except pure unadulterated BALONEY.
  
"So the LORD blessed the LATTER END of Job" (v 12).  This is the
fifteenth warning that the Book of Job is a future prophecy:  Compare
Numbers 24:14, Hosea 3:5, Daniel 10:14, Jeremiah 23:20, and James 5.
  
"He had also seven sons and three daughters" (v 13).  At verse 13(!)
we see why there was such a concerted rush by the Catholics,
Conservatives, Liberals, Fundamentalists, Neo-evangelicals, and
Atheists to get rid of verse 10.  For as sure as Job's ten children
vanished in Chapter 1, they show up again in Chapter 42!  To get rid
of this Biblical Truth as quickly (and as neatly) as possible, Taylor
(TLB) inserts "seven MORE sons" and "three MORE daughters" into the
passage.  In spite of God's warning to Kenneth Taylor (see Prov. 
30:6), he has added in his notes that (p.  44) Job now has TWENTY
children.
  
By whom, brother Taylor?
  
Where was Job's wife?
  
I said, "WHERE WAS JOB'S WIFE?"
  
Do you remember "Lot's wife"?  Didn't Jesus Christ tell you to
remember "Lot's wife"?
  
How could any man who "took his Bible studies seriously, etc."
overlook the fact that Job and Lot are both types of Tribulation
saints?  And if they were, what would their WIVES be doing bearing
children at the end of the Tribulation?  When a commentator or revisor
ignores the Bible's own dictionary for types, he develops a sort of
"Disneyland exegesis" like Kenneth Taylor's.
  
Quickly, will someone come to brother Taylor's aid and help him get
rid of the truth?!  Ah yes!  Dr.  Rawlinson (The Pulpit Commentary, p. 
664) is on hand!  he is "a good man" who "loves the Lord, etc.," and
surely he will not mislead us!  "We need not suppose however that
either the round numbers or the exact duplicity are historical."
(Rawlinson) Ahh, so!
  
But the, on the other hand--are you listening?  All of you stuffed
shirts who think that The Pulpit Commentary was the word of
"scholars"--"we need not suppose that any writer in The Pulpit
Commentary knows what he's talking about when he attacks the history
of the inspired account on the grounds of his own stupidity."
  
(There are two ways to look at everything, aren't there?  I thought
you would agre.  There is nothing like being broadminded, is there?)
  
Job had ten more children, did he, and then lived 140 years after
that, did he?  Look at verse 16.  This would put Job at 190 years old
if he was 50 when God restored him.  That is, ten children before he
was 50 and then ten more, without a wife, after he was 50.  Now tell
us something!  In Job's time, Isaac lived to be 180, but he never
married till he was 40 years old, and then he had two children in the
next 140 years.  Are we to suppose that Job's wife--who told him to
curse God and die, and then never showed up again!--had twenty
children, ten of them after Job was 50?  One a year till he was 60? 
One every two years till he was 70?  It took a miracle to give Abraham
a child after he was 90, and Isaac had no children after he was 60. 
Aren't our commentators stretching things a little to make us think
that the same woman who told Job to curse God and die came back to him
and added ten more tax exemptions to his family before he got to be
70?  And if that doesn't stretch your credulity, aren't you just as
capable of believing the following:
  
1.  There is a resurrection of dead saints at the end of the
Tribulation.
  
2.  This resurrection includes the dead of Israel (Ezek.  37:1-12).
  
3.  Job believes in a resurrection in the "latter day" (Job 19:24).
  
4.  Christ's resurrection had an addenda on it which pictures this
resurrection (Matt.  27:52, 43).
  
5.  Israel gets her dead back later (Isa.  26:17-19).
  
6.  Abraham, the father of the nation of Israel, believed that he
would get his dead son back again (Gen.  22:5, John 8:56).
  
Job got 'em back (v 13)!
  
The reason, then, for the exact number (seven and three) is
"simplistic" (cliche by socialistic educators, 1970-1980) in the
extreme:  These are the children whom Job lost in Chapter One.  The
fact that the names of the daughters are given in verse 14 caused the
expositors to reject the mass of evidence given above, for it is
either assumed that Job would not have renamed the first three
daughters, or it is assumed that the names are different names--not
the original ones.  But neither of these assumptions could counter-
balance the testimony of Ezekiel, John, Genesis, Isaiah, and Matthew
where they deal with a Post-tribulation resurrection (Matt.  24:31)
and rapture of Tribulation saints (Ezek.  37).  Job 42 is the exact
duplicate of these matters, including the restoration of Israel and
their subsequent Millennial blessings.
  
Plainly, and scripturally, Job got his children back from the dead. 
And nothing more is ever said about Job's wonderful "help mate." She
wound up with Lot's wife.  Like Lot's wife (Gen.  19:26), she seems to
have "turned aside after Satan" (1Tim.  5:15), and Lot and Job finish
their trips alone.  Lot finishes as a widower with daughters while Job
finishes as a widower with sons and daughters and then grandsons (v
16).  Longevity is one of the characteristics of the Millennium (Isa. 
65) since many of the Edenic conditions will be restored (Isa.  2; 11;
33, Amos 9:13, Rom.  8:18-22).  "The right of the firstborn" (Deut. 
21:17) belongs to Israel as the "first born son" (Exod.  4:23) of
Jehovah, and the right of the firstborn guarantees a "double portion"
(Deut.  2:17), so that is exactly what Job gets (v 10).  The
commentators and revisors who made the Book ninety percent
"figurative" or "metaphorical" must now suddenly take the phrase
"twice as much" (v 10) literally, after altering the first half of the
same verse!  But Job did NOT get back two wives; he didn't even get
back the shrew he had; therefore, to say that "twice as much" refers
to people is stretching the text to accommodate the unbelief of the
scholar in the typology so clearly presented in the Book of Job.
  
"So Job died" (as they will in the Millennium) "being old and full of
days" (v 17).  As a little girl said in Sunday School:  "All of God's
stories have happy endings." The unhappy endings are found in the
historical narratiges of those who follow science, education, money,
humanism, sex, religion, philosophy, or the devil to their own
destruction.  "The end of the wicked" (see comments under Prov.  4:14;
10:6; 10:24,25; 15:9, and 11:10, 23) is easily predictable:  It is
outer darkness and a lake of fire.  Where a man repents as Job did and
accepts God's revelation as superior to his own wisdom--at the same
time accepting God's judgment against himself as a sinner--the end is
also predictable:  A new heaven and a new earth, and an eternity with
a Sinless Saviour in New Jerusalem (see Rev.  21; 22, and comments).
  
And though the screams of wounded and dying Christians will yet echo
up over the highways and skyscrapers of America, and though the groans
and cries of tortured saints may resound off the walls of jails and
hospitals in the next few years, the end is predictable:  new
Jerusalem.  The worst thing that can happen to a child of God is
GLORY, in the end, or the "final analysis." In the "end" Job comes out
healthy, wealthy, successful, honored, blessed, and happy.  The man
who cried out in his misery:  "Oh my God, though you SLAY ME, yet will
I trust in thee!" lived to see the day when he cried:  "Oh my God, how
good Thou hast been to me!" The man who spit out:  "Leave me alone
till I swallow down my own spit!" survived to proclaim:  "Bless the
Lord, oh my soul, and all that is within me bless His holy name!"
  
"For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy
to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us...for our
present light affliction, which is but for a moment, worketh for us a
far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory...for we are more than
conquerors through Him that loved us!" (2 Cor.  4:17 and Rom. 
8:18,37).
  
The great Book (which is quoted more than sixty times in the Bible)
teaches us seven great lessons, and the plain, simple-minded, ordinary
Christian can learn all of them without referring to any version by
anyone other than the King James 1611 AV.
  
1.  We learn that "all those who live godly" shall suffer persecution.
  
2.  We learn that God uses Satan to glorify himself.
  
3.  We learn that the best of men are sinners.
  
4.  We learn that some things cannot be explained apart from
supernatural revelation.
  
5.  We learn that God's ways are not our ways, nor His thoughts our
thoughts.
  
6.  We learn that "all things work together for good to them that love
God."
  
7.  We learn that God will be merciful and loving to any sinner who
forsakes his own righteousness and accepts God's righteousness.
  
And thus we shall close the covers of the Book of Job and leave our
nomadic friend from Selah, Petra, in Uz, strolling through his
pastures, chatting with his friends, playing with his grandchildren,
offering sacrifices for his sons "lest they curse God in their
hearts," and maintaining his integrity--this time without trusting in
it!  As the ancient scroll rolls together, Job's "hedge" (Job 1:10)
has been rebuilt by the One who planted it, and in the portals of
eternity when the Adversary approaches, he is warned:  "No deal.  Lay
off him.  He has been tried and tested.  You'll have to pick on
someone else."
  
"Behold, we count them happy which endure.  Ye have heard of the
patience of Job, and have seen the end of the Lord; that the Lord is
very pitiful, and of tender mercy" (James 5:11).
  
And it would seem like a shame to add one more critical note to such a
sublime ending, but lest we should "rest on our laurels" or be "at
ease in Zion" may we not forget that the corrupt Alexandrian
manuscripts promoted to the seat of authority by Stewart Custer (Bob
Jones University), Roberston (Louisville, Southern Baptist Seminary),
Machen (Princeton and Westminster), Wuest (Moody Bible Institute),
Afman (Tennessee Temple), and John R.  Rice (Sword of the Lord: 
Recommendation on New ASV) have deliberately violated Proverbs 30:6,
exactly the way Kenneth Taylor violated it (see v 13) by adding
fifteen words to the book of Job.  These words are so obviously
fraudulent that not even the idolators who worshipped Sinaiticus and
Vaticanus dared to copy out their text at this point.  The text of the
Septuagint here reads as follows:  "It is written that he will rise
again with those whom the Lord raises up."
  
Nothing of the kind is "written" or "has been written" or ever will be
"written" by the Author of the book of Job.  This final scribal
blooper is just as spurious as the depraved Greek text it came from--
the Greek text used for the International Bible and The New American
Standard Bible, and Taylor's paraphrase.  If 100% of the "godly"
Christian scholars recommended this text, they would still be
recommending a depraved counterfeit of God's truth.
  
"Crocodile," your bridge-work.
90CTXT           *>	  ICR0490 TXT           l>&+  h.  He directeth it under the whole heaven, and
his lightning unto the ends of the earth.  After it a voice roareth: 
he thundereth with the voice of hsi excellency; and he will not stay
them when his voice is heard.  God thundereth marvellously with his
voice; great things doeth he, which we cannot comprehend.  For he
saith to the snow, Be thou on the earth; likewise to the small rain,
and to the great rain of his strength.  He sealth up the hand of every
man; that all men may know his work.  Then the beasts go into dens,
and remain in their places.  Out of the south cometh the whirlwind: 
and cold out of the north.  By the breath of God frost is given:  and
the breadth of the waters is straightened.  Also by watering he
wearieth the thick cloud:  he scattereth his bright cloud:  And it is
turned round about by his counsels:  that they may do whatsoever he
commandeth them upon the face of the world in the earth.  He causeth
it to come, whether for correction, or for his land, or for mercy.
  
The passage is one of the greatest in the Old Testament on the rapture
of Tribulation (or church age) saints.  Naturally, Dr.  Barton Payne
and Dr.  Biederwolf failed to find it when listing their compendiums
on "Prophecy" and the "Second Coming." Both men named are Pre-
millennial Fundamentalists; so, once again, we are faced with the
violent and terrible truth that being a "Fundamentalist" doesn't
guarantee that a Christian is a BIBLE BELIEVER.  Several things are of
note in the passage which were overlooked by the educated
Conservatives who sat in judgment on the King James Bible:
  
1.  Someone's heart is not only trembling (v 1), but "is moved out of
his place" (v 1), as the "day star" arises in the "heart" of the
Christian (2 Peter 1:19) when he rises at the first resurrection.
  
2.  The noise of God's "voice" (v 2) is THUNDER (v 4), exactly as it
is written in John 12:28,29.  The lightning is directed "unto the ends
of the earth" (v 3), clearly matching Matthew 24:27, where a Post-
tribulation rapture of tribulation saints is in the context.
  
3.  Somebody is sent on their way when this blast goes off, for the
wording states:  "He will not stay THEM when his voice is heard" (v
4).
  
Now what is the answer of the majority of "recognized scholars" (who
"agree," etc.) to this obvious, scriptural evidence concerning the
phenomena of 1 Corinthians 15:5-55 and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18?  Here
is a perfect test case (among several dozen already listed) to show
the Bible believing preacher, teacher, or student the difference
between Bible believing Scholarship and Bible-rejecting
Fundamentalism, the difference between Christian Education and
Christian Understanding, the difference between reverent, serious
Bible study, and the obscene and blasphemous nonsense carried on by
the faculty members of Biola, Midwestern, Southeastern, Northwestern,
Mid-South, Southwest by Northeast, and South-southwest by North-
northeast, etc.
  
1.  The "THEM" of verse 4 is a "misprint." It should have been "who
can assign the limits to thunder and lightning?" (Clarke, Ibid., p. 
162).
  
2.  The word "THEM" (v 4) is a reference to snow (!).  This is the
work of Williams (Ibid., p.  293) a Pre-millennial, Hyper-
dispensationalist.
  
3.  The word "THEM" (v 4) is lightning (J.  F.  and Brown and The
Amplified Bible).
  
4.  The word "THEM" (v 4) is the "voice of his majesty" (Living
Bible).
  
5.  The word "THEM" (v 4) was a reference to men DYING (Septuagint).
  
6.  The word "THEM" (v 4) was completely removed from the NEB (Dodd).
  
7.  Kline and Heavenor give up any attempt to even explain the verse.
  
8.  The word "THEM" (v 4) has been converted to "lightnings" in the
grossly corrupt New ASV, recommended by John R.  Rice and Bob Jones,
III.  Dummelow reads "flashings and thunderclaps."
  
There, now, how is that!?  We have listed two Post-millennial
Conservatives, two apostate Liberals, two dead orthodox Conservatives,
two Pre-millennialists, and two Bibles recommended as "RELIABLE"
translations by John R.  Rice, Stuart Custr, Reuben Olson, Bob Jones
III, Billy Graham, and the Lockman Foundation!  Where could one find a
more "happy" spirit of ecumenicism, as all seek to be "all things to
all men that by all means" (see the baloney in Rice's book on I Am a
Fundamentalist, where he uses the same alibi for cooperating with
Modernists) that they may replace the God-breathed words of Divine
Authority with the man-made nonsense of superstitious idiots.
  
Let us approach this crowd (inclusive of Fundamentalists and
Conservatives as well as Liberals and Apostates) exactly as God the
Holy Spirit would have us do it; that is, let us begin by throwing out
100% of all their interpretations, no matter who suggested them or who
believed them.  If "dedicated, godly, good men," whose "vast labors"
and "hours of research" produced these interpretations, let us handle
them properly:  Let us discard them like a marked deck.  And let us
say as reverently as we know how (of their "unquestioned loyalty to
the word of God") the only thing that a real believer could say
prayerfully:  PIFFLE.
  
Observe:  Rapture (Job 37), advent (Job 38).
  
Observe:  The man of Sin (Job 40), the Son of Perdition (Job 41).
  
Observe:  When the Lord speaks (John 12:28) it is mistaken for thunder
or the voice of the Archangel (John 12:29)--"Mah Lawd is inna dey
thundah, de trumpet sound withinna mah soul!  Ah ain't got long to be
heah!"
  
Observe:  Thunder can "speak" (Rev.  10), and you can explain rain as
an "electronic action," or lightning as "positive and negative
charges" (or ionized particles) till you are Black (Muslim) and Blue
(Angel) in the face, and it will never overthrow the words of truth. 
With the direction of the Advent in the chapter (v 22), with the manna
falling to feed Israel (v 6, Job 38:22), with the Tribulation and
Millennium related to Israel (v 13), and the "latter rain" (v 6, Joel
2:23:  Oh yeah, mean!  What punk told you that was the Holy Spirit?)
right in the context, 100% of the "recognized," Pre-millennial
Conservatives who "agree" that they are "good" and "godly," are just
as blind as an unsaved Christ-rejecting sinner, dead in trespasses and
sin.  (Typical "recognized" scholarship as found in the Lockman
Foundation, promoted by Moody Bible Institute).
  
"He sealeth up the hand of every man; that all men may know his work"
(v 7), because the absolute surety of the Divine hand is found in the
human hand.  No two sets of fingerprints are exactly alike.  To add
vengeance to condemnation, the Lord has just mentioned the "snow" (v
6) in the previous verse.  You see, when 180,000,000,000 flakes are
falling every day, somewhere, no two of them are alike.  Any man can
know God's work (v 7), for every man "may behold it afar off" (36:25). 
You (and your political constituents) are blank fools if you think
that "mother nature" or "evolutionary processes" could produce such
phenomena under the flexible and unpredictable "laws" of chance and
"statistical probability." A random evolution that is so careful that
it refuses to make two sets of fingerprints alike and, at the same
time, is so careless that it can't keep a dinosaur alive is a pretty
haphazard affair, you will have to admit.  If no two snowflakes match,
the "evolutionary processes" have certainly gone a long way around
left end to accomplish NOTHING.  If one millionth of that care and
energy had been expended in keeping vitamins and minerals in the
ground, anyone could live in good health, for 200 years, on bread and
beans.
  
When the great rain of God's strength comes (v 6), or the great snow
(v 6), then "the beasts go into dens, and remain in their places" (v
8); the bears hibernate and the cats and dogs head for shelter.
  
"Out of the south cometh the whirlwind" (v 9), except in the case of
the Second Advent (Ezek.  1:4), where it comes out of the North (in
relation to the planet).  However, even this whirlwind will move South
to North (Mt.  Sinai to Mt.  Olivet) after the Lord descends into our
atmosphere.  Since these truths are completely hidden to Hal Lindsay
and Kirban (and any other modern "Prophetic" writer), they usually do
what Clarke does with the verse:  He denies that the whirlwind (v 9)
is a real whirlwind, and then alters the word "south" to "chambers."
(Nice work; if you're too stupid to know what you're talking about,
then attack the Bible.  It goes on all the time, in every classroom in
America, from Pensacola Christian College to Hyles-Anderson.)
  
The cold wind that produces "frost" (v 10) comes from the North (v 9),
and it is equated with "the breath of God." And the "breadth of the
waters is straitened" (v 10) in the sense that when water freezes, it
expands till it covers the waters and prevents them from moving.  Now,
notice, thoughout all of this, the constant equatiing of nature's
forces with God's actions (see Ps.  147:8, 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 18),
and wherever the Bible does this, the modern response is one of two
assumptions:
  
1.  The writers are presumed to be using figurative expressions in
poetic form (see the Old ASV or the New ASV, and notice how the form
matches the New RSV and The New English Bible.  No!  Check it!  Don't
holler about "terminology," you prejudiced bigot.  CHECK IT!) That is,
the writers are pretending that God is responsible for these things,
where He really is not.
  
2.  Being "primitive" and "unacquainted with the Inductive Scientific
method," they wrongly attributed to God things that were nothing more
than the natural reactions of materials and chemicals which showed up
gradually (and naturally) without any supernatural intervention.
  
We will discard both of these modern religious dogmas (or credal
statements) as being little more than panicky attempts by
superstitious pagans to cut God out of time, life, and history.  If
any of us knew how much God really had to do with frost, rain, snow,
hurricanes, floods, crops, famines, heat waves, typhoons, tidal waves,
and "dry spells," we might go back to praying for our groceries
instead of looking to the "great white father" in the "white" house,
and the Committee for "price controls." If you believe that God
controls Life and Death (see Job 1, 2)--and what Christian doesn't
believe this?--why have you suddenly decided that certain elements
which produce life and death (crops, rain, hurricanes, earthquakes,
famines, etc.) are incidentals, or "ACCIDENTALS," determined by the
caprice of the natural elements?  Isn't this position rather
inconsistent?  Doesn't the Communist or Atheist have a much more
tenable position when he just cancels out God altogether?  If God can
nmber the "hairs on my head" (Matt.  10:30) and count the sparrows as
they fall (Matt.  10:29), am I to believe that the "cold front" and
the "low pressure area" are produced by "the weather"?  On a morning
so cold that the squirrels are pushing the jack rabbits to get them
started, am I to assume that God had nothing to do with the reading of
the thermometer?  When it is so hot that the dogs chasing the cats are
walking, am I to assume that God is not the author of the temperature? 
Do I assume that the foggy weather over Dunkirk (May, 1940)--which
saved the BEF from annihilation--was "mother nature at work?" And look
at this one:  "Who can stand before HIS cold?" (Ps.  147:17). 
Napoleon (Russia, 1812) couldn't; Adolph Hitler (1944) couldn't.  Are
we to believe that it was an "accident" that made Napoleon and Hitler
attack West to East with a Russian winter coming on?  And if it would
have snowed "anyway," and the temperatures would have dropped below
zero "anyway" (yes, we've been to college too), why didn't Hitler
cross the channel instead of attacking Russia, or why didn't he begin
operations in April instead of June, or why didn't the "lend lease"
tanks from the USA to Russia sink the Atlantic, or why didn't Napoleon
sign an alliance with Russia against Germany, or...?  You can't
overrule God's providential hand on time and history with all of the
depraved "rational" powers of the degenerate "scientific" mind.  Men,
in a flooded mine shaft, have seen water rise steadily to a mark on a
beam, and, upon claiming a Scriptural promise and crying out to God,
they have seen the water stop at the mark, and an hour later, recede. 
Men have raised their sails in the doldrums, without a breath of wind
to encourage them, and in answer to prayer, they have seen the sails
billow and the ship take off at three knots.  POWs have run for their
lives in fresh fallen snow, and had a snow storm cover their tracks
from their pursuers within an hour of their flight.  Men, adrift on
rafts in an open sea, have prayed for rain, and have had a
thundershower come up from a clear horizon in less than ten hours. 
Men have prayed for rain to stop when two more inches on the level of
a lake, or river, would have meant a flood disaster; the rain stopped. 
The rain turns off and on, many times, in answer to prayer (1 Kings
18, Rev.  11:6), and you are a credulous dupe, indeed, to believe that
rainfalls and droughts can be explained apart from the One who causes
them to "correct" His land (v 13); it is His land, His rain, and His
sun and His clouds and His atmosphere (Rom.  11:36), and if He says
"drought," you couldn't make rain with five witchdoctors, a rain
dance, ice pellets, and a government ecological handout of
$12,000,000.  If God says, "Pour!" you couldn't stop that rain with a
battery of artillery, two cobalt bombs, a solar plant, and the Space
Center at Houston (see Job 38:16, 27).  Elihu continues his lecture to
Job.
  
37:14-18 Hearken unto this, O Job:  stand still, and consider the
wondrous works of God.  Dost thou know when God disposed them, and
caused the light of his cloud to shine?  Dost thou know the blaancings
of the couds, the wondrous works of him which is perfect in knowledge? 
How thy garments are warm, when he quieteth the earth by the south
wind?  Hast thou with him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as
a molten looking glass?
  
The phenomena we have been discussing is called "the wondrous works of
God" (v 14), not the "marvels of evaporation and condensation." No man
knows when God disposes the clouds; for there were no clouds before
Genesis 9:13, as far as anyoe can tell, and since 95% of the
"qualified scholars" don't believe in a Universal Flood (Gen.  6-8),
they can only guess as to when "clouds" showed up.  These "guesses"
vary from 900,000,000 years (on earth) to 400,000,000,000,000 years
(dust clouds in outer space).  But, again, these "clouds" are more
than those which a man can see over his head, observe:  "the light of
HIS cloud" (v 15) is in reference to a particular cloud, as it is
found in Revelation 14:14 and Ezekiel 1:4.  Now, we have commented on
our own insufficiency in these matters (see 36:29, 30) as well as the
matters of Exodus 25, which see.  Verse 18 is plainly a reference to
the top of the great deep (Gen.  1:1-3) which is FROZEN (38:30), and
this "deep" is no more the Atlantic or Pacific ocean than it is your
front yard birdbath.  The crystalized (Rev.  4:6) "sea of glass" (Rev. 
15:2) is NORTH (37:22) beyond Alpha Draconis, and if the "Space
Centers" at Houston and Canaveral cannot discern this, they are merely
shooting par for the course.  No major scientist ever lived who
believed Genesis 1 literally, and that includes the entire group of
Christian scholars engaged in writing apologetic works on catastrophic
geology (Rimmer, Price, Morris, Reid, Pattern, Nelson, Davidheiser,
etc.).  The trouble with "his cloud" (v 15) is that it hearkens back
to Job 26:7 and 8, which see.  Practically, we may marvel at the
"balancings of the clouds." However, we may marvel even where these
"clouds" are the ones we see.  (See Job 28:25 and comments on the
"balance.")
  
Job's garments are "warm" (v 17) when God quiets the earth by the
South wind, which is sometimes called the "Sirocco." The sky that is
"spread out...as a molten looking glass" (v 18) is plainly the
"firmament" of Genesis 1:6-8, not the ionosphere or exosphere.  This
is the "glass" through which we now seek "darkly" (1 Cor.  13:12). 
(No, it's not just a mirror, even though it reflects back more than it
magnifies.  Never mind the Lockman Foundation, just read your Bible
and believe it.) It is "molten" (v 18) because it was poured out by
God (Gen.  1:6) as a solid cast (38:30), and the "ancient Hebrews" (to
cite the modern Liberal) had the concept right while the modern
Astronauts have it wrong--as usual.
  
37:19-24 Teach us what we shall say unto him; for we cannot order our
speech by reason of darkness.  Shall it be told him that I speak?  if
a man speak surely he shall be swallowed up.  And now men see not the
bright light which is in the clouds:  but the wind passeth, and
cleanseth them.  Fair weather cometh out of the north; with God is
terrible majesty.  Touching the Almighty, we cannot find him out:  he
is excellent in power, and in judgment, and in plenty of justice:  he
will not afflict.  Men do therefore fear him:  he respecteth not any
that are wise of heart.
  
Verses 23 and 24 are self-evident and every word in them is true.
  
Verses 19 and 20 hearken back to Job's desire to appear before God "in
court" and speak his piece (23:3-7).  Elihu's thinking is this:  "You
have been telling us that you knew what you would say if you could
address God!  Well we don't have that much sense!  'TEACH US what WE
shall say unto HIM,' if you know it all!" (v 19).  Elihu says that "WE
cannot order OUR speech by reason of darkness" (v 19).  (See 38:2 for
the ethical meaning of this.) God dwells in the "thick darkness"
because the "sea of glass" and the clouds that cover His throne (Job
26) are not visible to a telescope; radar signals could not reach them
in less than 40,000,000 years at a minimum.  We are in the bottom of
the "great deeps," and here, in our sink hole (the back end of an S-
shaped Nebula), we cannot see God unless He withdraws the veil (Acts
7:55) and reveals Himself (Acts 9:5, 6).  "Shall it be told him that I
speak?" (v 20).  Will someone step into God's presence and say, "Lord,
here comes Elihu and he wants to justify himself!" The irony in all of
it is that with the finished work of God's Son (John 19:30), there is
Someone who can stand for us in the "presence" (John 1:4) and tell God
that we speak (Rom.  8:26)!  "If a man speak, surely he shall be
swallowed up" (v 20), the idea being that his words will be his
condemnation (Matt.  12:37), for they will "swallow" him up.  But the
Lord Himself is said to swallow sinners in Psalm 21:9, exactly as the
Devil swallows them in Jeremiah 51:44.  Job's words were swallowed up
in Job 6:3, and he admitted it; not only this, but the earth (Ps. 
106:17), the deep (Ps.  69:15), the grave (Prov.  1:12), and the "lips
of a fool" (Eccl.  10:12) are able to "swallow" men up.
  
Verses 21 and 22 again take us forward to the Second Advent.  We can
say (practically) that the light "which is in the clouds" is
lightning, or that no man can look at the sun when it is shining
(Clarke, Ibid., p.  166).  But all of this has an air about it of,
"avoid the doctrinal import as quickly as possible." This wind cleans
the cloud, it does not blow it away; furthermore, this wind can be
cleaning MEN (v 21), not "clouds." {For the skeptical let us recommend
a careful reading of Ps.  1:4; 35:5, Prov.  25:23, Isa.  11:15; 57:13,
Jer.  18:17, Hos.  13:15, and Acts 2:2.} "Fair weather cometh out of
the north" (v 22).  {Cf.  Prov.  25:23.} "With God is terrible
majesty" (v 22).
  
Gesenius' (who wrote the text books for the professors who taught the
faculty at Bob Jones and Dallas) note on the word "north" is a "beaut"
(cliche 1940-1950).  Since he had no idea what he was saying to start
with, Gesenius says:  "Prop.  hidden, obscure, inasmuch as the
ancients regarded the North as obscure and dark" (Hebrew and Chaldean
Lexicon, p.  715).  Yes they certainly did, and it certainly is.  It
is too bad that "moderns" (not "ancients") don't have access to the
scientific knowledge of the "ancients" (not "moderns").  And it is too
bad that neither the Dead Sea Scrolls, nor the Bodmer Paopyrus, nor
the Vatican MS (see any baloney published on the texts of Aland,
Metzger, and Nestle) couldn't give any Hebrew or Greek Scholar any
light on "the north" that wasn't in print in 1611.  The RV (1884) has
another "beaut," and since they didn't know what they were doing
either, they say:  "Out of the north comes a GOLDEN SPLENDOR." (You
bet it will!  Ezek.  1.) But no one on the RV committee believed the
verse to start with, so what was the point in altering it?  The so-
called "Living" Bible makes no attempt to paraphrase any of the first
clause; Taylor simply pretends it wasn't there.  Instead, he converts
"fair weather" into the sun "shining brightly." I do not remember
seeing the sun "shining brightly" in the NORTH since I have been on
earth, but perhaps my education has been neglected, and I have not
been to all the places that the "qualified meatheads" have been. 
Evidently the 10,000,000 suckers who brought The Living Bible (after
listening to Billy Graham) have access to scientific information that
is still unknown to astronomers in the twentieth century! 
(248,000,000 copies of the AV (1611) were in circulation before Taylor
sat down to mess the Bible up with a "paraphrase.") No one in Job's
area saw the sun in the NORTH one day in his lifetime.  The "golden
splendor" of the ASV (any edition; same bunko) must have been a yellow
Aurora Borealis--a unique "American standard version" of Metaphysics
if you ever saw it, buster.
  
Again--carefully placing all of the revisions and commentaries in the
wastebasket--let us turn to the AV (1611) to see why a compass needle
points NORTH.
  
1.  The city of the Great King (Ps.  48:2) is on "the sides of the
north" and the "sides of the north" (Isa.  14:13) are above the
galaxies (Isa.  14:12-15).
  
2.  The "sides of the north" have to do with a PYRAMID structure (Heb. 
12) called a "Mount" (Isa.  14), and the sea of glass is on top of
this "mount" (Rev.  4, 15); it is called a "HOLY HILL" (Ps.  26:3, 4;
24:3, and 43:3).  The confounding of this mount (every time) with the
earthly Mt.  Zion at Jerusalem is quite typical of the Bible-denying
"Fundamentalists" who blab so much about "serious Bible study." These
allegorizing Alexandrians are about as "serious" in their Bible
studies as Bob Newhart giving a monologue.
  
3.  When the Lord Jesus returns, He returns from the NORTH, past an
"image of jealousy" (Ezek.  8:3) which is between YOU and the "door"
(John 10).  This image of jealousy (Rev.  13:1-18) is clearly
identified in Job 41, which see.  It blocks a sea entrance (Job 41)
which is NORTHWARD (Ezek.  8:1-5).
  
Directions through the Universe, then, are measured South to North
when going UP, and North to South when going DOWN.  The milk-and-bran-
flakes New Scofield Reference Bible was so anxious to obliterate this
truth (in order to get along with unsaved apostates) that it tells us,
on page 1261 (footnote 1), that "the first century cosmology" was so
outdated and archaic that it had to use the "phenomenal language
common to men." (See how it's done?) Now, kiddies, there is nothing
"phenomenal" about North or South unless you are an unsaved Jew like
Einstein, or a Zen Buddhist like Suzuki.  South is DOWN and North is
UP in the Universe, according to a King James AV (1611), and if 100%
of the saved (or lost) physicists and astronomers don't believe that,
it would be of no more significance than a Pope denying eternal
security.  Having rejected Ephesians 3:18 thumbs down, having turned
the Devil into a crocodile (see Job 41:1), and having turned the Son
of God (Dan.  3:25) into "one of the gods," the New Scofield Bible has
given up Bible cosmology for the apologetics of Rimmer and Smith, and
the pity is that you cannot buy one book on the market printed by
Zondervan, Baker, or Eerdmans (or The Sword of the Lord) that does not
waste paper and ink talking about the "recent discoveries which have
given us NEW LIGHT on the Bible since the AV was translated." Why, you
simpering liar, when did anything anyone ever discovered, aside from
the AV text itself, enable you to know what "North" means or what it
stood for in the Bible?  And when did any archaeological discovery of
anything, by anyone since 1611, give any real light on salvation,
prophecy, the new birth, the blood atonement, the Deity of Christ, the
religious history of the world (past, present, or future), or the
unseen world (demoniac or otherwise) that isn't found in the King
James text?  {See some more of this flim-flam in Acts 1:10 in the
NASV, tolerated by Pensacola Christian College.}
  

  
CHAPTER THIRTY-EIGHT
  

  
38:1-7 THEN the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said, Who
is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?  Gird up
now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou
me.  Where was thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? 
declare, if thou hast understanding.  Who hath laid the measures
thereof, if thou knowest?  or who hath stretched the line upon it? 
Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened?  or who laid the
corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all
the sons of God shouted for joy?
  
Now the Lord puts in an appearance for the first time since Job 2.  It
is important to notice that when He shows up He reveals Himself
primarily to Job (38:1), a type of Israel.  Observe, further, that it
is a WHIRLWIND (v 1), and it comes from the NORTH (Ezek.  1) without
consulting anyone on the Scofield board of editors about the
"cosmology" of any scholar in any century (see Nah.  1:3, Amos 1:14,
Zech.  9:14, and comments).  This whirlwind (Jer.  23:19; 30:23) comes
North to South in relation to the globe, and then it moves South to
North up the "King's Highway" (Num.  20-21) from Bozrah ("Petra" in
Edom:  Hab.  3) to Mt.  Olivet (Zech.  14) via Rabbath of the
Ammonites (Numb.  20-24), Ar of Moab (Jer.  48), and Gilgal (1 Sam. 
15:33).
  
The Lord has either ignored Elihu's speech, or else Elihu (as the
author of the Book) has not recorded what God said to him.  Observe
the same thing in Job 42:7 where he again omits any reference to
himself.  The Lord now speaks through the next four chapters, and the
questions which He asks Job in this chapter (38) could not be answered
by any group of scientists in 1980.  As a matter of fact, Harry Rimmer
left (at death) a standing offer of $1,000 to anyone who could prove a
scientific error in the Bible.  During his lifetime, Harry was taken
to court by a "plaintiff" on eight counts in regard to this offer; the
plaintiff's case was thrown out of court, after boring an unsaved
judge to tears.  At a scientific convention, Rimmer got together with
a bunch of scientists in a hotel lobby and challenged them to answer
the 35 questions in Job 38 which God asks Job; there wasn't a man
there who could answer more than 25 of them correctly.  You see, the
average scientist is a man who "studies more and more about less and
less till he knows everything about nothing," so these scientists were
called "specialists." Once they got out of their "field," you had them
where they thought they had the Bible.  The 35 questions in Job 38
cover questions about physics, phonetics, tonal values, light rays,
oceanography, biology, weather, astronomy, philosophy, and geography. 
Where a man could get three fields correctly, he could not get eleven,
and the prodigy is even more marvelous when we consider that the
author of Job is writing more than 3,100 years before Christopher
Columbus set sail.
  
"Who is he that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?" (v 2). 
Job knew nothing of the celestial judgment hall of Job 1 and 2.  He
knew nothing of Satan's charge, what prompted it, how God answered it,
or why God allowed the Devil to go only "so far." God is going to
justify Job and bless him, eventually, but first a good "tongue
lashing" (Heb.  12:5-8) is in order, and if we can get ot with a
verbal rebuke like this (Heb.  12:6-9), we are fortunate indeed.  Job
is accused of obscuring ("darkeneth") the truth about God's dealings
with men by his tirade of Chapters 21 and 31.
  
"Gird now up they loins like a man..." (v 3).  Whew!  Don't you know
something when through Job, then, like it coursed through Adam when
God said, "WHO told thee thou wast NAKED?" (Gen.  3)!  "For I will
demand of thee" (as in Romans 3:2-6) and "answer thou me." Job's
prayer has been answered.  He is going to get "his day in court," and
he is going to get a chance to deal with God directly.  But, brother,
what a "chance"!  It is kind of like the "chance" that unsaved men get
in Revelation 20:11-15.
  
And now the questioning starts:
  
1.  "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth?" No
answer.  There is no way that any man can answer such a question.  A
Zen Buddhist master could answer, "WE KNEW," but that doesn't really
answer it.  A Zen master with Satori can play with the mind and the
imaginations as a professional news writer can play with words, but it
still doesn't answer the question:  "Where wast thou?" You weren't "IN
Christ" if you were "chosen" (see Eph.  1:4 and comments), for John
Calvin forgot that 4,000,000 (or more) Old Testament saints weren't
"in Christ" even after they were "elected," or before they were
"chosen." You weren't "in Adam" because Adam wasn't there, and if you
were in "the mind of God" you couldn't prove it and wouldn't know it. 
"Declare if thou hast understanding" (v 4).  A silence so silent
follows, you could hear a watch ticking in an empty tomb.
  
2.  "Who hath laid the measures thereof if thou knowest?" (v 5).  No
answer.  You didn't, that's for sure; none of your kin folk did,
that's for sure.  A "demiurge" or "created God" (see the apostate New
ASV promoted by Bob Jones University) didn't the gods and devils
didn't (Jer.  10:11).  Who did?  Ninety-eight percent of the
scientists would answer:  "Nobody did; they just happened." And that
kind of an answer would be enough evidence to discard "science"
without a second trial run.  Nothing with measurements, genetic codes,
balances, rotation, substance, shape, and harmony "just happens."
Technically speaking, "science" is supposed to be a "correlated body
of absolute knowledge." If it is, then science is unable to deal with
origins of any kind; the origins of the earth or the solar system are
beyond "scientific scope," and always have been and always will be,
apart from believing the revelation of God in the Bible.  What a
scientist calls "evolution" is only development.  As to the origins of
the earth, or the origin of man, there is no body of scientific
knowledge anywhere outside of Genesis 1, Job 26, 38, and Exodus 23-30. 
The Bible is still the only scientific textbook in print on the origin
of man and the universe; there are no others written by anyone.
  
One of the fundamental laws of physics is that all transformations of
matter which result in the production of energy are the results of
DEGENERATION:  A breakdown from the complex to the simple (not vice
versa).  The "simple" never evolves to the complex where
transformations of this nature occur.
  
3.  "Who hath stretched the line upon it?" (v 5).  You stretch out a
tape measure when laying a brick wall, a sidewalk, a driveway, a
foundation, or a fence.  Who decided that the earth should be 7,927
miles in diameter (at the Equator), with a circumference of 24,894
miles?  Who decided that it would weigh 5,883,000,000,000,000,000,000
tons, with a total land surface of 197,272,000 square miles and an
average ocean depth of 12,500 feet?  Who decided that the earth should
spin at a speed of 1,000 miles per hour at the equator, whirl in an
oval path around the sun at 20 miles per second, at a distance of
around 93,000,000 miles out?  "Declare, if thou hast understanding!"
(v 4).
  
4.  "Whereupon are the FOUNDATIONS thereof fastened?" (v 6).  You
would have had a tough time finding them, for "He hangeth the earth
upon NOTHING" (26:7).  Still this may be a reference to the
foundations which underlie the continents; to what are they fastened? 
A metal core?  A molten core?  Did you ever dig one up and look at it? 
Do you think if no one did it in 1970 A.D.  that anyone sitting near
Job would have done it in 1800 B.C.?  To quote the Associated Press
Almanac of 1973 (p.  343):  "The core at the earth's center is the
least known part of the interior; our knowledge of it stems mostly
from study of seismic waves..."
  
5.  "Who laid the cornerstone thereof; When the morning stars sang
together, and all the SONS OF GOD shouted for joy?" (vv 6, 7).  What
was the first thing (cornerstone) the Creator did when He created the
earth (Gen 1:1) in "the beginning"?  Let's see if the scientists of
1970-1980 can tell us, shall we?  "About 150,000,000,000 years ago,
most scientists believe there were clouds of gas and dust...the
clusters of chemicals began to spin...within it lumps were formed, as
in a pudding...as the millions of years passed ther large lumps became
planets...slowly the planets cooled...some stars were formed like the
sun...after 100,000,000,000 years our solar system evolved...slowly
the crust of the earth cooled...perhaps it took millions of
years...its heat was radiated out into space...the hot matter from
inside came bubbling and boiling...as this cooled the heavier matter
settled back into place, sealing the fiery heat in the center of the
planet...so the center of the earth is probably a gigantic ball of
molten iron...the mantle is perhaps 1,800 miles thick, it is probably
made of iron rich rock...perhaps where the crust below was weakest
these out-pourings kept piling up...most geologists think that a
floating island of lighter granite began to harden on the still molten
sea, or perhaps the granite gathered in great pools...they may have
hardened where they rest today...perhaps the..."
  
Sure, doc, we understand; things are tough all over.
  
But there is more in the question than just this dead end for a modern
"scientist." Stars do have tonal values as well as phonetic values,
and the morning stars can "sing" if they want to, for their rays emit
sounds on certain frequencies.  However, the "morning stars," here are
plainly "stars" like the seven stars of Revelation 1, and they were
with the heavenly "choir conductor" (Ezek.  28) on the morning of
creation (Isa.  14:12), for Lucifer was the "son of the MORNING" in
Genesis 1.1.  {See Pember, Earth's Earliest Ages.} The "sons of God"
are present in Genesis 1:2 (see vv 4, 5, 6) before Adam's wife gave
birth to Seth.
  
38:8-15 Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if
it had issued out of the womb?  When I made the cloud the garment
thereof, and think darkness a swaddlingband for it, And brake up for
it my decreed place, and set bars and doors, And said, Hitherto shalt
thou come, but no further:  and here shall thy proud waves be stayed? 
Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the
dayspring to know his place; That it might take hold of the ends of
the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?  It is turned as
clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.  And from the wicked
their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken."
  
6.  "Who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had
issued out of the womb?" (v 8).  When the seas were formed, what
stopped them from overflowing the land, Job?  Gravitation?  What is
"gravity," Job?  "Well, a portion of matter attracts other portions
with a force directly proportional to the product of the two masses,
and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them,
because lines of force radiate so that even though the masses are only
related to attracting bodies, and have no relation to chemical or
physical conditions of the acting masses or intervening mediums..."
Yes, Job, but what is GRAVITY?  "Well, the independence of gravitation
of any quality but mass, bars the way to any explanation of its NATURE
or SOURCE." (Thank you, Job, for loaning us the Encyclopedia
Americana, Vol.  13, p.  164.  It is amazing how much men have learned
since you sat on the ash-heap!) If the men who wrote the Encyclopedia
Americana in 1969 couldn't answer the question, do you suppose Job
could have?  The proud waves (v 11) go only to a certain point and
then they stop.  A man said that it was because of the "gravitational
pull of the moon." What is "gravitation," doctor?  "Gravity is the
linear acceleration downward of falling bodies due to the GRAVITATION
of the earth." Okay!  One more time, doc:  What is gravitation? 
{Verse 9 is probably the cloud problem we mentioned under 36:29, which
see.  Bars and oors may not be as "figurative" as they look when one
remembers the "windows of heaven" (Gen.  6) and the "lattice work" of
S.  of Sol.  2.  Furthermore, a "cloud" (v 9) is the garment of this
"sea" (v 8), and it wraps this sea up like swaddling clothes wrap up a
new baby (v 9).  The reference is probably to Gen.  1, again.}
  
7.  "Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days?" (v 12).  No, you
haven't.  No scientists, living or dead, ever told the sun what time
to rise and when not to rise (see Exod.  10).  No scientist could slow
the course of the sun in the heavens as Joshua did (Josh.  10), and no
scientist could delay the sun from rising a fraction of a second.
  
8.  Have you "caused the dayspring to know his place; that it might
take hold on the ends of the earth..." (vv 12 and 13)?  The
"dayspring" in the passage is said to be "turned as clay to the seal"
(v 14) and they stand as a garment." The verse is so difficult that
Taylor (TLB) simply strikes out all of verrse 14 and invents a reading
that is not a paraphrase of any Hebrew manuscripts; like many of the
readings in The "Living"--saints preserve us--Bible, it is a piece of
imaginative fiction, inserted at the caprice of the author.
  
How can the "take hold of the ends of the earth?" Well, from the
Divine viewpoint it was simple:  The sun can do it, because the earth
declines North and South between March 21st and December 22nd so that
the sun's rays reach the Arctic and the Antarctic continents. 
Furthermore, the earth is like a seal turning against the sun, which
represents clay; a steel roller, rolling over wax on an envelope, will
leave the imprint everywhere on the wax.  Every inch of the steel
roller is exposed to the wax, and, thus, every mile of this earth is
exposed to the sun as it rotates in passing.  Since none of the Bible
readers for the last 3,000 years were able to believe this passage in
Job, none of them believed Galileo (1546-1642) when he began to talk
like a Bible believer instead of a Roman Catholic.
  
"...and they stand as a garment" (v 14).  The reference was to the
ends of the earth (v 13), and the "ends" in the context, are the
Northern and Southern extremities.  We should not be surprised, then,
to find an Aurora Borealis standing "as a garment" (v 14) at the ends
of the earth.  One can tone down the interpretation and say that as
the earth turns against the sun, the spreading rays of the morning
light make the things on the earth "stand out" like a beautiful
garment draped on something However, "their light" (v 15) is a
reference to the dayspring (v 12) and the sun (v 14).  We are i
exegetical trouble, and before we alter the text to match our
stupidity (see the Septuagint here), let us notice the "broken arm" of
verse 15.  You see, the Antichrist has a bad RIGHT ARM (Zech.  11:17)
because he is a Syrian Jew from Moab (Jer.  48:25) when he gets the
"deadly wound" (Rev.  13) that puts out his RIGHT EYE (Zech.  11:17). 
{Man, did you hear the howl of protest that went up, just then, from
the faculty members of Moody Bible Institute, Fuller Theological
Seminary, Dallas Theological Seminary, Bob Jones University, and
Pensacola Christian College?  Don't those dudes get upset when you
find something deep in the scripture that they couldn't find in the
"original text"?  But you can't really blame them.  After all, they
have been occupied (according to their own profession) in trying to
show you revelation from the word of God, and being unable to do it--
because God would show them nothing--they must feel pretty miserable
to see "new light" continually coming on the Bible, without any
relationship to them or their books, studies, abilities, or talent.}
This matter is mentioned in Psalm 10:15, Jeremiah 48:25, Ezekiel
30:21, 22, 24, and Zechariah 11:17.  Furthermore, we slammed through
verse 12 a little too quickly, in view of the fact that the literal
sun (Ps.  19:3-6) is a type of the bridegroom Who is the "Sun of
righteousness" (Mal.  4:1-3) at the Advent.  After all, the
"dayspring" (v 12) is "from on high" in Luke 1:78, and He comes "To
give light to them that sit in darkness and the SHADOW OF DEATH!"
(Lev.  1:79).  (Ahhh!  There it is!) This explains the statement in
the context (Job 38:13):  "That it might take hold of the ends of the
earth, that the WICKED might be shaken out of it" (v 13).  We are back
on Secnd Advent passages again.  The rising sun of our passage is the
one found in Nahum 3:17, Psalm 83:11, and James 1:11.  So, we read,
"from the WICKED their light is withholden" (see Acts 9:4-7 for the
mid-tribulation appearance of the Lord God to Israel).
  
9.  Can you withhold the sunlight from the wicked and bust their arms
at the same time (v 15)?  All of them?  (Don't forget Job 40:12!)
  
38:16-35 Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea?  or hast thou
walked in the search of the depth?  Have the gates of death been
opened unto thee?  or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death? 
Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth?  declare if thou knwest
it all.  Where is the way where light dwelleth?  and as for darkness,
where is the place thereof, That thou shouldest take it to the bound
thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof? 
Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born?  or because the number
of thy days is great?  Hast thou entered into the treasures of the
snow?  or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail, which I have
reserved against the time of trouble, against the day of battle and
war?  By what way is the light parted, which scattereth the east wind
upon the earth?  Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of
waters, or a way for the lightning of thunder; To cause it to rain on
the earth, where no man is; on the wilderness, wherein there is no
man; To satisfy the desolate and waste ground; and to cause the bud of
the tender herb to spring forth?  Hath the rain a father?  or who hath
begotten the drops of dew?  Out of whose womb came the ice?  and the
hoary frost of heaven, who hath genered it?  The waters are hid as
with a stone, and the face of the deep is frozen.  Canst thou bind the
sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?  Canst thou
bring forth Mazzaroth in his season?  or cant thou guide Arcturus with
his sons?  Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven?  canst thou set the
dominion thereof in the earth?  Canst thou lift up thy voice to the
clouds, that abundance of waters may cover thee?  Canst thou send
lightnings, that they may go and say unto thee, Here we are?
  
The greatest non-commercial quiz program ever presented for "week-day
morning viewers" continues, with no "Jackpot prize," but only the
right to repent and apologize.  The "panel of experts" this time is
one man, and, so far, he has missed nine out of nine.  (Almost like
watching the League of Nations and the United Nations, isn't it?)
  
10.  "Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea...?" (v 16). 
Several of Harry Rimmer's friends (see comments under 38:1-4) missed
this one and insisted there were no springs of water in the "sea," but
there are.  It is true that there were not discovered, for certain,
until after 1910, but when one is fickle and naive enough to follow
"the latest scientific discoveries," he will always be 100 to 1,000
years behind Biblical knowledge.  After all, Biblical knowledge is
advanced revelation; "scientific discoveries" are belated confirmation
of non-essential matters.  There have been no "scientific discoveries"
in the last 2,000 years that have prolonged life for anyone but the
rich, or have made life more tolerable for anyone but the rich. 
America still eats seventy-five percent of the world's food, though
she constitutes six percent of her population.  You have money while
you honor the Bible (see England, Germany, America, etc.); you lose
your shirt (Africa, Asia, China, India, Russia, Mexico) when you honor
the Vatican text of the New ASV, or the multiple "gods" of the Orient. 
"Scientific discoveries" have nothing to do with any of it; never have
and never will.
  
11.  "Hast thou WALKED in the search of the depth?" (v 16).  No, not
even Dr.  Bebee did that.  In 1969, Piccard and Walsh touched down at
35,000 feet below sea level, in the submarine "Trieste," while
exploring the Mariana Trench.  (The Mariana Trench is out by Saipan
and Guam.) The pressure on the sphere was equal to the weight of five
battleships.  They found fish at this level, living in temperatures of
38 degrees.  Do you think that Walsh or Piccard got out and WALKED
(see the text) around?  Well, Job didn't either.  Science, since Job,
batted .000 in 2,000 innings on that one.
  
12.  "Have the gates of death been opened unto thee?" (v 17).  They
were not opened to the faculty at Wheaton or the "translators" of the
Lockman Foundation.  In the ridiculous New ASV, promoted by these
Bible-insulting institutions, one will find the scriptural "gates of
Hell" (Matt.  16:18) privately interpreted to be "the powers of
death":  This is the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church
(see any work by the Knights of Columbus on the passage).  Reading
"POWERS" (or "power") for "GATES" is the standard Roman Catholic
dogma.  Actually (according to the highly scientific King James text),
Hell has gates and bars, keys and oors, and an inner earth location
(if we are to believe Jonah 2:1-9 and Revelation 1:18).  The "doors of
the shadow of death" (v 17) are connected with this place, and we will
stop here while we are still in the running, for once we are caught
between the depths of the sea (v 16) and the breadth of the earth (v
18) where darkness dwells (v 19), and a "death" that has gates which
can open (Rev.  9:11), we are coming close to a "hollow earth"
doctrine, and the kiddies at Piedmont, Dallas, Moody, Wheaton,
Pillsbury, Fuller, Gordon-Conwell, and Westminster will hardly be able
to keep pace with the "original text" no matter how "scientific" they
are.  With a possible "sun" INSIDE the earth (hello, Apollos!) and
maybe even rivers that cannot issue out of the two poles (ah yes!  Job
38:8 and 9)--we will stop before all the scripture babies (any
translator or revisor on any Bible committee since 1800) fall off of
the church bus.  We have not seen the "gates of death," and the
"doors" have not been opened to us, although there are several eye
witnesses who have claimed revelations that we will temporarily omit
from this Commentary.  Suffice it to say that the Bermuda Triangle and
the UFOs are underworld phenomena, not terrestrial phenomena or
celestial phenomena.
  
13.  "Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth?" (v 18).  Well, no
one in Job's day had, although we know now that the earth is about
24,811 miles in circumference around the poles, and about 24,894
around its equator.  The oceans cover more than 139,000,000 million
square feet (70.8%) of the earth's total surface area, to an average
depth of 12,500 feet.
  
14.  "Where is the WAY where light dwelleth?" (v 19):  Not "the PLACE"
as we find it in the absurd "newer translations." The word "way" was
mistranslated to mean "place" in the ASV, New ASV, RSV, New RSV, Good
News, New English Bible, and the International Bible (and other
apostate corruptions) because it is "verbotten" in the Scholars Union
for the King James Bible to be more accurate in scientific matters
than any scientist of Job's time (or Columbus' time, or King James'
time).  You see, light is always moving, and has no real "place,"
unless that place is third heaven (see Gen.  1:3-4 and comments), for
"the light dwelleth with HIM" (Dan.  2:22).  Light does not "dwell" (v
19) anywhere on earth.  The reading, therefore, of the ASV (1901) and
the New ASV (1963) is an attempt to make God--God is speaking to Job,
remember!?--comply with the "scientific brains" of 1800 B.C.  God is
not supposed to have enough sense to word the question the way it is
worded in the Bible.  {In a great Evangelistic Conference in
Indianapolis, Indiana, where a number of "celebrites" met, a notice
was sent out which stated that no one in the conference could
advertise or sell RSV, The Living Bible, Good News for Modern Man, or
the translation by Phillips.  Oddly enough, no mention was made of the
ASV (1901), which is the Greek text of the RSV, nor was any mention
made of the New ASV (1963)--which is the Greek text for "Good News."
The thinking behind all of this lying double-tongued, two-faced flim-
flam was that if Liberals are connected with a translation, it is "of
the devil," no matter what text it came from.  To cover up for this
bunch of Bible-denying reprobates, John R.  Rice wrote personal
letters to prove that no Christian layman had any business
investigating any Greek text to find out where ANY of the newer
translations came from.  You couldn't be any more dishonest and
inconsistent if you were a Black KKK.}
  
15.  "As for darkness, where is the place thereof...?" (v 19).  Now
darkness has a place; it can be located, so the question is "where"
does darkness stay?  Until men got out into outer space no one could
prove it, but late in the twentieth century, Job's question is
answered.
  
16.  Can you take darkness to its boundaries and "know the paths to
the house thereof?" (v 20).  Well, you can't if it is the "land of
darkness" spoken of by Job in Job 10:21 and 22.  Furthermore, the
boundary would be the bottom of the sea of glass we spoke of in 37:22
and 38:13-15, if it were a reference to the darkness of outer space. 
If the direction is UP (never mind the silly note in the New Scofield
"Bible" under 2 Corinthians 12:1-4), the boundary is North.  If the
direction is DOWN, then we are back in the hollow earth again, so we
have to climb out before the astronauts find some opening in the North
end!
  
17.  "Knowest thou it, because thou wast then born?" (v 21). 
Obviously not, if you know about outer and inner darkness, you
wouldn't have gotten the information because you were there, back in
Genesis 1:2-4; you were NOT there.
  
18.  "Or because the number of thy days is great?" (v 21).  Obviously
not.  Job was older when he died than your great-grandfather, and he
didn't know the answer.  If you had to put your finger on a map of the
universe and take "darkness to the bound thereof," (vv 19-20) where
would you stop pointing?
  
19.  "Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow?" (v 22). 
There are some there, you know; Dr.  Schutt says that there are $8.14
worth of nitrates, ammonia, and albuminoid in an acre of ground that
has been covered with one inch of snow.
  
20.  "The treasures of the hail, which I have reserved against the
time of trouble, against the day of battle and war?" (vv 22-23).  If
you were as ignorant as Kenneth Taylor or C.  H.  Dodd (TLB and NEB),
you might think that the hail was only for things like Joshua 10:11,
and although this is true for the battle and war of Revelation 11:19
(which Dodd and Taylor forgot!), one must never forget that the "small
hoar frost" (Exod.  16:14), which melted when the sun came up (Exod. 
16), will be dumped out again (Mic.  7:14 and comments) in the
Tribulation (Rev.  12) to Israel so that they can eat without taking
the "mark" (Lam.  5:9).  {Ah the unsearchable riches of the
Elizabethan English!  How superior its archaiv words are to "living
bibles" and how infallible are its revelations when contrasted with
"reliable translations"!}
  
Still, snow and hail in the "day of battle and war" can turn a victory
into a retreat and a defeat into a massacre.  Readers of Stalingrad
(Heinz Schroeder), The Siege of Leningrad (Ballantine Books), and This
Kind of a War (Fehrenbach) know what snow can do to (or for) an army. 
When the five German divisions around Dmitrevka, Karpovka, Goroditche,
Nov-Alexeyevka, and Baburkin were overrun (November 15, 1942) by
Russian tanks, streams of wounded soldiers had to escape eastward to
Pitomnik and Gumrak.  It had been snowing for weeks and the
temperature was eighteen below zero.  The wounded crawled yard by yard
till they froze to death, or were hauled by their comrades on
tarpaulins, boards, and ammunition cases.  It began to snow again, and
many of the lorries broke down on the road.  Fourteen thousand men
fell on that road, frozen by the icy wind; their life's blood
congealed upon gangrenous wounds and their bodies were crushed beneath
the wheels of fleeing vehicles:  Frozen bones crack like glass.  In
the night snow storm, the drivers could often not see a man (dead or
alive) until their front tires hit him.  Wounded men, screaming and
cursing, tried to hang on to the tail gates of the lorries that passed
them, but they were already full of wounded so that the "boarders"
were either hammered off the tailgates, or the boarders succeeded in
pulling wounded men out of the trucks who froze to death on the road.
  
The battalions that passed over the road to Pitomnik made six miles in
twelve hours; those who survived often passed piles of dead, huddled
together in a frozen ball, twenty to thirty men, with their blood-
soaked bandages, blankets, and uniforms frozen into a solid mass. 
Many a man that night, or the next day, pulled off a boot and his foot
with it; the frozen lower extremity had broken off at the ankle.  When
two planes landed at Pitomnik to "evacuate" the wounded, it began to
snow again; the wounded, trying to get a seat on the planes trampled
each other and half of them were wounded again; twenty of them were
killed in the stampede.  Some moved faster than others, bursting
through the ranks of those with "leg and foot injuries." Those
trampled down into the snows did not scream anymore, but those who
were unable to get into the plane after they got there were screaming;
rifle butts were used by the guards to clear paths to the planes, but
when the guards fought their own way to the doors, they threw away
their weapons and jumped in.  With cabin doors still open and forty
men in a plane (that would hold twenty), the Junkers would take off. 
Those trying to hang on to the wings and tails of thh planes were
hurled off into the path of stretchers where other wounded still lay
on the ground.  One wretched soul retained his grasp on the icy wheels
of a plane until it was 200 feet in the air and then he fell.
  
When the last plane left the Gumrak airport (November 19, 1943) headed
for Germany, 24 men were pushed into a cabin built to hold sixteen
men, while nine men were left outside in the snow (fifteen below
zero).  To get room for the nine men still left outside they had to
throw out cannisters, stretchers, lighting equipment, ammunition,
bandages, and dressings.  At this point, one Lance Corporal, standing
in the door of the plane, jumped out and said to a wounded man, "Bot
my arms are broken chum, but you can't even walk." He gave his place
to the man on the ground and they picked that cripple up and put him
into the plane, leaving his "substitute" on the field.  The machine
was so full they had to hook a belt through the door handles for two
men to hold, because the door could not be closed.  When that plane
took off, a single, lonely soldier sat in the snow at Gumrak with the
collars of his two overcoats turned up and a scarf knotted over his
face.  The pilot said that he had never seen a more lonely man than
that Lance Corporal, sitting in the snow, head raised, staring at the
sky while his salvation departed from him; it was the last plane that
ever left Stalingrad for Germany.  He could not even wave to the plane
because his arms were broken.  That pilot took off, circled the field
(wasting valuable gasoline), and flew over, dipping his wings in a
salute to that remarkably brave and unselfish German.  There is no
other case in military history where an aircraft circled to salute one
enlisted man.
  
"WHO CAN STAND BEFORE HIS COLD?" (Ps.  147:17).
  
The Russian tanks at Stalingrad (financed by Communists in America)
were able to grind several thousand German soldiers into the ice,
because, with temperatures in the twenty to forty degree below zero
area, no one could "dig in." Not even a grenade or a mortar shell
could "dig" a trench in ground that was frozen eight feet down.  So,
when the tanks came over, they often just hunted down one man at a
time.  Did you ever try to run on icy ground, covered with eight
inches of snow, while you were dressed in boots and overcoat and
carrying forty to sixty pounds of equipment?  Many of the men they
chased were wounded, and suffering from frostbite, and scores of them
had fevers of 102 degrees or more, and many of them did not have
winter uniforms.  The snow "reserved against...the day of battle and
war" (v 23) is often the undoing of an army.  Out of 500,000 men who
marched to Moscow under Napoleon (1812), only 25,000 returned.  The
snowstorms and sub-zero weather of Russia killed ten times as many men
as were killed by bullets in any battle Napoleon fought in Russia.  A
cloud comes on the sky and the air gets chilly; one of the soldiers
feels a snowflake on his cheek.  Soon the plumes of the officers are
decked with white.  The horses begin to find it hard to pull the
supply trains; men begin to fall under fatigue; they lie down in
drifts and never rise again.  The snow keeps coming; it blinds the
eyes, it stings the faces, it blocks the vision of the enemy, it clogs
the feet of the infantry, it prevents accurate fire on targets, and it
covers those who lay down in it to rest.  The victor of Jena and
Austerlitz must surrender to the snow.
  
"Who can stand before HIS cold?" (Ps.  147:17).
  
Robert Gautchie survived 58 days on a frozen lake near the Arctic
circle (1975), in a stranded plane, with nothing to eat but raw frozen
fish that could only be thawed out by draining fluid and gasoline from
the plane.  Every other day he would pace out letters (SOS) 150 feet
high (from the air) on the snow-covered ice, but in less than two
hours the snow drifts would cover them up.  He saw four planes go over
in fifty days, and not one of them spotted the flares he shot up.  His
transmiter would not work nor would his emergency "Sarah set"--a
portable radio used to contact the Royal Canadian Air Force.  With
frostbitten toes and gangrene setting in, Gautchie was picked up on
the 58th day by a "Beaver" which had been delayed three and one half
hours in its flight to a small camp.  At exactly 6:10 a.m., the co-
pilot of that plane "happened" to see sunlight reflecting off of the
windshield of the stranded plane; thirty minutes sooner, or later, and
he would have missed it, as the Arctic sun never rose high enough to
shine directly on the plane.  They landed and picked up a man who
later lost five toes and had to go through weeks of hospitalization. 
Gautchie's "survival secret" was simple:  He had a Christian wife
praying for him at home, and she had gone on praying thirty days after
the RCAF had given up the search!
  
Did you know that only 39 tanks out of 104, in the German 204th Panzer
Regiment (Battle of Stalingrad), could move on the morning of November
10, 1942 when some kind of a "breakout" could still have been made? 
Do you know what put 65 tanks out of commission?  Well the tank pits
were covered with straw, and in the severe cold the rats had nested in
this straw and had entered the tanks and chewed up the rubber
insulation on the wiring.  Several tanks caught fire from short
circuits and sparking, and the ones that didn't couldn't be started. 
If that weren't enough, the Panzer Regiment had no "track sleeves" for
winter operations, so the tanks slithered from one side of the icy
roads to the other.
  
If you doubt that snow and hail can influence the battlefield, talk to
the ragged remnant of 1950-1953 who fought in the Korean "police
action"; ask them how it went.  Ask some of those Marines who made
that frozen, bloody trek from the Changjin Reservoir to Hungnam
(November 30-December 11, 1950).  Combat in the "cold" has penalties
and tortures of its own that no other form of combat has:  Frostbitten
fingers that cannot load the clip; frozen gun barrels that will not
fire the shell; fluid in vehicles that freezes and sticks the
mechanism together; frozen toes and feet that eventually kill the man
who walks on them; frostbitten ears that hurt when you try to thaw
them out until you could scream; snow blindness that prevents you from
seeing an enemy fifty feet away; clothes that stick to the ground
overnight; dead bodies you can't bury because you can't turn the soil
over; food you can't eat because you can't thaw it out; glasses that
steam up from sweat and then freeze; fingers that cannot pull the
trigger; stiff limbs that cannot react in time to dodge the bayonet or
the knife, and miserable nights so cold that you cannot sleep even
though you are too tired to stand up.
  
The worst damage done to the "flotilla" at Bikini Atoll was done by
falling HAILSTONES, which were created by Atomic fission.  In the
winter of 1959, upstate New York was "hub cap deep to a ferris wheel"
in snow.  In 1888 (March), snow stopped traffic in Brooklyn, New York,
Washington, and Richmond.  On a winter day in Chicago (1962), the
traffic moved at 11.7 mph.  You say, "What made the difference?" Well,
about ten inches of snow.
  
Curly Hollinger (Bay Minette, Alabama) was captured by the German 14th
Army when he was fighting with the 45th Division at the Anzio
Beachhead (February 16, 1944).  The 45th was holding a line from
Padiglione to the Anzio-Albano Road, and they took the head-on charge
of the German 715th Infantry Division, the 114th Light Infantry
Division, and the 3rd Panzer Grenadier Division.  For the next few
weeks Curly marched North with the POWs.  It got colder, and it began
to snow.  He caught pneumonia.  As he marched in a ragged line of
prionsers, he saw men hanging on fences who had their bellies ripped
open with bayonets.  He saw prisoners grabbing raw food by the
roadside, and then they would start vomiting and writhing in pain;
some of them died.  On a cold snowy night, they stopped to sleep
outdoors on the road.  Curly lay down in a snow drift with his head
full of mucous and a temperature of about 103 degrees.  He lay down to
die, knowing he would never survive that night.  The snow covered him
up and more snow fell.  When he plowed his way out of his "burrow" the
next morning, he was well!  {An examination of snowfalls in Siberia
show that it is nearly eighty degrees warmer under the snow than above
it; Alpine plants have been known to perish in the mild winter of
England for lack of enough snow to keep them warm.  Absolute Zero is
460 degrees below fahrenheit, while the boiling point of water is
about 212 degrees above the freezing point.  Just think!  If the
freezing point had been four percent lower than 32 degrees it would
rain at six degrees above zero!  Ain't "evolution" wonderful?}
  
21.  "By what way is the light PARTED, which scattereth the east wind
upon the earth?" (v 24).  It can be "parted" with a prism of a
"spectroscope," but God did not let any sinner find that out till long
after He put the question to Job.  To make sure that the Bible does
not hint at anything in the future, the "new" translations (as old as
Hell) have stated that the verse doesn't read this way, but should say
"where is the path to, etc.," (see ASV, New ASV, etc.).  Again (see
note under verse 19), this is quite typical of the bloated, puffed up
egotists of 1880-1980, who fancy that the sun rises and sets on
"modern science." If the reader doubts it, let him examine the remarks
of Dr.  Jan Lever--a born again Christian who believes in the
"Fundamentals."
  
"We can never derive from scripture exact physical, astronomical and
biological knowledge." In reference to Genesis, Dr.  Lever says that
it has no "concrete contact" with any investigation into physical
life, and that the Scriptures do not "impart to us scientific data."
In line with the modern Conservatives and Fundamentalists of the
Laodicean church, Lever says that the Bible is not a "scientific
treatise" about God's acts, and therefore Genesis cannot convey
anything to us about nature in "scientific terms," etc.  Neither did
anything Lever ever read, wrote, said, or saw.  "SCIENTIFIC" means
truth that is known to be truth.  The Bible is the only SCIENTIFIC
TREATISE on life; there are no others.
  
Now the format above (cited from Creation and Evolution, pp.  21, 56,
121, 139, and 214) is the standard format for fifty "bastions of
Orthodoxy" in the United States.  It is really just Kant's old rag-bag
about "faith" being in one bracket and "science" being in the other,
so that "us intellectuals who deal with FACTS can always get the
upper-hand over you dumb, Bible believing people who only deal in
FAITH." Well, we deal with more facts than "science" has access to, at
least where those facts deal with the practical, major, historical
issues.  If "science" is slow in catching up to the Bible, that is
their problem, but if you think for a minute that any of us are stupid
enough to respect the "scholarship" or the "valid data" of men who
have enough FAITH to believe in Ice Ages, Miocene, Pleistocene,
Pliocene, Oligocene, and Eocene ages (or "periods"--don't confuse the
issue with invented terminology), you are "Giganticopethicus Blacki!"
(See Koenigswald, Anthropology Papers, American Museum of Natural
History, 1952, pp.  295-325).
  
You see, the whole trend of Christian Education (above the high school
level) is to get you to respect the OPINIONS of these deluded asses
(or their friends), or at least take note of their learning and
intellectual achievements.  If this can be done, the leaven has been
inserted (Matt.  13:33), and it will not be long before you will be
consulting these rascals for advice.  Shortly after that, you will be
propagating their views at the expense of the Word of God.  Don't ever
doubt it for a minute; no man who ever "respected" the Biblical
scholarship of Trench, Hort, Westcott, Vinecent, Gregory, Tischendorf,
Lachmann, Schaff, Robertson, Nestle, Aland, Metzger, or Wuest, ever
got off again with believing the Bible was the final authority:  He
substituted Christian Education for the final authority.  The less
respect the Bible believer has for men who think they are smart enough
to correct the Book, the better off he will be and the better off his
church and his nation will be.  And don't give us this unholy gass
about "at least we should give these men the respect due to their
standing, because of their vast research and vast labours in..." In
WHAT, sonny?  I said, "In WHAT?" Research in WHAT?  Isn't the truth of
the matter that you are simply awed by a vocabulary you don't
understand, and it was invented so you wouldn't understand it?  What
is THIS, for example--hieroglyphics?  
Upper Cretaceous, Eocene, Creodonta, Condylarthra, Amblypoda,
Taeniodonta, Fissipeda, Ungulata, Edentata, Hyracoidea, Probosecidea,
Cetacea, Zeuglodontia, Pangolins, Aardvarks, Litoptenra, Typotheria,
Entelodon, Mysidae, Toxodontia, Pyrotheria, Embrithopoda, Anamniota,
Lymnaeidae, Cypraeidae, Rudista, Sirenia, Miohippus, Perissodactyla,
Artiodactyla, Sinanthropusx, Erinaceus, Meganthropus, Ephippidae,
Palaeodictyoptera, Nasions, Parahippus, Nuculidae, Halichoerus,
Pithecanthropidae, Palaeosimia, Hylapithecus, Xenopithecus, Naricas,
Myriopoda, Velutinae, Palinuridae, Myxophyceae, Diplopoda, Pauropoda,
Chilopoda, etc., etc., etc.
  
Now, as you were saying:  "...vast researches in..." IN WHAT?
  
Don't you get the message yet?  "Have ye yet no understanding?"
  
The men who invented these names to match the Disneyland figments of
their depraved imaginations thought that "LEVIATHAN" (Job 41:1) was a
crocodile.  So did Custer, Westcott, Hort, and Dr.  A.  T.  Robertson.
  
Do you get the message yet?
  
The men who memorized the list you just read thought "BEHEMOTH" (Job
40:15) was a hippopotomus!  So did Vincent, Trench, Schaff, and
Tischendorf.
  
Now when will you get it through your thick, stupid, unbelieving head
that the last 50,000 scholars who corrected the King James Bible--from
ANY field of human endeavor (science, philosophy, physics, biology,
paleontology, archaeology, religion, psychiatry, or socialism)--spent
the majority of their time trying to make an ASS out of you and a
CLOWN out of God!?
  
Now tie that down.  Keep it where you can look at it.  And when some
educated idiot begins to hound you about "Brother Ruckman," or "Pete
Ruckman," being "disrespectful of scholarship," etc., ask him: 
"DISRESPECTFUL OF WHAT?" Or, to practise what some of these meatheads
preach, put yourself in my shoes for awhile and consider that after a
proper amount of time studying the theories and findings of Sir Albert
Seward, Walcott, Metzger, Gregory, Raymond, Barrett, Cayeux, Lawson,
E.  S.  Moore, Darwin, E.  S.  Moore, Pompecki, C.  E.  Van Grundy, R. 
S.  Baseler, G.  Stiasny, Daly, W.  K.  Brooks, Grabau, Bradley,
Lamark, Laley, Lyell, Huxley, Nietsche, De Vries, Bateson, Rhodes,
Goldschmidt, Simpson, Medawar, Lysenko, Tobias, Price, Zuckerman,
Popper, Heisenberg, Schwindwolf, Einstein, Bergson, Reichenbach,
Russell, Davies, Schilder, Morris, Nelson, Rommer, Smith, Pattern,
Nuttal, and Newman (where they speak of evolution and creationism),
and then carefully studying Rimmer, Larkin, Pember, Scofield, Stam,
Bullinger, Ironside, Pieters, Pentecost, Wuest, Nee, Thieme, Vincent,
Trench, Pettingill, Joe Smith, Russell, Rutherford, M.  E.  White,
Armstrong, Robertson, Gregory, Davis, Burgon, Dake, Miller, Scrivener,
Westcott, Hort, Dollinger, Lightfoot, Ellicott, Newell, Alford,
Farrar, Eusebius, Schaff, Newman, Gesenius, Lange, Henry, Clarke,
Keil, Welhausen, Graf, Barnhouse, Newell, Weiss, Seiss, Baxter,
Cronin, Darby, Morgan, Kant, Astruc, Plato, Socrates, Leibnitz,
Aristotle, Dewey, Hegel, Bacon, Descartes, Tillich, Kierkegaard,
Brunner, Barth, Rauschenbusch, Schleirmacher, and Zen Buddhism (where
they speak of the scriptures, or philosophy or "reality"), how would
you feel if some nut tried to convince you that because he knew that
"man" was neither truly "nidifugous or nidicolous" that he was
"scholarly?" What would you do?  Laugh or go to sleep?  I mean, the
very idea of some amateur like the faculty members of Dallas, or the
University of Chicago, trying to impress us when they alter the King
James Text!  Who are you trying to impress, sonny, someone as green
and naive as you are?
  
I mean, after giving careful attention to most of the literature on
Astronomy and Abnormal Psychology, and much of the literature on
chemistry, geology, and archaeology, plus the esoteric literature on
UFOs, space ships, ESP, TM, the wisdom of the Rosicrucians, black
magic, demonism, Satanism, clairvoyance, the cults, the Sutras,
Shastas, Puranas, Tripitaka, and the Koran, plus the handbooks on
masonry, carpentry, hunting, fishing, boating, camping, and survival,
plus the literature on World War I and II, the Civil War, the Korean
War, the Vietnam War, the campaigns of Alexander, Baibars, Hannibal,
Napoleon, Saladin, Frederick, and Gustavus Adolphus, plus the
literature by Shaw, Lord, Leckie, Remarque, Heinrich, Critchell,
Mailer, Jones, Catton, Cope, Craig, Woulk, Cochester, Michene,
Laurence, Middleton, Yank Magazine, Churchill, Bowman, Stiles, Van
Praag, Casey, the Ballatnine Series, Myrer, Shirer, Wyeth, West,
Dawes, Henderson, Goss, Freeman, Mauldin, Pyle, Forsyth, Poert,
Hinman, Trobrian, Pullen, Lewis, Wallace, Livermore, Bowman, Lamb,
Bulwer, Garrett, and Hemingway, plus the literature on Karate, Judo,
close combat, hand-to-hand fighting, infantry weapons and tactics,
plus the literature on drawing, popular and classical music, art
techniques, sculpture, opera, symphony, and the theologies of Calvin,
Anselm, Aquinas, Chafer, Strong, Berkhof, Dabney, Kuiper, Hodge, and
O'Leary, and then plowing through 42 Bible commentaries and forty
church histories numbering over 200 volumes, plus six different Greek
Testaments, what do you think a man like ME is going to do when some
naive, superstitious muttonhead says, "We should RESPECT the labors of
these men because of their untiring efforts to..." To do WHAT, doctor? 
Make mud pies?  String beads?  Cut out paper dolls?
  
Why, children, if that King James Bible cannot thoroughly correct any
20,000 writers who ever wrote about ANYTHING mentioned above (directly
or indirectly), I wouldn't waste time to break in the binding on it.
  
If the combined faculty members of the ten highest rated universities
in the world were to combine their knowledge and enforce it with a
World Court, they could no more compete with a King James Bible (when
it comes to Absolute Truth) than a cockroach could compete with a
German Shepherd in taking care of a bank.  Truth is not about to yield
to some half-baked upstart who thinks that brick-and-mortar monuments
are greater than the Eternal Truth of God's Eternal word.  Where
30,000 authors alter the Book, you alter them.  Do it at once and do
it without regard for their training, background, upbringing,
breeding, scholarship, or education.  "Respect" is out of the
question.  If they want our respect, let them keep their defiled,
unbelieving hands off of our Book.
  
Now the "light" of verse 24 is said to "scatter the east wind upon the
earth" (v 24).  {Cf.  Job 28:26.} For this reason Clarke, and others,
take it to be lightning which scatters the "eastern storm" (Ibid., p. 
171).  If the verse is taken in this fashion, no one knows the "way"
the light is parted, for no one knows why lightning takes the zig-zag
form it takes.  (No, you don't get rid of it by, "Oh the plus and
minus charges, etc.").  There isn't an electrician alive who can tell
what causes positive and negative charges.  You say, "Magnetism." And
what is "magnetism," doctor?  No, don't tell us!  It's like "GRAVITY,"
isn't it?  {You see, it is as we have stated the matter.  You invent
words to impress people with, and just so the word can't be found in
the Bible, it will do.  Imagine these hucksters and hamsters who make
their living by substituting "reliable translations" for the word of
God, telling us that we should "respect their scholarship" of the
scholarship of some linguistic specialist, simply because he had a
reputation for "accredited, scientific, validated research!" The
theory of evolution is nothing but philosophical speculation; the
depraved fantasy of heathen imagination.  The theories of Westcott and
Hort, used to justify Aland and Metzger's text at Bob Jones
University, are the same brand.  There is less evidence that the "best
Greek" text was used by the ASV and the New ASV or that they were
"reliable" manuscripts, than the evidence presented by Haeckel on
"embryonic recaptiulation."}
  
22.  "Who hath divided a watercourse for the overflowing of
waters...to cause the bud of the tender herb to spring forth" (vv 25,
27).  Since Adam Clarke cannot see "how the overflowing or torrents of
water can be said to ascend any other way than by evaporation" (Ibid.,
p.  171), he limits the passage to a regular cloud and a regular
rainstorm.  Since we are never particularly concerned with Bible
rejectors who "can't see how," or who "see how," we shall look beyond
the obvious application of the next two verses and understand that the
"overflowing of the waters" occured TIDALLY in the time of Noah (see
The Genesis Flood, Whitcomb, and The Ice Age Epoch, Patten), and
COSMICALLY (Gen.  1:2) when the earth sank through space!  {No, there
is no "Gap theory" in Genesis 1:2 and 2 Pet.  3:6 is no more the flood
of Noah's day than your bird pond.}
  
A way is created for the "lightning of the thunder" as we have
remarked under Job 37.  The "desolate and waste ground" (v 27) does
have tender herbs, and it does bud, even in the desert.  In the
deserts of Africa, one will find the blue Kleina; in the deserts of
Mexico, one will find the Mexican Sedum.  In addition, the desert is
often covered with a carpet of brilliant colored flowers right after a
rain:  White daisies, purple Nama, yellow Eriophyllum, and the blooms
from barrel cactus, hedgehog cactus, and beavertail cactus.
  
Furthermore, the thunder and lightning do "cause it to rain" (v 26),
for the explosion for the gases (hydrogen and oxygen) is instrumental
in breaking up cloud formations.  And all of this is still beside the
point, the original question was "WHO" (v 25) did these things?  No
modern materialist or atheis could answer the question, for his
question would assume at the start--from the standpoint of a
"reactionary bigot"--that the only proper question could be:  "WHAT
hath divided..." (v 25).  But consider!  What is the point, anyway, in
decorating the whole surface of the earth and the bottoms of the seas
with myriads of plants, microbes, marine animals, flowers, shurbbery,
insects, and rocks?  Is there a man reading this, who spends any time
in hunting, who has not found beautiful plants and shrubs (or tiny
animals) outside, on the "backside of the boon docks," where no human
eye would see them once every 500 years, or more?  Lie down on your
face sometime, out in the woods; lie down in some wild grass or dead
leaves, and take a good look at the activity that God sees every day
in 20,000,000 places that no man has looked at ONCE (see v 39 and
comments).  If you had to take care of all the "critters" that God
takes care of every 24 hours, wouldn't you be ready for the funny
farm?  The question is:  "WHO takes care of these animals and plants?"
The question is not:  "WHAT takes care of them?" (But Darwin, Hegel,
Freud, Marx, Huxley, Sartre, Einstein, and Heidegger (and the United
Nations) never could get it right, and they never will.)
  
God Almighty, the creator of the world (Heb.  1:2-4) and the "Father
of lights" (James 1:17), waves His hand in Infinity (Ps.  147:4), and
showers forth 10,000 galaxies that His creatures could not find in
5,000 years of recorded history.  He breathes on the ocean expanses
(Gen.  1:20) and the swarms of living creatures spawn forth from it
until 500 oceanographers, working eight hours a day for 100 years,
haven't been able to catalogue all of them yet.  He creates bright red
fish whose scales camouflage them from nothing--see the ridiculous
teaching of any evolutionist on "environmental adaption." He created
animals that can't move fast enough to escape their prey, and some of
them have no hard "coverings," inky clouds, sharp teeth, or claws, or
even poisonous auras.  A man who talks about the "survival of the
fittest" and "progressive evolution" is not a man to whom any
"respect" should be shown, at least no more than you would show to a
12-year-old newsboy.  Be polite but don't get carried away with a lot
of bunko.  And while speaking of respect, we all agree (I am sure!)
that we should respect one another enough to not force each other to
go to schools we don't want to go to--don't "we"?  And we all agree
that we should "respect" one another enough not to curse and tell
dirty jokes on the job in front of men who are offended by either--
don't we?  And of course we all "agree" (you just betcher booties,
"we" do!) that we should "respect" one another enough to let Bible
believing preachers get as much TV and radio time as Catholic priests
and Liberals--don't "we"?  And in dealing with such kind, loving,
polite, broad-minded, tolerant people, are we to "respect" the
scholarship of any man who believes the prune juice that James, Dewey,
Russell, Marx, Sartre, Ramm, Heidegger, Darwin, and Tillich dished
out?  Oh, com'on, man!  Get off it!  God has made thousands of animals
(birds, fishes, and mammals) who have horns to handicap them running
through the woods (deer), bright colors so they can be seen and shot
better (birds), and no teeth or hard shells so they can be eaten
better (shad minnows and shrimp), and the ones who survived the
longest (400,000,000 to 800,000,000 years, according to Einstein--give
or take a few hundred million) had no teeth, no shells, no camouflage,
and no means of locomotion to carry them two feet in an hour. 
(Amoebas aren't exactly "highly complex" forms of "higher life.")
  
What is this fish doing with a fishing pole growing out of his head,
where he can dangle "bait" before a smaller fish?  What is this silly
looking thing doing with warts and moles all over his body, which is
as soft and slimy as a wet pollywog?  What is this wretched thing I
pull up on my line that is half snake and half eel?  Every time he
shows up the white trout (weak fish) leave!  What is this ribbon-like
thing I pull up, with teeth like a Tyranosaurus and a silver hide (no
scales) that shimmers and shines in the sun like a sword blade?  You
say, "The Ichthyologists tell us..." Yea, but WHO made the thing and
WHY?  I don't care if you classify and reclassify your Phyla, Sub-
phyla, and species in your "Taxonomy" until you look like a
computerized zoo, you can't tell me that "mother nature" did all that
stuff just so each species would "fit" its environment or be "adapted"
to its habitat.  And if good old motehr nature did, wouldn't she be a
dunce?  Boy, you talk about wasting resources!  You talk about
extraneous "redundancy!" If 35 birds can all live in the same
temperate zone, and all 35 of them eat the same type of food in that
zone, what is the point in coloring thirty of them differently, unless
someone likes "color" and gets a kick out of a "variegated palette?"
Hasn't it ever struck some of you that the real purpose behind the
myriads of variations existing in the flora, fauna, and animal life is
to demonstrate an Almighty hand that can do anything?  Now there is a
thought!  God says, "Whattchee here!  BLAM!" There it is (Gen.  1)! 
And you could no more reduplicate it (Job 40:10) than you could get by
the White Throne Judgment in your own righteousness.  Tell us doctor,
why the pepsis wasp has to have a dead tarantula for an incubator
before she lays her eggs?  There are pepsis wasps all over the desert,
yet there are over 2,000,000 people in Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas
who have never seen one lay an egg.  What were all of these variations
for?  To look at?  Who looks at them?
  
23.  "Hath the rain a FATHER?  or who hath begotten...?" (v 28).  The
answer of the natural scientist (and we do mean "natural") to this
question is:  "The rain does not have a 'father,' and no one 'begat'
the 'dew.'" Professing themselves to be wise (Rom.  1), the
materialists took the very information which God let them find (Rom. 
1) and then used it to prove that God had no part in it (1 Cor. 
1:21).  "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" (Rom. 
1:22).  Nor do the modern Christian Educators manage much better.  In
their zeal to add 2,000,000 dollars to the last 3,000,000, they uphold
their school as the final authority, and professing themselves to be
wise (1 Cor.  3:19,20), theri scholars take the very information which
God lets them find (Luke 10:21) and use it to prove that God had no
part in it (Ps.  12).  But it is God who "giveth the dew of heaven"
(Gen.  27:28), and the "dew of heaven FROM ABOVE" (Gen.  27:39) is
never to be set aside by such flippant remarks as "The AV Bible is
wrong; dew comes from the ground." (See Exod.  16:13, 15, and
comments.) When God says that "the HEAVENS shall give their dew"
(Zech.  8:12), He is not to be set aside simply because some
nincompoop (whose "scholarship" is supposed to be respected) doesn't
like the King James Bible.  Three concurrent sources of dew are
recognized (American Encyclopedia, Vol.  9, p.  44), and the first of
these is the "condensation of the moisture of the ATMOSPHERE." And not
only that, but God has a way of using His words the way He wants to
use them, since He is the author of all real scientific truth, and He
ALONE wrote the only "scientific" text book in print which never has
to be altered to match "the findings of science." "Dew," in the Bible,
is used throughout to stand for drops of condensed vapor, and these
drops can occur in clouds (Prov.  3:20) or foggy atmospheres (Ps. 
133:3) or as dew that comes from plants on the ground (Isa.  26:19). 
Never alter the AV text with Hebrew or Greek simply to match the
demands of some half-batty Fundamentalist who is worried about what
educated people will think of him if he doesn't attack the Bible.
  
24.  "Out of whose womb came the ice?  and the hoary frost of heaven?"
(v 29).  Answer:  "The expressions are figurative, and cannot be
answered by refering to a PERSON.  The question should be:  "WHAT
causes ice and frost?" (See how it is done?) But this doesn't get
around the question, for notice what follows:  "The waters are hid as
with a stone and the FACE OF THE DEEP is frozen" (v 30).  Since not
one scientist--including any saved scientist in California engaged in
research in "Catastrophic Geology"--ever even located "THE FACE OF THE
DEEP" (see Gen.  1:2-3 and comments), how could an unsaved sinner
answer the question?  The saved scientists (Morris, Rimmer, etc.) will
not believe the first four verses in Genesis, so how in the world
could they begin to answer a question concerning ICE that was
connected with the "Deep"?  If the "ice" (v 29) is the ice deposited
around the "Van Allen" belts from outer space (see Patten, Ibid.), no
scientists (saved or lost) before 1960 could have answered the
question if the question had been "WHAT causes ice to come...etc!"
  
That isn't all.  Why doesn't water obey the laws of expansion and
contraction?  Why does it expand under cold and contract under heat
when the other elements do not?  A man says, "Well, the atomic
structure of the chemical elements (H2O) is of such a nature that..."
Yes, but you are not going to tell us why there is so much variety
(see above).  Why not have everything expand and contract on the same
principles?  How did "mother nature" get so fickle and capricious that
she decided to have water follow one law and lead another one?  And
what is Venus doing spinning the wrong way on her axis (clockwise)? 
Why can't the moon turn on its axis?  Now, the scientists have a lot
of pretty little "pat answers" on these things which they derive from
"laws." However, these same fools (Rom.  1:22) will flatly reject
their own laws when these laws clearly indicate that "progressive
evolution" or "spontaneous generation" are pipe dreams.  The first and
second Law of Thermodynamics (adopted by all Evolutionists) would
forbid any evolutionist from believing in evolution.  So, what do they
do when they find a scientific law that goes against their theories? 
They annul the law and go on looking for "facts" to support the
"THEORY"!  But, you understand, you are to trust these birdbrains when
they give you an answer based on "the laws of physics" dealing with
planetary motions and celestial phenomena!  How do you know that God
just didn't jam the whole works in Genesis 1:2, and again in Genesis
6?  Like He will do AGAIN in Revelation 19 and 20?
  
"The face of the deep" for example, "is FROZEN" (v 30), because it is
at absolute zero (460 degrees below zero), to form a crystalized
"firmament" (Rev.  4, 14) with the properties of fire (Rev.  15:2). 
Nor do we ever have to make any allowances or "adjustments" about
these matters, although science will constantly demand them of us as
she "progresses" with "ever new discoveries" of "hidden, blah, blah,
blah, etc." The King James Bible will state the scientific FACT, and
if you catch up with it in a lifetime, you will be doing better than
average, and if you don't, it won't change one letter to meet the
demands of some reactionary bigot who thinks a Greek or Hebrew lexicon
is more accurate.  Surgeons did everything but jail a physician in
Vienna, back in 1850, for teaching that germs stay on a surgeon's
hands if he doesn't wash them in running water (Lev.  14).  If they
had caught up (not "back to") the King James 1611 Bible in 1860, they
would not have talked like a bunch of bigoted, narrow-minded, archaic
jackasses, and they would have saved ninety percent more of their
patients.  Back to the Bible or back to the jungle:  Take your pick. 
"Back to the Catholic Greek text of Vaticanus" (see any text put out
by Aland, Metzger, Bob Jones, Westcott, Hort, Wuest, or Nestle) is not
a third option.  Vaticanus was written in Africa by an African church
(Latin) for African scholars (Augustine and Origen), and it is as
close to the "JUNGLE" as you can get without disappearing into the
vines.
  
25.  "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades or loose the
bands of Orion?" (v 31).  The pleiades are seven stars in the
Constellation of Orion; they make their appearance in the Spring. 
Orion is the "giant" of the constellations, and it can be seen off and
on from October to January.  The question God asks Job is simple: 
"Can you make spring stay all through summer and can you take off the
bonds of winter from nature?" No man can.  No man ever has, and no man
ever will.  And whether you "air-condition" all summer to "bind the
sweet influences" (v 31), or whether you heat electrically all winter
to "loose the bands" (v 31), you will run out of energy, your electric
bill will double every five years, your body will get filled with
poisons from not sweating, your land and crops will lie under snow in
the winter and drought in the summer, and you are a blank fool to
think you can trifle with God (or the Book of Job) just because you
imagine that "science" has done anything since Cain killed Abel (see
Gen.  3-4 and comments).
  
Orion appears on the Southern horizon and slightly Westward throughout
the winter.  Bullinger wrongly marks the "strong one" as the "coming
Prince," referring to Jesus Christ, but this is grossly in error. 
"Scorpio," for example is not "the Redeemer's conflict," and a crab
("Cancer") no more represents the "Messiah's position held fast"
(Ibid., p.  18) than it represents the underground passages of the
Chase National Bank.  The stars which make up Canis Minor no more
represent "the victorious, conquering Redeemer" (Bullinger, Ibid., p. 
18) than they represent the John Birch Society.  Crabs and dogs are
unclean animals (Lev.  11), according to the infallible definition
given by the Creator of dogs and crabs.  The Lord Jesus Christ, in His
suffering and Atonement, is likened to a worm (Ps.  22) and a serpent
(John 3), but never to dogs or crabs; "dogs" attack Him when he is
dying (Ps.  22:16).  Get your Bible straight.
  
Kesil (Orion) also means "the FOOL," so the typology is indisputable;
the Redeemer was never a "fool," but there is a fool and a "foolish
man" in Job 5:2, 3, Proverbs 17:12, 24; 18:2, 6, 7, Luke 12:20, and
Zechariah 11:15 (check out that last one!) who could well be a giant
(Gen.  6:2-6), and he might even be GIGANTOPETHICUS BLACKI.  {If the
last reference is a little obscure, consult your nearest university
anthropology professor or biology professor--preferably one who is a
member of the NEA and well read on current hallucinations.} The giants
have been here before; they were FOOLS when they were here, and any
reader of the infallible text knew that in 1700, 1750, 1800, 1850, and
1900, before any atom was split, before any trips were made to the
moon, and long before Velikovsky or Van Daniken were old enough to
make guesses regarding any history of the earth.  You don't go forward
with science; you go BACKWARD.  Furthermore, "Orion" will be bound
literally (see Rev.  20:1-2), and you could not "loose his bands" if
you had access to the lost wisdom of Atlantis, the hidden wisdom of
the Martians, ESP, TM, an astrological computer, and an I.Q.  of 170. 
Nor could you loose the bands of the "giants" who are now bound in
"chains of darkness" (1 Peter 2:4); nor could your professors (saved
or lost) find any of those cross-references in any Greek or Hebrew
text unless we showed them where they were.  "The bands of Orion," the
mighty hunter (see Gen.  10:9), is a reference to scientific fact so
far beyond the reach of the contents of the Library of Congress, at
this point (1974), that you would waste your time trying to find the
material.
  
26.  "Canst thou bring forth Mazzaroth in his season?" (v 32).  The
reference is probably to the twelve signs of the Zodiac (Virgo, Libra,
Scorpio, Sagittarius, Capricornus, Aquarius, Pices, Aries, Taurus,
Gemini, Cancer, and Leo).  Most commentators suppose that the Hebrew
scribe has erred and written "resh" for "lamed" in the Hebrew--
Mazzaluth (Gesenius, Ibid., p.  462).  In this case, the meaning would
be:  "Can you bring forth each one of the signs of the Zodiac out of
his 'house' at the time he is due, or can you make the sun pass
through this 'house' or dwelling place, at each season?" However, this
is something much deeper than this in the passage, for Orion (v 31) is
so clearly a picture of the Antichrist that only Biederwolf, Payne,
Pember, Larkin, Kirban, Lindsay, Von Daniken (keep on, make your own
list) could miss it.  Sticking with the Bible text, we would have
this:  "Can you bring forth the constellations of the Zodiac in HIS
season--Lucifer's!" (Notice how the Vulgate jumps at this
interpretation and writes the word "Lucifer" down in verse 32.) The
modern Massoretic Bible has translated the possessive as "their"
seasons, to match the interpretation given by most commentators. 
However, the Hebrew is "etho"--the third person SINGULAR, masculine. 
In view of the events which will take place in Isaiah 13 and
Revelation 6 (and 16:1-10), the "Mazzaroth" will NOT come in their
seasons, nor will they be even visible at times during the reign of
Orion, the mighty hunter.
  
27.  "Canst thou guide Arcturus with his sons?" (v 32).  Arcturus is
Ursa Major ("The Big Bear"), which includes what we call "the Big
Dipper." This constellation is also called "the bier," in Arabic, and
the three stars which comprise the handle of the Big Dipper are
called, "the daughters of the beir." Here, the expression "his sons"
(v 32) is supposed to refer to these three stars, but again, we are
dealing with more than Arabic roots or even astronomy.  Any man who
spotted the BEAR of Daniel 7 and the BEAR of Revelation 13 and the
BEAR of Amos 5:19 knows better than to "wish upon a star" and think
positive thoughts about "bears!" When the Lord says that He will tear
Israel to pieces like a "bear bereaved of her whelps," He is talking
about somebody's "sons," and they are not "the sons of God," in the
sense of John 1:12.  The "ranging BEAR" of Proverbs 28:14 comes on the
scene, connected with a Lion, four times (Prov.  28:15, Dan.  7:5,
Rev.  13:2, and 1 Sam.  17:35).  Not in one instance is anything
expressed "positively" about "redemption" (Bullinger, Ibid.) or
"sharing your religious experience." A ranging bear is about as
constructive and "helpful" as a forest fire.
  
28.  "Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven?" (v 33).  No, not even if
you have waded through LaPlace, Kepler, Newton, Copernicus, Patten,
Einstein, Price, Nelson, Velikovsky, and the "pulps." The landings on
the moon did not solve one important question for mankind that wasn't
solved in the Book of Proverbs and Job.  The "findings of lunar rock"
didn't contribute one iota of evidence for evolution (of any kind),
although that was why the $25,000,000,000 was spent in the first
place.  Outside of providing philosophical food for speculative
fanatics--grant that some of them make a good living off of it!--there
has been no discovery (or discoveries) by anyone, for 3,000 years,
that have enabled man to know the ORDINANCES of heaven.  In 1978 they
are still guessing origins of the solar system, the origins of life on
earth, the origins of stars, the composition of stars, the origin of
the universe, and "life on other planets." The best astronomer you
know doesn't know enough about the "heavens" to tell you how to get to
any star in them, or what to do after you get there.
  
You don't know why Venus goes one way and Mars goes another.  You
don't know why our atmosphere turned out differently than those of
Neptune and Pluto.  You don't know what happened to Vulcan or Typhon. 
You don't know if the stars have been up there for 400,000,000,000
years, and if you had to prove it by the speed of light, you could no
more prove it than prove that Uranium proves the age of this earth. 
If you had seen Adam (Gen.  2), you would have sworn on a stack of
"living bibles" that it had taken that man thirty years to arrive in
the condition you saw him, and you would have been just as wrong as if
you had stated the earth was 1,000,000,000 years old.  God made
everything in the universe so that it had the appearance of age; Adam
was born "growed."
  
You don't know why some Nebulas are dark and others are not; you don't
know where the empty place over the North is; you don't know why stars
represent angels (and vice versa); you don't know how creatures move
up and down in outer space (Eph.  6) without UFOs of any kind, and you
don't know how God can know everything that is happening on this
earth, down to the activity of sparrows (Matt.  10:31), while at the
same time, He is keeping track of galaxies beyond the reach of your
telescope.
  
And if you DID understand the physical ordinances of heaven, would you
know the moral and spiritual ordinances?
  
29.  "Canst thou set the dominion thereof IN THE EARTH?" (v 33).  Five
hundred million Roman Catholics have been praying "thy Kingdom come,
thy will be done ON EARTH as it is in HEAVEN" (Matt.  6:10) through
ten centuries of killing, torturing, burning, and murdering Bible
believers; did the dominion ever come?  These silly Post-
millennialists (all Communists and Socialists) who believe man can
bring in a perfect kingdom by his own self-effort, have been talking
about "bringing in the Kingdom" ever since the great Bible-rejecting
evolutionist St.  Augustine keeled over and sank in the fog of Neo-
Platonism.  Did you ever bring it in?  "His truth is marching on," is
it?  You "had a dream," did you (M.  L.  King, Jr.)?  Can you set the
dominion thereof on the EARTH?  You say, "We're working on it!" So did
Napoleon, Marx, Charlemagne, Angela Davis, Alexander, Pope Urban,
Louis XIV, Pepin, Bloody Mary, Castro, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin,
Roosevelt, Mao Tse Tung, Ho Chi Mihn, and Abbie Hoffmann.  You say,
"Pete Ruckman, you are being sarcastic; not all of those people
thought..." Well, that shows what a greenhorn YOU are, doesn't it? 
Every man and woman in that list had a plan for improving world
conditions; every one of them was sincere in his belief that his plans
would make the world a better place to live in, and every one of them
honestly believed that killing, lying, stealing, and swearing falsely
was perfectly justifiable if it attained the god ends which they had
in mind.  No unsaved leader (religious, political, military,
scientific, or educational) ever looked at matters any differently.
  
You say, "We shouldn't despair!  Don't give up hope!  If we can just
all 'get together'..." And make the black people white?  And the white
people black?  And the Catholics Protestant and the Protestants
Catholic?  And all the men womanly?  Right?  Isn't that about it? 
Make the Orientals Occidental, and the Occidentals Oriental?  Right? 
Make the poor folks rich and the rich folks poor, the adults juvenile
and the juveniles adult, and then call evil good and good evil,
and...!
  
Are THOSE the "ordinances of HEAVEN" (v 33)?  Can you prove it?
  
There isn't a religious or political leader (living or dead) who could
answer either of Job's questions in the affirmative (Job 38:33).  {See
The Sure Word of Prophecy, 1970.}
  
30.  "Canst thou lift up thy voice to the clouds, that abundance of
waters may cover thee?" (v 34).  If you could, there are 200,000,000
people waiting to pay you your own price.  When the good old Communist
FDR brought the beer back in, the wind blew western Oklahoma and
western Kansas into the dust bowl.  On one of those vast wastes, in
the Dakotas (1933), which used to be a farm, a gruesome sign was
erected.  It said:  "You gave us BEER, now give us WATER." FDR
couldn't give them water, neither can you.  When God turns off the
spigot of His water courses in the Great Tribulation (James 5:17), you
can lift your voice to Venus and back by means of "teleframus-
flimstratographic-ionized-electroscopic-lasernontics," and you will
still breathe dust (1 Kings 17:7).  "Science" has never solved one
major problem man ever had, and it never will; science is a clown. 
Science has "proved conclusively" that if your grandfather and your
great-grandfather had no children, you won't have any either.  At its
best, science has been able to improvise a few gadgets to keep some
rich people alive a few weeks longer, and allow some rich people to
move about more than they would have.  At its worst, science has been
responsible for more destructive, violent killing nonsense than any
medium on earth outside of the news media and religion, and both of
these sources tend to make a god out of "science."
  
31.  "Canst thou send lightnings, that they may go, and say unto thee,
Here we are?" (v 35).  Ben Franklin (1706-1790) and A.  G.  Bell
(1847-1922) finally got around to it, but you'll have to admit that 26
centuries is a pretty good "lag" behind "scientific fact." Tamed
electricity finally produced a telephone where someone could "say unto
thee, Here we are," but Job couldn't answer the question any more than
Franklin or Bell could answer the question God put to Job in verse 4: 
What is "electricity"?  "Well, you see, when the magnet turns inside
the coil of wire, the electrons..."
  
"But, I mean what is that MAGNETISM you keep talking about?"
  
"Well, magnetism is kind of like GRAVITATION!"
  
So, we always come in where we go out and vice versa.  The modern
attitude is "Well, it works, and look at all we have done with it
(pragmatism), so who cares how it comes about?" Well, how did the
human race get along for 5,000 years without it?  Is there any
evidence that Dollinger and Eusebius had any more trouble with their
eyes, while writing their histories, than La Tourette or Newman?  Is
there any more evidence that Nathaniel Bedford Forrest and Charlemagne
were any punier than Larry Csonka or General Patton because of their
lack of automobiles?  What proof is there that John Wesley and Charles
Wesley were more carnal than Billy Graham or Dave Wilkerson, even they
didn't have radio and TV?  If Ohn (1878-1854), Faraday (1791-1867),
Morse (1791-1872), Marconi (1874-1937), Edison (1847-1931), and
Steinmetz (1865-1923) had never messed with the stuff, could you have
had an Atom bomb?  Cancer through TV tube rays?  Intercontinental
ballistic missiles?
  
A friend of mine was black as a cinder after 3,000 volts hit him while
he was painting a roof on a church.  A man in Dayton, Ohio, had his
arms melted and welded to his sides by a jolt; he was left for dead,
leaning on a tree, and a nurse got him "alive" again after four hours
work on him.  A man shocked in Cincinnati had his hair blown clear
through his hat, and one hand and one foot blown off his arm and leg. 
A man here in Pensacola got 440 volts through his body, and it looked
like someone had gone across his body with an acetylene welding torch. 
But look at electricity "positively!"
  
Think how much better things are now when you can work all night long
and keep a plant running 24 hours a day!  Look how this has helped
anti-pollution and conservation of "energy!" And think how much better
it is to wait six to eight hours after the sun has gone down before
going to bed and then paying $100.00 a month to cook your toast, wash
your clothes, dry your hair, fry your bacon, argue with the telephone
operator, carve your turkey, sue the power company, beat your eggs,
and scratch your back!  And what would we do without dead batteries,
blown fuses, busted light switches, headlights that go out, tail
lights that don't work, back-up lights that don't shine, radios that
short-circuit your ignition, telephone companies that double your
rates every five years, light bulbs that last two months, and
flashlights for "emergencies" that go dead every time an emergency
shows up?  And if you are going to tell the whole truth about it, why
not point out the beautiful destructive properties of radio pulse,
echo techniques, Loran, electronic jamming, proximity fuses,
electrical predictors, gyroscope lead computing devices, electronic
computers, peizoelectric effects on quartz crystal, radio sonobuoys,
homing torpedoes, guided missiles, and atomic fission--all made
possible through "man's vast researches into electricity by the
inductive scientific method!"
  
Don't kid us.  Men died in their twenties, thirties, forties, and
fifties in the seventeenth and eighteenth century; they still do. 
There have been as many men in America (between twenty and fifty)
killed on the highway since 1920 as there were men (between twenty and
fifty) who died of pneumonia and TB between 1800 and 1850.  Don't kid
us; kid your head-shrink.  You live longer now because you pay a
bigger hospital bill for it.  Half the gadgets they treat you with
work on ELECTRICITY.  Don't kid us.  If you can harness the lightning
and make it run and say, "Here we are" (v 35), you are to be commended
for getting one question out of 31 correct.  "Progress" was not a
point in question.
  
38:36-41 Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts?  or who hath given
understanding to the heart?  Who can number the clouds in wisdom?  or
who can stay the bottles of heaven, When the dust groweth into
hardness, and the clods cleave fast together?  Wilt thou hunt the prey
for the lion?  or fill the appetite of the young lions, When they
couch in their dens, and abide in the covert to lie in wait?  Who
provideth for the raven his food?  when his young ones cry unto God,
they wander for lack of meat.
  
32.  "Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts...understanding to the
heart?" (v 36).  Well, mother nature didn't and Darwin didn't, and you
didn't and evolution didn't and education has never done much more
than make a smart crook out of a dumb one.  Wisdom is knowing how to
use what you know, and understanding is knowing how it is related to
God (see 28:28).  Wisdom goes to the inward parts of animals while
understanding (see Prov.  1:2, 5 and comments) goes to the heart of
man.  Where God deprives an animal of wisdom (see Job 39:17), a
disaster follows, and where God deprives a man of understanding (Prov. 
6:32), a disaster follows.  Neither education, talent, training,
religion, science, or sacraments can supply these essential
ingredients.  Illustrations (from nature) about the imparted wisdom
found in the animal creation would take ten text books of 800 pages
each to document.  Spiders "instinctively" know how to construct webs,
fish "instinctively" know when and where to lay eggs, birds
"instinctively" know where to fly and where to land, sick animals know
"instinctively" what to chew on and where to hide out, and the
activity of BEES and ANTS is of such a nature that man has to be half
insane to observe them and come to the conclusion that "instinct" is
anything but IMPARTED WISDOM.
  
33.  "Who can number the clouds in wisdom?" Nobody.  You can't even
number the stars (Jer.  31:35), but God has them all numbered and
named (Ps.  147:4).  The stars are fa