THEOLOGICAL
Theological Heresies that Shaped World History
Copyright © 2006 by Robert C. Voiles. All rights reserved.
This title is also available as a Tate Out Loud product.
Visit www.tatepublishing.com for more information
No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any way by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the author except as provided by USA copyright law.
Scripture quotations marked "NKJV" are taken from The
New King James Version / Thomas Nelson Publishers,
The opinions expressed by the author are not necessarily those of Tate Publishing, LLC.
Book design copyright © 2006 by Tate Publishing, LLC. All rights reserved.
Cover design by “name”
Interior design by “name”
Illustration by “name”
Published in the
ISBN: 978-1-6024725-5-6
00.00.00
In loving memory of
Mother,
And, Vernon M. Smith, my brother.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am especially indebted to my
Wife,
for her love and encouragement in writing this volume.
PREFACE
Life is full of uncertainties, and to say the least, the unknown fails to provide comfort and a feeling of security. In a world of confusion and false hopes, history has proven that the only thing that has stood the test of time as an anchor of the soul and beacon of hope is the unchanging Word of the Living God. Those who accept the Scriptures as God-breathed know that in them is found the needed assurance of better things to come.
In the early years of my own faith, I possessed an insatiable desire to understand the Scriptures, in particular the greater picture of God’s plan for His people in times to come. Many of the old soldiers of faith greatly influenced my direction of thinking in basic theology, and especially the field of eschatology. God be thanked that through their efforts, the twig was bent in the right direction from the beginning.
I am greatly
indebted to the Scofield Reference Bible and the great works, past and present,
from the Dallas Theological Seminary, John F. Walvoord’s The Millennial
kingdom; John D. Pentecost’s Things to Come, and Charles C. Ryrie’s
excellent works. I also owe much to the works of Moody Bible Institute’s Henry
A. Ironside, William R. Newell, and definitely not to be overlooked is the late
Alva J. McClain of Grace Theological Seminary and his monumental work, The
Greatness of the Kingdom, one of the truly great efforts in setting forth
the
As a new believer in Christ over forty years ago, I began my attempt at combining Scripture with Scripture to form a coherent picture. From the beginning, however, I noticed a difficulty in what my Bible called “The Gospels” in the New Testament. So often I felt I had a reasonable understanding of what the Lord said until I read the epistles of Paul. I then began to have doubts of what I thought I understood about the Lord’s teaching. What Paul said in his letters to the churches seemed easier to understand than what the Lord had taught. The insurmountable problem I always encountered was in harmonizing the two.
Where the Lord had spoken of keeping the commandments as a way to enter into life, Paul said of those who taught the necessity of keeping the Law (Commandments), “Let them be accursed,” and if one put himself under the obligation of keeping the Law, then Christ was useless to him and he was fallen from grace. The more I struggled to understand, the greater became the confusion, until finally I ceased to seriously study what my Bible called “The Gospels,” in what was said to be the New Testament.
As the years passed, without a deliberate study of certain passages, they nevertheless kept coming to mind. Speaking of the New Covenant, in The Epistle to The Hebrews it is said: “For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.” Only hours before His death, the Lord had said to His disciples when He passed the cup: “this is My blood of the New Covenant.”
Paul had said the Lord was “born under the law to redeem those under the law.” From my earliest years, I well remembered Christians often quoting: “without the shedding of blood there is no remission.”
Yet, it was sometime later when I began to put the above passages together with my earlier problem of harmonizing Paul’s teaching with the Lord’s words. By then the roots of Paul’s teaching on the Mosaic Law (Ten Commandments) had reached deep into my thinking. The more I studied the situation from the Scriptures, the more I realized that the division between the Old and New Covenant in my Bible was incorrect.
Paul in the Epistle to The Hebrews likened the New Covenant to a last will and testament which had no power, or authority for execution of its provisions until the death of the testator. Nor could there be a New Covenant until the sins under the Old Covenant were paid for. “And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant… (Heb. 9:15)” which continued up until His death and resurrection.
But even more serious were the ramifications of that mistake. It was a mixing of the Law of the Old Mosaic Covenant of commandments, and the gospel of grace under the New Covenant, where according to the apostle Paul, “Christ has delivered us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us.”
Not only was the division of the Old and New Covenant incorrect, but also the titles to what was called “the Gospels” were also incorrect. Instead of preaching the gospel that Paul preached, which the titles “Gospels” speak of, the Lord preached “the Law,” and the necessity of keeping the commandments to be saved. It was the same “Law” that Paul said was a ministry of condemnation and death. Besides the above, if we are to examine Scriptural record of the “gospel” that the Lord and His disciples did preach, it was the “Gospel of the Kingdom,” whereas, the present church is not a kingdom of any kind.
Unless the
identifying title of the Lord’s message, the gospel of “the kingdom,” was used
together, it was misleading, because we in this present dispensation of grace
cannot preach the gospel of the kingdom. That message was that the kingdom of
heaven was at hand, an offering of the Messianic Kingdom, the re-establishment
of the Davidic kingdom, and that, to
One of those indispensable truths that will be referred to many times is Paul’s claim that “his Gospel” and the present dispensation of grace was a mystery, unrevealed, during the Lord’s ministry. If that fact is overlooked or ignored, then confusion about many things is inevitable.
Because the early and modern translators believed the present church was what the Lord was speaking of, in Matthew 16:18 when He said He would build His church, they translated “Ekklesia” to “church” instead of the correct translation, “assembly.” In context, when the Lord said He would build His assembly, He immediately identified that same assembly when He gave Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven, which he used in Acts 2 and 3. With the word church used for the first time in all the Scriptures instead of the common word assembly, the translators have misled others into the same mistake of believing He spoke of the present assembly of Christ.
It is obvious with no more than a casual reading of the early chapters of the book of Acts that the original apostles yet knew nothing of the present church. A mystery which remained, until Saul of Tarsus was called to be Paul the apostle, and by special revelation given the present gospel and mission of taking salvation through faith in Christ to the Gentiles in this present dispensation of grace.
Another mistake soon realized was that according to Paul, the Old Testament (Covenant) did not start with Genesis, but “four hundred and thirty years after God made the promises to Abraham.”
When we refer to the New Covenant (diatheke) as meaning testament, it is incorrect and should be translated “covenant.” The Hebrew word found throughout the writings of Moses, the Psalms, and Prophets consistently translated covenant is berith, and simply means covenant, or league. The Greek word diatheke is the equivalent of the Hebrew word birith (covenant). The English word “testament” has the same meaning as the Hebrew “testimony” (edah), to bear witness or testimony, in this case to whatever is revealed by God in His Word. The equivalent in Greek is mantureo, and neither should be used instead of, or to mean covenant.
When using the word “testament,” whether before or after the New Covenant began, it only can speak of the revelation and statement or testament of God’s intentions. As things now stand, the word “covenant” (diatheke) is incorrectly used as “testament.” However, in the coming studies, it will be used at times when speaking of His intentions as found in the New Covenant. There is a reason for the misuse of the above words, and this will be addressed later.
But how could such serious mistakes be found in the Holy Bible? How could all the Reformers and others since then almost without number, who spent a lifetime in poring over the Scriptures and written so many books, be so mistaken about something as obvious as the proper separation of the covenants? There could not possibly be a New Covenant until after the Lord’s death. In view of the profound implications, it was scarcely believable that they would knowingly mislead the Lord’s people, or were ignorant of all the passages of scripture that clearly show where the New Covenant began.
Not only had I been misled for years by those mistakes,
but as I searched through the works of learned men past and present, I began to
realize the serious aftermath of the mistakes that had been incorporated into
the Bible and accepted by the unsuspecting as being part of the Word of God. In
particular, the confusion regarding God’s ancient covenanted people
Education, formal or informal, in no way seems to affect the ability of discernment of the mistakes in question. The specialist seems to have no more discernment than the layman of what ought to be obvious to everyone.
Because of the controversial nature of the claims I propose, I realize resistance will be forthcoming. Some will reject outright the premise as tampering with the Word of God. Let the reader be assured, this book in no way diminishes the trustworthiness of Scriptures, the truths of the doctrine of God, salvation through His Son’s sacrifice, or any of the fundamental tenants of orthodox Christianity. On the contrary, its goal is to point out mistakes made by church leaders ancient and modern that radically affect what we believe, and clarify certain truths without which a truly systematic theology is unattainable.
I do not ask that the reader believe me, but only to consider the Scriptural and historical references in support of my conclusions. I cannot ask for more then an open mind and fair consideration.
With all the different interpretations and Christian church denominations, there must be some basic errors being overlooked that are causing most of the differences. It is my belief and conviction that if the major theses in this book are accepted and incorporated in forming one’s conclusions, the result will be a vastly simplified and improved theology.
Because the re-establishment of the kingdom of heaven that Adam lost is the main goal of God’s revelation and the main theme throughout the Bible, no field of theology is unaffected. Consequently, all of the coming studies will be interrelated with their effect on the biblical teaching of the kingdom, especially the difference between the present church and the coming Messianic Kingdom of David.
Because of the interrelatedness and interdependency of many things discussed, there will of necessity be considerable repetition. Some passages of Scripture and certain key points of doctrine unavoidably will be referred to often throughout the different studies, they being supportive of other truths. The repetition itself is evidence of the all pervasiveness of the following errors into every cardinal doctrine of Christianity:
(1). The allegorical method of teaching is the parent of all heresies.
(2). The incorrect division of the Old and New Covenant.
(3). The teaching that the present assembly of Christ is the New Israel.
(4). The teaching that the present assembly of
Christ is the kingdom promised to
(5) The teaching that the present assembly of Christ was revealed before the Apostle Paul.
It is also very important that the simple, normal use of
the words in Scripture are to be accepted as such, and what are presently but
incorrectly referred to as “the Gospels,” will be called the “Memoirs,” or,
“Memoirs of the Apostles.”
I am acutely aware of my own limitations and lack of qualifications to attempt to correct those who in countless ways are more capable than me. Nevertheless, with few exceptions, no one else even appears concerned, and being fully persuaded that what I have to say is the truth, and that far past due, I felt I had to try to rectify what is perceived as an intolerable conglomerate of mistakes that in part are accepted as part of the Holy Scriptures themselves.
In reality, the mistakes were added by the early church leaders years after the New Testament Scriptures were written. If at times it seems that I am too matter of fact, about my conclusions, again I ask for the reader’s patience.
If accepted, the views set forth in this work could no doubt bring about strained relations because of a natural resistance to change, and in particular institutional restraints. However, to sacrifice the truth of Scripture on the altar of institutional dogma is not acceptable at any cost, because it fails to honor the Lord.
I have no delusions as to the reception of many of the views and positions taken in this book. Nevertheless, if my attempt to rectify what I perceive as a number of grievous mistakes made by the primitive church benefits anyone, then my time and labor have been well spent.
From the beginning I have endeavored to present a fresh, independent examination of many things, and the reader can be assured of originality rather than endless repetition of what someone else has already said.
Perhaps the most I could hope for is that someone more qualified than I will be challenged to pick up where I leave off. It is my sincere desire to encourage others to re-examine and rethink some things that have long been accepted as biblical, when in fact, they are not.
May it please Him, “with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning,” to use this effort to the edification of His people and to His glory, both now and forever. Amen.
Robert C. Voiles
2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1
Primary Things for Consideration
CHAPTER 2
Biblical Interpretation Versus Allegorical Teaching
CHAPTER 3
The Origin of Allegorical Teaching
CHAPTER 4
Allegorical
Teaching in the
CHAPTER 5
The Origin of the Church is Israel Heresy
CHAPTER 6
The Origin of the Church is the Kingdom Heresy
CHAPTER 7
The Biblical Doctrine of the Kingdom
CHAPTER 8
The
CHAPTER 9
The
CHAPTER 10
The
CHAPTER 11
The
Kingdom that is to be Restored to
CHAPTER 12
The First Offer of the Re-establishment of Israel’s Kingdom
CHAPTER 13
The Disciples are Sent to Preach the Gospel of the Kingdom
CHAPTER 14
The King is Rejected and the Kingdom Postponed
CHAPTER 15
CHAPTER 16
The Three Offers of the Kingdom in Matthew Chapter 22
CHAPTER 17
The Meaning and use of the Word Covenant
CHAPTER 18
The Unconditional Covenant With Noah
CHAPTER 19
The Unconditional Covenant With Abraham
CHAPTER 20
The
Unconditional Covenant With
CHAPTER 21
The Unconditional Covenant With David
CHAPTER 22
The
Conditional Covenant With
CHAPTER 23
The Need for a Better Covenant
CHAPTER 24
The New Covenant With