Translate

Thursday, March 30, 2017

THE MAN OF SIN
PART I: THE PROPHECY
by David Vaughn Elliott

   We are all sinners. Yet, one man in all history is singled out as "the man of sin... the son of perdition." Not a lovely description. Why talk about him? Yet, the Word of God does talk about him. 

    Most students of Scripture, past and present, see a connection between "the man of sin" of 2 Thessalonians 2 and the "little horn" of Daniel 7. They also see a connection with one or more of the beasts in Revelation 13 and with "the great harlot" and "Babylon" in Revelation 17 and 18. From ancient times, these outstanding prophecies have been lumped together under the common title "antichrist."  

    In spite of such agreement, views regarding the fulfillment vary widely. Is this enemy of God someone in the past, present or future? The most popular view today, futurism, says that he is yet in the future. To the opposite extreme are a growing number today, preterists, who believe that he is a relic of ancient history. Howbeit, for hundreds of years, the vast majority of Bible believers unswervingly proclaimed that "the man of sin" is a present reality.  

WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?

    Since there are so many conflicting views, why bother to try to figure out who "the man of sin" is in 2 Thessalonians 2? To ask that question betrays an ignorance of the text. This is not just some idle study out of vain curiosity. Eternal issues are at stake here.  

    Number One: Christ versus "the man of sin" (verses 1-3). It is our Lord Jesus Christ on the one side, and "the man of sin" on the other. Paul assures his readers that Christ is coming, but that "the man of sin" is also coming. The best and the worst. The Son of God versus a son of the devil (verse 9). Nothing less is involved than the eternal battle between the forces of good and evil. The eternal battle between God and Satan. 

    Number Two: "not shaken" versus "falling away" (verses 2-4). Some people think the study of prophecy has little to do with "practical" Christianity. How much more practical can you get than holding fast or falling away? The problem is that many believers think that "falling away" relates only to drunkenness, adultery, forsaking the assembly and the like. However, Paul speaks of being "shaken" by not knowing if "the day of Christ" is past or future. Paul speaks of "the falling way" which involves "worship" in "the temple of God." We need to investigate what this is all about. 

    Number Three: "the love of the truth" versus "not receive the love of the truth" (verse 10). Love God. Love Jesus. Love your brother. Love your spouse. Love your neighbor. Love your enemy. Also--love the truth. To some people, "love" means "sex." To others, "love" means "unconditional acceptance" of whatever another person believes or does. Enter "love of the truth." That love is not at all popular in our relativistic-materialistic society. It is not at all popular with the do-it-if-it-makes-you-feel-good club. If you love the truth, you will search for it as diligently as for a hidden treasure (Proverbs 2:1-4). 

    Number Four: "truth" versus "deception," "delusion" and a "lie" (verses 10,11). Living the Christian life is more than morality. It has to do with what we believe. It has to do with truth versus error. In the Garden of Eden, it was God's truth versus Satan's lie. It still is. Eve wanted the "freedom" of "choice." Paul tells Timothy that Eve was deceived. So are millions today by "the man of sin." We are not dealing here with idle prophetic curiosity. We are dealing with nothing less than the issue of truth versus lies. Jesus is truth. Satan is the father of lies. That is what this prophecy is all about. 

    Number Five: "saved" versus "condemned" (verses 10, 12). Eternity is involved in "the man of sin" prophecy. Saved or lost; blessed or condemned. Many Christians sidestep various issues by retorting: "Well, it isn't a matter of salvation." However, the issues of this prophecy are very much "a matter of salvation." This prophecy has very much to do with understanding the characteristics of those who are saved and those who are condemned. The issue is live and real.  

    Number Six: holiness versus "unrighteousness" (verse 12). Yes, morality does count. You cannot believe right and live wrong. At issue here are those who have "pleasure in unrighteousness." Reminds us of "lovers of pleasure" in 2 Timothy 3:4. Sin is fun; you had better believe it. Fun now; pay later. If it were not fun, why would people bother with it? Moses chose to suffer with the people of God rather than "enjoy the passing pleasures of sin" (Hebrews 11:25). "The man of sin" has to do with fun religion. Fun because you can have one foot in a church and another foot in the world. They "worship" yet have "pleasure in unrighteousness." 

    These are six solid reasons why "the man of sin" prophecy merits serious study on the part of every person who cares about his relationship with the God of the universe and His precious Son. 

MUST BE BASED ON SOUND DOCTRINE

    The interpretation of prophecy must always agree with sound doctrine. Example: if Christians are no longer obligated to keep the Sabbath, then the seal of God in Revelation 7 cannot possibly be Sabbath keeping. The doctrinal issue must be settled before attempting to interpret prophecy. 

    The prophecy at hand has several doctrinal issues that must be clarified in the light of New Testament Scripture. Among the most important issues is the meaning of "the temple of God," since that is where "the man of sin" will sit.  

WHICH "TEMPLE OF GOD"?

    Six centuries before Christ, Nebuchadnezzar of Babylonia devastated the temple in Jerusalem. Howbeit, three great prophets of God, Isaiah, Jeremiah and Daniel, foretold the rebuilding of Jerusalem with its temple. Ezra and Nehemiah recorded the history of the fulfillment.  

    Nevertheless, Daniel and Jesus prophesied the destruction of this second temple. That was powerfully fulfilled in 70 A.D. (See Index by Subject, especially under heading "70 Weeks of Daniel 9.") There is not one Bible prophecy foretelling a rebuilding of Jerusalem's temple after its destruction in 70 A.D. 

    Those who claim the temple will be built again at some future date base their views solely on inference. Their arguments run like this: "Since the man of sin will sit in the temple of God, the temple in Jerusalem has to be built again in order to fulfill that prophecy." 

    What proof is there that "the temple of God" in 2 Thessalonians 2 is to be a physical temple in physical Jerusalem? Indeed, there are at least three reasons for rejecting that interpretation. First is the fact already mentioned that no Scripture makes a direct prediction of rebuilding after 70 A.D. 

    Secondly, one must consider the nature of the Jerusalem temple in the New Testament. Everyone understands that the temple in Jerusalem was the temple of God when Jesus arrived on the scene. Jesus himself said of the temple, "Do not make My Father's house a house of merchandise!" (John 2:16). It was in the temple that animals were sacrificed and their blood shed for the remission of the people's sins. However, Jesus came into the world to offer His own body and blood as the perfect sacrifice for sins. Thus, at the moment of His death, God acted in an unprecedented manner: "Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked" (Matthew 27:51). In this graphic fashion God declared that when Jesus died, He was finished with that physical temple. 

    Following the rending of the veil, the term "house of God" never again refers to the temple in Jerusalem. A physical temple has not existed now for over 1900 years. Any physical temple built today would be a slap in the face to Jesus, who shed His blood to do away with the temple's animal sacrifices. The second temple, which existed in Jesus' day, was once the temple of God and then ceased to be. A third temple, if built, would not for one second of time be a temple of God. 

    This brings us to the third point. Notice how clear 1 Timothy 3:15 states it: "that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth." Scripture could not say any more clearly what the "house of God" is today. God's church. 

    The same is true of the expression "temple of God." Examination shows that after Jesus' death, "temple of God" never again refers to the physical temple in physical Jerusalem. Rather, it refers to the church of God. It seems that our brethren in Corinth were not quite clear on this point. Thus Paul asked them, "Do you not know that you are the temple of God and [that] the Spirit of God dwells in you?" (1 Corinthians 3:16). Today we would ask people a similar question: "When you study prophecy about the 'temple of God,' do you not know that since Jesus' death the people of God are the 'temple of God'? Do you not know that the 'house of God' is the church of God?" 

    This is sound doctrine. Using sound doctrine as the basis for the study of prophecy, the careful student of the New Testament will realize that when 2 Thessalonians 2 speaks prophetically of "the temple of God," it must be a prophecy about the church. Something very bad is going to happen to Jesus' church. 

WHAT IS APOSTASY?

    There are more doctrinal issues that must be clarified in the light of Scripture before attempting to find the fulfillment of "the man of sin" prophecy. The matter of the "temple of God" is only the first. 

    Second, there is the question of the meaning of the expression "the apostasy." Actually, several versions make it clear when they render the word "the falling away." That is exactly what apostasy means.  

    A man can not fall from a cliff if he has never been on the cliff. A child cannot fall from a train she never boarded. Since this prophecy has something to do with "the temple of God," the church, it is therefore predicting a falling away from the true church. It is a prophecy about apostasy, a prophecy about a departure from the faith "once for all delivered" (Jude 3). The prophecy cannot be talking about Judaism, because it preceded the church of Christ. It cannot be talking about Islam, because it is a wholly distinct religion unrelated to the Gospel of Christ. We have to study church history to search for "the falling away."  

    Notice also that the prophecy is not about just any falling away. It prophesies "the" falling away, "the" apostasy. That would seem to tell us that to find fulfillment we must look for the most important false church in all history.  

    Connected with the idea of falling away is "the lawless one." That is to say, he would turn his back on the law of Christ and establish his own laws. A person is a "law breaker" for breaking just one law. However "lawless one" conveys the idea of someone who repeatedly and in large measure opposes the commandments of the New Testament. This prophecy, then, is not dealing with just any slight variation from the true Gospel. It foretells a departure of major proportions.  

    Paul wrote this more than 1900 years ago. Before thinking that "the man of sin" might be future, a believer must search 1900 years of church history to see if the prophecy has already been fulfilled. It is only when people ignore 19 centuries of Christianity that they can be deceived into thinking that fulfillment is in the future. 

ONE MAN OR A GROUP OF MEN?

    Third, there is the question of how many people are involved. The text says "the man" of sin. However, in Bible prophecy, one person often represents an entire body of people. For example, most students agree that the four beasts in Daniel 7 represent Babylonia, Persia, Greece and Rome. Each beast represents an entire empire. Daniel 7 clearly says as much. In verse 17, it says "Those great beasts, which are four, [are] four kings." Yet, in further exposition, in verse 23 it says, "The fourth beast shall be a fourth kingdom on earth." So, a beast represents a man and both represent a kingdom. This Bible symbolism is not nearly as strange as some seem to think it is. Ever hear of Uncle Sam? What about the elephant and donkey representing the Republicans and Democrats? 

    This same type of symbolism is found in Revelation 17. Who would argue that "the great harlot" is a prophecy of a red-light-district prostitute? Indeed, the prophecy itself clears up any doubt when verse 18 says, "And the woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth." One woman represents an entire city. She represents especially the power of the leaders of that city to exercise control over many nations. 

    Both Daniel and Revelation thus make clear that a prophetic individual may well represent an entire city or an entire empire, especially the governmental powers. 

A MATTER OF RELIGION

    Fourth, "worship" is involved in this prophecy. Whatever political power he may have, "the man of sin" is a religious figure. He presents himself as God. Moreover, he does this in the temple of God, which is the church.  

    God does not want just any religion. The very first murder in the human race was for religious motives. "The LORD respected Abel and his offering, but He did not respect Cain and his offering. And Cain was very angry" (Genesis 4:4,5). The first sin of Cain was not murder, not even hate for his brother. Cain's first sin was false worship. 

    The Bible is filled with accounts of religious conflict. Jesus, for example, told the Samaritan woman, "You worship what you do not know" (John 4:22). Jesus said of the religious leaders of his day, "in vain they worship Me, teaching [as] doctrines the commandments of men" (Matthew 15:9). "The man of sin" is all about false worship. 

MIRACLES BY SATAN

    Fifth, the apostate church here foretold would be "the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders" (2 Thessalonians 2:9). This eliminates many apostate people and organizations as candidates for "the man of sin." "The man of sin" works miracles. Satan working miracles is nothing new to the Bible. As early as the time of the Exodus, Pharaoh's magicians were capable of duplicating Moses' signs of turning rods into snakes, of turning water into blood and of producing a plague of frogs (Exodus 7:8 to 8:19). Yes, Moses by the hand of the Almighty outdid them. However, make no mistake about it. These pagan magicians worked real miracles.  

    There are numerous ways God's people can distinguish between the miracles of God and the miracles of Satan. One way is exactly that recorded in Exodus 8:18: "Now the magicians so worked with their enchantments to bring forth lice, but they could not." They had worked many miracles, but they came to the point where they tried again and they failed. Anyone who tries to work a miracle and fails is not of God, no matter what other miracles he has worked. Because God's miracle workers do not fail. They do not blame other people for their failures. 

    Sixth, do not overlook the fact that "strong delusion" (verse 11) is a part of the picture. Do not expect the people of the world to be convinced easily that some false church is "the man of sin." Do not expect the ecumenical movement to believe it. Do not expect those who put unity above purity of doctrine to believe it. "The man of sin" is very religious, he works miracles, he seems to many to be the true church of our Lord. Multitudes will be deceived, strongly deluded. 

STARTED IN PAUL'S DAY

    Paul made it clear that in his day "the mystery of lawlessness is already at work" (verse 7). Therefore, in searching for the fulfillment of this prophecy, we must look for some principle, some spirit, some activity that was already at work in the first century. It makes no sense to start our search with the year 2000 and work backward. It makes even less sense to theorize about some future possibility. How can we believe that something, which was already at work in Paul's day, has not been able to break out into the open for over 1900 years?  

    Rather, the sensible thing is to start our search with the first century and move forward in time. We must examine the movement of church history from its origin. We must search for something that was already working in Paul's day that in time became the full-blown apostate church. When we find that, if it fulfills all the details of the prophecy, then we have found "the man of sin."  

DESTROYED WHEN JESUS COMES

    Verse 8 of our text is very clear: "the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will... destroy with the brightness of His coming." Clearly "the man of sin," the antichrist, comes before Jesus returns.  

    Strange as it may seem, the popular futurist view says just the opposite and uses this text as a basis. "They" say that the antichrist will be manifested in all his power after the "rapture."  

    Futurists accomplish their twist by making "the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" (verse 1) as one event, "the day of Christ" (verse 2) a second event, and "His coming" (verse 8) a third event. They claim the text teaches four events in this order: the rapture, the man of sin, the tribulation and the Second Coming of Jesus. Did Paul say all that? 

    "They" claim that the "coming" in verse 1 is "the rapture" and that the "coming" in verse 8 is "the Second Coming" seven years later. However, the Greek word for "coming" in the two verses is identical. If they are two different comings, then verse 1 is the Second Coming and verse 3 is the Third Coming. However, since no one accepts the idea of a third coming, "they" avoid such an expression. Instead, they invent the theory of "two phases" to the "second" coming. (See Insight #78 for a full treatment of "The Rapture.")  At this time, the discussion will be limited to 2 Thessalonians 2. 

    Their theory holds that "the day of the Lord" (or "day of Christ") is neither the Second Coming nor the Third Coming. Rather, they say, it is something in between. As in the case of "temple of God," they lean heavily on Old Testament usage while sidestepping New Testament usage.  

    Without leaving 2 Thessalonians 2, let us examine the question. In verse 1, Paul introduces the topic for discussion: "the coming of our Lord Jesus." Now if that is "the rapture," it is the only verse from verses 1 to 12 that speaks of the "rapture." In such a case, "they" put Paul in the position of saying he would talk about one topic but instead he talked about another. 

    But if you take "the day of Christ" (or "the day of the Lord") in context, then certainly "the coming" of our Lord Jesus Christ is "the day" of our Lord Jesus Christ. In verses 1 and 2, Paul is simply saying that in regard to Jesus' coming, don't think that it has already happened. Verse 3 says why they should not believe that: because "the man of sin" must come first. Verse 8 explains that the man of sin will be destroyed by the "coming" of Jesus. Obviously, therefore, "the man of sin" comes before Jesus comes. Now, if the "coming" in verse 8 is not the same "coming" as in verse 1, then Paul said he was going to talk about one thing but tricked us by talking about another thing. 

    These then, are the things to consider about "the man of sin" prophecy before ever going beyond the Biblical text. Once we have learned all we can from the Bible itself, only then are we ready to launch out into history in search of fulfillment.  

    (Scripture in the preceding article is taken from the New King James Version. Copyright (c) 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved.) 

Wednesday, March 29, 2017

UNREASONABLE POSITIONS by steve finnell


Do some men have unreasonable positions concerning the doctrines of God?

The apostle Paul reasoned with men using the Scriptures, however, all men are not reasonable. Acts 17:1-2 ...they came to Thessalonica...2 Then Paul, as his custom was, went into them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures,(NKJV) The problem was, those at Thessalonica were unreasonable, because they were not fair minded. Acts 17:10-11 Then the brethren immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea. When they arrived, they went into the synagogue of the Jews. 11 These were more fair-mind than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so,(NKJV)

The Berean Jews were reasonable people, they searched the Scriptures for the truth concerning God's doctrine.

Are men today reasonable or unreasonable in their views of God's doctrine?

1. Matthew 24:27,36 "For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the the Son of Man be. 36 "But of that day and hour no one knows, no not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.(NKJV)

Some men contend that Jesus Christ is also God the Father, however, Jesus said only the Father knows when He will return. Is it reasonable believe that Jesus is God the Father? No it is not, it is an unreasonable understanding of God's doctrine.

They searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.

2. Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved..(NKJV)

Is it reasonable to believe that He who was baptized was saved before baptism because they were saved as soon as they believed? No, that is an unreasonable assumption.

They searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.

3. John 8:21-24 ...24 "Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for if you do not believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.(NKJV)

Is it reasonable to deny that Jesus is the one and only Son of God, the only way to heaven, and still have your sins forgiven? No, it is unreasonable to conclude that there are various and sundry Saviors. There is only one Savior for mankind and that is Jesus Christ. Only one way to have sins forgiven.

They searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.

It takes unreasonable men to search the Scriptures and believe false doctrine.

You have to be unreasonable to believe it took billions of years for God to create the heavens and the earth.

You have to be unreasonable to believe that water baptism is not essential for the forgiveness of sins.

You have to be unreasonable to believe that men today can be saved like the thief on the cross.

You have to be unreasonable to conclude that God preordained a select few for salvation and preordained all those not selected  to burn in hell for eternity.

You have to be unreasonable to believe once a man is saved he can never be lost.

You have to be unreasonable to believe you can worship the Virgin Mary, by praying to her, without facing God's displeasure.

You have to be unreasonable to believe the false doctrine of original sin. Do you really believe men will be sent to hell because Adam sinned? Men will be sent to hell because of their own unforgiven sin, not because of Adam's sin.

Reasonable repentant men who prayerfully search the Scriptures will not reach unreasonable conclusions concerning God's doctrine.

Were the Bereans searching the Scriptures to prove that some denominational doctrine was correct, or were they searching for God's truth?


   

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

INTOXICATING BEVERAGES?   BY STEVE FINNELL


Does God really approve of Christians drinking intoxicating beverages? Did Jesus actually turn water into intoxicating wine so the wedding party could continue to drink themselves into a drunken stupor? (John 2:1-10) I do not think so. If the wedding party had been drinking intoxicating wine, then many of them would have already been drunk. All wine mentioned in the Bible is not fermented wine nor does all wine have a high alcohol content.

Noah was a social wine drinker. How did that work out for him?

Genesis 9:20-25 ....21 He drank of the wine and became drunk, and uncovered himself inside his tent....24 When Noah awoke from his wine, he knew what his youngest son had done to him. 25 So he said, "Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants he shall be to his brothers."

Do social drinkers get drunk? Noah did.

Lot was a social wine drinker. Was that a good thing?

Genesis 19:30-38....32 Come, let us make our father drink wine, and let us lie with him that we may preserve our family though our father.....

Had Lot not been a social drinker he never would have committed incest. Social drinking always precedes drunkenness.

Were priests social drinkers?

Leviticus 10:8-11 The Lord then spoke to Aaron, saying , 9 "Do not drink wine or strong drink, neither you nor your sons with you, when you come into the tent of meeting, so that you will not die---it is a perpetual statute throughout your generations.....

Social drinking was not inconsequential for priests.

Hosea 4:11 Harlotry, wine and new wine take away the understanding.

Is wisdom and understanding  a result of social drinking. No.

All drunkards were social drinkers before they became drunkards.

Galatians 5:21 envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.

SOCIAL DRINKING IS TRAINING WHEELS FOR DRUNKARDS!  

Monday, March 27, 2017

ERRONEOUS BELIEF IS NOT A VALIDATION OF TRUTH STEVE FINNELL

The sinner's prayer is an erroneous belief.

"Heavenly Father, have mercy on me, a sinner. I believe in you and that your word is true. I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of the living God and that he died on the cross so that I may now have forgiveness for my sins and eternal life. I know that without you in my heart my life is meaningless.


I believe in my heart that you, Lord God, raised Him from the dead. Please Jesus forgive me, for every sin I have ever committed or done in my heart, please Lord Jesus forgive me and come into my heart as my personal Lord and Savior today. I need you to be my Father and my friend.

I give you my life and ask you to take full control from this moment on; I pray this in the name of Jesus Christ."

There is no Scripture that confirms the sinner's prayer as fact. The proof-texts given are 1 John 1:5-10 and Luke 18:9-14.

1 John 1:5-10.....9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and cleanse us of all unrighteousness....... (NASB)

In 1 John 1:5-10, John was addressing Christians, he was not talking to sinners outside of the body of Christ. Non-Christians need to meet God's terms for pardon in order to have their sins forgiven.

Luke 18:9-14.....14 I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted."......(NASB)

Jesus was talking to a Jewish Pharisee and a Jewish tax collector. The tax collector said a prayer of humility and Jesus said he went to his house justified. The Pharisee nor the tax collector prayed in the name of Jesus. The tax collector was not added to the body of Christ by saying a prayer of humility. Jesus had not died nor had He been resurrected from the dead. The new covenant was not in effect. Men need to follow God's terms for pardon to have sins forgiven under the new covenant.

No matter how sincere or honest a person is erroneous doctrine cannot save them.

GOD'S TERMS FOR PARDON.
1. FAITH: John 3:16
2. REPENTANCE: Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19
3. CONFESSION: Romans 10:9
4. IMMERSION IN WATER: Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, Acts 22:16, John 3:5, Romans 6:3-7, Colossians 2:11-13, Galatians 3:26-27, Ephesians 5:25-27, Titus 3:5, Acts 8:35-38

Humility and prayer is the avenue to the truth.         

WISE MEN SEEK THE PREDICTED KING
by David Vaughn Elliott 

With December well behind us, so that "the spirit of the season" doesn't interfere with a calm consideration of the topic, let's consider the famous Magi, who came to visit the baby Jesus.

First, let's get some false concepts out of the way. How many Wise Men were there? We don't know. Three gifts, yes, but three gifts could have been given by two men or twenty. Came on camels? Maybe. Were they kings, as in "We three kings of orient are..."? Not at all. Did they come to the manger the night Jesus was born? No way. Matt. 2:10-11 says, "After coming into the house they saw the Child with Mary His mother." The house, not the stable. When did they arrive? It's a matter of harmonizing Matthew with Luke. 

Luke 2:22-24 tells of Mary and Joseph taking the baby Jesus to Jerusalem to perform the rites commanded by Moses "for their purification according to the law of Moses." Compare this context with Lev. 12. Mary's purification would have been 40 days after Jesus' birth. Forty days is not enough time to include the visit of the Wise Men, the flight into Egypt, and the return from Egypt. In addition, when the family arrived back in Israel, God warned Joseph not to go into Judea, where both Jerusalem and Bethlehem were located. So they returned to Nazareth. Putting all this together, the visit of the Wise Men had to be after the presentation in the temple, at least six weeks after Jesus' birth. 

Who Were These "Wise Men"? 
 
We commonly call these men the "Wise Men," with capital letters. Some Bibles choose rather to transliterate the Greek word into English as "magi." This is the plural form of "magos," which one Greek authority defines as "the name given by the Babylonians (Chaldeans), Medes, Persians, and others, to the wise men, teachers, priests, physicians, astrologers, seers, interpreters of dreams, augers, soothsayers, sorcerers, etc."

This makes us think of the prophet Daniel, who six centuries earlier, was among "the wise men of Babylon" (Dan. 2:12, ff). In Dan. 2:27, wise men, conjurers, magicians, and diviners are listed together. In the Septuagint (Greek translation of OT), "magos" appears often in connection with Daniel. And Daniel 5:11 says that Daniel was made the "chief of the magicians, conjurers, Chaldeans and diviners." Chief of the magi. 

On Pentecost A.D. 30, among the Jews present in Jerusalem were "Parthians and Medes and Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia" (Acts 2:9). This means that many Jews still lived in the area where Daniel had lived. It is thus tantalizing to ponder what connection the Magi may have had with Jews in "the east," and if they were even acquainted with the great prophetic book of Daniel. We know not. 

"Magi from the east arrived in Jerusalem, saying, 'Where is He who has been born King of the Jews? For we saw His star in the east' " (Matt. 2:1-2). How did these men know that the star they saw in the east was the star of the King of the Jews? 

We know that God spoke to the Wise Men later, because "having been warned by God in a dream not to return to Herod, the magi left for their own country by another way" (Matt. 2:12). We also know that the star did not behave like a normal star, because "the star, which they had seen in the east, went on before them until it came and stood over the place where the Child was" (Matt. 2:9). No star moves like that nor stands over a specific building. So it was a miraculous star, a divine act of God. We must assume that God originally somehow communicated to the Magi the meaning of this star.

Wise Men Seek and Worship the Baby
There is much we do not know about these Wise Men, Magi. We do know that they traveled a long way in order to worship a baby! "They fell to the ground and worshiped Him" (Matt. 2:11).

However, the star had not guided the Wise Men immediately to Bethlehem. Because they were somewhat on their own, it seemed logical to go to Jerusalem first, since it was the capital of the Jews.

When Herod heard that the Wise Men were looking for the King of the Jews, he called the chief priests and scribes and "inquired of them where the Messiah was to be born" (Matt. 2:4). Herod knew enough of God's prophetic Word to equate "King of the Jews" with "Messiah" (Christ). He also figured the Jewish scholars would know where the Messiah was to be born. He was right. The scholars quoted the prophet Micah, and Herod had enough faith to believe the truth of that seven-century-old prophecy. And yet Herod dared to attempt to assassinate the Messiah.

Not so, the Wise Men. The Wise Men were wise men. They sought the infant, not to slay Him, but to worship Him. Worship an infant! How much did these men know? We don't know. But somehow they realized this infant was unique, He would be King of the Jews and obviously not just any ordinary King. 

Jesus was born to be King of the Jews. Thirty-three years later, He died on the cross with the same title over him: "This is Jesus the King of the Jews" (Matt. 27:37). Born King, died King. That, of course, was not the end. It was just the beginning. Scripture tells us that the "Lamb" is "Lord of lords and King of kings" (Rev. 17:14). At his first coming, many mocked him for claiming to be a king. At his second coming, "at the name of Jesus every knee will bow... every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father" (Phil. 2:10-11). Worship Jesus now voluntarily in love, or worship Him at the judgment in fear.

Two thousand years ago, the Wise Men worshiped Jesus. Today, wise men and women still worship Jesus. And you? 

Scripture quotations taken from the NASB.
_________________________________________
You can now Google my entire site on this page:
http://insight2bp.homestead.com/Subject.html