Bill Watson – A Traditionalist?
I apparently hit a nerve when I characterized CGI’s Pastor Bill Watson as a traditionalist. For those who may not have read (or remembered) my post on the Church of God International’s messaging problem, I outlined the ongoing struggle between the folks within that organization’s leadership who see real problems with some of Herbert Armstrong’s theology (I called them reformers), and those who embrace most of his teachings (I called them traditionalists).
According to Bill, such characterizations are misguided and misleading. He insists that the stark differences which many of us have discerned in the messaging of the two camps are really illusions and are not indicative of real discord.
Last Sabbath, Bill delivered the second part of his message on the twelfth chapter of Romans, Processing Unity by Love. For the pastor, the key passage from this chapter is: “Just as our bodies have many parts and each part has a special function, so it is with Christ’s body. We are many parts of one body, and we all belong to each other. In his grace, God has given us different gifts for doing certain things well.” (Verses 4-6) In other words, just because Bill’s messaging is different that doesn’t mean it’s bad. Unfortunately, the pastor seems to be conflating gifts and messaging and doesn’t understand the real differences between the two.
To underscore his point, Watson also referenced Paul’s first letter to the saints of Corinth. Specifically, the pastor was interested in the place where the apostle wrote: “I appeal to you, dear brothers and sisters, by the authority of our Lord Jesus Christ, to live in harmony with each other. Let there be no divisions in the church. Rather, be of one mind, united in thought and purpose. For some members of Chloe’s household have told me about your quarrels, my dear brothers and sisters. Some of you are saying, ‘I am a follower of Paul.’ Others are saying, ‘I follow Apollos,’ or ‘I follow Peter,’ or ‘I follow only Christ.’” (I Corinthians 1:10-12) Apparently, this was meant to refute my observation that the reformers had the preferred or correct messaging. Notice, however, that Paul was talking about folks who expressed loyalties and/or preferences for one personality over another. There is no indication here that Paul was talking about differences in the messaging of the various leaders he mentioned.
To be clear, Paul believed that different people within the church had different offices/functions/gifts/talents to contribute to the edification of “the body.” Nevertheless, Paul believed that there was only ONE message that was acceptable for a minister of Jesus Christ to be preaching. Paul said that they all preached “Christ crucified” (I Corinthians 1:23). He wrote to the saints of Galatia: “I am shocked that you are turning away so soon from God, who called you to himself through the loving mercy of Christ. You are following a different way that pretends to be the Good News but is not the Good News at all. You are being fooled by those who deliberately twist the truth concerning Christ. Let God’s curse fall on anyone, including us or even an angel from heaven, who preaches a different kind of Good News than the one we preached to you. I say again what we have said before: If anyone preaches any other Good News than the one you welcomed, let that person be cursed.” (Galatians 1:6-9)
Hence, I say again: “A message to the English-speaking peoples of the earth which is focused on warning them about their sins and God’s impending wrath is NOT the equivalent of teaching all nations about Christ and his teachings and baptizing them into the Church in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit! The headline theology (preoccupation with current events and prophecy) and political messaging of Bill and his allies is NOT appropriate messaging. In other words, this is not some benign and/or superficial difference which should be overlooked by folks inside and outside of the Church! These folks are NOT simply filling a necessary and beneficial niche that others have ignored or overlooked!
Indeed, Bill’s reaction to the “traditionalist” and “Armstrongist” labels is particularly telling in this regard. He throws out several straw men in his attempt to make those labels appear ridiculous. He suggests that if his support for Holy Day observance, the Torah, rejection of paganism, or his belief in the resurrection of the dead means that he’s a traditionalist or Armstrongist – then so be it! For the record, my posts have NOT taken Bill to task for his positions on ANY of those issues. Instead, I have questioned his messaging about British-Israelism, warning Israel, culture wars, headline theology, right-wing politics, conspiracy theories, and Covid-19 public health measures.
Unfortunately, Bill’s messaging has gone “off the rails” over the last decade. Once again, it is INAPPROPRIATE for a minister of Jesus Christ to be discoursing on these topics! Moreover, when Bill’s messaging returns to his former focus on salvation through Jesus Christ, he will NEVER hear another peep out of me (and he won’t have to worry about unity in the church either)!
Lonnie Hendrix
The Armstrongist approach to gospel strikes me as being abbreviated. Christ preached the Good News (Gospel) of the Kingdom of God. So Armstrongists zealously preach a message of a coming theocratic utopia. And they focus on the ways that swords can be beaten into plowshares. In support of this imminent entry of the Kingdom on the world, they preach how all the Deuteronomic curses are coming home to roost prior to the arrival. And Christ will come to fix the fallen world. And this view results in a pre-occupation with current events and all that is wrong in the world that Christ is going to have to fix. There is nothing wrong with this as a relevant side issue, but by itself it seems like only part of a Good News message.
ReplyDeleteThey never seem to get around to preaching why the Kingdom of God is good news. This approach to the message is supported by reading Matthew 24:14 in isolation from all of Jesus' words and this verse seems to truncate the Gospel at the "witness" level - no need to go further than to warn. But Paul tells us in Romans 1:16:
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel; it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. (NRSV)"
How is a message simply about current events and a coming theocratic utopia the power of God for salvation? It isn't. The Gospel can only be the power of God for salvation if it tells you about salvation and how it can come to you. And this is predicated on "Christ crucified" like Miller cites.
It is ironic that a preacher who started a magazine called "Human Potential" adopted a truncated message as Gospel that seems to ignore the "Human Potential."
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
I used to think Bill Watson was a straight shooter, but I guess I've been proven wrong.
ReplyDeleteNeo,
ReplyDeleteI strongly disagree with your characterization of the ACOG traditionalist's message as a truncated version of the gospel. Their "watchman" messaging is based on their belief in Anglo-Israelism - which you have eloquently refuted in numerous posts. They believe that they have been commissioned to warn the English-speaking peoples of the world (and a few other Western Europeans) away from their sins, and about God's impending wrath. This is NOT the Great Commission, and it is NOT preaching the Gospel. The Gospel message is about salvation through Jesus Christ - that is the really "good news" about the Kingdom of God! That other message about current events (and how they relate to ancient prophecies) is a counterfeit pure and simple. It is not an accurate or relevant message, and it has NOTHING to do with the gospel that Jesus Christ, Peter and Paul preached.
As Christians, God expects us to be strangers and pilgrims on the earth. We are not supposed to become entangled in civilian affairs or participate in the Beast/Babylonian system of this present age (which means ALL human systems). There is nothing wrong with having an opinion, expressing that opinion (in forums outside of the ekklesia), exercising our franchise in systems which permit us to do so, or trying to improve the lives or circumstances of others individually or collectively (as part of the Church). Nevertheless, our primary citizenship is in God's Kingdom - we are looking forward to a new city. It is NOT our business/mission as Christians to prop up, support, or apologize for the human systems of this present age (that includes democracies, autocracies, and ANY of the different isms that we could name)!
Neo therm if you do research Jesus and his disciples were waiting for a physical kingdom in their time the jews also thought this way they never expected a heaven.
ReplyDeleteCareful, Lonnie. Do you really want old Bill to waste his precious time writing you another nastygram?
ReplyDeleteThere's an old saying that each of us is three people in one. There is ourself as we see us, as others see us, and as we really are. So, how does one deal with it when the way others see us, or the way we really are, collides with the way we see ourselves? The high road would seem to be taking that as an educational opportunity. A secure person, who is accustomed to taking introspection, would be more likely to ponder such an evaluation, and perhaps make some course corrections.
ReplyDeleteIt is also a very human thing to dislike labels or being placed in a box, even when it is actually what we deserve.
Why do you assume Bill Watson is preaching about you?
ReplyDeleteIs this not a sign of mental illness?
"Why do you assume Bill Watson is preaching about you?
ReplyDeleteIs this not a sign of mental illness?"
Now that's a good one! Maybe time to consider that "three people in one"? As Larry the cable guy might say .... 'That there is funny, no matter who you are', (no matter which side you may be" on or no side). Wasn't it Carly Simon who sang "You're So Vain ---- I bet you think this song is about you"?
Miller:
ReplyDeleteI am not sure I laid it out clearly. I think that the announcement of the coming Kingdom of God is an inherent part of the Kerygma of the church. But it is only part and not even the central part. The message of salvation in Christ forms the core. The Kingdom of God is the wrapper. And salvation is the logical and necessary predecessor to the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God as a theocratic utopia has no personal meaning for anyone unless they first have salvation. This means dwelling on prophecy and current events to the exclusion of the good news of salvation is an overdone pulpit exercise without its meaningful underpinning. Majoring in the minors.
As for how Armstrongism handles their version of the Kerygma that was something I was not considering and have not thought about. I know that telling "Israel" its sins, with its BI connections, was high on the Armstrongist agenda, but I never really understood it to be the only item on their kerygmatic agenda. That's where I am. Maybe I am not understanding your viewpoint.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
I'm not really understanding this post. Maybe because I dont see where hes responding to you?
ReplyDeleteMaybe other folks are calling him out for being a traditional Armstrongist - I don't know. If that's the case, my observations about his perspective and messaging are strengthened and given more credibility.
ReplyDeleteI love Carly Simon's "You're So Vain." Of course, the fun part of the song is its irony. The song IS about the person who thinks it's about them! As Golda Meir and Henry Kissinger once observed, "Even paranoids have real enemies."
Neo,
I liked your clarification about salvation being essential to that part of the gospel that suggests a more literal kingdom. My point is that the emphasis on national sins and current events is NOT part of the commission given to the Church by Christ. His message was about individual repentance and salvation. The world is saved, and the Kingdom is ushered in, when each and every person has accepted Christ's sacrifice for him/herself. So, I think we're in agreement on this?
Miller:
ReplyDeleteFurther clarification:
* Christ stated in Mark 16: “Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation."(NSRV) Proclaiming the gospel then is a part of the Great Commission.
* The good news or gospel is referred to many times as the "Gospel of the Kingdom of God." (It is also called by Paul "the Gospel of Christ.") The Gospel must, then, have some connection to the Kingdom of God. The Kingdom of God may not be the central message, but it has a significant place at the table.
* The Kingdom of God is a spiritual state or reality under the Kingship of Jesus. But in the Millennium and then later in the New Heavens and New Earth, it will subsume part or all of the earth (really, the Cosmos) as the implementing force behind a utopian theocracy.
* So, communicating the happy eventuality of an earthly utopian theocracy is not out of alignment with the Great Commission. It is just not the sole or even principal content of the kerygma or proclamation of the church. But neither is it absent.
GTA stated the following in the article “Just what is the Kingdom of God?”:
“Four things are necessary to constitute a KINGDOM: 1) the territory, with its specific location and definite boundary lines, of 2) a KING or supreme ruler or governing agent, ruling over 3) SUBJECTS or citizens within that territorial jurisdiction, with 4) LAWS and a form of GOVERNMENT. If we leave out any of these vital requisites, we do not have, and cannot believe, the true gospel for this time!”
And in the same article:
“The Gospel Christ brought as a messenger from God the Father was the message of the coming KINGDOM (government — rule) of God! (John 14:24)”
Both these statements are patently false. But they are false not by being categorically wrong but by being both misdirected and incomplete. The focus should be on salvation in Christ leading to inclusion in a spiritual kingdom, and this is not mentioned in these statements.
If I am wrong about this, gimme some feedback. Also, I don't get the Carly Simon reference.
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Neo,
ReplyDeleteHerbert Armstrong believed that the message of Traditional Christianity was NOT the Gospel that Jesus and his apostles preached. For him, the "Gospel of the Kingdom of God" was NOT a message about Christ, salvation or grace. Like the early Jewish Christians before him, Herbert believed in a literal restoration of the Kingdom of Israel. This is made plain in ALL of his writings on the subject, including his booklet "Just What Do You Mean Kingdom of God?"
In that booklet, he wrote: "This is THE KINGDOM OF GOD. It is the END of present
governments - the governments that rule Russia, China, Japan, Italy, Germany - yes, and even the United States and the British nations. They then shall become the kingdoms - the GOVERNMENTS of the Lord JESUS CHRIST, then KING of kings over the entire earth. This makes completely PLAIN the fact that the KINGDOM OF GOD is a literal GOVERNMENT. Even as the Chaldean Empire was a KINGDOM - even as the Roman Empire was a KINGDOM - so the KINGDOM OF GOD is a government. It is to take over the GOVERNMENT of the NATIONS of the world."
Now, while everything that I just quoted from Herbie is technically true, he fundamentally misunderstood both the nature of that Kingdom and how it would come to pass! Herbie focused on some highly symbolic prophecies about the Messianic Kingdom - which, eventually, became "The Wonderful World Tomorrow." The entire message was centered on Christ ruling over a utopian earth where "the wolf would dwell with the lamb...and the calf and the young lion...and a little child would lead them all." For Herbie, this was the essence of the "Good News" - the REAL GOSPEL!
This message was later supplemented with a warning message for "modern" Israel (the English-speaking peoples of the earth). Herbert and his followers believed that they were fulfilling the role of the "watchman" in the "end times" (the period following the close of World War II). They were supposed to "cry aloud, spare not, and lift up their voices like a trumpet, and show God's people their sins."
Conspicuously absent from any of this messaging was the ONE who had made it all possible by his life, teachings, death, burial, resurrection and ascension, Jesus Christ! - Which most Christians have noticed is the subject of the four "gospel" accounts that were included in the New Testament. Moreover, all of the epistles and the book of Acts focus on Jesus and what he accomplished for us. The fact that he fulfilled the law (lived a sinless life) and paid the penalty for our sins is the CENTRAL message of the New Testament - period!
(continued below)
Jesus Christ told Nicodemus that a man cannot even see the Kingdom of God unless he is "born again." About the only time that this was mentioned by Herbie and his followers was to ridicule traditional Christian notions about what that entailed. Likewise, Herbie loved to quote from the fifteenth chapter of Paul's first epistle to the saints of Corinth; but his focus was always on what that meant for the afterlife (which, by the way, I still believe what he taught on that subject). Unfortunately, Herbie usually glossed right over the fact that flesh and blood humans could NOT inherit the Kingdom of God.
ReplyDeleteChrist, Peter, Paul, and the other apostles taught that Christians would someday shed their earthly/temporary tabernacle and replace it with a heavenly/spiritual/eternal one because of Christ's having paid the death penalty which their sins had incurred. Hence, we see that the Gospel of the Kingdom of God is all about Christ, grace, and salvation - the very things that Herbie and his followers had always insisted was NOT the "true" gospel message!
Now, there is also definitely a sense in which that Kingdom will one day replace all of the manmade governments and systems of this present age, but that will only happen AFTER Christ's saints have been clothed in their heavenly tabernacles. Moreover, Scripture makes very clear that Christ and his followers will then be preoccupied with pulling the rest of humanity into that Kingdom! And, when that is finally achieved, the book of Revelation tells us that God will create new heavens and a new earth and will dwell with us forever - the Kingdom will finally be universal!
This is the Gospel message of the New Testament. Hence, you can see why I would say that the traditional Armstrongist message (as promulgated by Herbert) does NOT even constitute a truncated or abbreviated version of the real gospel. If we're going to base our understanding on what is revealed in the New Testament, the messaging of traditional Christianity is much closer to the original message of Christ and his apostles than Herbert Armstrong's message ever was. He left out the very heart of the message. Hence, I believe that his "gospel" was a counterfeit in the truest sense of that word.
I think that we are on the same page on this, but you can tell me if we're not. I think that what I've written in these two posts makes my thinking on this subject clearer and more transparent. I know that traditional Armstrongists will be gnawing their legs off over this, but hopefully most folks will understand that I believe the Armstrongist "gospel" to be heretical.
As for the Carly Simon reference, that was meant for a couple of the anonymous posters who implied that I was being vain for imagining that Bill's comments were partially directed at me and my posts. It was all good fun and wasn't directed at you or any of the comments that you've made.
Well Lonnie, it sounds like you can't control Bill and it's driving you crazy. You feel a constant need to "hit" him. You are only making yourself look all the more foolish.
ReplyDeleteIf you are not part of CGI, why do you care what they do? Do you fret over the actions of the Pope like that? Or the Lutherans? Or the SBC? Or the Methodists?
I get the feeling from reading your posts that you have a lot of pent up anger from not getting your way at CGI. Why don't you just walk away? Go live your life.
Miller 7:10
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you have written. But then I am agreeing with my interpretation of what you have written which may not be what you intended.
My use of the word truncation was inaccurate. This makes it sound like I do not disagree with the Armstrongist concept of the Kingdom of God in category but only in degree. My understanding is that you disagree with the Armstrongist KoG in category. I also believe the Armstrongist KoG is categorically different from the NT KoG, although I may not have understood that clearly when this dialog began.
The simplest way I can see to characterize the category difference is to observe that the HWA KoG was a worldly government like other worldly governments only it's King is Jesus. Whereas the NT KoG is spiritual realm with Jesus as King. And as Christians we have already entered into this spiritual realm.
I also believe that the Cosmos remains yet under the control of Thrones, Principalities and Powers and these forces, though already defeated in the crucifixion, will be finally deposed at the Return of Christ. Then all the enemies of God will be defeated. I do also believe that this will result in an intelligible and concrete hegemony of Jesus over the Creation - making it essentially a new creation - the Apokatastasis. And this will begin with a concrete utopian theocracy on earth. And this utopian theocracy will be intelligible to us in the same way that Christ in his post resurrection appearances was intelligible to the disciples. And we will exist in bodily mode within this Christ-ruled spiritual and material environment.
To go back the beginning. What I was trying to say is that only at the point of the utopian theocracy does the NT KoG resemble HWA's "world tomorrow." Not a truncation but a resemblance. Now, I could be wrong about this. Maybe all of the NT language, especially in Revelation, that seems to refer to a concrete utopian theocracy on earth is metaphor and there is no resemblance. Maybe the language refers to relations and orders that exist in an unearthly dimension. But at that point, I believe that what Revelation and other NT passages seek to describe has limited intelligibility to us in our present state.
My two cents ...
******** Click on my icon for Disclaimer
Lonnie writes:
ReplyDelete“Now, there is also definitely a sense in which that Kingdom will one day replace all of the manmade governments and systems of this present age, but that will only happen AFTER Christ's saints have been clothed in their heavenly tabernacles. Moreover, Scripture makes very clear that Christ and his followers will then be preoccupied with pulling the rest of humanity into that Kingdom!”
I will add my two cents fwiw, not even that much I expect:
Isa 8:14 To the two houses of Israel (YLT).
The term "house of Israel" may refer to the 12 tribes combined and separately to the northern kingdom and the southern kingdom.
2Ti 4:18 And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom
Somewhat similar, there will be one kingdom of God comprising two kingdoms - a heavenly kingdom and an earthly kingdom
1Co 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God;
A heavenly body is required to inherit/enter the ‘heavenly' kingdom of God.
Ac 1:6b they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?
1:6b refers to the ‘earthly' kingdom of God.
Andrew Fausset (1821-1910) understood this, it appears, at least twenty years before HWA was born. But a Scripture to introduce a couple of his quotes:
Rev 20:6b but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand [chilia] years.
"The mistake of the Chiliasts [and HWA] was, they restricted the kingdom to the terrestrial part. Besides this earthly glory, there shall be the heavenly glory of the saints reigning above" (Andrew Fausset, 1 Corinthians, JFB, Vol.3, p.298).
"Jews and Gentiles stand on an equal footing, as both alike needing mercy; but as regards God's instrumentalities for establishing His kingdom on earth, Israel is His chosen people. The Israelite priest-kings on earth are what the transfigured priest-kings are in heaven... Earthly and heavenly glories shall be united in the twofold election. Elect Israel in the flesh shall stand at the head of the earthly; the elect spiritual church, the Bride, in the heavenly. These elections are not merely for the good of the elect, but for whom they minister. The heavenly Church is elected, not merely to salvation, but to rule in love, and minister blessings over the earth, as king-priests" (A. R. Fausset, Revelation, JFB, Vol.3, pt.3, p.722).
Mt 12:26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?
There is a ‘heavenly' kingdom operating now that went bad some time ago.
Lk 4:5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, showed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.
Lk 4:6 And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.
"Paul shares with other New Testament writers, and with Jesus himself, the belief in the existence of a dark power to whom the human race, and the world, is subject because of sin - and the belief that, in Jesus Christ, God had defeated this power and is establishing his own kingdom in its place" (N.T. Wright, Colossians and Philemon, TNTC, p.62).
Eph 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness "in the heavenlies"
The good news that Christ came preaching is that Christ and the Saints are going to replace Satan and the demons "in the heavenlies." As the demons, who inhabit this realm, are not "flesh and blood" so the Saints will also not be comprised of flesh and blood.
In stead of demon "principalities," "powers," and "rulers" there will instead be saint ones. For example:
Part 2
ReplyDeleteDa 10:13 But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia.
Da 10:20 Then said he, Knowest thou wherefore I come unto thee? and now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and when I am gone forth, lo, the prince of Grecia shall come.
Instead of "demon princes" of Persia and Greece there will be "saint" princes of Persia and Greece.
Rev 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth
(Rev 2:13 I know ... where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is... where Satan dwelleth).
As Satan was not literally dwelling in Pergamos nor will Christ and the Saints be literally on the earth.
(Eze 43:5b and, behold, the glory of the LORD filled the house.
Eze 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile,
But Christ will have a dwelling presence in the earthly temple of the earthly kingdom of God in the Messianic Age).
The above pictures the "kingly" role of the Saints; looking then at the "priestly" role:
Rev 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands;
Rev 7:14 ... And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
Rev 7:15 Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.
Revelation 7 is a retro-prospective insert in the chronological story line of Revelation; with Rev 7:9-17 being the "prospective" part. (Probably the most well know and easily identified "prospective" insert in the OT is Ezra 4:6-23. In the chronological story line of Ezra 4 verse 24 follows verse 5).
This "prospective" insert pictures the future "priestly" role of the Saints.
For the success of the Kingdom of God there needs to be Israel the Church in the heavenly kingdom and Israel the Kingdom in the earthly kingdom. But for the Saints to be successful in their role as "kings" they need ‘help' and access to God in the heavenly most holy place. An ‘earthly' type:
2Ki 19:14 And Hezekiah received the letter of the hand of the messengers, and read it: and Hezekiah went up into the house of the LORD, and spread it before the LORD.
2Ki 19:15 And Hezekiah prayed before the LORD, and said, O LORD God of Israel, which dwellest between the cherubims, thou art the God, even thou alone, of all the kingdoms of the earth; thou hast made heaven and earth.
2Ki 19:16 LORD, bow down thine ear, and hear: open, LORD, thine eyes, and see: and hear the words of Sennacherib, which hath sent him to reproach the living God.
2Ki 19:19 Now therefore, O LORD our God, I beseech thee, save thou us out of his hand, that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that thou art the LORD God, even thou only.
Christ, through the nation of Israel, "will then be preoccupied with pulling the rest of humanity into that [earthly] Kingdom!"
Isa 14:2 And the people shall take them, and bring them to their place: and the house of Israel shall possess them in the land of the LORD for servants and handmaids: and they shall take them captives, whose captives they were; and they shall rule over their oppressors.
"... according to the prophet's meaning, to be ruled by the people of God is the true happiness of the nations, and to allow themselves to be so ruled is their true liberty" (F. Delitizsch, Isaiah, KD, Vol.7, p.199).
1143, The words of the prophets are written on the subway walls, and tenement halls!
ReplyDelete"For the words of the profits were written on the studio wall
ReplyDeleteConcert hall
And echoes with the sound of salesmen...of salesmen...of salesmen."