The Great Slaughter!
—— A RESPONSE TO CHAPLAIN RON ADAMS’ AGGRESSIVE E-MAIL THAT WAS SENT TO GEN. JIM
TO CONDEMN HIM
FOR BEING AGGRESSIVE ——
BY: General James Green
IT IS IRONIC that the unrepentant Jews had “the Lamb of God” MURDERED and then the “Lamb of God” — after rising from the dead — oversaw the SLAUGHTER OF THE JEWS, using the same FORCE, the Roman Army, that the Jews had besought in order to accomplish His (Jesus’) death!
Revelation 5:6 states, “...in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain...” What John saw in the Spirit was the resurrected/glorified Christ, appearing as a Lamb that bore the marks of having been slain, which represented His giving of Himself on Calvary for the sins of the human race. He offered salvation FIRST to His own backslid people, the Jewish nation, before offering it to the Gentile nations.
It was John the Baptist that first used the title, “Lamb of God” in John 1:29. Jesus was (and is) the “Lamb” provided by God the Father to be sacrificed in the place of human sinners (see Exod 12:3-17; Isa 53:7). By His (willing, obedient) death, Jesus the Christ made provision for the forgiveness of sin and removal of the guilt and power of SIN. He opened the WAY to the Father for ALL IN THE WORLD.
“Lamb” is Revelation’s foremost symbol for Christ (see 5:6-7; 12:11; 15:3; 17:14; 21:22; 22:1, 3).
Let it be said also that Christ’s judgment is ON those who reject His sacrifice; it was back then; it is now. Note 6:16 and 17 —
“...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?”
We know of a certainty that the Jews that rejected Jesus’s message of REPENTANCE were SLAUGHTERED by the Roman army in AD 70.
“Lion of God”
Before we continue with the “Lamb,” look at Revelation 5:4 — “And one of the elders saith unto me (John), weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah ... hath prevailed to open the (sealed) book.”
So, here we find Jesus portrayed both as a “Lion” and a “Lamb” — two entirely different natures, as it were: one, AGGRESSIVE, the other, PASSIVE. Our “Love only!” opponents try to tell us that Jesus was only “LOVE,” which to them means He was never, ever AGGRESSIVE. Really? Before I continue, let me put forth the dictionary definition of “AGGRESSIVE.”
“Aggressive” (adj.): 1. Aggressing or inclined to aggress (which means, to attack, go to, to stop, to start a quarrel or be the first to attack unprovoked; “Aggression” = warlike act; the use of armed force by a state ... the practice or habit of being aggressive or quarrelsome; in Psychiatry = forceful, attacking behavior, either constructively self-asserting and self protective or destructively hostile to others or to oneself.”
This is not all, though. “Aggressive” also means: “ready or willing to take issue or engage in direct action; militant; full of enterprise and initiative; bold and active; pushing (onward).”
Further, “Aggressive” can mean or imply, “a bold and energetic pursuit of one’s ends, connoting (in derogatory usage) a ruthless desire to dominate, and, in a favorable sense, enterprise or initiative.” “Militant” implies a “vigorous, unrelenting espousal of a cause (like the “Gospel”), movement, etc., and rarely suggests the furthering of one’s own ends.” Isn’t this what “Taking Jesus to ALL the World!” is all about?.
The word “assertive” emphasizes self-confidence and a persistent determination to express oneself or one’s opinions (which is the way of “churchianity” and “political correctness”!!). The word “pushing,” in a negative context, is applied derogatorily to forwardness of personality that manifests itself in officiousness or rudeness, like we see in our dear chaplain here).
So, we see that “Aggressive” can mean either physical war/aggression or mental/spiritual/emotional WAR. In our case, in “Aggressive Christianity,” we fall in the latter category. We do not and will not condone the use of physical violence to propagate the Gospel. This is why we use the slogan “Join the Army that Sheds No Blood!” We have always made this clear. Our chaplain just jumped to MALICIOUS, HURTFULLY AGGRESSIVE assumptions without doing any respectfully honest inquiry into who and what we are and why we use certain terms (just as the Bible uses a number of terms that could be interpreted diverse ways).
Let’s get back to these two natures in ONE.
When one reads the Gospels, one can’t help but perceive these two natures (in ONE): the “passive aggressive” is what we are like. There were times when Jesus acted as a “Lamb,” and other times, as a “Lion,” but NEVER as “Lamb” all the time.
Our MDiv./DMin. chaplain is guilty of eisegesis (reading into Scripture what you want it to say). Exegesis is interpreting a text or texts properly, letting the text speak for itself. And his eisegesis reeks with misguided ebullience — overflowing with enthusiasm to portray Jesus as a weak, frivolous, SIN-LOVING humanist, as opposed to the righteous Savior that He was and is. The chaplain’s delusion of grandeur knows no bounds as one can see by his letter to me. His ad absurdum worldviews are all too obvious, along with his ad hominem arguments — ad nauseam! His “Jesus” gives him carte blanche to promote his own views, clearly without integrity or courtesy of others, and clearly without a balanced perspective of Scripture. (“Carte blanche” (French) = “to receive full power and absolute authority to do as one wishes.”) But the REAL Jesus is nobody’s FOOL!
“The Slaughtered Lamb”
We might ask, “What caused Jesus to be slaughtered by His own people?” SIN! POINTING OUT AND REBUKING SIN! But according to our “love” chaplain, Jesus never went on the “aggressive.” HA! Better study Jesus’ words and actions, dear friends.
Revelation 13:8 tells us that “the Lamb [was] slain (slaughtered, as in some translations) from the foundation of the world.” This redemptive death of the “Lamb” for salvation of the world was decreed from the very beginning of the creation (see 17:8; 1 Pet. 1:18-20).
“The slaughtered Lamb” — read 1 Cor. 5:7, where Paul calls Christ our “Passover.” Here Paul offers very early testimony to the comparison of Jesus with the Passover Lamb. In itself, crucifixion, as distinct from execution by the sword, does not bear any close relation to slaughtering. So the idea of the “slaughtered Lamb,” referring to Jesus, is a theological idea rather than a reference to the actual historical event of His death on the cross. As we see in Scripture (e.g., 1 Cor. 5:7), it is an idea linked with the reality of Him being our “Passover,” comparing Him with the actually slaughtered Passover lambs.
The slain Lamb (KJV) is the basic Christological theme in John’s Apocalypse. Revelation 5:6 reads, “...a Lamb as it had been slain...” The word “as” comes from ὡς, which literally means “in that manner.” Thus: “a Lamb in the manner [of one that] had been slain.” So, according to Greek scholars, the Greek ὡς (hoce) aligns with the veiled and visionary language, as does its Hebrew equivalent, not a literal rendering. “In figurative paradox,” says Professor Otto Michael Tübingen, “it denotes the extreme character of the offering and the lasting effect of the Lamb’s death on the community and the world.” You see, victory and vesting with power accrue as fruits of this death. Revelation 5:9 expressly refers to the blood of the Lamb, which was SLAUGHTERED/SLAIN; it is here a ransom for the community. (I’ve already written on this in other articles.)
Killed All the Day Long
Since our “love” chaplain believes that “aggressive” means physical violence ONLY, let’s look at a similar word — “killed.” Paul uses this word. In Greek it is θανατόω (thanatŏō; also thanatŏs), “to kill” (lit. or fig.), or “mortify” (as in Romans 8:13 and Colossians 3:5, which no “expert” or “scholar” would dare to interpret as literal “killing”!).
Clearly, even the more expressive word “kill” (-ed, -ing) may be used in a figurative sense, depending upon context. (One must KNOW the context!) So both “aggressive” and “killing” can be used in a figurative sense, along with many other Scriptural terms.
Our chaplain here accuses me of physical violence, at least he implies it, without even considering a figurative interpretation or the fact that Scripture itself is packed full of figurative expressions and contexts.
Read Psalm 44:22. Then observe that Paul wrote: “As it is written (referring to Psalm 44:22): ...for your [GOD’s] sake we are KILLED all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.” While believers were killed physically, the Psalmist also means it in a figurative sense: “for Thy sake [CHRIST’s] we are KILLED all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.”
Referring to Paul, no one I know believes that Paul meant physical killing ONLY. He does mention the “sword” in verse 35, along with other things that, depending upon context, are types/images of physical death or mental/emotional death.
Paul uses “die” in Romans 14:8; 7:9; 2 Corinthians 4:10; 6:9; etc., in a figurative sense.
Paul goes on to state in 1 Corinthians 15:31, “I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I DIE DAILY.” What? To the reader of this passage, the words “I die daily” (or “I die every day”) do not appear exaggerated at all. Paul merely refers to his life in Christ: he must die to himself every day in order to follow Christ. Quite the opposite for MOST professing “Christians” of today: they kill the Lord Jesus every day by doing their own thing!!
Paul was merely speaking of his personal hardships on behalf of the Christian faith. He was speaking figuratively. The same principle applies to being an “AGGRESSIVE Christian.” “...be strong in the Lord, and in the power of His might. Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand (AGGRESSIVELY!) against the wiles (tricks) of the devil” (Ephesians 6:10-11). Read verses 12-18. See if this depicts a “passive” believer.
Read 2 Corinthians 10:4 please. Read 1 Timothy 6:12 also (“fight”...??? YEP!). Read 1 Timothy 1:18 (“WAR a good WARFARE”??? YEP!). Read 2 Timothy 2:3 (be “a good SOLDIER of Jesus Christ”??? YEP! Indeed, SOLDIERS are “AGGRESSIVE”!). Read 2 Timothy 4:7 (“I have fought a good fight”??? YEP!). Read Jude 3 (“earnestly contend for the faith”??? YEP!). READ THE ENTIRE NEW TESTAMENT!!!
Now, tell me if a true Christian is supposed to be passive or aggressive? I HAVE DOZENS OF BOOKLETS, MAGAZINES, CDS AND DVDS ON “SPIRIT WARFARE” — ALL ARE FREE, PLUS MANY MATERIALS ON THE “WRATH OF GOD” — for anyone who wants to know what the Bible really teaches on this issue.
Was Jesus Aggressive?
“The Jesus I have been called to serve, and the Jesus of the Bible WAS NOT AGGRESSIVE.” This is what our “love”/“passive” chaplain writes. Well, let’s look into this matter.
Dr. Adams goes on to write on the “11th commandment,” quoting John 13:34-35. Well and good. I have no problem with this “love” commandment. In fact, I wish all Christians could and would practice it. But chaplain Adams missed something. Something which I have been writing and preaching about now for years: Jesus did not nor does not love everybody the same way. There are many people that He did not nor does not love, nor does He love what they do. It is because of THEIR choices.
Let’s take a look at John 13, which Mr. Adam’s cites. Judas and the other disciples were gathered in the upper room, and Jesus demonstrated the washing of feet (vv. 4-11). He let His disciples know that “not all are clean” (v. 11), meaning inside (i.e., in the heart, not on the feet). In verses 12-20 Jesus explains His action of love, implying that one would lift “up his heel against Me” (v. 18).
Verses 21-38 speak of Jesus’ betrayal by Judas.
Now, our “love” chaplain would have us to believe that Jesus only acted out of “love.” But the kind of “love” that chaplain is implying is not seen in the sequence here:
- verse 21 says, “...one of you shall betray Me.”
- In verse 26, Jesus gives a sop to Judas.
- Verse 27 states, “And after the sop, satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, ‘That thou doest, do quickly.’”
What do we see so far? We see that one of Jesus’ disciples, Judas, had NO CHANGE OF HEART. This scene was probably one final appeal to persuade Judas to TURN from his sin. He did not repent, and satan took control of him.
We know that at one time, Judas walked with Jesus. Psalm 41:9 prophetically reads: “Even my own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, has lifted up his heel against Me.” (We know this is referring to the last supper.)
What is my point? My point is this:
- “Therefore, when he (Judas) was gone out, Jesus said, ‘Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in Him’” (v. 31).
Now, chaplain, I will quote your two verses:
John 13:34-35 — “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.”
What do we see? We see that the 11th commandment was given AFTER Judas, the betrayer, WAS GONE!! This tells me that Jesus took AGGRESSIVE action — harsh, unloving, judgmental action — in that He dismissed Judas from Himself and from the presence of His disciples’ company, before Judas could ever hear the new commandment. Jesus in no wise showed “false love” by giving His “love commandment” to a FALSE DISCIPLE ... as MOST churches wrongly do today.
Has not our chaplain told us that “HIS Jesus” would never do such a mean thing?
Do we ever find, in Scripture, where Jesus or any disciple sought out Judas for restoration/salvation? NO! What kind of “love” did Jesus exercise by dismissing Judas from their “love feast”?? The Biblical kind. Where was Jesus’ love, chaplain?
Since I’ve written and taught on this “love” chapter many times, let me mention the following. John 3:16, 17 and 18 tell us much: verse 16 reveals the heart and purpose of God — His love is BIG enough to embrace all persons, i.e., “the world” — meaning, out of all nations/races/cultures/etc. God wants the “world” to be saved, including Muslims, who are the subject in the case which Mr. Chaplain addresses. But Mr. Chaplain hates our attempts to show Muslims what their very own books (the Qur’an and Hadiths) teach, namely, violence and dead works.
God’s love is conditional: I mean, the sinner must BELIEVE or remain CONDEMNED! (John 3:18). And the Bible certainly points out for us what is involved in this condemnation: HELL/LAKE OF FIRE! Jesus spoke of this many times (I have many booklets, CDs and DVDs on Eternal Hellfire). To some liberals, Jesus’ teachings are considered harsh, unloving, and judgmental. Sorry, folks, Jesus spoke of eternal judgment/punishment much more than He did about “love.” Do your own homework.
Now we’ll get to our main text: The parable of the pounds (Luke 19:11-27). No one can miss the point that Jesus, the Lamb of God, is making here. Yet our liberal “love” preachers/scholars/theologians/ missiologists have failed to teach on verse 27: “But those MINE ENEMIES, which would not that I (JESUS) should reign over them, bring them hither,
and SLAY them before Me.”
Some translations use “SLAUGHTER.” Professor K.S. Wuest (N.T. Greek scholar) has it,
“...SLAUGHTER them before Me by SLASHING THEIR THROATS”!!!
Did Jesus, the man of “love,” “peace,” “tolerance,” “mercy,” and “compassion” say such a thing? YEP!
(Greek) “Slaughtering” (ritual or profane): cutting or slashing the throat was the common way to kill in antiquity. In the LXX, this word occurs 23 times. As shown already, we have the saying, “We are counted as sheep for the slaughter” (Psalm 44:22). In the shepherd allegory, God gives the commission: “Feed the flock of slaughter” (Zechariah 11:4); the answer follows: “And I fed the flock of slaughter” (v. 7).
Again, it was ironic that the religious Jewish leaders had Jesus “slaughtered,” and then Jesus — that “loving,” “forgiving” Man that “never, ever said anything harsh or unloving” — acted VERY “aggressive” and oversaw the SLAUGHTER of the Jewish nation. The parable under study proves this.
In the LXX, σφάζω can also be rendered “violently and pitilessly slaughter a man” (1 Kings 18:40 is where God oversees a great slaughter in the story of Elijah). We could go so far as to use “massacre” (something ISIS is now doing, in conjunction with non-Islamic forces).
Back to the parable. Jesus’ parable points out a “second group” of people who now come into the picture. They are the citizens who REJECTED the rule of the nobleman (Jesus): in reality, they were the Jewish people who rejected Jesus as their Messiah/King. Their fate, predicted by Jesus (who only “loved,” remember! and never “judged” or “punished”!) — their PUNISHMENT was similar to the TERROR and TERRIBLE fate meted out to rebels by Oriental monarchs.
Jesus’ parable, dear chaplain, is an allegorical reference to the AD 70 “slaughter”/“destruction” of Jerusalem! Period! No apologies, no pity, no salvation. The whole world is aware of this.
“Slaughter”? Pretty HARSH and UNLOVING words coming from the “Prince of Peace,” the “Lamb of God”!! These words were spoken during Jesus’ earthly ministry. Will our “love” chaplain acknowledge this?
Did Jesus have anything to say after His death-resurrection-glorification? Let us see.
Revelation 2: “And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write: These things saith the Son of God (risen Christ) ... ‘Behold, I will cast her (Jezebel, v. 20) into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.’” Note, Mr. Adams, the following verse: “And I (JESUS) WILL KILL HER CHILDREN WITH DEATH...” Oh, no, not “KILL”!!! YEP!
The same Jesus that spoke Luke 19:27 is the very same Jesus that will “KILL,” according to Revelation 2:23.
Jesus had very little good to say about six of the seven ekklesias mentioned in Revelation (only one had a “clean slate”). He pointed out their SIN/SINS and called names (i.e., “wretched, miserable, poor, blind, naked,” etc.; e.g., see 3:17).
Moreover, dare our “love” chaplain to read aloud Matthew 23. Go ahead, chaplain, we’re waiting.
Shake the Dust
Will our “love” chaplain please read Matthew 10:11-15 to us? Was it “politically correct” for Jesus to tell His disciples to (AGGRESSIVELY!) “Shake the dust of it (the house where they were rejected) from your feet.” This, my friends, was an AGGRESSIVE demonstration of REJECTION!! Jesus taught His disciples to “shake the dust.”
It gets more AGGRESSIVE: “Truly, I tell you (disciples), it shall be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town” (v. 15). Tell me, chaplain, what happened to Sodom and Gomorrah, and why?? And here the “loving” Jesus, who is teaching the AGGRESSIVE (perhaps “MEAN”!) doctrine of “shaking the dust,” speaks of GREATER (HARSHER!) judgment? Well, what do we make of this, chaplain? Please reply, we’re waiting in expectation.
YEP! Jesus gives us His evaluation of family life vs. following Him (Matthew 10:32-42). Note verse 34 please: “Do not think that I have come to bring peace upon the earth ... but a SWORD.” We know that the “sword” was not literal but spiritual, i.e., His Word.
How would our “love” chaplain answer this verse? WERE NOT AND ARE NOT JESUS’ WORDS RADICAL/REVOLUTIONARY/ AGGRESSIVE... putting the natural family in second place to Him?
Would we consider verse 38 “passive,” “loving”? “And he who does not take up his cross and follow Me is NOT WORTHY of Me.” Say, Jesus, where is your “love”??? (See my FREE DVDs on “The Other Side of Jesus” for more Scriptural examples of Jesus’ REVOLUTIONARY-AGGRESSIVE nature.)
Back to Luke’s Narrative (Chap. 19)
After Jesus predicted Jerusalem’s destruction (AD 70), the narrative goes into the triumphal entry (vv. 28-44). Note: as Jesus came “nigh, even now at the descent of the mount of olives, the whole multitude of His disciples began to rejoice and praise God...” (v. 37). We come to verse 41: “And when He was come near, He beheld the city, and wept over it.”
This “wept” in Greek means more than shedding tears. It suggests “a lamentation, a wailing, a heaving of the chest, the sob and the cry of a soul in agony” ... over the sheer LOSTNESS of the Jews (and the world!).
You see, Jesus was disturbed by the Jews’ unrepentance and also by the fact that He would soon have to visit them — with DESTRUCTION. He says in verses 43-44 (CEV),
“Jerusalem, the time will come when your enemies will build walls around you to attack you. Armies will surround you and close in on you from every side. They will level you to the ground and kill your people. Not one stone in your buildings will be left on top of another. This will happen because you did not see that God had come to save you.”
“...because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation” (v. 44, KJV). Personally, I do not believe that America knows that its time for God’s judgment/punishment has arrived. The American “Church” REALLY doesn’t realize it. People, like our chaplain, refuse the “sword that cuts and the fire that burns” (the HELL out of them!). They only speak of God’s so-called “love.” Except one thing ... they, of course, are allowed to AGGRESSIVELY, HARSHLY AND UNLOVINGLY REBUKE people like us who merely wish to be a true witness to those who are the enemies of God. Our Christian (?) chaplain defends the Muslims and criticizes us. This is very common for church snakes, flakes and fakes whom we’ve had dealings with over the decades.
After the “weeping,” Luke’s account goes right into the cleansing of the Temple — Jesus’ first physical/public act that clearly displays His “other” side.
Our “love” chaplain might have a hard time with this account of Jesus’ VERY AGGRESSIVE behavior, which was displayed right in front of His disciples, mind you, giving them an exemplary standard for AGGRESSION and FERVOR FOR THE HOUSE OF THE FATHER. We, too, must maintain this same Spirit of AGGRESSIVE ACTION to clean up the House of God, which is now the “Church” of God (we are His Temple) — which should be the Ekklesia of God.
I don’t have to say much about this, do I? In BLAZING ANGER/WRATH/RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION, JESUS drove from God’s house the greedy, ungodly Jews who were defiling it. Do you suppose it wasn’t like this, contrary to Scripture? Maybe Jesus just smiled, apologized and said, “Could you nice folks not do this? Please excuse me while I gently turn a few of these tables on their sides.” HA! Get serious! Get Biblical (see Matthew 21:12 where Jesus OVERTHREW things ... VERY AGGRESSIVELY.
Now that wasn’t very “loving” of Jesus, was it, chaplain?
Mark 3:1-6 is another account I want our chaplain to ponder: “...and when He (JESUS) looked round about on them (the Pharisees, v. 6) with ‘LOVE,’” — OOOPS! I MEAN — “ANGER, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts...” (v. 5). Here we have a “Jesus ATTITUDE.”
Jesus’ ANGER, chaplain, reminds us that He was both human and Divine. But always PERFECT, WITHOUT SIN, EVEN IN ANGER. What do the Scriptures say about Him? Do they tell us that Jesus or His Father loved all peoples and their sinful acts? No. Jesus was ANGRY with SIN.
Chaplain, you defend Islam — which MURDERS countless believers — and rebuke those who want to show them the error of their books, the Qur’an and Hadiths, along with the error of their murderous ways! Is that really Biblical love?
What do the Scriptures say about the Son? “Thou hast loved righteousness, and HATED iniquity...” (Hebrews 1:9; see Isaiah 61:1 and Psalms 45:7 also).
Sadly, (so-called) “Christians” of today hate what God the Father/Son/Holy Spirit love, and love what They hate! Isaiah 11:5 tells us that “...righteousness shall be the girdle of His loins, and faithfulness the girdle of His reigns.” (“His” = “Rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots,” v. 1, speaking of the Messiah).
IF we are to truly be His disciples, we cannot re-image Him to fit into our passive/liberal point of view. We must allow the Scriptures to be what they are. They need no help.
Biblical love HATES wickedness/iniquity. It’s not this phoney stuff these liberals push. It HATES sin or sins that destroy human lives (like GLBTQ PUKE!) One ought to do a thorough Bible study on what the Father, Son, Holy Spirit hate and love.
Proverbs 8:13 says that “The fear of the LORD is to HATE EVIL: pride, and arrogancy, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I HATE.” HUBRIS to think OTHERWISE!
Jesus demonstrated true “zeal” for His Father’s House (Temple). John 2:17 records it this way: “...The zeal of thine house hath eaten Me up,” a quote from Psalms 69:9. Just what did 2:17 mean by “zeal”? The Greek word here means: “jealousy, indignation, and fervor (the word is zelos = ζηλος). In both Biblical and non-Biblical texts, this same word translated “zeal” further signifies: “the capacity or state of passionate committal to a person or cause.” It is perfectly fair to say, dear chaplain, that being “aggressive” for the Lord and His Gospel can mean “zealous.”
ζηλος describes a human emotion, not a violent act (though you imply we are physically violent — again, without ever having met us, or, obviously, without ever studying or even casually glancing at our materials.
I must admit that Jesus Sirach (in 30:24) uses ζηλος in a derogatory sense (a bad disposition of spirit). The same (non-Jewish) view is found in Sir. 40:5. In Proverbs 27:4 it states that “Wrath is cruel, and anger is outrageous; but who is able to stand before envy (‘zeal’)?” (Note: God’s and man’s “wrath”/“anger” are not the same — one is Divine, the latter, human). The “zeal” of man, if misguided, can be hostile and disruptive, even murderous, like Jihad in Islam.
It is said that about half the instances of our Greek word in the LXX denote a specific intensity of Divine action; the other half are ill. So ζηλος may mean either good or bad, either salvation or damnation (see our two magazines, The Wrath of God 1 and 2, for a deeper study).
When Jesus’ zeal was mentioned, it was because men were defiling God’s Temple. This defilement angered Jesus. We’ve already seen what He did. He got AGGRESSIVE! ... in the true, righteous sense of the word.
Exodus 20:5 mentions the Hebrew “jealous” (“zealous”) concerning idolatry. The Old Testament is replete with such texts on these issues.
The John 2:17 usage of “zeal” is not a direct description of Jesus, but it is an indirect one, speaking of the disciples’ recollection of Scripture and the “zeal” of the O.T. righteousness that maintained the honor of God and His House.
The O.T. usage mostly deals with the moralistic spirit, that is: “to strive after, be aggressive for.” The N.T. is similar in reference. Titus used the words “zealous of good works” (2:14), followed up with, “These things speak, and exhort, and REBUKE with all authority...” (v. 15). Rebuke? YEP! “That sounds TOO AGGRESSIVE, General Jim!” shout many liberals, who stand hand-in-hand with hoards of Biblically illiterate “believers.”
“Zealous” in the New Testament also signifies: “desire to take action to fulfill a moral ideal.” But the “love Gospel” allows sin to be tolerated, even practiced ... all in the name of “love.” I’m not speaking of idealistic individual ethics, but of what is Biblically correct, not politically correct.
So, concerning the OUTBURST of ZEAL that Jesus demonstrated by the cleansing of the Temple, I consider it to be HOLY AND PASSIONATE.
Here is another Greek word (see also σπουδή) that also means “zeal” or “make haste.” In classical Hellenistic Greek, these words also meant “surge on,” “to be zealous, active, concerned about something.” We could rightly include the word “AGGRESSIVE” here, which can mean “to push on with something quickly, assiduously, zealously!” Our two Greek words can be used for “ethical motivation” along with other nuances, of course.
Josephus used σπουδάζω to mean “to be zealously engaged,” “to exert oneself,” “to pursue assiduously,” “to be concerned,” “to show interest,” etc. So, why does our “love” chaplain equate “AGGRESSIVE” — used by Christians, in a Christian context — with “physical violence”?
Philo also used these words to mean “for the morally good,” “upright and virtuous.”
There are various gradations in our N.T. use of these Greek words; the most common is “to make haste.”
Paul uses them to mean “zealous effort” as an expression of the Ekklesia life. Do your own homework.
So, dear chaplain, is there such a thing as “holy zeal”? or “holy aggressiveness”?
The word σπουδή also means “zealous concern.” If one is zealously concerned for the lost, one will naturally be AGGRESSIVE in the proclamation of the Gospel. Such a one won’t be content to merely defend the lostness of the lost, but will make haste to PREACH/TEACH/PRINT THE GOSPEL .
Paul goes so far as to use the words “vehement desire” in his letters to the Corinthians (read 2 Corinthians 7:11). He uses “indignation,” “vehement desire,” “zeal,” and “revenge.” Do you think he copied Jesus?
ZEAL, I feel, is the essence of Christianity:
- “Fight the good fight of faith”
- “contend for the faith”
- “war a good warfare”
All this is done because love motivates us. What is passed off today as “love” is actually “HATE.” Men who think they are so “LOVING” are actually UNLOVING. When men (or women) fling this “You’re not showing Christian love” at us, and “Don’t judge!” — these are the very things THEY are guilty of! When we point out sin in individuals or churches (or in the world), self-righteous hypocrites are the first to fling the Scriptures at us.
We don’t mind being rebuked IF we’re wrong. In fact, I have changed my views on certain Biblical teachings because someone showed me where I was wrong. But it’s not even “Christian” to accuse us of something we’re not guilty of, especially without even talking to us or having the courtesy to read our clearly defined standards and practices that we abide by, laid out in various places on our webpage and in a plethora of our materials. For this precise reason, I’m inviting our “love” chaplain to honestly debate the nature of Jesus: Again, was Jesus passive (effeminate) or aggressive (masculine)? If Mr. Adams refuses to debate, I will post this study up anyway for the consideration of all.
Them that SIN!
The apostle Paul wrote Timothy (his son in the faith), “Them that sin, REBUKE before all, that others also may fear” (1 Timothy 5:20). God’s Word gives us many principles and guidelines with regard to keeping in right relationship with the Lord — here “elders” were referred to: church leaders must not be allowed to do whatsoever they please. Looseness is WHY today’s Church is so backslid: the leadership is so sinful. The prophets of old dealt with such leaders; Jesus dealt with them too; they must be dealt with today.
Israel became so wayward that at one time it was called a “wild ass”! (Read Jeremiah 2:1-24: “A wild ass used to the wilderness, that snuffeth up the wind at her pleasure, in her occasion (in heat) who can turn her away? All they that seek her will not weary themselves; in her month they shall find her” (v. 24). Priests, prophets and people were wild! Sounds like today’s American “Church.”
If one cares to, read Jeremiah 2:20-24. There are 7 similes referring to Israel’s defection. Now, the depth of America’s sin is well noted by those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. Jeremiah’s graphic figures of speech should tell us that God was not fooled — neither is He today. All this “love” and “tolerance” is merely a smokescreen to cover the STINKING SINS within the Body of Christ.
During this time in Israel’s/Judah’s apostasy, prophets were scorned, even killed. This provoked God’s jealousy (zeal) to ACT ... punishments followed. Do you think God is going to tolerate all this sinfulness in today’s Church forever?
To express zealous or aggressive attention to something is Biblical, chaplain. It is the lack of true correction that has turned the “Church” into a “stinking, rotting corpse” awaiting burial! “This witness is true. Wherefore REBUKE them (false teachers/leaders, even those who hold religious degrees!) SHARPLY, that they may be sound in the faith” (Titus 1:13).