Mary anoints Jesus for his burial (vs. 6-13)—Matthew doesn’t give us the name of the woman, but in John’s account (John 12), he tells us it was Mary, the sister of Martha and Lazarus. Mary was very probably still alive when Matthew wrote his gospel; she was no doubt dead by the time John penned his in the late first century. Thus, Matthew might be protecting her from the Jews, who weren’t above persecuting anybody who supported Jesus in some way. There are some commentators who think two different incidents are involved with Matthew and John, but the similarities seem conclusive for the same event.

John includes that Mary also anointed Jesus’ feet (Matthew only mentions the anointing of His head) and wiped them with her hair. The oil was expensive—300 denarii (John 12:5), which is close to a year’s wage for an average worker (see Matthew 20). Some of the apostles—notably Judas (John 12:4)--complained about the cost, arguing that “this fragrant oil might have been sold for much and given to the poor” (Matthew 26:9), but the beloved John also tells us that Judas was a thief and often stole from the store of cash he kept for the group. But Jesus commends Mary: “For she has done a good work for me” (v. 10), “for in pouring this fragrant oil on My body, she did it for my burial” (v. 12). It’s really doubtful that Mary understood that last point; if she believed that Jesus was going to die and be buried and resurrected, then she was far ahead of just about anybody else in her faith and understanding. But Jesus praised her and that is sufficient, and His final words on the matter are certainly true because I am writing about her right now: “Assuredly, I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what this woman has done will also be told as a memorial to her” (v. 13).

Judas sells out Jesus (vs. 14-16)—Judas went to the chief priests and asked what they would give him to “deliver Him to you.” Thirty pieces of silver. The chief priests knew what Jesus looked like, of course, but they needed to know where He might be so that they could seize Him at an opportune time. That’s what Judas provided for them—information about His whereabouts.

Christ and His apostles eat the Passover (vs. 17-30)—The disciples weren’t sure where they were going to eat the Passover, so Jesus directs them to the appropriate place (vs. 17-19). When evening had come, they sat down together to observe the memorial. The first thing Jesus does is announce that one of them is going to betray Him. “And they were exceedingly sorrowful and each of them began to say to Him, ‘Lord, is it I?” (v. 22). Judas asked Him the question, surely just to find out if the Lord knew, and Jesus indicated that He did. The phrase “You have said it” (NKJV) or “Thou hast said” (KJV, ASV) is simply a Hebrew way of saying “yes.”

Jesus then explained the memorial feast to them as they ate it: “And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, ‘Take, eat; this is My body.’ Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you. For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins’” (vs. 26-28). The Passover feast, instituted nearly 1500 years previous, right before the Israelites left Egypt, pointed to this night, and the body and blood of the Savior. In a sense, prophetic prophecy. God does nothing arbitrarily. Certainly no one in Moses’ day understood the ultimate meaning of the Passover. But Jesus now explains it, and as Paul said in I Corinthians 5:7, “For Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us.” This memorial was remembered each week by the early church, and is the meaning of Jesus’ next statement, “I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom” (v. 29).

Incidentally, Jesus’ statement in verse 28, “For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins,” tells us that His blood was shed “for the remission of sins,” something we all know, of course, and no one disputes. The phrase, “for the remission of sins,” in the original Greek is “eis aphesin amartion” and is the exact same phrase, word for word, that Peter uses in Acts 2:38, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” So, for whatever purpose Jesus shed His blood, baptism has the exact same purpose—the “remission of sins”—and for those who deny that baptism is unto that end, they must explain why the phrase in Matt. 26:28 means Jesus’ blood was shed in order to obtain our forgiveness, but the exact same phrase in Acts 2:38 means something completely different. Salvation is not at the point of faith alone. Repentance and baptism “eis aphesin amartion” are also necessary. How can one truly be said to have “faith”—“trust”—if he doesn’t accept and believe what God said?

The woman in the basket (vs. 5-11)—Zechariah is then commanded to “lift your eyes now, and see what this is that goes forth” (v. 5). Zechariah sees a basket with a woman in it. The KJV and ASV use the word “ephah” instead of “basket,” and this is a little more accurate; the ephah represented an ordinary measure of grain. A lead disc (NKJV; “talent of lead,” KJV, ASV) is placed over the basket to secure the woman inside (vs. 7-8). The angel tells Zechariah that the woman (or the whole thing) represents wickedness (v. 8). The “wickedness” almost assuredly was the impiety and iniquity of the Jews (v. 6); the “earth” (NKJV, KJV) or “land” (ASV) means Judea, and again, the ASV may have the better sense here. Zechariah then spots two women, “coming with the wind in their wings, for they had wings like the wings of a stork” (v. 9), and they pick up the basket and haul it off. “Where are they carrying the basket?” Zechariah asks the angel in verse 10. “And he said to me, “To build a house for it in the land of Shinar; when it is ready, the basket will be set there on its base” (v, 11). This is a little obscure, but I think the following may be the fundamental thought. “Shinar” is “Babylon,” which symbolizes here all the foes of the people of God. Sin will be taken away from His people and dwell among those who oppose Him and His cause. The intended purity of God’s followers is being illustrated. Get sin out from among us and into the world where it belongs.

The quaint Old Testament books of Ruth and Esther, not among the most well-known, fit perfectly into this theme, as God worked through history to fulfill His plan. When man sinned in Genesis 3, God promised a redeemer (v. 15), who would come in human form. The rest of the Old Testament reveals God working that plan out through history. This Redeemer would come through Adam’s son Seth, then through Noah, Shem, and Abraham, the father of the Jews. So, the Messiah, the Savior of mankind, would be born, in the flesh, from the Jewish people. Look there, not elsewhere, for Him.

The book of Ruth, a splendid little love story, demonstrates how a Moabite woman got into that Messianic line (the Moabites were distantly related to the Jews through Abraham’s nephew, Lot). Through a complicated plot of events (read the book), Ruth married a Jewish man named Boaz, who became the great-grandfather of king David (Ruth 4:21-22), who was, of course, in the Messianic line. The purpose of this book is not to tell a love story; that’s only a sidelight. It’s meaning is to trace the Messianic lineage through an historical event, the lives of Ruth and Boaz. It fits in perfectly with the Old Testament’s theme of “Christ is coming”—through Boaz and David. The book’s events, several thousand years after Genesis 1 and 3, explain God working His plan, in His own time, through history. It’s what the Old Testament was all about.

The book of Esther also matches this theme. Interestingly, God’s name is never even mentioned in the book, but His providence is clearly seen all through it. The events took place during the Persian empire (6^th-4^th centuries B.C.). Esther, a Jewish girl, became the queen of Persia, but a wicked Hitler-type fellow named Haman wanted to obliterate the Jews from the face of the earth—and he convinced the king of Persia to go along with his plan. That would have been disastrous for mankind, for recall that it was through the Jews that God had announced He was going to bring to earth the world’s Savior. Well, long story short (you should read the book of Esther yourself), Queen Esther saved the day, preserved the Messianic line, and the Old Testament’s unified theme of “Christ is coming” continued. Satan could not, and will never, thwart God’s plans.

So, two “minor” books in the Old Testament—if any of God’s works can be called “minor”—about two forgotten women (forgotten to secular annals). But God doesn’t need kings, emperors, or Presidents to accomplish His purposes—only humans do. And human beings, males especially, arrogant and full of hubris as they are, would never, over a period of 1,000 years, have come up with stories like this. Especially since the Jews never really understood—and do not to this day—the true purpose of God in the Old Testament. The authors wrote, by the hand of God, things they didn’t even understand. Men don’t do that, especially not numerous men separated by hundreds of years.

One Mind is behind the Bible. Ruth and Esther prove it.

“Then to Adam He said, ‘Because you have heeded the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, say, “You shall not eat of it”: ‘Cursed is the ground for your sake; In toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life. Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you…’” (Genesis 3:17-18)

The recent flooding in the country of Nepal took many lives and was a very sad thing. Of course, such disasters happen in our world—hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, and other such “natural catastrophes,” as we call them. People often ask—and skeptics make it one of their main arguments against God—“Why does God let such things happen? Doesn’t He have the power and love to stop them?” And yes, He does, but His plan is not always what we would like it to be. He doesn’t take His orders from us. Nor, given the moral “catastrophe” man has, and continues, to produce, should He.

You see, folks, just like man, this earth is dying. “Heaven and earth will pass away,” Jesus said. “It is appointed for men to die once.” The earth is not eternal, either. It “groans and labors with birth pains.” It has been “cursed”—interestingly, because of man’s sin. God obviously doesn’t intend for man to live on this earth forever—we die. Everybody dies. We get diseases, we get sick, we die. Or, maybe some natural catastrophe ends our life in a shorter time than we would wish. But every one of us will die—sometime and in some way.

And the earth is dying, too. The floods, earthquakes, etc. are the signs of the eventual dying of this earth, the “curse” God put upon it, the “groaning” of our planet. And sometimes, we get in the way and die because of the dying of the earth.

None of us are promised tomorrow—or even tonight. And many people won’t see either. Both history and the Bible teach that. It is an inescapable fact of this existence. What, thus, should be the wise course for us to pursue? “Prepare to meet thy God.” Always be ready, for we don’t know when it will happen. It will happen, but we don’t know when. Therefore, humble yourself before God in preparation and anticipation of that event. Fear God and obey His commandments. If we do, we will some day be glad that we did. Especially if the next “natural catastrophe” falls on us.

The parable of the talents (vs. 14-30)—Another point Jesus made at the end of chapter 24 was that part of that preparedness was to be faithfully about the Master’s business (Matt. 24:46). In this parable, a man was going on a journey and delivered his goods to his servants, expecting them to use them wisely while he was gone. To one he gave five talents, to another two talents, and to a third one talent. It isn’t easy, in today’s inflationary times, to determine the exact monetary value of a “talent,” but it was an enormous sum. The man given five talents used his gift well and accrued five more talents; the two talent man likewise doubled his money. The man given one talent, however—the one of whom the least was expected—“went and dug in the ground, and hid his lord’s money” (v. 18). He failed to employ what was entrusted to him for his master’s benefit. When the lord of those servants returned, there was a reckoning, and the five and two talent servants were commended and blessed: “Well done, good and faithful servant; you were faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord” (vs. 21, 23). The one talent man made an excuse: “Lord, I knew you to be a hard man, reaping where you have not sown, and gathering where you have not scattered seed. And I was afraid, and went and hid your talent in the ground. Look, there you have what is yours” (vs. 24-25). The lord knew it was an excuse: “You wicked and lazy servant” (v. 26). Yes, God can be “hard,” but only if we fail to live up to the blessings He has given to us. So, part of the preparedness for His Second Coming is to be faithful with what He has committed to us so that we will be fruitful laborers. Not surprisingly, the penalty for the slothful servant was, “Cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (v. 30). This is not a fate we wish to experience.

The final judgment scene (vs. 31-46)—When Jesus returns, “He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats” (vs. 31-32). The “sheep” are the saved, and the “goats” are the lost. Both will ask why they receive their sentence. The essence is, “for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me” (vs. 35-36). Or, in the case of the “goats,” they did not do that. “The righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink?” and so forth (vs. 37-39), and “the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me” (v. 40). And the “goats” did not do such and thus were condemned. Jesus has made it plain that “whoever desires to become great among you, let him be your servant” (Matt. 20:26)—the route to “greatness” in God’s eyes is in serving others, and in this final scene in Matthew 25, that point is emphasized. Do note, please, that nothing is said in this scene about the love and grace of God! Nor is there a word about church attendance, baptism, or the Lord’s Supper. Does that mean these matters have no role to play in our eternal destiny? Of course they do. But those things aren’t what Jesus emphasizes in Matthew 25. We look for the easy way; unfortunately, that’s not the road to heaven. Be watchful, be prepared, and be busy with serving others. Then, “the righteous [will enter] into eternal life,” but the lost “will go away into everlasting punishment” (v. 46).

I do Biblical exegesis on my substack, but if you go to my site, you’ll also find a lot of Christian evidences—defense of the faith against atheistic lies. I’m currently publishing a series on how predictive prophesy proves the inspiration of the Bible. This is the 2nd time I’ve run this series. I recently published my series on proving the resurrection of Christ again. I have recently written a series on Charles Darwin, and where his errant theory came from historically. I’ve had other such articles and will continue to publish these types of articles. We need these types of teachings to help our children understand the truth—something they are not going to get in the public schools. We’ve lost too many of our children already by being unable to counter the false arguments of the skeptic.

So, just a reminder. Biblical exegesis AND lots of Christian evidences on Mark It Down! Bible Substack. I don’t send out an email every time I write an article, so bookmark the page and remember to go often. Glory to God and the Lord Jesus Christ!

Mark Lewis

1. Isaiah 7:14—the virgin birth. I’ve already discussed this in a previous article, so I won’t repeat that material here. Check this page for the Isaiah 7:14 prophetic discussion.

2. Isaiah 9:6-7—”For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order it and establish it with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.”

There is so much in these two verses that it would take a book to sort through it all. That Isaiah is pointing to Jesus is denied only by those who absolutely refuse to understand the Bible. Unfortunately, their name is Legion. To their own eternal destruction, I might sadly add.

Here are just a few things noteworthy in these two verses:

1. “Unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given.” As noted frequently before in this series, God promised that a Savior would come in human form, i.e., a man. He would grow up in this world as a normal human would. Isaiah 7:14 has already spoke of His virgin birth; in this verse, Isaiah reiterates He will be born into this world, given to us by God.

2. “The government will be upon His shoulder.” He would establish a kingdom and rule over it. He did that, the church, and is now “King of kings, and Lord of lords” (I Timothy 6:15).

3. “His name will be...” In other words, His character, not what people called Him (Jesus). He will be Wonderful, a Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. I emphasized “Mighty God” to further demonstrate His dual nature. Genesis 3:15, the first Messianic promise, only spoke of the Savior’s human nature. Micah 5:2 and now here in Isaiah 9:6, we are informed that He will be God, too. “Everlasting Father” tells us of His eternal equality with God. See Philippians 2:6-8 for more on this. The triune nature of God (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit) is far beyond the finite mind of man to comprehend, and countless hours have been wasted trying to explain it. I’m not going to participate in and attempt such futility. What we can determine, however, from this thought is that Jesus was/is God, and He is eternal in His existence. “Before Abraham was, I AM” (John 8:58). The Hebrew in Isaiah 40:3 uses YHWH, Yahweh, or Jehovah (ASV). This is the John the Baptist passage discussed in an earlier article—“Prepare ye in the wilderness the way of Jehovah.” Jesus is called “Jehovah.” Any who deny the eternal nature of Christ are in grave error.

4. “Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end.” His “government” began almost 2,000 years ago (Acts 2), and has spread throughout the world. And it’s not going anywhere any time soon, Marx and other atheistic Leftists to the contrary notwithstanding. History proves this statement of Isaiah correct.

5. “Upon the throne of David”—refer to Peter’s sermon in Acts 2 and other apostolic sermons recorded in that book. A HUGE mistake is made by Jews, and many others, who think that the Messiah will some day literally sit on a resurrected throne of David, and rule literally on this earth as king. That was never God’s intention—eternal salvation from sin was and is His design! Please again study the first three chapters of the Bible to see what man needed and what God promised. Too many people love this world too much and don’t want to leave it. And they want a Messiah who will let them live here. Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, gentle reader, not on this earth (Matt. 6:20)

6. His kingdom shall be established “with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever.” The church will exist till the Lord returns and then we will be with Him forever in heaven.

What a magnificent prophecy this is!

In my next article in this series, I will discuss the prophecy in Isaiah 11, especially Jesus being “the Branch.”

You grow up with that kind of mentality, in that kind of a “zeitgeist.” What kind of scientific theory would you produce?

Darwin knew he didn’t have the scientific evidence to support his theory. The most important “proof” of his theory, the fossil records, where we could actually see this molecules-to-man evolution takes place, is totally lacking in what Darwin said happened. And even he said so:

“Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.” Darwin, On the Origin of Species

It was an hypothesis, based upon the current “zeitgeist” Darwin lived in, not upon scientific evidence.

But surely, since Darwin, paleontologists have found the “finely-graduated organic chain” that hadn’t yet been discovered in Darwin’s day. Well, here is a 1980 quote from one of the greatest evolutionary paleontologists who ever lived, Dr. Stephen J. Gould:

“The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches. The rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils. All paleontologists know that the fossil record contains precious little in the way of intermediate forms. Transitions between major groups are characteristically abrupt.”

The absence of the intermediate forms needed to prove Darwin’s theory remains a “trade secret of paleontologists,” something “all paleontologists know.” Why are they keeping it a secret? Is there something they don’t want you to know? Or believe?

Harvard evolutionist Richard Lewonton explained what is going on:

“Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

Bottom line is, we believe Darwin, not because the scientific evidence proves his theory correct, but because the only alternative is to believe in God, and being good materialistic atheists, we aren’t going to believe in that. Very open-minded, these Darwinists, aren’t they.

Most scientists know that the Darwinian theory has huge, unscientific holes in it. So, why do they believe it?

Well, maybe it’s because Darwinism is the “zeitgeist” they live under, and they can’t rise above theirs any more than Darwin could rise above his.

Think and investigate for yourself!

The two olive trees (vs. 11-4)—Zechariah was as confused as the rest of us. “What are these two olive trees?” (v. 11), and olive branches (v. 12). Again, the angel asked him, “Do you not know what these are?”, and again the prophet professes his ignorance (v. 13). So it is explained to him that the two trees are “the two anointed ones, who stand beside the Lord of the whole earth” (v. 14). There is near universal agreement that these two “anointed ones” are Joshua the high priest and Zerubbabel the governor.

Jesus never asked the people to believe in Him apart from the evidence He provided that He was who He said He was. He had told the Jews that He was the Christ, but mainly, He said, “Look at the evidence.” Just because He said He was the Christ was no cause to believe in Him. I could claim to be God; anybody can say anything. The question is, what does the evidence say?

And that is exactly what Jesus is pointing at in these verses. “Don’t believe me just because I say it. Look at the works that I do. What does the evidence say?” He was talking mainly of the miracles He did, but His teaching, His godly life, the many good deeds He did—all gave evidence of His divinity. But mainly, the miracles. No human being could do the miracles Jesus did. He had to be God because only God can do the things He did.

But the Jews didn’t believe for the simple reason that He didn’t give them what they wanted—the earthly kingdom they (mistakenly) thought their Messiah would bring. They wanted the conquering Christ, not the suffering One. So, regardless of the evidence He provided, they were emotionally and volitionally unwilling to accept it. Their Jewish descendants today fit in the same category.

But the evidence was plentiful. In Matthew 27:42, when He was on the cross and they said, “let Him now come down from the cross, and we will believe Him,” that was a bald-faced lie. He had, for three years, given them plenty of, and sufficient, evidence of Who He was. One more miracle wouldn’t have changed their minds because one more miracle wouldn’t change His teaching. He had to die on the cross; that goes all the way back to Genesis 3 when man sinned. But it wasn’t what the Jews wanted.

And people today reject Jesus for the same reason—not because the evidence is insufficient, but because He doesn’t give them what they want, the sinful lifestyle they crave. “Go and sin no more” is not what the message people want to hear. So, all the evidence in the world wouldn’t convince them.

The evidence clearly says that Jesus was the Messiah Who died on that cross for our sins, so that we can have eternal life, not just a short earthly one. “The works that I do…they bear witness of Me,” i.e., prove who I am. But He will not force us to believe. That is our choice. Make sure you draw the correct conclusion from the evidence Jesus gave.

A couple of key points in verse 36, which reads, “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.” The phrase “that day” is used several times in the New Testament to refer to the Day of Judgment. For example, in Matthew 7:22, a Judgment Day scene, Jesus says, “Many will say to Me in that day…” Luke 10:12 reads, “But I say to you that it will be more tolerable in that day for Sodom than for that city,” another obvious allusion to the final day. In II Timothy 4:8, Paul wrote, “Finally, there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will give to me on that day, and not to me only but also to all who have loved His appearing.” And there are others. “That day” was a well-known and clarion reference to the final Judgment Day, the Second Coming of the Lord.

And note also in verse 36, that of that day, “no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but My Father only.” Jesus had just spent 30 verses specifying exactly when a certain event was going to take place. If verses 4-35 refer to the Second Coming, we know exactly what to look for. But then, in verse 36, He says no one knows? No, the only explanation is the one I’ve given—verses 4-35 refer to the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., and the end of Jewish system as established by God. Beginning in verse 36, the subject is the literal Second Coming.

Notice also one more thing: a shift in terminology. In verses 4-35, Jesus speaks of “those days” (vs. 19, 22, and 29)—the whole time of the coming of, and then the destruction of, Jerusalem. But now, beginning in verse 37, it’s “that day.” Also, we saw how specific things were before the fall of Jerusalem—wars, rumors of wars, famines, pestilence, false Christs, etc. But, before the Second Coming, there is nothing specific: “But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark” (vs. 37-38). What warning did people have that the flood was about to come? None, except Noah’s preaching. They were carrying on their daily lives, “eating, drinking, marrying and giving in marriage”; and so it will be when Jesus comes again. You might be on your way to work—and there He appears. You could be eating supper—and you hear the shout and the trumpet. There will be no warning. “Then two men will be in the field: one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding at the mill: one will be taken and the other left” (vs. 40-41). Those two men and women weren’t looking for anything; there were no signs warning them of the impending arrival of Jesus. They were simply going about their daily business. Thus, what should our response be? “Watch therefore, for you do not know what hour your Lord is coming” (v. 42). If we knew when He was coming, we could prepare: “But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect” (vs. 43-44). And that’s part of Jesus point: how many people, if they knew the signs approaching Jesus’ Second Coming, would wait until they saw them before they got ready to meet Him? No, no such luck. We must always be ready, for there are no signs before Jesus’ Second Coming! Folks, we are not looking for the signs, we are listening for the shout (I Thess. 4:16). Jesus ends Matthew 24 with an example of a servant who was, and a servant who was not, looking for the coming of the master—and the end result of each. Reward for the watcher, punishment for the slacker.

In Matthew 25, Jesus will give some examples of how we need to be ready for “that day” to come.

Please keep the quote above in mind. I will return to it in this series. But just so you’ll know, the theory of Charles Darwin arose far more from laissez-faire economics and English “progressive” philosophy than it did form scientific observation and experimentation. That’s the historical truth, but we don’t know history, and Darwinian pseud-scientists aren’t going to tell us. Well, most of them don’t know, either.

Where did Darwinism come from? Out of what “zeitgeist” did Darwin develop his theory—a “zeitgeist” which, incidentally, is in many ways still with Western-influenced civilizations. History, as always, provides solid answers, and our ignorance of history often means we don’t know the answers. My point in this article is not to argue that Darwinism is unscientific; here I’m only going to trace its historical origins.

To keep this less than book-length, I’m will only mention three historical movements which perhaps had the greatest influence on 19^th century thought into which Darwin was born. Remember, that no less thinkers than Karl Popper and Arthur Koestler suggested that Darwin was a child of his times, inspired more by 19^th century “zeitgeist” than by science strictly construed. That great thinker of today, Mark Lewis, agrees with them totally (ahem 😊).

1. The decline of Christianity. I do believe that Christianity is true, proven by the resurrection of Jesus and many other lines of evidence, but I would also argue that, down through history, human abuses in the name of Christianity by its “adherents” have been the religion’s own worse enemy. While the Protestant Reformation did some wonderful things for human freedom, it also led to the incredible horrors of the religious wars of the 16^th and 17^th centuries. These wars were/are utterly nauseating to any right-thinking person, totally contrary to the teachings of the Founder of Christianity, and no true New Testament Christian would ever defend them for one second. They are completely disgusting historical events from the standpoint of true Christianity. I cannot say one good word about them.

And they turned a whole lot of people off during their time and after. The atheistic strain of the Enlightenment (led mainly from France by Diderot and Voltaire) attacked Christianity viciously. And while they were not successful in totally destroying the religion, they did wound it grievously, wounds that have not healed to our day. Those who were of a mind to not be especially favorable to religion (and Charles Darwin was one) found in the Catholic-Protestant religious wars evidence they wanted to reject Christianity. An anti-Christian, skeptical mentality arose from the Enlightenment and Darwin accepted it. It became much of the “zeitgeist,” at least in “intellectual” circles, in the 19^th century, and again, still is.

2. The Industrial Revolution. This movement is perhaps the greatest “revolution” in human history. It completely changed all the world, and everyone alive today has been influenced by it. Its effects cannot be put into human language.

To understand the impact of the Industrial Revolution, we must realize that for all of human history (up to the IR), people lived, globally, pretty much the same way. They farmed, they hunted, they fished, they lived off the land. Agriculture was the greatest employer (hence, slavery). There was some trade, commerce, and manufacturing, of course, but nothing like modern times. Probably at least 90% of humanity lived by farming or hunting. And that was true everywhere on earth.

Thus, the major philosophical “thought” through history was based on “stasis”—things just don’t change very much. And there was a reason for that. Most people believed that God (or their “gods”) didn’t change much. So, if He doesn’t change much, we can’t expect human existence to change much. Stasis. And for thousands of years, up to the Industrial Revolution, that was the world. People in 1750 A.D., with very minor exceptions, lived the way people in 1750 B.C. lived, and nobody ever expected anything different.

But beginning in the late 19^th century, things did change. Slowly, at first, but then increasingly rapidly. The Industrial Revolution. I won’t take time to go through the early great inventions of this Revolution, but the main idea is things did begin to change. Maybe “stasis” didn’t explain human existence after all! With all this rapid, and fascinating change—and “progress”—going on, thinkers began to cast about for explanations of it. Hegel developed his dialectic, Comte gave us “positivism,” Spencer articulated a theory of universal evolution—“change” explains everything, not “stasis.” But, for whatever reason(s), the world was “changing,” “progressing,” and it was almost universally accepted in “intellectual” circles that “progress” was inevitable. “Progressivism,” as we know, is still with us today.

That was the “zeitgeist” Charles Darwin was born into. He was a member of the most favored class in the most favored nation in the world. He would have been inhuman if he hadn’t thought in terms of “progress” and “evolution.”

And he gave the world a “scientific” explanation for why this “progress” was the true philosophy of history. God died, Nietzsche told us. “Progress” replaced him. It is incredibly important to understand the “zeitgeist” Charles Darwin was born into. And his theory swept the world that the Industrial Revolution and anti-Christianity had created.

3. Malthusian economics. One other matter greatly influenced Darwin—the laissez-faire ideas of Adam Smith and especially Thomas Malthus. Herbert Spencer had theorized about a “survival of the fittest” concept, but it was Malthus’s economic laissez-faire notions of competition that gave it legs. Malthus argued that while human population grows exponentially, food production only grows geometrically. Soon, human population will outpace food production and only the “fittest” will survive—a condition caused by laissez-faire economic competition. Darwin believed that religiously, and “survival of the fittest” became almost synonymous with “Darwinism.” It was the “zeitgeist” of Darwin’s day, at least among the intelligentsia.

This Malthusian argument needs a little more explanation, and I will return to it in a future article in this series. Go back to the quote at the beginning and think that through.

So, put together a revulsion and rejection of Christianity and a desire to find other explanations for human existence. Add to that the philosophic shift from “stasis” to “change” and “progress” produced by the Industrial Revolution, and then throw in Malthusian laissez-faire “survival of the fittest,” and what will come out of that mixture?

Atheistic Darwinian evolution. It would have taken a far greater man, and far greater age, not to produce such a theory. Darwin wasn’t the only person thinking in those terms, he just got published first.

That verse pretty much explains the current situation in America, and indeed, all through history. Jesus, as God, knows the human heart, knows history, and knows that this statement is true in every time, nation, and clime. What is happening in America is not new in human history, indeed, it would be a little shocking if it didn’t happen.

It’s still sad to see, however, the incredible amount of evil and hatred that exists in the nation. Again, that Jesus is hated by the Left is not news: “The world…hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil” (John 7:7). How such evil and hatred arose in America is an historical question, and, as with all historical questions, doesn’t lend itself to an overly simplistic answer. America has never been a perfect country, of course; we are composed of imperfect human beings and sinners, and such has always been the case. But even during the Civil War period, the division wasn’t this deep; the North and South disagreed on the purpose of government and slavery, of course, but there was still an underlying belief, in both parts of the country, that the Bible and the Judeo-Christian moral code was the foundation of the nation and was the moral system on which all agreed. That is certainly not the case in America today.

The current hatred and evil has largely arisen in opposition to Christianity, which the Left and the Democratic Party—and not a few in the Republican—now rejects. The country is divided on its foundation principles and there seems no hope, any time soon, of this division being healed.

The country, after World War II, became very affluent—more affluent, one might say, but especially enjoyed great prosperity coming out of the Great Depression and war deprivations. As in all of history, when people become affluent and prosperous, they tend to get lazy (read Deuteronomy 31:20). They want to enjoy their prosperity, and lose many of the qualities and characteristics necessary to remain a morally and spiritually strong people. America, especially in the 1960s, became an increasingly pleasure-loving society, and began divorcing itself from its strong moral roots. It didn’t help that our schools were teaching a godless, atheistic philosophy as “science”—Darwinism, with it naturalistic, materialistic worldview. “Science” became the new “religion,” and many, many people began to draw the—correct—conclusion from atheism: “if there is no God, then everything is permitted” (Sartre). No God, no heaven, no hell, no life after death, this life is it, so let’s eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. It isn’t in the least bit shocking that the sexual revolution arose—sex seems to be the most pleasurable activity humans can enjoy—and the churches slept, and didn’t fight back against what was happening. We began losing our young people, and America has suffered through at least two generations of that.

People rejected the light of God’s word, the light that Jesus provides, and, as a result, promiscuity, licentiousness, and every other kind of evil began to seep through every fiber of the country. Not surprisingly, government was no help at all, indeed, often paramount in the movement towards godlessness (Bill Clinton, anyone?). And with a pseudo-scientific philosophy (Darwinian materialism) to support it. Americans began to revel in evil—love it—and thus began to hate that—Christianity—which opposes and exposes it. And that’s where we are right now. America’s problems are not economic or political, they are moral and spiritual—exactly the thing that Jesus pointed out in the verses at the beginning of this essay.

Forget about a turn-around, folks, that’s not going to happen. The Left’s “religion” is the evil they believe and practice, and they aren’t going to give it up; at least not any time soon. Obey the Lord and go to heaven; that’s just about all we have left for the foreseeable future.

The Leftist “hates the light”—Christianity and “does not come to the light, lest his deeds be exposed.” Evil—darkness—killed Jesus to shut Him up, and they are doing everything they can now—short of mass murder, they can’t do that yet in America—to silence Christianity.

God and His Word aren’t going anywhere, of course. The reckoning will come, though not all accounts will be settled on this earth. But Jesus told us about light and darkness. It’s just heart-breaking that so few listen anymore.

“The voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord; Make straight in the desert a highway for our God.’” (Isaiah 40:3)

Each of the four gospel writers in the New Testament refers to this verse and explains it as the work of John the Baptist. Every skeptic will, of course, deny it because they don’t believe in predictive prophecy, Jesus, or the Bible as God’s Word. But, to those who understand the meaning of the Old Testament, and the subsequent historical account in the New Testament, it is clear that John the Baptist is intended in this verse.

John’s work, as he himself claimed, and as Isaiah 40:3-5 makes clear, was introductory: to “prepare the way of the Lord.” To get people in the proper frame of mind to receive the coming Messiah. This John did extremely well. He was asked if he were the Messiah, and he himself claimed, “I am ‘The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Make straight the way of the Lord,”’ as the prophet Isaiah said” (John 1:19-23). John understood his work very well. “He must increase, but I must decrease” (John 3:30). What a great and humble man John the Baptizer was!

Notice that John was to “prepare the way of the Lord”—the Messiah would be Lord of all. The verse is even more explicit: “Make straight in the desert a highway for our God.” As I noted in an earlier article in this series, by Isaiah’s day, the prophets are announcing that this Savior who was predicted all the way back in Genesis 3:15 to come in human form, would have a dual nature: He would also be God. God in the flesh. The perfect, the only acceptable sacrifice for man’s sin. What human could be such a sacrifice? Jesus was all man and all God. Please don’t ask me to explain that because no human is able to, and it is the height of arrogance to think that one can. He was human, and He was God. That’s as much as our finite minds will ever comprehend. And it should be enough, because if God had wanted us to know more, He certainly would have told us.

“Behold, I send My messenger, And he will prepare the way before Me. And the Lord, whom you seek, will suddenly come to His temple, even the Messenger of the covenant, in whom you delight. Behold, He is coming.” (Malachi 3:1)

There actually seems to be two “messengers” intended in this verse, and the New King James Version distinguishes them by putting the first “messenger” with a lower-case “m,” and the second “Messenger” with an upper case “M.” I think they’ve got it right. The first messenger, in line with Isaiah 40, was John the Baptist. As Malachi said (agreeing with Isaiah), “he will prepare the way before Me”—again, the Messiah will be human and God. The second “Messenger” in Malachi 3:1, “will suddenly come to His temple, even the Messenger of the covenant.” That’s Jesus. And Malachi isn’t finished.

“Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord. And he will turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the earth with a curse.” (Malachi 4:5-6)

These are the final two verses of the Old Testament, clearly indicating the “story” is not over yet and something else will ensue. Malachi speaks of the coming of “Elijah the prophet,” but this is only a figurative reference to John the Baptist who came “before...the great and dreadful day of the Lord.” Jesus’s coming was indeed “great” for those who accept Him, and it will be “dreadful” for those who do not. Jesus tells us that the “Elijah” here is John the Baptist: “And if you are willing to receive it, he [John] is Elijah who is to come” (Matthew 11:14). That settles the matter for believers; nothing would settle it for unbelievers.

So, we’ve already seen several predictive prophecies in the Old Testament that were fulfilled in Jesus, going all the way back to Genesis 3:15. These alone would be enough to convince any “noble and good heart” (Luke 8:15). But there are many, many more such prophecies, and I will continue this series and show them to the reader. God has indeed done everything He can to save our wicked souls; if we are lost in eternity in a devil’s hell, it will be in spite of everything He has done for us.

(To be continued)

And, frankly, if we’d do just a little bit of Old Testament study, there would be no difficulty. This idea of the sun being darkened, the moon not giving its light, etc. was used by the prophets to indicate judgment upon a nation. For example, in his “burden against Babylon” in Isaiah 13, we find this language: “Behold, the day of the LORD comes, cruel, with both wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate; and He will destroy its sinners from it. For the stars of heaven and their constellations will not give their light; the sun will be darkened in its going forth, and the moon will not cause its light to shine” (vs. 9-10). Notice that the language used is almost exactly what Jesus says in Matthew 24:29. If God used this language in illustrating “the day of the Lord,” i.e., a day of judgment against Babylon, why would He not use it against Jerusalem? It’s language Jesus’ listeners and Matthew’s readers would have been familiar with.

Another example: In Ezekiel 32, the prophet speaks judgment against Pharaoh and Egypt. Verses 7 and 8 read, “When I put out your light, I will cover the heavens, and make its stars dark; I will cover the sun with a cloud, and the moon shall not give her light. All the bright lights of the heavens I will make dark over you, and bring darkness upon your land,’ says the Lord GOD.” Sound like Matthew 24:29 again. If we study the Old Testament, this “apocalyptic” language that Jesus uses in Matthew 24 should be familiar to us, too, and thus we ought not be surprised that such speech is found in reference to the coming judgment on Jerusalem.

And, once more, the “coming with the clouds” is also figurative. Isaiah 19:1 says, “The burden against Egypt. Behold, the LORD rides on a swift cloud, and will come into Egypt.” Jehovah is coming in judgment upon Egypt riding on a cloud. Literally? Psalm 104:3 talks about a God Who “lays the beams of His upper chambers in the waters, Who makes the clouds His chariot, Who walks on the wings of the wind.” Now, indeed, when the Lord Jesus returns the final time, He will come with the clouds (Acts 1:11; Rev. 1:7). But that coming will be a judgment day, too. So, familiarity with the Old Testament figures and allusions will help us to understand Jesus’ language in Matthew 24:29-31, the most difficult passage in the chapter—the coming in judgment upon Jerusalem, by the Roman armies, in 70 A.D. That’s what Jesus has been talking about so far in the chapter!

Verse 31, “And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other,” tells us that, during this destruction of Jerusalem, the Lord will protect “His elect”—provided, of course, they paid attention to what He had told them earlier in the chapter. “See, I have told you beforehand” (v. 25).

The lesson from the fig tree (vs. 32-36)—Jesus relates a short parable in vs. 32-33: “Now learn this parable from the fig tree: When its branch has already become tender and puts forth leaves, you know that summer is near. So you also, when you see all these things, know that it is near--at the doors!” You know the signs for ripe figs, Christ says, now you know the signs for the coming destruction of Jerusalem. If they didn’t pay attention, it wouldn’t be the Lord’s fault.

Verse 35 is clear: “Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.” A generation in Jesus’ day was considered 40 years and that’s about how many years intervened between Jesus’ warning in this chapter and the disaster that befell Jerusalem at the hands of the Romans in 70 A.D.

The destruction of Jerusalem that year is a cardinal event in the history of the Jews. The Romans obliterated everything—the temple, all the records, etc. There isn’t a Jew alive today who can tell you which of the 12 tribes he comes from, because the Romans destroyed those records. How can Israel today set up their religion as revealed in the Law of Moses? The priests must be from the tribe of Levi, but no Jew today can know if he is from that tribe or not. The destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. was God’s plenary judgment upon the Jewish nation—no more land, no more temple, no more sacrifices; the Jewish religion is not God’s authorized religion today, and He has no more purpose for the Jewish people. God “desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (I Tim. 2:4), and that can only happen through Jesus Christ and the Christian religion (Acts 4:12). If the Lord had His way, there wouldn’t be one single, solitary Jew left on the face of this earth. They would all become Christians.

That’s what He was trying to tell them in 70 A.D.

A message for the high priest (vs. 6-10)—The Lord would allow the high priest to continue his work “if you will walk in My ways, and if you will keep My command” (v. 7). All of this is made possible because of “My Servant the Branch” (v. 8). This is a reference to the Messiah. He is called “the Branch” is several places in the Old Testament (Isaiah 4:2; 11:1; Jer. 23:5; Zech. 6:12). Without His redeeming work, of course, none of this would be possible. The stone (“cornerstone,” Is. 28:6) will be laid before Joshua; it has seven eyes—the all-seeing providence of God. The last statement of verse 9 is significant: “’And I will remove the iniquity of that land in one day”—the cross of Christ. And “in that day” there will be peace with God (v. 10). The “under his vine and under his fig tree” is used on more than one occasion in the Old Testament as a proverbial statement of peace (cf. Micah 4:4). The Jews have been restored and forgiven, and the larger purposes of God through the Messiah will come to pass. Satan cannot prevent that.

The apostles’ questions (vs. 1-3)—Jesus, probably still angry, left the temple. The disciples, perhaps to mollify Him a little, pointed out to Him how beautiful and magnificent the temple was. Wrong move. “Jesus said to them, ‘Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down.’” (v. 2). That was no doubt a shock to His apostles. They apparently said no more until they all arrived on the Mount of Olives. Then the disciples asked Jesus, “Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” (v. 3). Very possibly, they thought they were asking only one question, i.e., that the destruction of the temple, the coming of Christ, and the end of the age (world?) would all be at the same time. But in reality, they were asking two questions: one, the destruction of the temple, of which Jesus had just spoken, and two, the Second Coming of Christ, the end of the age. Or at least that’s the way Jesus answers them. In verses 4-35, He answers the first question—the destruction of the temple, which took place in 70 A.D. by the Romans. Beginning in verse 36, and continuing all the way through chapter 25, He deals with His Second Coming. It is absolutely essential to understand that verses 4-35 are NOT, except for one brief reference, referring to His literal Second Coming; they refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

Signs preceding the destruction of Jerusalem (vs. 4-28)—Jesus is very specific here about what to look for before Jerusalem is destroyed. False Christs will arise and deceive many (v. 5). There will be wars and rumors of wars; but “see that you are not troubled; for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet” (v 7). This is just the “beginning of sorrows” (v. 8). The apostles would be delivered up and some of them killed and hated “for My name’s sake” (v. 9). There will be betrayals, hatred, false prophets, and lawlessness (vs. 10-12). And “the love of many will grow cold” (v. 12). But endure and you will be saved (v. 13). Keep in mind, Jesus is talking to the apostles about an event that is going to happen in their lifetime. In verse 14, the gospel “will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.” Now, He obviously doesn’t mean to America; “all nations” would encompass Jew and Gentile. We have a reference in Colossians where Paul writes about the gospel, which “was preached to every creature under heaven” (Col. 1:23). This is a Hebrew expression that, again, would mean Jew and Gentile, that salvation in Christ has been offered equally to all. But back to Matthew 24:14 and compare—the gospel “will be preached in all the world…and then the end will come.” Colossians was written in the early 60s; Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 A.D. So, the time frame is perfect, and given to us by inspired Scripture.

But then, the end will come. Verse 15 is obscure, but not for long: “Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (whoever reads, let him understand).” Matthew is writing to a Jewish audience, thus “whoever read” would understand. In the parallel passage in Luke 21:20, which is written to a Gentile who wouldn’t understand Daniel, Luke simply writes, “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies…” That’s what Daniel’s “abomination of desolation” refers to. The Romans are coming. Well, when you see that, Jesus says, flee to the mountains (v. 16). Don’t waste time going and getting your stuff; you aren’t going to have time (vs. 17-18). Woe to those who are pregnant—they obviously won’t be able to move very rapidly (v. 19). Hope that it doesn’t happen in winter or on the Sabbath, both of which could slow down flight. Folks, think about it a minute—if this is referring to the literal Second Coming of Christ, why flee to the mountains? What good will that do? What difference is it going to make if a woman is pregnant or not? Or if it’s the Sabbath day? This isn’t the Second Coming; it’s the destruction of Jerusalem, thus fleeing as rapidly as possible will be necessary. The rest of this section, through verse 28, is designed to protect His disciples from deception: “Therefore if they say to you, ‘Look, He is in the desert!’ do not go out; or ‘Look, He is in the inner rooms!’ do not believe it” (v. 26). Because when Jesus does come in His literal Second Coming, He’s not going to be in the desert or somebody’s closet—“For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be” (v. 27). There will be no time to prepare or to look for Him in the desert. Then, the vivid picture of despair: “For wherever the carcass is, there the eagles will be gathered together” (v. 28). Jerusalem is dead, and the Roman vultures are going to gather to clean the bones.

Part Two will explain the most misunderstood section of this chapter. Stay tuned.

Every period of history, every generation, every culture and society, every year of history in every locale on earth has its “zeitgeist,” it’s accepted beliefs and norms through which all activity is judged and measured. As often as not, perhaps more often than not, a culture’s “zeitgeist” is non-factual or truthful, being based upon human philosophies rather than eternal, divine revelation and principles. The ancient Greeks viewed the world through the lenses of Zeus and thus much of their philosophy, morality, and decisions were in error. The Chinese Communist Party views the world through a Marxist perspective that is as unhistorical, unscientific, and uneconomic as any philosophy can be. Thus, millions have been brutally murdered, tortured, and oppressed because of it. But by viewing the world this way, they can justify the mass murder of millions of Chinese (and others) in the 70+ years they’ve been tyrannizing their country.

The CCP notwithstanding, modern man is (supposedly) above the “zeitgeist” of ancient superstitions about God or “gods” because we live in a “scientific” age. “Science” tells us what our “zeitgeist” should be, and ours is “factual” and “truthful” because it is based on “science.” We have become immune from the superstitions and errors of past “unscientific” ages. Yes, our “science” is right. Yet our “science” doesn’t just put men on the moon, it also gives us man-made climate change, “scientific” socialism, pregnant men, mask mandates, and gave us eugenics just a few short decades ago. But we are right, and earlier generations were wrong.

I beg to differ with this as I shall demonstrate in a few articles.

It is certainly true that all of us are products of our “zeitgeist.” It is impossible to totally escape it, to “rise above it.” It is around us everywhere, it becomes the very fabric upon which a society is based. It’s the common tongue, the assumptions that underlie our conversations, and anyone who doesn’t speak the language is probably not going to be understood very well. It’s the accepted “wisdom” upon which people discuss things, it’s in the news, it’s on the TV and movies, it’s in our classrooms, thus is what is taught to us in our schools, it’s what we eat, sleep, wear, think, and absorb into our very existence. If, in one sense, everything is “education,” then we are “educated” every day in our own, current “zeitgeist.” That’s not all bad, of course, we couldn’t exist if we tried to totally reject our “zeitgeist.”

However, rising above it and viewing things as God does (He Who can see the whole panorama of history) is, to a degree, possible, and becomes more possible depending upon how well we acquaint ourselves with Him and His knowledge and wisdom. Yet, even the wisest, most righteous Biblical scholar cannot fully escape his “zeitgeist.”

Charles Darwin accepted the “zeitgeist” of his day, and he helped create the “zeitgeist” of ours. And it is one of the biggest hoaxes of human history.

Both Karl Popper and Arthur Koestler suggested that Darwin was a child of his time, inspired more by his “zeitgeist” than by science strictly construed. They were exactly right. Scientists aren’t immune to “zeitgeist,” especially if grant money and peer reviewed publications are at stake. It is difficult to get the grant money, and perhaps even a job, if one denies “man-made climate change,” and no scientist can dare challenge Darwin and survive. The “inclusion” part of DEI certainly doesn’t include creationists in university science departments. Darwinism has become that entrenched in Western “zeitgeist.” As one Chinese scientist amusingly said, “In China, you can challenge Darwin but not the government. In America, you can challenge the government but not Darwin.” Having lived in both countries, I know this is largely true.

But Darwin, and his theory, were products of his time, his “zeitgeist.” Evolution (and it is not the same thing as “Darwinism”) happens, but only on a limited scale, nowhere near as extensively as Darwin and his offspring argue. And, frankly, most “evolution” scientists know it.

I will look at Darwin’s “zeitgeist” in my next article in this series. And then consider a few examples of Darwinian misconceptions. As I wrote in an earlier article, “evolution” yes, “Darwinism” no. They are not the same thing.

Darwin’s “zeitgeist” in my next. It is really fascinating to see how history affects the way people think. In this case, it has helped produce some of the greatest tragedies, and more barbaric actions in human history. Darwinian theory can’t escape some responsibility for that.

“Beware that you do not forget the Lord your God by not keeping His commandments…lest—when you have eaten and are full, and have built beautiful houses and dwell in them, and when your herds and flocks multiply…when your heart is lifted up, and you forget the Lord your God…it shall be, if you by any means forget the Lord your God, and follow other gods, and serve them…I testify against you this day that you shall surely perish…you shall surely perish, because you would not be obedient to the voice of the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 8:11-14, 19-20).

I want to make it very clear that this is not, repeat Not, repeat NOT a prophecy about America. This is God speaking to the children of Isreal before they entered the Promised Land. So, God isn’t talking to America here.

But we are being warned. History has a way of “repeating itself” because the eternal principles upon which God based this existence cannot be violated without serious consequences. That has been proven true countless times through the ages.

Israel was given, by God, and bountiful land; the people who had been living there before didn’t appreciate it, were incredibly wicked, and God justly destroyed them (read Leviticus 18 and Romans 1:18-32 for the reasons why). As we learn from subsequent history, Israel didn’t appreciate the land, either, refused to be obedient to God, and He sent them into captivity and for hundreds of years they served other masters, no longer free in the land God gave them. He kept them alive because He had made the Messianic promise through them (Genesis 12:1-3). But they lost their freedom due to their rebellion against God.

America has been given a bountiful land through the providence of God—one of the most blessed nations in human history. And we built a great country. But, just like with ancient Israel, so many of our people are turning their backs on God, refusing to appreciate what He has given to us, and bowing down to other “gods”—those of their own creation. What will the end result be?

Well, read verses 19 and 20 above again.

God warned Israel in the passage above. They didn’t listen. We are being warned, too, in these remarkable verses.

And if we fail to listen, we’ll be even more to be blamed, and America’s destruction will be just. And it will come. It cannot be avoided.

Deuteronomy 8—American history, in principle, written 3,500 years ago.

1. Daniel 2, Nebuchadnezzar’s dream. We do not have space here to post the entire chapter; let me give a brief summary. King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon was disturbed by a dream he had one night (v. 1). He demanded, on pain of death, that his “wise men” not only provide him the interpretation of the dream, but also its content (v. 5). He either didn’t remember the dream’s particulars, or didn’t trust his wise men to tell him the truth. Tell me the dream so I know you know the interpretation! His wise men balked at this; how could they know the dream, too? The King was firm, and heads began to roll (v. 13).

This was a threat to Daniel and his three companions because they were advisors to the king as well. But Daniel asked God for help, and, because Jehovah had inspired the dream in the first place and intended for all of subsequent history to know this paramount prophecy, He gave Daniel the information needed. And Daniel told the King. The dream was as follows.

Nebuchadnezzar saw “a great image” (v. 31). It’s “head was of fine gold, its chest and arms of silver, its belly and thighs of bronze, its legs of iron, its feet partly of iron and partly of clay” (vs. 32-33). As Nebuchadnezzar admired and watched, “a stone was cut out without hands, which struck the image on its feet of iron and clay, and broke them in pieces” (v. 34). The stone then became “a great mountain and filled the whole earth” (v. 35). That was, in a nutshell, the dream. What did it mean?

It meant: Nebuchadnezzar (Babylon) was the head of gold (v. 38). After him, another kingdom would arise (Persia), and following that third kingdom would “rule over all the earth” (v. 39—the earth known to the people of Daniel’s day). That kingdom was Greece, begun by Alexander the Great. Then, the fourth kingdom would come (v. 40). This was the Roman Empire, and “in the days of these kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom which shall never be destroyed” (v. 44). God’s kingdom—the church—would be established during the Roman Empire. This is, of course, exactly what happened. How did Daniel know any of this except by divine inspiration?

How do we know that Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome were meant as the four kingdoms of Daniel 2? Look at history. Who else could they have been? God worked through history; that was established in Genesis 3:15. He is unfolding that history, majestically and magnificently, through prophecies like Daniel 2. We must know a little bit about history, too, to understand the Bible, because the Bible is history, some of it written (like Daniel 2) before it happened. People who don’t know a least the rudiments of history obviously will never understand the Bible

There is more to Daniel’s prophecy here, but the basics are sufficient for our purposes. This is an extremely significant passage in the Old Testament. God told us a Savior would come in human form (Genesis 3:15). He would actually have a dual nature, be born in Bethlehem, and be a “ruler” (king—Micah 5:2). Now, we are told, in general when He will be born and establish His kingdom—in the days of the Roman Empire. God is pinpointing to us, more and more, facts and truths about the One Who would save man from sin. It isn’t God’s fault if we don’t pay attention. He has done everything He can to redeem us from sin—except take away our freedom of choice. That He will never do.

2. Deuteronomy 18—The prophet like Moses. In Deuteronomy 18:15, Moses told the people, “The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren. Him you shall hear.” This can only be Jesus, the promised Messiah. Why?

Who else could it have been? Who else in Israel was a “prophet like Moses”? Joshua wasn’t. Elijah wasn’t. Daniel wasn’t. None of the other Old Testament prophet were “like Moses.” Only Jesus was. How?

Several ways, but let me just mention a few. One, Moses was a lawgiver; nobody else in Israel gave the Jews their law. Jesus, like Moses, was a lawgiver (James 1:25). Two, Moses led the people out of slavery in Egypt into freedom. Jesus leads people out of the bondage of sin and into spiritual freedom. Three, Moses led the people through the wilderness towards the Promised Land and rest. Jesus leads His people through the wilderness of this earthly existence toward the heavenly Promised Land and their final resting place (Hebrews 4:9). Four, Moses’ law established a system of sacrifice and worship where men’s sins could at least be covered until the Savior came. Jesus has established a system of worship and sacrifice where we can receive the forgiveness of our sins from God. And there are other parallels between Moses and Jesus, but these are sufficient.

Nobody else in the Jewish religion, or on this earth in any religion, was a “prophet like” Moses, who did what God did through that great man. Only Jesus did it. Deuteronomy 18:15 can only find its fulfillment in Jesus of Nazareth. And even though Moses did not specify when that Messiah would come, Daniel did! So, we don’t look to the future from our time, we look to the time in which God told us to look.

It all fits like a perfect glove. And there is a whole lot more to come.

(To be continued...)