The last time I dove into the Gospel of John, we were looking at John 1:42, where we saw Andrew bringing Simon/Peter to Jesus.

The last time I dove into the Gospel of John, we were looking at John 1:42, where we saw Andrew bringing Simon/Peter to Jesus.

Let's pick up where I left off several months ago. I initially added a couple of colorful maps.  I think they would have broken any monotony and given you a visual reference to the subject, Jesus and His surroundings, but that turned into an editing nightmare, so I abandoned the maps. 

Virtually every Bible entitles this next section:

Jesus Calls Philip and Nathanael

“The next day, Jesus decided to set out for Galilee. Finding Philip, He told him, “Follow Me.”” (John 1:43 BSB)

The context puts Jesus in proximity to John the baptizer, and this is a portion of what we know about John.

Matthew 3:13 NASB “Then Jesus *arrived from Galilee at the Jordan coming to John, to be baptized by him.”

After some discussion, John relents and baptizes Jesus. This is when the spirit descended upon Him like a dove, and God acknowledged His Son.

Mark 1:12-13 NASB “Immediately the Spirit *impelled Him to go out into the wilderness. (13) And He was in the wilderness forty days being tempted by Satan; and He was with the wild beasts, and the angels were ministering to Him.” 

Clearly, Jesus, at this point, is by Himself, off in the wilderness; therefore, this gathering of disciples and all the amazing things associated with drawing them in did not happen right away.

John 1:35-36 BSB  The next day, John was there again with two of his disciples.  (36)  When he saw Jesus walking by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!”

This would have happened after the wilderness because Jesus had gone South toward the Negev, and He was alone.

John 1:37 BSB  And when the two disciples heard him say this, they followed Jesus.

This next statement doesn't sound like something Jesus would say.

John 1:38 BSB  “Jesus turned and saw them following. “What do you want?” He asked. They said to Him, “Rabbi” (which means Teacher), “where are You staying?”

 

The NASB conveys that He said, “What do you seek?” It is the Greek word zēteō and means to seek. The word seek is an open-ended question and leans more toward what the Strong's tells us. He just as easily could have said to them, What are you looking for.

What disciples was Jesus talking to?

Verse 35 tells us that there were two disciples with him when Jesus showed up. I am convinced, although I do not think it matters, that the two who were with John when Jesus first showed up were Andrew and Philip. Possible evidence for this assertion is as follows:

John 1:40-41 BSB  “Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother, was one of the two who heard John’s testimony and followed Jesus.  (41)  He first found his brother Simon and told him, “We have found the Messiah” (which is translated as Christ).”

And Philip.

John 1:44-45 BSB  “Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the same town as Andrew and Peter.  (45)  Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the One Moses wrote about in the Law, the One the prophets foretold—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”

Bethsaida, in case you are wondering, is at the Northeast end of the Sea of Galilee.  

 

“Nathanael is the one who said, “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” Nathanael asked. “Come and see,” said Philip.” John 1:46 BSB 

Andrew, when he found Peter, said,  “We have found the Messiah” (which is translated as Christ). John 1:41 BSB

 

It's odd, Andrew expressed that “we” have found the Messiah. Take that with a grain of salt, for they all, including the baptizer, struggled to grasp who this Jesus was.

Interesting how the “Apostle” John wrote this next verse.

John 1:42 NASB He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, "You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas" (which is translated Peter).

Cephas/Peter, is the Greek word Kēphas and means the Rock.  

 

If you have not seen the series “The Chosen,” you should because it portrays the characters in their fleshly frailties. The series took its time fastening the title, the rock, on Peter because they put him through several intense struggles of faith. I frequently tell the men (who don't read their Bibles) that we are not given this information in the scriptures. But we all have human frailties, and something like this may have happened, just as it happens to each of us.

Proof?

1 Corinthians 10:13 NASB (13) “No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it.

I already pointed out how Jesus got baptized by John, although this may have been the second day, that is not clear to us; and now the two disciples are overambitious to get Jesus to tell them where He is staying.

Almost as if Jesus had paid for a room at the Motel 6 and had slipped out for a coffee and doughnut, the English translators, often under pressure from the state church, said things that give you, the reader, the wrong impression.

Allow me to demonstrate.

John 1:37-38 NASB “The two disciples heard him speak, and they followed Jesus. (38) And Jesus turned and saw them following, and *said to them, "What do you seek?" They said to Him, "Rabbi (which translated means Teacher), where are You staying?"

We know that the Spirit led Him off into the wilderness for 40 days. So there was not much in the way of the next day. Let's assume that He has come back from the wilderness, and it is still a great distance to the Galilee region, where home might have been.

John 1:43 NASB “The next day He purposed to go into Galilee, and He *found Philip. And Jesus *said to him, "Follow Me."”

This is the reason why I included an occasional map, so you can get the idea of how far it is from a possible location of John's baptizing(s) to, at least, the homes of several of the disciples. There is a tremendous amount of logic in Jesus asking Philip to follow Him into the wilderness, so what we see in verse 43 had to take place when Jesus came back from the wilderness.

Luke 3:1-3 BSB  “In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, while Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod tetrarch of Galilee, his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias tetrarch of Abilene,  (2)  during the high priesthood of Annas and Caiaphas, the word of God came to John son of Zechariah in the wilderness.  (3)  He went into all the region around the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins,”

So there is a practicality for the Baptizer to stay in close proximity to the Jordan River. Having established that Philip is one of the two, John's gospel gives us a bit more background.

John 1:44 NASB “Now Philip was from Bethsaida, of the city of Andrew and Peter.”

 

Where did we find Jesus, John the baptizer, Andrew, and Philip?

With John the baptizer going to where usable water was available, our clues as to where he is baptizing come from multiple clues. I did a word search in e-Sword and got this information.

• In John 1:28. we are told “these things took place in Bethany beyond the Jordan, where John was baptizing.”

  Most of the maps show the Jordan River running east to west the closer to Galilee, and turning southward toward the Dead Sea as it moves downward. Since we see John the baptizer near Jerusalem, we make assumptions about him choosing a location closer to the Pharisees and Herod, so he could confront them, while the truth is, it was all about water.

• It is in John 3:23 that we see John also “baptizing in Aenon near Salim, because there was much water there; and people were coming and were being baptized—“.

  The gospel of John is the only place we find a reference to Aenon.

  This place/name is not mentioned anywhere else in the New Testament, nor is it found in any other historical sources; therefore, its location is uncertain. It might be important to note that the Jordan River is frequently lacking enough water to baptize anyone.

Bethsaida was toward the Northern end of the Sea of Galilee. Galilee proper was a region that encompassed Nazareth in the South and Capernaum in the North.

John 1:45 NASB Philip *found Nathanael and *said to him, "We have found Him of whom Moses in the Law and also the Prophets wrote--Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph".

 

Nathanael responded with a classic, Jewish, snarky response.

John 1:46 NLT  “Nazareth!” exclaimed Nathanael. “Can anything good come from Nazareth?” “Come and see for yourself,” Philip replied.  

 

Most of us have no idea that Jewish culture is dripping with sarcasm. I would not have known that if I had not been watching a man, who has since died, named Zola Levitt. He kind of reminded me of Tevya, the actor who dominated the movie, The Fiddler on the Roof. Zola, when he had his program on the Trinity Broadcasting Network, would give you background information about the Jews.

I want to add that I, like so many others, could see and understand all the reasons that people were, and some still are, believing that Jesus should have come back to gather His bride already. One prominent example could be drawn from Paul's letter to the church in Corinth.

1 Corinthians 15:52 NASB (52) in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed.

Many, including me, easily see this as the last trump of Rosh Hashanah, which has come and gone. I have taken the attitude that Jesus can and will return at any moment. I strongly suggest, if you are a follower of the Messiah, that you do the same. Our brothers and sisters in Christ, who live in Nigeria, for one, are being slaughtered daily, while their cries for justice are being ignored, primarily because they are not Jewish and they are Christians.

What do you say about yourself? John 1:21-23

The Apostle John is trying to convey who this Jesus was, not that they did not know for he was writing to believers – Jewish believers, converts. These converts, especially on John's part, were not asked to leave the richness and fullness of Judaism, but were shown how much richer it is knowing that the Messiah was no longer awaited, but here now in spirit; just as he had promised. The converts had the evidence of their lives filled with the power of the Holy Spirit to prove that this was all true.

Saint John the Baptist and the Pharisees (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Sadly, not everyone believes your words and other methods must be used to convince them; such was the case with a man named Saul. We eventually come to know him as the Apostle Paul.

John the Baptist, the cousin of Jesus, is at least six months older than Jesus, and, according to Scripture, filled with the baptism of the Holy Spirit while in his mother's womb.

Why would this be important and what difference does it make? Being filled as he was, circumvents standard religious practices and methods. Are you telling me that God does not work within our parameters? Exactly. It is the other way around as we work within His.

John the Baptist was the first human, that we are aware of, to be indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

If you consider how the Holy Spirit prompted Peter to behave on the day of Pentecost, then how did this infilling impact John, all his life. Perhaps the answer to that is, how did the Holy Spirit transform Jesus, throughout his life. The answer is seen. To those who needed help and asked for it, the impact was gentle and dramatic, not so dislike the attributes given to a dove. Was John the Baptist perceived as gentle? Only to those who needed his help, as he led them into water baptism. Oddly, this water baptism as it is not the prescribed method for the cleansing of sins, the blood of animals was. So, those who caught the brunt of John's zeal and peculiarities were the same as those who caught Jesus wrath as well, the Pharisees with their holier-than-thou attitudes.

The Apostle John, whom we gather to have been a disciple of John the Baptist, tells us that he testified about Him. Let's ponder that for a moment:

Merely to say Him means nothing unless the hearer is already aware of who is being referenced, and that may not have been the case.

The phrase, to testify about Yashua/Jesus, begins to take on a deeper meaning, as there were many who had this name. If Jesus had done amazing things before this moment, and therefore his name is associated with notoriety, then John the Baptist could have been speaking about those events. But as yet, Jesus, as far as scripture points out, had done nothing. (You know that is not true, although this is merely a logical assumption, for his mother, at the wedding in Canaan, said, “whatever he tells you to do, do it.” That statement does not come out of presumption, but evidence; evidence that convinces you that your son is filled with a power that you do not understand and he is capable of doing amazing things.)

My last attempt at speculation about such a simple word as “him,” implies that John, based on scriptural knowledge, (remove the images of the Bible from your thinking here,) knew who He was and why He had come. This knowledge could only have come through the suggestion of the Holy Spirit and yet have little to do with head knowledge or understanding. To make that statement clear, let me just say that the Holy Spirit has prompted me to say things to people, that at the moment made no sense to me; and yet, when I said them the response was often, “how did you know that?” I did not know anything, I merely complied with what I heard, and John the Baptist may have done the same. Now, none of this disqualifies study, and John the Baptist was the son of a priest. He then may have been intentionally taught, orally, about the coming Messiah. It is a major theme in the Jewish process of learning.

So in testifying, what did John the Baptist say?

John 1:15-18 NASB John *testified about Him and cried out, saying, "This was He of whom I said, 'He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.'" 16) For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17) For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. 18) No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.

Keep in mind that I pointed out how John was born before Jesus, and yet, here he is saying, “He existed before me.”

John tells them, “for of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace.”

What is he trying to say? Jesus is about to come into his role and launch into the ministry of which we all seem to be aware. But, none of that appears to happen until John baptizes Jesus in the river Jordan. (What happens when John does this?)

“For the Law was given through Moses: grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.”

As far as we know, Jesus had said nothing yet. How is that possible? Therefore John sees moments into the future, or God's plan is already in action, and it means salvation.

This last aspect of what John testified about is somewhat convoluted unless you change one word – God, in the second half of the sentence, “No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.”

(We are in no way trying to diminish our understanding, nor are we trying to lessen the fact that Jesus was God in the flesh.) However, we do have this same verse as an explanatory statement, “No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.”

Since the Apostle John's purpose in writing was to point out that Jesus was God, this statement, above all others, should do it - “The only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father..” The Son, who had been no less God, and, the very Word involved in creation was caused to be birthed. God sends his only son to be birthed, bypassing the natural process of man, one in which we, without an option, continue to pass a damaged DNA string along to every child through birth.

So God, the Son, is now resting His head upon God the Father's breast. No one has seen God at any time, and yet Jesus the Christ: A man who is God and God's son at the same time; an heir to the throne of God; referred to as God; and yet there were those that saw Him. I might add that even after death and resurrection, Jesus has continued to be seen. Because He is God I could also say that God has continued, in a sense, to be seen. One huge example we have of this is found in the transformation of the Apostle Paul.

As usual, you have endured another of my horrendously long introductions.

The religious crowd had already openly challenged John the Baptist as to whether he was the Messiah, now they ask him, Who then are you; what do you say about yourself?

John 1:21-23 NASB They asked him, "What then? Are you Elijah?" And he *said, "I am not." "Are you the Prophet?" And he answered, "No." 22) Then they said to him, "Who are you, so that we may give an answer to those who sent us? What do you say about yourself?" 23) He said, "I am A VOICE OF ONE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS, 'MAKE STRAIGHT THE WAY OF THE LORD,' as Isaiah the prophet said."

At this point, the question is, are you, Elijah? It is a logical issue for those in the Jewish community. In thinking differently, what evidence would we, if Jewish, have that prompted a question like this?

Malachi 4:5 KJV Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:

If he held to the claim that he was Elijah, then they were all sitting dangerously close to the edge of eternity, and some could find that frightening. An alternative understanding is that the law allowed for the Jews to stone false prophets, and that would put a damper on anyone's ministry. Consider that Israel is still anticipating the return of Elijah the prophet.

It seemed they believed his simple answer of NO; so they ask again, “Who are you,” and, if you are not some huge personality that we should be enthralled by, then “what do you say about yourself?” The question carries many implications. It is highly possible that this crowd are the same ones who asked Jesus a similar question, which we find in John chapter 8.

One of the implications would be, by whose authority do you act and talk the way you do? John who had a rather direct way of saying things got him beheaded had a simple explanation:

"I am A VOICE OF ONE CRYING IN THE WILDERNESS, 'MAKE STRAIGHT THE WAY OF THE LORD,' as Isaiah the prophet said."

John's response was not just a sentence pulled out of the air for John had memorized Isaiah chapter 40, along with the majority of the Old Testament. Memorization was the primary method for passing along the wealth of information, written on scrolls, to the next generation; therefore it was necessary to learn these words with precision. However, like many of the things John the Baptist and Jesus said, this was an excerpt; if you must be critical, it was taken out of context. Having done that did gravity cease to exist, or the world come to an end, No.

So, what was the context? Isaiah 40,  as the Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Commentary, states, is saying that “The restoration after the Exile pointed to the coming of the Lord's kingdom.” God's command in verse one of chapter forty is to comfort his people. Calling the Pharisees vipers does not come across as comforting.

Certainly, John the Baptist had a sense of urgency, but for what, “The Way of the Lord.” Now the question then should be, what did that mean? Christ had already been born, and wiser men recognized him, so that eliminates that possibility. It feels as if we are being guided to assume that this day something else was to happen. I say that as though this scenario transpired earlier in the day, and it might have, for it seems to have been on John's mind.

So what was different about this day?

As far as we can tell we are all still awaiting our restoration after exile, and the coming of the Lord's kingdom. What if it has come and we who have accepted His salvation are already in it? There is no doubt that we still long for a salvation and redemption that includes an undisturbed peace in the Father's arms; certainly, no one would say that we are there yet.

So, again I ask, what was different about the day that Jesus was baptized if that was the day John made this statement?

• The day of His baptism was the day Jesus was introduced to the world as the Messiah.

  

  The Holy Spirit depicted as a dove, surrounded by angels, by Giaquinto, 1750s. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Is that an honest and valid statement? Wasn't the "star in the east" that led the Wisemen to Jesus an announcement? And what of the choir of angels that told the shepherds that the (key word) Christ was born. The word Christ is the Greek word for Messiah. Based on this, I could easily say that God had already made His proclamations.

• This day was also significant, as God, announced to those gathered around the Jordan that day, by sending the Holy Spirit, like a dove, to lite upon Jesus, and to those listening, he said that "this was His beloved Son, in whom He was well pleased.”

The reality of that moment was that some saw something alighting upon Jesus, while others heard a rumble or noise, but heard no distinctive words. It makes me wonder what John heard. Perhaps John operated on faith and merely trusted that the noise was God. However, John was filled with the Holy Spirit, the first and only one so far, and because of his ability to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit, he may have heard distinctly.

With those ramifications in mind, what impact did this moment in time make on the world?

It was not simply the entrance of Jesus into the world; it was a shift in the method; delivery; a change in procedure. I think we could even make the assertion that God's plan had been in motion for a long time and that God looks at His plans as complete, regardless of what things look like, knowing full well that there will be a completion, just as He said. Therefore, what John said in response, was only restating God's plan, and that to God, it does not matter how long the process takes.

Related articles

• Aren't you just a bit curious about what John had to say? John 1:19-20
• Depression Hurts

Aren't you just a bit curious about what John had to say? John 1:19-20

In a recent post, I talked about spending time in a psyche hospital and how they asked me how long my parents had been alcoholics. That generated some negative feedback, not from a reader, but from a relative.
Sadly, I allowed his input to almost shut me down, and for that, I apologize. Fortunately, I got a phone call from a brother who told me to keep doing what God called me to do. That being said here is something I have been lax in posting.

The object of Bible study is to understand.

How many people do you know that understand the Bible, and can effectively convey it back to you?

I was asked on one occasion if church leadership had contacted me about leading a Bible study. (I suppose I should tell you that our book study had ended four weeks prior and a window of opportunity came to lead a Bible study when our group leader pointed out that he had been asked already and if he was not available was anyone else interested. I told our leader yes, and made the point of telling that particular pastor yes also.) I answered the brother, with a resounding No. His response was for me to develop a format so that I could present what I intended to do, to church leadership. 

Having been involved with book guided Bible studies, I found them to be atrocious in their context, as the authors teach fallacies, traditions and direct the reader to assume false scenarios through the wording of the text. I want no part of that, but, I also realize that the modern church thinking is that we have to race through the Bible because people will get bored and leave – the church in its entirety; if that is the case, then let them go.

I have no problem with leadership asking me to lead some book guided study that is filled with conjecture and tradition, however, you should know that I will contest every time I think it's wrong and integrate a verse by verse approach as I deem necessary. What then happens to your time frame?

I often find myself surrounded by fools who tell me, "we cannot understand all of what we read" (This usually occurs when the book of Revelation or prophecy come into the discussion.) What they do when they say that, is prove how little they read and their lack of desire to know. As for the boring aspect. Teachers are boring, but the Word of God is alive, and there is nothing boring about that.

Now, let's continue with the Gospel of John.

The NASB entitles this section, “The Testimony of John the Baptist.”

Since I have always understood a testimony to be what one says, either in defense of themselves, about something they have seen, or in defense of someone else. 

Aren't you at least curious what John the Baptist had to say? 

So were the Jewish leaders. One aspect of what he said was this:

John 1:19-20 ERV, The Jewish leaders in Jerusalem, sent some priests and Levites to John to ask him, "Who are you?" He told them the truth. 20) Without any hesitation, 

A study Bible. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

he said openly and plainly, "I am not the Messiah."

If you are an avid reader of my work, then you know I prefer the NASB translation. The NASB finishes this paragraph with the word Christ instead of Messiah, as do many others, however, there are about as many who end with “the Messiah.” This choice of terminology and our casual way of handling it is another example of where our Westernization of the Bible comes into play. When we read Christ, as the NASB puts it, what do we see? Sadly, it is often little more than a man that has yet to come into His own? We don't see God standing there as a man; neither do we see a triumphant king, yet to come into power. No, we see a man that is frail and insipid, unable or unwilling to defend himself. We see him exactly as the prophet Isaiah said we would, a lamb about to be lead to the slaughter.

Isaiah 53:2-4 NASB "For He grew up before Him like a tender shoot, And like a root out of parched ground; He has no stately form or majesty That we should look upon Him, Nor appearance that we should be attracted to Him. 3) He was despised and forsaken of men, A man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; And like one from whom men hide their face He was despised, and we did not esteem Him. 4) Surely our griefs He Himself bore, And our sorrows He carried; Yet we ourselves esteemed Him stricken, Smitten of God, and afflicted."

In today's world, which is far too concerned with marketability and packaging, there was nothing here that could be sold to the public. Besides all that, there was this lingering question about Jesus familial heritage. We understand this to be a valid assertion for the Pharisees, on several occasions, rudely rebutted him when they said, “we know who our father is!” Their statement was very intentional, meant to hurt and degrade Jesus in front of those who heard them.

But, we fail to ask, what does the word Christ mean? So, even if John the Baptist used the word Christ instead of Messiah, and he may have, is this a problem? Not really, and here is why:

It is the Greek word Christos and means anointed, that is, the Messiah.

When you consider the languages forced upon the Jews of that day, you come to realize that Greek was the language of the ruling authority. Jesus also spoke Aramaic and may have spoken Hebrew. To call Jesus the Christos would have been a far stretch for the chief priests and elders for it means the anointed one, and hence the Messiah. If they did this, they would have been admitting that He was the Son of God, and they were not going to do that. When Jesus rode into Jerusalem that day, on a young donkey, they all recognized that this was something different, something rare, and the entry mode for Kings. The strongest assumption of the people was that Jesus must then be the king, and these common folk, longing for freedom, cried out appropriately.

This dialogue about Jesus' entry into Jerusalem may not answer the question for many, so I'll give you some scriptures that may help to identify Jesus as the Son of God, a high priest, anointed by God, and Messiah that He truly was.

1Samuel 2:35 'But I will raise up for Myself a faithful priest who will do according to what is in My heart and in My soul; and I will build him an enduring house, and he will walk before My anointed always.

Is 1Samuel 2:35 a description of Jesus? Absolutely, but his identity is cloaked in veiled language that speaks in the future tense. If you go back to find the context of this statement you end up at 1Samuel 2:27 where an unknown man, a prophet, comes to Eli, the priest, and points out the changes that are to come because Eli did not act according to God's plan. The prophetic declarations take us to verse 35.

Hebrews chapter 10 talks about Jesus, the faithful high priest who performed every detail. As one “who will do according to what is in My heart and in My soul." Jesus filled that role precisely and told the Jewish leaders so. We see this in John chapter five.

John 5:19 NASB Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

And in John 12:49-50 we have Jesus telling the Jewish leadership of the day, that He only said what He heard his Father, God, saying.

John 12:49-50 NASB "For I did not speak on My own initiative, but the Father Himself who sent Me has given Me a commandment as to what to say and what to speak. 50) "I know that His commandment is eternal life; therefore the things I speak, I speak just as the Father has told Me."

There is that other thing that plays a role in this question, “who are you?”

This next passage is one every Jewish kid would have learned in Synagogue school.

Malachi 4:5-6 NASB "Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the LORD. 6) "He will restore the hearts of the fathers to their children and the hearts of the children to their fathers so that I will not come and smite the land with a curse."

The Jews, anticipated Elijah coming again.

Now, how he would come is debatable, for example: in spirit, or in the flesh. There was no question that he would come again and they anxiously awaited him. Why? For the Torah (Law) clearly, states that man will return to the earth in death. We can find this in multiple locations: Genesis 3:19; 2Samuel 14:14, and Job 14:5. The idea that it is appointed for man once to die and then the judgment comes from the New Testament in Hebrews 9:27.

Because we are also trying to find those things that would have instructed the Jews of Jesus day, we really should exclude Hebrews as an influence, particularly as it would not have been written at the time of John the Baptist. Historically Elijah was known to have been caught up in a fiery chariot unto God; then we make the logical assumption that Elijah did not die and must at some point be returned to expire, following the conventional path of man.

What other problems we could have with Elijah's return?

The answer resides in the verse from Malachi that we just looked at:

“Behold, I am going to send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord.”

What about a few more references to the terrible day of the Lord.

Many tell me that I make these posts too long, but try to consider the person who reads this and does not have access to a Bible. Another problem could easily be the abbreviation of references that do not convey the context or the scenario adequately and therefore wrongly feed skewed misconceptions about God's timing and the event that is going to happen.

The prophet Joel went into a long oration inspired by the Holy Spirit, in which he describes events that cover a substantial amount of time, and, demonstrate a God that still shows a willingness to relent if men will humble themselves before Him. It also includes the paragraph about the sons and daughters that dream dreams and prophecy as God pours out His Spirit upon them. Does this all happen in a day? I don't think so, but it can happen over a “seven-year” period.

Joel 2:30-32 NASB "I will display wonders in the sky and on the earth, Blood, fire, and columns of smoke. 31) "The sun will be turned into darkness And the moon into blood Before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes. 32) "And it will come about that whoever calls on the name of the LORD Will be delivered; For on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem There will be those who escape, As the LORD has said, Even among the survivors whom the LORD calls.

While Joel gave us some hope, Isaiah speaks of making the land desolate and destroying the sinners out of it. This descriptive includes the darkening of the sun and an impairing of the moon's light. (There are several places in the world, at present, where the populace rarely see the sun or moon thanks to smog.)

Isaiah 13:9-11 KJV "Behold, the day of the LORD comes, cruel both with wrath and fierce anger, to lay the land desolate: and he shall destroy the sinners thereof out of it. 10) For the stars of heaven and the constellations thereof shall not give their light: the sun shall be darkened in his going forth, and the moon shall not cause her light to shine. 11) And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogance of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible."

The Apostle John, in relating his vision of the end times says, that the stars fall to the earth; the heavens depart like a scroll, and the earth is shaken by a serious of vicious earthquakes. These events are so frightful that the rich, the kings of the earth and the great men have hidden in elaborate caves.

Take a moment to look at this article from the Daily Mail.com, which runs in the U.K. Written by By Isabel Hunter For Mailonline and Published:15:42 EST, 13 April 2016.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3538525/Where-pandemonium-strikes-Super-rich-buying-underground-bunkers-installing-panic-rooms-luxury-apartments-protect-against-revolutions-natural-disasters.html.

In the article, it talks about the ultra rich who are buying these complexes to protect themselves from the insanity that is coming upon the earth. This is an accurate depiction of what we see in the book of Revelation.

Revelation 6:13-17 KJV "And the stars of heaven fell unto the earth, even as a fig tree casts her untimely figs, when she is shaken of a mighty wind. 14) And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together, and every mountain and island were moved out of their places. 15) And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every freeman, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16) And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17) For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?"

So when is the day of the LORD going to take place?

There is really only one place prescribed in scripture for this to happen and it is after the harpazo or snatching away of the church. Yes, it also entails the climatic end where Jesus physically returns with a vengeance and plants his feet on the Mount of Olives, at the end of the time of wrath, (we love to call it, The Great Tribulation.) Sadly, most of you still have a problem in understanding the timing involved because the Time of God's wrath, is this entire period after the church is snatched out of here. This scenario is equatable to the flood account with Noah and righteous Lot, where God removed the righteous from the harm that was to come. In both cases God had them removed just moments before destruction began. And make no mistake, while God will be pouring out His wrath man, it seems, will be ramping up the violence. Since one of the principal methods of violence we see in scriptures includes the beheading of “believers,” then it is easy to ascertain the “religion” that loves to do that. We, in what we deem the civilized nations, still do not wish to believe this level of destruction and violence can befall us. How naive we are, as our governments have been on a fast-paced course of action to eliminate the overabundance of users (that includes food and resources) and they know they can do this through what they think is controlled violence and poisons.

(Again, do not be naive, the same people that brought you chemicals for a better tomorrow are owned or controlled by the same people that run the governments, and there is an intentional effort to reduce the population legally. Why do think abortions are government funded?)

Because the time that is labeled, the day of the Lord, is a time of wrath; then you must know that the church is not meant to partake in that time of destruction. We see this in several places and here is one of them.

1 Thessalonians 5:9 NASB 9) For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,

Some would say, that's fine, but it's not enough. Are there any reliable references from the Old Testament? Sure there are, and one is found in Malachi, the last book of the Old Testament.

Malachi 3:16-17 NASB Then those who feared the LORD spoke to one another, and the LORD gave attention and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before Him for those who fear the LORD and who esteem His name. 17) "They will be Mine," says the LORD of hosts, "on the day that I prepare My own possession, and I will spare them as a man spares his own son who serves him."

Don't make the mistake of thinking this excludes followers of Christ from the extraordinary but everyday violence that surrounds us, for we were told that “in this world, you will have tribulation.” (You can find this reference in the Gospel of John chapter 16 verse 33.)

One last thing – I have been talking to so-called Christians as my target audience. Do not think you are excluded, for the main reason God sent His son, was to save the entire lost world, broken by this “sin” thing that corrupts us. I find it easier to think in terms of a damaged DNA strain that is common to man. From the scientist point of view, having never seen a man without a damaged DNA chain, would not think it anything but normal. Having lived just a little, and seen the side of life that includes Christ, I can tell you that there is a difference and it is life. No, I don't wake up in a bed of roses, my life is tough, just like everyone else' is, but I have a confidence that there is a life beyond this garbage here on earth. I mean really, you think life is nothing more than collecting trophies and then you turn into worm fodder.

Related articles

• Sunday reflection: Matthew 3:1 - 12
• When Your Church Doesn't Miss You
• The thousand-year reign of Christ