“Is this man Coniah a despised, shattered jar? Or is he an undesirable vessel? Why have he and his descendants been hurled out and cast into a land that they had not known? O land, land, land, hear the word of the Lord! Thus says the Lord, ‘Write this man down childless; a man who will not prosper in his days; For no man of his descendants will prosper sitting on the throne of David, and ruling again in Judah.’” [Jer. 22:28-30]

Upon first reading this passage, one might sense a seeming contradiction by Jeremiah because he first speaks of Coniah as “childless,” but then he immediately follows that by speaking of “his descendants.“ But actually there is a simple explanation for Jeremiah’s prophecy. First of all, Coniah was not childless, biologically speaking, for both he and his son Shealtiel [Salathiel] are found in the genealogical record of Messiah [see Mt. 1:12]. How then, could he be considered “childless,” someone asks? Well, I believe that Jeremiah explains that for us. Notice that he first says in v-30b, “For,” which indicates that what is about to follow will explain his afore-mentioned remark of Coniah’s “being written down childless.” And so, he intimates that “Coniah” would be childless, in the sense that “no man of his descendants will prosper, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling again in Judah.“

Now, the fact that Jeremiah declares that Coniah would be the “last” to reign on David’s throne in Judah speaks volumes about the “nature” of the Kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ as to whether it was to be a “physical” kingdom or a “spiritual” kingdom. Please look at those words of Jeremiah again! Notice that he says of Coniah, that, “No man of his descendants will prosper, sitting on the throne of David, and ruling again in Judah.” Did you catch that? This is huge! Do you see what this verse tells us about the Kingdom of Christ? Well, first of all, let's not forget the fact that Jesus was of the lineage of Coniah. But then, Jeremiah said that no man of Coniah’s descendants would prosper sitting on the throne of David and ruling again in Judah!’ Did Jeremiah tell the truth here? If Jesus, who is a descendant of both David and Coniah, is to someday come back “physically” and reign on David’s throne in Jerusalem for a thousand years, [as many of today’s Christians understand], wouldn’t that make Jeremiah a false prophet? Remember now, Jeremiah said that no man of Coniah’s descendants would prosper and sit upon the throne of David and rule again in Judah [Jerusalem]! Therefore, one would be forced to conclude that, if Jesus did come back and reign “physically,” in Jerusalem, then that would nullify Jeremiah’s prophecy and show him in a bad light as a prophet! However, if the Kingdom of God, the throne of David, and the rule or reign of Jesus are all “spiritual” in nature, then there is no conflict with Jeremiah’s prophecy whatsoever, but rather, perfect harmony! And it would also show Jeremiah as the true prophet of God he is. This is just one more example of why I believe the Scriptures to be their own best interpreter and commentary.

Continuing with the thought of the Kingdom of Christ as being spiritual in nature, do you remember, from Acts 2, what Peter said in his discourse on the day of Pentecost? In that discourse, he declares Jesus to thousands of Jews who were there in Jerusalem for this great annual feast [v-22]. Even though the Jews had had Jesus put to death, Peter said in v-24 that God had raised Him up. And, he begins to quote David’s prophecy concerning Jesus, where David, in v-30, spoke of the oath which God had sworn to him; that one of his descendants would “sit upon his [David’s] throne.“ In vs. 31-36, Peter assures his audience that this was a prophecy about Jesus’ being raised from the dead, and exalted to the right hand of God the Father as His anointed King. This comports perfectly with the prophecy of Daniel in Dan. 7:13, 14, regarding the ascension of our Lord into heaven and appearing before the Father, where He was given the Kingdom. Daniel said,

“I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, with the clouds of Heaven, one like the Son of Man was coming. And He came up to the Ancient of Days and was presented before Him. And to Him was given dominion, glory, and a kingdom, that all the peoples, nations, and men of every language might serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion which will not pass away; and His Kingdom in one which will not be destroyed.”

if Daniel’s prophecy is true, and Jesus did receive the Kingdom when He ascended to heaven and was brought before The Father 2,000 years ago, why then, would we, today, still be waiting for Jesus to come and set up a physical Kingdom here on earth? I must say, reader, that I believe that Jesus was indeed given the Kingdom by His Father 2,000 years ago, at which time, He sat upon David’s throne, and continues to reign even today, and will continue to reign eternally [Lk. 1:23]. And I believe that Kingdom is spiritual in nature and not physical.

At this point, even though I have not, as yet, expressed just what I understand The Hope of Israel to be, I’m sure you have already ascertained that it is something other than the widely accepted view which we have examined. So, at this time, I would like to explain from Heaven’s Message, clearly and succinctly, just what I understand this hope to be. We will not have gone very far at all before my understanding of this hope will become unmistakably clear. For this explanation, I would like to go to Luke’s account of Paul’s arrival in the city of Rome, near the close of his life and ministry.

It was not merely by chance that Paul ultimately comes to Rome, for he had been personally instructed of the Lord, that he would indeed bear Him witness in Rome before his earthly pilgrimage was ended [Acts 23:11]. It was by no means a pleasant journey for the apostle, who by this time had been a prisoner for more than two years. Bound with chains, he is now sent on his way to Rome, where he will stand before the Roman Emperor. The journey for Paul was arduous at best, fraught with many difficulties, not the least of which was shipwreck. His appeal to stand before Nero Caesar is found in Acts 25:10, 11. His actual arrival at the imperial city is recorded in Acts 28:14. Three days after his arrival, and with his Roman guard at his side, he is allowed to call together the leading men among the Jews. Beginning with V-17b, Paul begins his address to these Jewish religious leaders [Sanhedrin] saying,

“Brethren, though I had done nothing against our people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans And, when they had examined me, they were willing to release me, because there was no ground for putting me to death. But when the Jews objected ], I was forced to appeal to Caesar [Acts 25:8-12] ; not that I had any accusation against my nation. For this reason, therefore, I requested to see you and to speak with you, for I am wearing this chain for the sake of the hope of Israel.” [Acts 28:17b-20]

So, from these words, we learn the reason for which Paul had been arrested by the authorities and brought to Rome. Here he says that it was because he preached “The Hope of Israel.” Now, let’s think back for just a moment and revisit that notion accepted by so many in Christendom today, namely, that the hope of Israel is the restoration of “national, fleshly” Israel to its former place of pre-eminence over all the other nations of the earth. I do this only to make, what I believe, is a very salient point. And, my point, is: If that is indeed what Paul was preaching as the hope of Israel, then why, oh why, would there be such a blood-lust among the Jews against Paul? If Paul was preaching that this was the hope of Israel, wouldn’t that be exactly what the Jews would have wanted to hear? Why, I would think that the Jews would have been ecstatic and elated over such preaching if that was what Paul was preaching! Yes, one would think that the Jews would have been lauding Paul and singing his praises instead! If this was what Paul was preaching as the hope of Israel, why would they have wanted him dead? And, boy did they want him dead! Why, the Jewish Sanhedrin wanted him dead so badly, that they formed a conspiracy and bound themselves under an oath, saying that they would neither eat nor drink “until they had killed Paul.” [Acts 23:12] So, it just seems to me, in light of these facts, that this view would not have been what Paul was preaching as “The Hope of Israel.”

But now let’s go back to the beginning of this drama and watch the progression of events which culminated in Paul’s trek to Rome, at which time we will also learn just what this hope of Israel was. It all began in Acts 21:27, 28, when Jews from Asia stirred up the multitude, making false charges against Paul crying out,

“Men of Israel come to our aid! This is the man who preaches to all men everywhere against our people, and the Law, and this place [the temple]; and besides, he has even brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place.”

Shortly thereafter in Acts 22:1, we find Paul, in Jerusalem, making his first defense, as he addresses the people, the chief priests, scribes, Pharisees, and Sadducees. And, in 23:6, as he stands before the High Priest Ananias, he makes this declaration:
"...Brethren, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees; I am on trial for the hope and resurrection of the dead." Here in this statement, it surely seems that the answer to our question is beginning to come into focus, for Paul is certainly pointing in the direction of “the resurrection” as being that hope. However, let’s not stop there because there’s more. After this appearance before the High Priest, Paul is then sent, under Roman guard, from Jerusalem on to Caesarea to appear there before Governor Felix. To Felix, he first proclaims his innocence of all the charges which the Jews had brought against him. And in 24:13, he insists that the Jews cannot prove those things of which they had accused him. But then, suddenly and unabashedly, Paul makes this statement to Felix:

“But this I admit to you, that according to the Way which they call a sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law, and that is written in the prophets, having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked.” [vs. 14, 15]

So, now we have Paul declaring for a second time, and declaring quite definitively, “this hope.” Now isn’t that remarkable? It surely seems clear to me now, that this “hope” was indeed “The Resurrection.” And please, take careful note of the fact that Paul says this hope was a “promise” made by God, to the fathers and, that this promise was also “written in The Prophets.” Beloved, this is very important, and we will see, momentarily, just where in the prophets, the resurrection was promised to the fathers.

But before going to the prophets, I would ask you to please consider just one more piece of evidence that persuades me that is was indeed “The Resurrection” that constituted The Hope of Israel. After his appearance before the governor, Paul continued to remain a prisoner in Caesarea for at least two more years. When the time came that Felix would step down from the governor‘s seat, Portius Festus became governor in his stead. After only a few days, King Agrippa and his wife Bernice came to visit the new governor, to pay their respects. Upon learning of the matter concerning Paul, King Agrippa expressed his desire to hear Paul himself. And so, consequently, Paul now makes his appeal before the king [Acts 26:6-8]: He said,

"And now I am standing trial for the hope of the promise made by God to our fathers; the promise to which our twelve tribes hope to attain, as they earnestly serve God night and day. And for this hope, o King, I am being accused by the Jews. Why is it considered incredible among you people if God does raise the dead?”

In light of all the evidence now, should there really be any question that “the resurrection” was indeed “the hope of Israel?” For so many years, I never really gave any thought to just how very important the coming of “The Resurrection” was to “the faithful” of “the twelve tribes of old covenant Israel! Perhaps the reason for that would have been because I personally understood the Resurrection as an event so far away; yes, even into our own distant future! But in the past few years, I believe that I have begun to understand a little better why those twelve tribes looked forward to it with such great anticipation. Yes, as I consider the above passage, along with a plethora of others, I get a real sense that in the 1st century, Paul and the twelve tribes were eagerly awaiting this hope of Israel. I also get the sense that they understood it as something that was “imminent!” Obviously, Gentile Christians were eagerly awaiting also, because in their being “in Christ,” they likewise had been made “fellow heirs” with Israel [see Eph. 2:11-22]. At this point, I would like to make a personal statement: In my former days, when I viewed eschatology [study of last things, or last days] from a “futurist” perspective, it was my understanding that all of the prophecies which God had ever made to Israel were all completely fulfilled by the time of “the cross”; that the cross was the point of reference for the complete end of the old covenant and old covenant age. But I would like to make an appeal to all of us, to observe very closely, what we see in that passage we just cited [Acts 26:6-8]. Paul spoke these words to King Agrippa some 34 years after the cross. Now notice in those words, what he says of this hope [The Resurrection]. He says that it was a promise made to the fathers, and furthermore, it was a promise to which all the twelve tribes [old covenant Israel) were, at that present time, hoping to soon attain. Paul had also said as much in Phil. 3:10-14. And, we have already read in Acts 24:14, 15, that this promise was written in The Law and The Prophets. In that passage, Paul said four very pertinent things about this hope of Israel:
[1] it was a promise made by God to the fathers [old covenant Israel],” [2] This hope was written in The Law and The Prophets “to” old covenant Israel, [3] This hope was something all twelve tribes [old covenant Israel] hoped to attain, and [4] This hope was something for which all the twelve tribes [old covenant Israel] were, at that present time, earnestly serving God night and day to attain. So, with these indisputable facts before us, consider this with me, please: In Mt. 5:17,18, Jesus said to those early disciples in His sermon on the Mount, that He did not come to destroy “the law and the Prophets,” but rather, He came to fulfill them. He further said that until He “did” accomplish, or fulfill all things in The Law and The Prophets, that not the smallest letter or stroke could pass from The Law [See also Lk. 24:44].

Do you know of any Christian today who does not believe that the old covenant law has passed away since the time Jesus spoke these words? I don’t. Please consider this also: In light of the words of Paul in the afore mentioned passages, wouldn’t we agree that the “the resurrection” was an integral element, yes, even the crown jewel of the many promises God made to old covenant Israel in The Law and The Prophets? But, if the resurrection, as an integral part of God’s promises to Israel, has still not yet come, wouldn’t that mean that God has not yet fulfilled all His promises to old covenant Israel? And furthermore, if, as Jesus said, the law of Moses could not pass away until all is accomplished [Lk. 24:44], wouldn’t that be the same as conceding that the Law of Moses is still in effect today?

Do you see the point I’m making here? Listen carefully to what Paul said of these promises in Rom. 15:8 “For I say that Christ has become a servant to the circumcision [old covenant Israel, on behalf of the truth of God, to confirm the promises given to the fathers.” This passage was written to the Roman brethren in about 60 A.D.. So that would mean, then, that neither by 60 A.D., nor by 64 A.D. [the time when Paul arrived in Rome], had God finished fulfilling all of His promises to Israel! Surely, we all believe that God has never gone back on His promises, for Paul also declared: “For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.” [Rom. 11:29]

So, I understand from all the passages that we have studied up to this point, that God had not yet fully consummated or completed the fulfilling of all the promises He had made to the fathers [Israel]. We saw that He had not done so by the time of “the cross” [30 A.D.]. He had not done so by the time of Paul’s writing of the Roman epistle [60 A.D.]. And, He had not done so by the time Paul arrived in Rome in 64 A.D.. So then, just when would that time come, when God’s dealings with fleshly, national Israel, and all His promises to them [which included the resurrection], would all be completely fulfilled? Because, as we have learned from Jesus‘ own words, the law of Moses absolutely could not pass away until every one of these things was accomplished! Well, it would certainly seem to me, in light of all that we have just studied, that it would have to be after The Resurrection! However, rather than relying on logic or our feelings about it, let us once again, allow the Scriptures themselves to give us the answer. To learn that answer, let us now go to The Prophets as we promised earlier, and of whom Paul spoke in his defense. We see this promise of “resurrection,” for example, in Ezek. 37:11-14 and Dan. 12:1-3, some 600 years B.C.. In the account by Daniel, we read of this promise in 12:1-3, as he prophesies concerning the promise of “the resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked,” along with mention of “the great tribulation,” of which Jesus had spoken in Mt. 24:21.“. Yes, Daniel speaks of them both as occurring in the same time-frame. But then, in v-4, he is told by the angel, to seal up the book until “the end time [not end of time].” Then, beginning with v-6, we hear one angel ask of the other angel,

“…How long will it be until the end of these wonders?” And the second angel answered: “as soon as they finish shattering the power of the holy people [fleshly, national Israel], all these events will be completed.” [v-7] Now Daniel was very perplexed by this, for he did not understand, but the angel told him in v-9, “Go your way, Daniel, for these words are concealed and sealed up until the end time.” Again, please notice that the angel did not say, “until the end of time,” as I once understood, but rather, “the end time.” And then, in v-13, we read the angel’s final words to Daniel. He said, “But as for you, go your way to the end; then you will enter into rest and rise again [resurrection] for your allotted portion at the end of the age.”

Did you notice all the precious nuggets of truth scattered throughout those remarks by the angel? In my estimation, the language here could not be more transparent or more enlightening! Is there really even any question now as to the time at which the hope of Israel i.e., the resurrection, was to occur? The angel said that Daniel would “rise again” at “the end of the age.” And just what “age” would that be? Well, wouldn’t it have to be the only age that Daniel knew of---the age in which he was living---the old covenant age? The angel, then, gives us even more precious gems of information as to when the resurrection would occur. In addition to the fact that it would be at the end of the old covenant age, he also said that it would be, “when they would finish shattering the power of the holy people.” A good question now is: Who are the “they” of v-7 and, also, who are “the holy people?” Well wouldn’t “the holy people” be the same as the “your [Daniel’s] people of v-1? Wouldn’t it have to be Israel? And, they continued to be the holy people until the time at which their power would be totally and completely shattered at “the fall of Jerusalem.” And who would be the “they,” the ones after Daniel’s prophecy, who would shatter the power of the holy people, Israel? Well, obviously, it had to be Rome, God’s instrument, whom He used in the Judgment on Jerusalem and the Jews from April 66 A.D. to September 70 A.D. [for a time; times; and half a time i.e., 42 months; 3-½ years; 1260 days--v-7]

I see three very important facts learned in Dan. 12:
[1] The resurrection mentioned in vss. 2, 3, would take place when the power of the holy people [old covenant Israel] would be shattered [v-7], [2] The resurrection would also take place at the end of the age [vss. 9, 13], and [3] Daniel would be resurrected at the end of the age.In light of these indisputable facts, I am fully persuaded that it was at the end of the old covenant age i.e., the Mosaic age, that The Hope of Israel [The Resurrection] occurred; just as the angel told Daniel.

It’s very interesting that this is not the only passage where we see a connection between the “end of the old covenant age“ and “the resurrection.” In the epistle of 1 Corinthians, which Paul wrote in about 57 A.D., he spent the entire 15th Chapter addressing the matter of “The Resurrection.” Among the many things he had to say about “the resurrection,” he spoke of the fact that Christ came to restore the life [spiritual life] which was forfeited in the Garden by Adam [vs. 21, 22]. In vss. 35, 36, Paul begins answering the supposed question that someone in Corinth would inevitably raise namely, “…How are the dead raised, and with what kind of body do they come?” And so, in vs. 37-49, he assured the Corinthian brethren that it would not be the body which was planted: He said it would be an “imperishable body” as opposed to the “perishable body” planted [v-42]; it would be a “spiritual body,” not the “natural or physical body” that was planted [v-44]; it would be a “heavenly body“ and not an “earthy body [v-49] as the one planted. Then in v-50, he explains why it would not be a “physical, earthy, natural body.” And, it was all because “…flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God“; that “the perishable [the fleshly]” does not inherit “the imperishable [the spiritual].”

In the last few verses [vs. 51-58], we learn about the “when” of the resurrection, and also it’s “covenantal connection.” Notice the intrigue of v-51. Here, Paul speaks to the brethren at Corinth about what was soon to happen regarding them, and himself; and he speaks of it as “a mystery.” This, of course is in the context of the righteous “living and dead” at Christ‘s parousia; it does not include the “wicked, It was “a mystery,” in that God had not before revealed the deeper and more intimate details of the Resurrection. But Paul says that when Christ would come, that not all of them would “sleep” [be physically dead], but all would “be changed,“ and that it would all be in the “twinkling of an eye, and at the last trumpet call.” (v-52]

But it’s in vs. 54-56, where we will learn of the “covenantal connection” between The Resurrection and the passing of the old covenant, which allowed for the passing of The Law which Jesus said could not pass away until all was accomplished, or fulfilled. In these verses, Paul indicates that the time of The Resurrection would also be the time of the fulfillment of a specific prophecy by Hosea. Notice Paul’s words in v-54b, where he says, “then will come about, the saying that is written,” and then Paul proceeds to quote Hosea 13:14. Now let’s stop there momentarily! As you look at this statement by Paul, to what time or event do you understand the “then” to be referring? Well, actually Paul goes on to answer that for us. He said that it would be the time when, “the perishable would put on the imperishable and the mortal put on immortality,” which, of course, would be at the time of “the resurrection.” Now here’s that prophecy from Hosea, which Paul declares would be fulfilled by The Resurrection! Hosea said, “I will ransom them from the power of Sheol [Hades]; I will redeem them from death. O death, where are your thorns? O sheol, where is your sting?” To which Paul then adds: “The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.” [v-56] Now then, beloved, when we connect the dots, we see that death [spiritual death] got its sting from “sin,” and the source of sin‘s power, was “The Law.” Isn’t this in itself, evidence that the old covenant law had not completely passed away at the time of Paul’s writing this epistle? I understand that at Jesus’ coming, He brought, perfected salvation, eternal life, and immortality, all of which were elements of His glorious eternal Kingdom. Yes, He defeated sin death and Sheol/Hades, upon His removal of all those obstacles which still stood in the way of that perfection; things such as the old earthly temple with its old temporal, typical holy of holies, its fleshly, earthly priesthood with its animal sacrifices etc., allowing then for the complete passing of that from which sin received its power , the old covenant law. [See also Heb. 8:13; Heb. 9:8-10; Heb. 9: 8-10; Heb. 9:27, 28; Heb. 12:18-30; Heb. 10:37, 38].

Yes,this would be the end of that old age; the end of that same age about which Jesus’ apostles asked Him of its “end” in Mt. 24:3. Upon examination of Mt. 24:1-3, one learns from the questions they asked Jesus, that they associated “His Coming [parousia] to destroy the temple.” with “the end of the age.”“ Please read it for yourself, and see what you think. Jesus said that, “this generation [His generation] would not pass away till all these things take place.” [Mt. 24:34] Folks, these things bring to mind, Mt. 16:27, 28, where Jesus said, “For the Son of Man is going to [Greek ‘mello‘ literally---about to] come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and will then recompense every man according to his deeds. Truly I say to you, there are some of those who are standing here, who will not taste of death until they see the son of Man coming in His Kingdom.” Therefore, in light of all the Scriptures which we have brought to bear upon this most intriguing subject, “The Hope of Israel [The Resurrection],” I’m compelled to remember that it was one of those great promises to old covenant Israel. And as such, I understand it as one of those promises which God would have fulfilled for them before that old covenant Age could finally pass away, Yes, the time of Christ’s coming in 70 A.D. was more, much more, that just the destruction of Jerusalem, it was also the time of “covenantal change; the old covenant now, not destroyed, but completely fulfilled, giving way to that marvelous New Covenant of Grace now completed and perfected with the glorious coming of The Savior, The Lord Jesus Christ.

this edited version was in its original given by jim gunter