“The House of Jacob shall Possess their Possessions” (6)

by Charles H. Welch

No.6. “The iniquity of the Amorites 

is not yet full”  (Gen. xv. 16). 

The reader will remember that we are to consider in this article the meaning or spiritual implications of the words spoken to Abraham concerning the period of affliction that his seed should endure ‘For the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full’ (Gen. xv. 16). 

The word translated ‘iniquity’ is the Hebrew avon and without actual reference, we might easily assume that such a word would be employed in Gen. iii. and vi. or xi., or in many places in Genesis where the sons of men are recorded following their evil ways. The fact however is, that avon occurs but four times in Genesis. Once it is used in self condemnation by the brethren of Joseph for their unnatural hatred (Gen. xliv. 16), the remaining three have peculiar associations with the evil seed. Cain uses it, ‘my iniquity’ (margin Gen. iv. 13) and he hated his brother; the angel uses it when he spoke of the wickedness of Sodom (Gen. xix. 15). Now just as Israel were debarred their inheritance until the iniquity of the Amorite was completed, so Sodom could not be visited with judgment until Lot had escaped and entered the city of Zoar (Gen. xix. 22). 

The four references to ‘iniquity’ avon are therefore closely related, as will be more clearly seen by the following arrangement of the references: 

The Hebrew word translated ‘iniquity’ avon is derived from avah ‘to bend, curve, twist, distort’ and ‘to be perverse’, very much as the English word ‘wrong’ is derived from the idea of being ‘wrung’ or ‘twisted’. So in Lam. iii. 9 it is used of ‘crooked’ paths, and in Isa. xxiv. 1 it is translated ‘turn upside down’. 

Seeing that the word is used but four times in the book of Genesis, as compared with 38 occurrences in the remaining books of the law, some specific perversion seems to be implied. We can get confirmation for this particular emphasis by observing the way in which another Hebrew word is used in Genesis namely the verb chata “to sin”. The first occurrence, Gen. iv. 7 is generally understood to refer to a sin-offering, and if this reference be excluded, then we must read on in Genesis until we come to the twentieth chapter before we come to the word chata ‘to sin’. The next occurrence of the word, Gen. xxxi. 39 “I bare the loss” has no bearing upon our search, and so we come to Gen. xxxix. 9 before we read the next reference to ‘sin’. The two passages that stand out therefore in Genesis as recording specific ‘sin’, are those that speak of Abimelech’s attempt to interfere with the coming of the true seed through Sarah, and the solicitations of Potiphar’s wife. 

The iniquity of the Amorite, the bending or twisting of something from its true course is also connected with the attack upon, and the corruption of the true seed. The Amorites being Canaanites were a people upon whom a curse had been pronounced. 

To the serpent God said . . . . . “Thou art cursed above all cattle” (Gen. iii. 14). 

To Cain the Lord said . . . . . “Thou art cursed more than the earth” (Gen. iv. 11). 


To Canaan Noah said . . . . . “Cursed be Canaan” (Gen. ix. 25). 

Contrary to common belief no curse was pronounced upon either Adam or Eve; the ground was cursed for their sakes. The first man to be cursed was Cain, and the N.T. declares that ‘he was of that wicked one’, and the second was Canaan. 

From these references it becomes apparent that there is a cursed line running parallel with that of the true seed, and the subject is of such importance that we must extend our survey, and in order to impress this terrible pedigree of the false seed upon the mind, let us set out the testimony of the Scriptures in tabular form: 

(1) Enmity declared between the two seeds (Gen. iii. 15). 
(2) Enmity is the meaning of the name “Job”, and the book of Job sets forth the conflict of the ages and the attack of Satan upon one who was “perfect” i.e. one of the true seed (Job i. and ii.). 
(3) Cain was “of that wicked one” (I John iii. 12) and his line is not included in subsequent genealogies (Gen. v. 1; I Chron. i. 1). 
(4) Noah was “perfect in his generations” (Gen. vi. 9) and is placed in contrast with “all flesh” that had corrupted its way on the earth. 
(5) The sons of God (Gen. vi.; Job i. 6) are fallen angels. These are said to have kept not their first estate, but to have left their own habitation and are likened to Sodom, having gone after strange flesh (Jude 6, 7). 
(6) The result of the irruption of the fallen angels was a race of abnormal men, called “giants” or nephilim “fallen ones” (Gen. vi. 4). 
(7) There was a subsequent corruption of the race “after that”, that is after the Flood (Gen. vi. 4), and as the purpose of God was now focused upon the line of Shem, so the attack of the evil one was concentrated upon the land promised to Abraham, “The Canaanite was then in the land” (Gen. xii. 6). 
(8) The descendants of Canaan are named in Gen. x. 6-19, with whom are allied Nimrod the rebel and founder of Babylon (Gen. x. 8-10). These descendants are Sidon, Heth, the Jebusite, the Amorite, the Girgasite, the Hivite, the Arkite, the Sinite, the Arvadite, the Zemarite and the Hamathite. Some of the descendants of Canaan are not mentioned anywhere else in the Scriptures, except once more in the genealogical table of I Chron. i., and it may be that all were not contaminated. All were not ‘giants’ as were the Amorites. 
(9) It will be observed that there is no son of Canaan named Jebus, or Amor, or Girga. There is a strange departure from the normal in the genealogy of Gen. x. All we know is that Canaan begat Sidon his firstborn, and Heth, but whether the father of the Jebusites, was a son named Jebus, or whether the father of the Amorites was a son named Amor, Scripture is silent, but this strange departure in the writing of a genealogy lifts out into prominence these Canaanite tribes. 

(10) Og, king of Bashan, an Amorite (Deut. xxxi. 4) is called “Of the remnant of the giants” (Deut. iii. 11). Giants had dwelt in this vicinity “in old time” (Deut. ii. 20), and Bashan was called “the land of the giants” (Deut. iii. 13). In connection with which the reader should consult The Giant Cities of Bashan by Porter. 
(11) A special tribe of the Canaanites was descended from Arba. He is said to have been a great man among the Anakim, and gave his name to the city of Kirjath-arba, afterwards called Hebron (Josh. xiv. 15). 
(12) The Anakim were described as “tall” and the name means “long necked”. These struck terror in the heart of the ten spies who brought back an evil report. In their sight, Israel felt as “grasshoppers” (Numb. xiii. 28) and the saying was repeated “who can stand before the children of Anak?” (Deut. ix. 2). 
(13) Some of the “giants” remained unto the days of David, notably Goliath (I Sam. xvii. 4) and Ishbi-benob, Saph, a brother of Goliath and an unnamed man of great stature who had “on every hand six fingers, and on every foot six toes” (II Sam. xxi. 16-22). 
(14) The parable of “the wheat and the tares” declares that the “good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one, and the enemy that sowed them is the devil” (Matt. xiii. 38, 39). No other end but to be gathered out and burned is said of the tares. They are evidently a counterfeit of the true seed, for not until the harvest is it possible to discriminate without endangering the true seed. 
(15) The Saviour discriminates between “My Father” and “your father” saying “If God were your Father, ye would love Me”, “ye are of your father the devil . . . He was a murderer from the beginning” so linking up with the “iniquity” of Cain (John viii. 38-44). 
(16) Some were called by the Lord “serpents” and “generations of vipers” (Matt. xxiii. 33), and He asked “How can ye escape the damnation of hell (gehenna)?” This denunciation is preceded by words that are reminiscent of Gen. xv. “The iniquity of the Amorite was not yet full” for He said “Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers” (Matt. xxiii. 32). 
(17) The Apostle Paul was withstood by a sorcerer named Bar-Jesus, significant name! who was also called Elymas, which by interpretation means a “sorcerer”. The Apostle called him “a child of the devil” (Acts xiii. 10), and his evil attitude is described as “perverting” the right ways of the Lord. 
(18) Just as the Amorites barred the way and prevented Israel from entering into their inheritance, so the Apostle says “we wrestle not against flesh and blood (even as Israel were told ‘meddle not’ with Esau or with Ammon in Deut. ii. 5, 19), but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high (or heavenly) places” (Eph. vi. 12). These principalities were “spoiled” and “made a show of openly” at the cross (Col. ii. 15) and were led captive at the Ascension (Eph. iv. 8) even as in type Joshua took the thirty-one kings (Josh. xii. 9-24). 
(19) John in his first epistle differentiates between “the children of God” and “the children of the devil”, and instances “Cain who was of that wicked one” (I John iii. 10-12). 
(20) In the book of the Revelation, we learn that at the time of the end, there will be those who say they are Jews, and are not, but who are “the synagogue of Satan” (Rev. ii. 9; iii. 9) and they who hold “the doctrine of Balaam” (Rev. ii. 14); a false prophetess named Jezebel (Rev. ii. 20), together with some who have “known the depths of Satan” (Rev. ii. 24), while the Laodiceans were about to be “spued out” of the Lord’s mouth (Rev. iii. 16), a figure that reminds us of the Canaanites who were “spued out” of the land (Lev. xviii. 28). They are summed up as “earth dwellers” whose names are not written in the book of life (Rev. xiii. 8). They are the false seed. When Babylon falls, the true seed enter into their inheritance, even as at the filling up of the iniquity of the Amorite, Israel entered into theirs, and in the seven last plagues is “filled up the wrath of God” (Rev. xv. 1). 

Here in these twenty items we have given little more than a catalogue; if each passage cited is considered in the light of the context, it seems impossible to avoid the doctrine of the two seeds, a doctrine which not only illuminates the purpose of the ages, but is the theme of that most ancient book, the book of Job, which sheds light on Gen. iii., vi., the extermination of the Canaanites, and a many doctrinal and dispensational subject. It is this that makes the passages in Gen. xv. of such importance, and which by application illuminates the conflict that the Church of the One Body must expect while “principalities and powers” are “the rulers of the darkness of this world”. 

----------------

(From The Berean Expositor, vol. 41, page 191).
http://charleswelch.net/BE%20Vol%2041%20Final.pdf

------------------

The Pleroma (5) - Charles H. Welch

No.5. The Age-Times, when do they begin? 

In the great majority of cases the translations “everlasting”, “eternal” and “forever”, in the A.V., are renderings of the Greek aionios, aion and the Hebrew olam. The A.V., however, renders aion by “world”, “course”, “age”, “eternal” as well as “ever”, and in conjunction with various prepositions it gives as translations “since the world began”, “from the beginning of the world” and “while the world standeth”. 

Such translations of a word that can range from a “world” which had a “beginning” and will have an end, to “eternity” which confessedly has neither, are too wide to be of service, especially when the choice depends largely upon the theological views of the translator. 

Olam, the Hebrew word, comes from a root meaning something hidden or secret (Psa. xix. 12) and suggests a period of time of undefined limits. Aion is used in the Septuagint to translate the Hebrew olam, and this we must take as our guide. 

In the book of Ecclesiastes the word olam occursseven times, and is translated in the A.V. as follows: 

“The earth abideth for ever” (i. 4). 

“It hath been already of old time” (i. 10). 

“No remembrance . . . . . for ever” (ii. 16). 

“Set the world in their heart” (iii. 11). 

“It shall be for ever” (iii. 14). 

“A portion for ever” (ix. 6). 

“Man goeth to his long home” (xii. 5). 

Such variety provides no connected thought, but a consistent translation of olam reveals a definite line of teaching. 

Leaving these passages until we are more prepared to consider their teaching in detail, we pass to another group, this time in the N.T., namely, in the epistle to the Ephesians. There the word aion is translated as inconsistently as we found its parallel olam in Ecclesiastes. 

“This world” (i. 21). 

“The course of this world” (ii. 2). 

“The ages to come” (ii. 7). 

“From the beginning of the world” (iii. 9). 

“Eternal purpose’ (iii. 11). 

“Throughout all ages, world without end” (iii. 21). 

“Rulers of the darkness of this world” (vi. 12). 

Here we have a strange assortment. This world, which had a beginning, but which has no end, and the course of this world, and the eternal purpose which terms are hardly comparable. Translate the word aion consistently, and order, light and instruction take the place of human tradition and confusion. 

All lovers of the Word must see how great is the loss which we have sustained through the traditional translation. “The eternal purpose” sounds very grand, it gives a certain sound of reality and indefectibility to the purpose of God, yet it is a double violation. The noun aion is translated as though is were the adjective aionion, apart from the mistake of putting eternity where age should have been. What we have to learn is that the Bible does not speak of “eternity”. It was not written to tell us of eternity. Such a consideration is entirely outside the scope of revelation. Many, many undreamed wonders will doubtless be unfolded when the ages are no more. What they will be and what they will involve is idle and profitless speculation. The Word of God as it has been given is a complete system of teaching for us; it does not treat fully of the creation around us, much less of the time before or after the present six days’ creation. While we acknowledge that there is much which our curiosity would tempt us to ask, we do most readily acknowledge the divine boundaries of our studies, realizing that by the repeated emphasis upon the teaching of the ages, and the absence of teaching concerning eternity, the Lord is still showing us (as is expressed in Ecclesiastes) that the time has not yet arrived when we may “find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end”. 

Our Immediate Enquiry. 

Accepting the fact of the ages and of the age-times, we now enquire from the Scripture an answer to the question “when did they commence?” 

As a fuller contribution to the subject, we place before the reader some of the most important expressions that are found in the N.T. dealing with the time factor of the ages. Such expressions as “the end of the world”; “since the world began”; “this world”; “the world to come” are known to all; we now propose to submit them to a more careful scrutiny, so that the Scriptural association of time with the ages shall be better seen. The reader already knows that aion is often translated “world” in the A.V.; and while it is a good rendering, meaning etymologically “the age of man” (vir-eld), it simplifies the enquiry if we agree to translate kosmos by “world” and aion by “age”, thereby preserving the distinction that must be maintained between words of place and words of time. 

“The end of the world.” There are more words than one that can be translated “end”; the word used in this phrase is sunteleia. In Matt. xiii. 39, 40, 49; xxiv. 2 & xxviii. 20 aion is in the singular, but in the one remaining occurrence, namely in Heb. ix. 26, aion is used in the plural. What the significance of this change may be we do not pause at the moment to consider, but just make a note of the fact that nowhere else except in Matthew or Hebrews do we meet the expression sunteleia tou aionos. If there is a period that can be called “the end of the world”, there is also a period which speaks of a time “since the world began” or “from the beginning of the world”. We should remember when reading this expression that the word arche “beginning” does not occur in the phrase, all that is found in the original being the words ap aionos “from (an) age”, when used in Luke i. 70; Acts iii. 21 and xv. 18; and apo ton aionon the plural with the article, in Eph. iii. 9 and Col. i. 26. We observe that in the last reference the ages are coupled with the generations a term which we must consider separately. 

“The world to come” translates two forms, one in which aion is spoken of as erchomenon “coming”, Luke xviii. 30; and aion spoken of as mello “about to be” Matt. xii. 32; Eph i. 21 and Heb. vi. 5. 

“This world” and “that world” are contrasted, the former expression using toutou with aion, the latter using ekeinos. “That world” occurs but once, namely in Luke xx. 35, but “this world” occurs some fourteen times, and these will be given fuller consideration when the occurrences are being examined in detail. Variations of this expression are found in Gal. i. 4 which adds the words “present” and “evil”, and I Tim. vi. 17, II Tim. iv. 10 and Titus ii. 12, where the word nun “now” is added. 

One passage contains the phrase “before the ages” (plural) pro ton aionon, I Cor. ii. 7, the other passages which speak of “before the world” employ the word kosmos not aion. 

The word “generation” is used in association with the ages. Genea has three meanings in the N.T. It means the simple succession from father to son (Matt. i. 17); it means a company of men living at the same time and sharing similar characteristics; and thirdly it means a mark of time, “the successive lives of offspring being taken to indicate so many stages in the world’s history”. 

Aion “age” belongs to no one particular dispensation or line of teaching. It occurs in all but five of the twenty seven books of the N.T., the epistles that contain no reference are I & II Thessalonians, James, Philemon and III John. Aionios the adjective translated “eternal” and “everlasting” occurs in nineteen books of the N.T., being omitted in I Corinthians, I Thessalonians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, James and II & III John. The books therefore which contain both aion and aionios are the four Gospels, Acts, Galatians, I & II Timothy, Titus, Hebrews, I & II Peter, I John, Jude and the Revelation. We must examine some of these occurrences in detail, and we shall have to consider the bearing of apo “from”, pro “before”, and eis “unto” or “for”, before we can even begin to come to any conclusion as to when the age-times began. 

What does the Scripture mean by “age-times”? Is such a term a correct translation of the original? What light do parallel constructions throw upon the phrase? Where does the expression occur? What light do we get from the context? Are there parallel, though different expressions, that should be considered? Let us address ourselves to these and any related questions that may occur during the investigation. 

The rendering “age-times” is not found in either the A.V. or the R.V. In the A.V. the translation reads “before or since the world began” and in the R.V. the rendering is “through” or “before times eternal”. “Before the world began” is at least understandable, but “before times eternal” cannot be understood without a very drastic revision of the meaning ascribed to “eternal”. If eternal thing have neither beginning nor end, then it is impossible to speak of a period before times eternal—the translation is figurative, and does not contribute to our understanding or add to our knowledge. 

The occurrences of the expression are three in number, and we give them first of all as they occur in the A.V. 

“Now to Him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the 
preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith: to God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen.” (Rom. xvi. 25-27). 

“Be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner: but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of God; Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began, but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ” (II Tim. i. 8-10).

“In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; but hath in due times manifested His word through preaching, which is committed unto me according to the commandment of God our Saviour” (Titus i. 2, 3). 

The Greek words translated “before” or “since” the world began, are chronois aioniois in Rom. xvi. 25, and pro chronon aionion in II Tim. i. 9 and Titus i. 2. We observe that the expression in either form is exclusive to Paul, and that such an exclusive character is emphasized in the context by such added terms as “my gospel”; “through the gospel whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles”; “through preaching which is committed unto me”. 

Our first note therefore is that the term “before the world began” or “since the world began”, however we are obliged ultimately to translate the original, belongs exclusively to the ministry of Paul. 

Secondly we note that there is a difference between the phrase found in Rom. xvi., and those found in II Timothy and Titus. The former speaks of a period “since”, the latter of a period “before” the beginning of the world. We must be careful therefore to keep these two periods distinct, together with the revelations associated with them. 

Ignoring for the time being the preposition pro “before” or the dative case, translated by the A.V. ‘since’, let us examine the words chronon aionion. It is not a matter of debate that aionios is an adjective derived from aion the noun, or that chronos is a noun. If we read in Matt. xxv. 19 meta de chronon polun we naturally translate “but after a long time”. If we find the order of the words reversed as in John v. 6 polun . . . . . chronon, while the emphasis may be shifted, the translation must remain the same, polun still remains an adjective, chronon still remains a noun. The word chronos ‘time’ is not of frequent use in the epistles, occurring only twelve times in the fourteen written by Paul, and when we turn to Romans, II Timothy and Titus in the hope of observing the usage of chronos in those three epistles which use the phrase ‘since’ or ‘before’ the world began, we find but one passage, namely Rom. vii. 1 “the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth”, literally ‘for a long time’ eph hoson chronon. 

Aionios the adjective, is derived from aion, and must retain whatever essential meaning pertains to the noun. It is impossible that the noun should be translated ‘age’, which most certainly had a beginning, and will certainly have an end, and to translate the adjective ‘everlasting’ or ‘eternal’. Keeping to Paul’s epistles we find aionion translated ‘eternal’, ‘everlasting’, and ‘for ever’, except in the three passages before us, Rom. xvi. 25; II Tim. i. 9; and Titus i. 2, where we read ‘since, or before, the world began’. If chronos is translated ‘world’, then aionios must have been translated ‘began’, or if chronos has been translated ‘began’ because of its association with time, then aionios has been translated ‘world’. In any case the translation is exceedingly wide. The Revisers were evidently unsatisfied with this rendering for in the three passages they substitute ‘times eternal’, which though it adheres more to the actual words so translated, is still too poetic to be of use, for ‘times’ belong to one category and ‘eternal’ to another. We can speak of ‘a living death’ but only in a figure; we can speak of ‘times eternal’ but only in a figure. For the purpose of discovering at what point in the outworking of the purpose of the ages these ‘times eternal’ commence, such a translation is valueless. There is nothing for it but to adopt either the foreign-sounding phrase ‘eonian times’, or the cumbersome expression ‘age-times’. This latter has the advantage of presenting to the eye the fact that we are still within the bounds of the ages, and not dealing with either ‘the world’ as in the A.V. or ‘eternity’ as in the R.V. 

We must now return to those passages that are under review, to observe any particular features that will help us in our attempt to place them in the outworking of the Divine purpose. 

First, we will give Weymouth’s rendering of Rom. xvi. 25-27, with our own emphasis of each occurrence of aion and aionios. 

“To Him Who has it in His power to make you strong, as declared in the Good News which I am spreading, and the proclamation concerning Jesus Christ, in harmony with the unveiling of the Truth which IN THE PERIOD OF PAST AGES remained unuttered, but has now been brought fully to light, and by the command of THE GOD OF THE AGES has been made known by the writings of the Prophets among all the Gentiles to win them to obedience to the faith—to God, the only wise, through Jesus Christ, even to Him be the glory THROUGH ALL THE AGES” (Rom. xvi. 25-27. Weymouth). 

The words chronois aioniois in Rom. xvi. 25 are in the dative case. This case is used to denote ‘a space of time’, ‘for’, as in Acts xiii. 20; John ii. 20. (The A.V. use of the word ‘since’ is without precedent; this demands the preposition apo, or its equivalent.) In the space of time known as the ‘age times’, a truth had been ‘kept secret’. As the word musterion and its derivations express the idea of something ‘secret’, and as the word translated ‘kept secret’ in the original of Rom. xvi. 25 is sigao ‘to keep silence’ (see I Cor. xiv. 28, 34), the translation of the A.V. is misleading. The word does not indicate that the truth in view was never made known at all, or at any time, but that during the space of time known as the age-times it was ‘hushed’, that period ending with the revelation found in the epistle to the Romans, and referring, not to the Mystery of Ephesians, but to the inner portion of Romans, namely Rom. v. 12 - viii. 39, where instead of the law of Moses and personal transgression being the dominant theme, Moses retires into the background and Sinai is exchanged for ‘the law of sin and death’. Adam now takes the place of Moses, and the ruin of the creature is stressed rather than personal transgressions, ‘sin’ rather than ‘sins’. Since the call of Abraham, and during the period of Israel’s discipline this inner teaching of Romans remained unemphasized, but with the commission of the Apostle, the hour struck for its proclamation. A comparison of Rom. i. 1-7 with Rom. xvi. 25-27, will reveal some thins in common, and some that differ. 

The structure of the epistle to the Romans is exceedingly complex, as we can well believe of so mighty an epistle. Simplified to the extreme it appears somewhat like this: 

--------------------

(From The Berean Expositor, vol. 42, page 203).

------------------