What do you think?
Rate this book
His Truth Is Marching On: Advanced Studies on Prophecy in the Light of History
At His first coming, Jesus said the kingdom was at hand. Did he then "postpone" the kingdom because the Jews rejected Him? Do the Scriptures teach a Jewish-type millennium when God will turn back to animal sacrifices in a Jerusalem temple? Presents reasons for believing a "fulfilled" view regarding Joel's prophecy, the 144,000, the coming of Elijah, and Ezekiel 38. Also discusses the error of setting dates for the return of Christ--1844, 1914, etc.
119 pages, Paperback
First published October 1, 1977
1 person is currently reading
14 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
May 27, 2025
A NOTED EVANGELIST LOOKS CRITICALLY AT SOME POPULAR NOTIONS
Ralph Woodrow was the author of 'Babylon Mystery Religion: Ancient and Modern,' but he recanted this book in 'The Babylon Connection?' He also reconsidered his former rejection of the Christmas celebration in 'Christmas Reconsidered.'
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1977 book, “Most of the prophecies of the Bible, as will be shown in this book, have already been FULFILLED… In the pages that follow, certain ‘future or fulfilled’ questions are before us---questions about the coming of Elijah, the 144,000, Joel’s prophecy, and Ezekiel 38. Does the expression ‘day of the Lord’ always refer to the end-time? Did the promise given to Abraham that his descendants would become a great nation ever find fulfillment? Will Russia invade Israel in the future? Will Christ pass through the East Gate of Jerusalem when he returns? Will Jerusalem become the world center of worship and government capital in the age to come?... we [also] consider the kingdom POSTPONEMENT teaching and its implications… [as well as] the question of the millennium.
“There are differences of opinion as to the proper interpretation of many of these prophecies. We believe such differences should be dealt with in friendly discussion… We can disagree without being disagreeable.”
He says of Daniel 8 (Antiochus Epiphanes, etc.), “How long was this defilement of the sanctuary and the casting down of the holy temples to continue? This brings us back to Daniel 8:14: ‘Unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’ History has this to say about the cleansing of the sanctuary [he then quotes 1 Maccabees 4]… With all of the evidence pointing to a fulfillment within the Old Testament era, we see no reason to bypass this and seek a fulfillment in 1844… If the 2300 years began in 457 B.C. and ended in 1844 A.D., what happened in 457 B.C. to defile the heavenly sanctuary? Was a Greek king removed from the heavenly sanctuary in 1844?” (Pg. 4-5)
Turning to Ezekiel 38, he asserts, “What… are our reasons for believing that the setting for the battle described by Ezekiel was after their return from the 70 years captivity? Why do we believe this battle pertained to Old Testament times and not to a future fulfillment? The reasons are as follows: First, the invading soldier who make up the armies of this passage would be riding on HORSES! [v. 15]… Will major armies of the world revert back to using horses in battle?... Second, the time of this invasion is described as a time when Israel would be dwelling in peace… But the modern nation of Israel is one of the most troubled spots on earth!” (Pg. 26-27)
He continues, “Third, the purpose of this invasion against Israel … was to obtain, among other things, CATTLE… Does anyone really believe this prophecy is talking about a bunch of Russian cattle rustlers?... Fourth… These soldiers fight with bows and arrows. They handle swords. They wear armor… Such a detailed description can hardly fit modern warfare… Fifth, these primitive weapons … were made out of materials that could be used as FIREWOOD (39:9-10). Modern weapons are not made out of wood … Sixth, the time of this battle was when people used WOOD for fuel [Ez 39:9-10]… This is not a picture of modern times.” (Pg. 29-30)
He goes on, “The basic argument for [the ‘futurist’ view] is based on the word translated ‘chief’ in Ezekiel 38:3… The word is, in Hebrew, ‘rosh’… some have supposed that Rosh is simply another way of saying Russia! But ‘rosh’ meaning ‘head,’ is a very common word and appears in the Old Testament over SIX HUNDRED TIMES! It seems very doubtful that it could mean Russia in the one instance… then we are told that ‘Meshech’ means Moscow! Again, this is doubtful. ‘Moscow’ is a Finnish name… Some think Tubal means Tobolsk, but this is only a similarity in sound.” (Pg. 31-32)
Of the Kingdom of God, he argues, “Many Christians think of the kingdom of God as being set up at the SECOND coming of Christ. If so, how can we explain Christ’s message [Mk 1:15] 2,000 years ago---that the TIME was fulfilled and the kingdom was then and there AT HAND?... there are two basic interpretations… (1)… when the Jews rejected [Jesus], he POSTPONED the kingdom and went to the cross. Consequently, the setting up of the kingdom awaits a future day. (2) The other view, and the one we believe to be correct... instead of postponing it, HE DID WHAT HE CAME TO DO. His kingdom was set up, but it was a SPIRITUAL kingdom, not a worldly, political, Jewish-type kingdom.” (Pg. 54)
He summarizes, “Because the kingdom of Christ is an ‘everlasting kingdom,’ it is sometimes referred to in a future sense… We do not deny the future aspects of the kingdom. But this does not annul its PRESENT reality… As Christians we can rejoice that we are NOW a part of that kingdom and that this kingdom is destined for a glorious and magnificent future!” (Pg. 62)
Of Israel, he asks, “Isn’t it true that God promised the land of Palestine to Abraham and his seed forever?... The promises involving a specific land area and Abraham’s fleshly descendants, met their fulfillment with the Old Testament. His descendants were to become a ‘great nation’ (Gen 12:2)---which they did… In [Deut 4:7] the question was asked: ‘For what nation is there so GREAT?’” (Pg. 72-73)
He continues, “As to the promise of possessing the land ‘forever’ (Gen 13:15), this was clearly based on CONDITIONS of obedience… That the promise of a continual inheritance of the land was conditional is apparent, and that they did not continually remain in the land is fact. Some suppose this tiny portion of land given to Abraham and his descendants is to be the inheritance of Jews throughout eternity. This was not the way the writers of the New Testament understood it… ‘But now they desire a BETTER country, that is, an heavenly…’” (Pg. 74)
Of the Millennium, he points out, “I came to realize this concept was based on Old Testament scriptures. NOT ONE of the New Testament writers ever spoke of Jerusalem becoming the world’s center for worship. Not one New Testament writer ever spoke of Jerusalem becoming the world capital in an age to come… Then, too, there was the problem of room. If the resurrected saints of the ages were to all come with Christ into Jerusalem… how would there be room for all of them?... a literal interpretation of these Old Testament prophecies would even have people coming from all nations riding to Jerusalem on horses, mules, in ox carts, and the like!... And then... there was the question of animal sacrifices… Yet, according to the New Testament, the sacrifice of Christ upon Calvary was the perfect and FINAL sacrifice for sin!” (Pg. 79-80)
Of Ezekiel’s Temple and the ‘East Gate’ [Ez 44:1-3], he explains, “only a very little investigation is required to determine that: (1) the gate Ezekiel mentioned has nothing to do with the present gate … in Jerusalem, and (2) the ‘prince’ that Ezekiel mentioned is not Jesus Christ… Not only was this ‘prince’ of Ezekiel’s vision to offer animal sacrifices for others, but for HIS OWN SINS as well! [Ez 45:22]… What, then, is the meaning of the temple with which this gate was associated in the closing chapters of Ezekiel? Adam Clarke says this temple was probably that which Ezekiel saw before the captivity, and which had been burned by the Chaldeans… If the temple built after the captivity failed to fully measure up to the grand scale of the prophecy, it could be [that] a total fulfillment was conditioned on total obedience [Ez 43:10-11].” (Pg. 86-87)
He adds, “If Ezekiel was describing a literal temple and worship of the future, it would mean a return to the rituals of the Old Testament… it would be an age of people getting married [Lk 20:22, 25]… it would mean a return to circumcision… then animals will again be offered as sacrifices for sin.” (Pg. 88-89)
He summarizes, “To be consistent, the futurist system would require not only God to go backwards, but mankind as well. The nations would have to go back to the use of horses, ox carts, mules, and camels for transportation. Some nations, including Israel, would have to go back to ancient heathenistic forms of worship… The armies of major nations would have to go back to riding and fighting on horses, using wooden swords, spears, and arrows!” (Pg. 110-111)
This admittedly controversial book will be of great interest to Christians studying ‘future prophecy.’
Ralph Woodrow was the author of 'Babylon Mystery Religion: Ancient and Modern,' but he recanted this book in 'The Babylon Connection?' He also reconsidered his former rejection of the Christmas celebration in 'Christmas Reconsidered.'
He wrote in the Introduction to this 1977 book, “Most of the prophecies of the Bible, as will be shown in this book, have already been FULFILLED… In the pages that follow, certain ‘future or fulfilled’ questions are before us---questions about the coming of Elijah, the 144,000, Joel’s prophecy, and Ezekiel 38. Does the expression ‘day of the Lord’ always refer to the end-time? Did the promise given to Abraham that his descendants would become a great nation ever find fulfillment? Will Russia invade Israel in the future? Will Christ pass through the East Gate of Jerusalem when he returns? Will Jerusalem become the world center of worship and government capital in the age to come?... we [also] consider the kingdom POSTPONEMENT teaching and its implications… [as well as] the question of the millennium.
“There are differences of opinion as to the proper interpretation of many of these prophecies. We believe such differences should be dealt with in friendly discussion… We can disagree without being disagreeable.”
He says of Daniel 8 (Antiochus Epiphanes, etc.), “How long was this defilement of the sanctuary and the casting down of the holy temples to continue? This brings us back to Daniel 8:14: ‘Unto 2,300 days, then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.’ History has this to say about the cleansing of the sanctuary [he then quotes 1 Maccabees 4]… With all of the evidence pointing to a fulfillment within the Old Testament era, we see no reason to bypass this and seek a fulfillment in 1844… If the 2300 years began in 457 B.C. and ended in 1844 A.D., what happened in 457 B.C. to defile the heavenly sanctuary? Was a Greek king removed from the heavenly sanctuary in 1844?” (Pg. 4-5)
Turning to Ezekiel 38, he asserts, “What… are our reasons for believing that the setting for the battle described by Ezekiel was after their return from the 70 years captivity? Why do we believe this battle pertained to Old Testament times and not to a future fulfillment? The reasons are as follows: First, the invading soldier who make up the armies of this passage would be riding on HORSES! [v. 15]… Will major armies of the world revert back to using horses in battle?... Second, the time of this invasion is described as a time when Israel would be dwelling in peace… But the modern nation of Israel is one of the most troubled spots on earth!” (Pg. 26-27)
He continues, “Third, the purpose of this invasion against Israel … was to obtain, among other things, CATTLE… Does anyone really believe this prophecy is talking about a bunch of Russian cattle rustlers?... Fourth… These soldiers fight with bows and arrows. They handle swords. They wear armor… Such a detailed description can hardly fit modern warfare… Fifth, these primitive weapons … were made out of materials that could be used as FIREWOOD (39:9-10). Modern weapons are not made out of wood … Sixth, the time of this battle was when people used WOOD for fuel [Ez 39:9-10]… This is not a picture of modern times.” (Pg. 29-30)
He goes on, “The basic argument for [the ‘futurist’ view] is based on the word translated ‘chief’ in Ezekiel 38:3… The word is, in Hebrew, ‘rosh’… some have supposed that Rosh is simply another way of saying Russia! But ‘rosh’ meaning ‘head,’ is a very common word and appears in the Old Testament over SIX HUNDRED TIMES! It seems very doubtful that it could mean Russia in the one instance… then we are told that ‘Meshech’ means Moscow! Again, this is doubtful. ‘Moscow’ is a Finnish name… Some think Tubal means Tobolsk, but this is only a similarity in sound.” (Pg. 31-32)
Of the Kingdom of God, he argues, “Many Christians think of the kingdom of God as being set up at the SECOND coming of Christ. If so, how can we explain Christ’s message [Mk 1:15] 2,000 years ago---that the TIME was fulfilled and the kingdom was then and there AT HAND?... there are two basic interpretations… (1)… when the Jews rejected [Jesus], he POSTPONED the kingdom and went to the cross. Consequently, the setting up of the kingdom awaits a future day. (2) The other view, and the one we believe to be correct... instead of postponing it, HE DID WHAT HE CAME TO DO. His kingdom was set up, but it was a SPIRITUAL kingdom, not a worldly, political, Jewish-type kingdom.” (Pg. 54)
He summarizes, “Because the kingdom of Christ is an ‘everlasting kingdom,’ it is sometimes referred to in a future sense… We do not deny the future aspects of the kingdom. But this does not annul its PRESENT reality… As Christians we can rejoice that we are NOW a part of that kingdom and that this kingdom is destined for a glorious and magnificent future!” (Pg. 62)
Of Israel, he asks, “Isn’t it true that God promised the land of Palestine to Abraham and his seed forever?... The promises involving a specific land area and Abraham’s fleshly descendants, met their fulfillment with the Old Testament. His descendants were to become a ‘great nation’ (Gen 12:2)---which they did… In [Deut 4:7] the question was asked: ‘For what nation is there so GREAT?’” (Pg. 72-73)
He continues, “As to the promise of possessing the land ‘forever’ (Gen 13:15), this was clearly based on CONDITIONS of obedience… That the promise of a continual inheritance of the land was conditional is apparent, and that they did not continually remain in the land is fact. Some suppose this tiny portion of land given to Abraham and his descendants is to be the inheritance of Jews throughout eternity. This was not the way the writers of the New Testament understood it… ‘But now they desire a BETTER country, that is, an heavenly…’” (Pg. 74)
Of the Millennium, he points out, “I came to realize this concept was based on Old Testament scriptures. NOT ONE of the New Testament writers ever spoke of Jerusalem becoming the world’s center for worship. Not one New Testament writer ever spoke of Jerusalem becoming the world capital in an age to come… Then, too, there was the problem of room. If the resurrected saints of the ages were to all come with Christ into Jerusalem… how would there be room for all of them?... a literal interpretation of these Old Testament prophecies would even have people coming from all nations riding to Jerusalem on horses, mules, in ox carts, and the like!... And then... there was the question of animal sacrifices… Yet, according to the New Testament, the sacrifice of Christ upon Calvary was the perfect and FINAL sacrifice for sin!” (Pg. 79-80)
Of Ezekiel’s Temple and the ‘East Gate’ [Ez 44:1-3], he explains, “only a very little investigation is required to determine that: (1) the gate Ezekiel mentioned has nothing to do with the present gate … in Jerusalem, and (2) the ‘prince’ that Ezekiel mentioned is not Jesus Christ… Not only was this ‘prince’ of Ezekiel’s vision to offer animal sacrifices for others, but for HIS OWN SINS as well! [Ez 45:22]… What, then, is the meaning of the temple with which this gate was associated in the closing chapters of Ezekiel? Adam Clarke says this temple was probably that which Ezekiel saw before the captivity, and which had been burned by the Chaldeans… If the temple built after the captivity failed to fully measure up to the grand scale of the prophecy, it could be [that] a total fulfillment was conditioned on total obedience [Ez 43:10-11].” (Pg. 86-87)
He adds, “If Ezekiel was describing a literal temple and worship of the future, it would mean a return to the rituals of the Old Testament… it would be an age of people getting married [Lk 20:22, 25]… it would mean a return to circumcision… then animals will again be offered as sacrifices for sin.” (Pg. 88-89)
He summarizes, “To be consistent, the futurist system would require not only God to go backwards, but mankind as well. The nations would have to go back to the use of horses, ox carts, mules, and camels for transportation. Some nations, including Israel, would have to go back to ancient heathenistic forms of worship… The armies of major nations would have to go back to riding and fighting on horses, using wooden swords, spears, and arrows!” (Pg. 110-111)
This admittedly controversial book will be of great interest to Christians studying ‘future prophecy.’
Displaying 1 of 1 review