The three compartments of the Tabernacle in the Wilderness correlate to the three stages defining our relationship to the Father while we are on our the path to complete and full sonship. These three relationships are found in the epistle of 1 John.

First, I will list the Scriptures and point out how the apostle John addresses his readers, and then we will come back and analyze them in their context, as well as looking at these words as they appear in other areas of the New Testament. The data in the brackets is the Strong’s reference number and the corresponding Greek word.

1 John 2:1 My little children [G5040 tekni,on teknion] these things write I unto you, that ye sin not…

12 I write unto you, little children [tekni,on teknion] because your sins are forgiven you for his name’s sake.

13 I write unto you, fathers [G3962 path,r pater], because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I write unto you, young men [G3495 neani,skoj neaniskos], because ye have overcome the wicked one. I write unto you, little children [G3813 paidi,on paidion], because ye have known the Father.

14 I have written unto you, fathers [G3962 path,r pater], because ye have known him that is from the beginning. I have written unto you, young men [neani,skoj neaniskos], because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.

18 Little children [paidi,on paidion], it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

1 John 2:28 And now, little children [tekni,on teknion], abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming.

1 John 3:7 Little children [tekni,on teknion], let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.

8 He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Notice now in verse 10 that John uses the word “children,” but it is not in the form of addressing his readers. It is a different Greek word from the phrase “little children.”

10 In this the children [G5043 te,knon teknon] of God are manifest, and the children [te,knon teknon] of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.

1 John 3:18 My little children [tekni,on teknion], let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.

1 John 4:4 Ye are of God, little children [tekni,on teknion], and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

1 John 5:21 Little children [tekni,on teknion], keep yourselves from idols. Amen.

Scholars believe that John wrote these three epistles of First, Second and Third John towards the end of the first century—very late in his life. He had pastoral care over the church at Ephesus and probably many daughter churches also, that had sprung from the church at Ephesus in one way or another.

Commentators tell us that John used this form of address, calling them “little children” as a term of affection. That may be true but I think there is something more to be learned here. We do not deny that there is a literal meaning in this epistle when John addresses three different age groups or classes of people as little children, young men and fathers. However, I think we can understand this allegorically or metaphorically as well. We have just noted where John calls them “little children” nine times in this epistle.

The phrase “little children” appears only seven other times in the New Testament, and only twice is it used with the same Greek word and in the form of direct address. We will take a look at those in due course. We also noted that John used the term “young men” only twice and the term “fathers” only twice in this epistle.

Nowhere else in the New Testament is the term “young men” used in the form of direct address. Therefore, we have a special case of its use here in the epistle of John Of course, the word “fathers” is used numerous times in the New Testament, but there are only four other places where it is used in the form of direct address.

Those four are in entirely different contexts. For example, in the book of Acts, both Stephen, the martyr, and Paul used the term “fathers” as they are making a defense of the faith. In both of those cases, the term “fathers” is in reference to the religious elders who are present.

In the other two uses, “fathers” are addressed in terms of their responsibilities as head of the household, head of the family. For example, in

Colossians 3:21 Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, …

Ephesians 6:4 And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

From all of this, we can see that John’s use of these terms of direct address: little children, young men, and fathers, is a special usage. And it is than just being terms of endearment, or of speaking to three different age groups. I believe it has reference to stages of spiritual growth. As the writer of the epistle to the Hebrews says in:

Hebrews 6:1 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

The apostle John is pointing out the possibilities of spiritual growth. He is encouraging his flock to go on to perfection, to progress to the stage of spiritual young men, and ultimately to the stage of spiritual fatherhood.

I want you to realize that spiritual fatherhood is simply another name for the sonship which we are describing. We’re talking about mature sons, sons who are fully grown. And what do fully grown, mature sons do? Well, among other things, they become fathers. (To be continued.)

To have a greater grasp on the subject of sonship, it would behoove the believer to understand the restoration of all things and the sovereignty of God. Those are major topics. We have expounded them in depth in a series of 38 lectures. It would also be helpful if one understood the progression of salvation as displayed in the types and shadows of the tabernacle in the wilderness. We expounded that in a series of 30 lectures. (See more information on both these studies at the bottom of this blog.)

Towards the end of the latter series, as we studied the Holy of Holies, we came to understand somewhat about the concept of the manchild, in particular, the birthing of the manchild. This is related to the subject of sonship, although we did not call it that at that time. And both are related to the overcomers, who will be the manifested sons of God.

Sonship is another one of those terms which is used widely among Christians, and yet many or most of them have no idea—or perhaps they have a false idea and conception of what sonship is really all about.

In the book of Revelation, chapter 5, verse 10, we read of the saints becoming priests and kings and they shall reign on the earth. Many believers have the mistaken impression that all Christians will be these priests and kings. This has been reinforced heavily by the term which originated in the Protestant Reformation and which speaks of “the priesthood of all believers.”

However, from our studies on the Tabernacle in the Wilderness, what class of people could lawfully enter into the Holy Place? All the Israelites? That is to say, all the congregation? No, only the priests. Only the overcomers will be those ruling. Just because a person becomes a Christian believer does not mean he is automatically a priest in the sense of those who will rule and reign on the earth.

While the Reformers were given many beautiful and marvelous insights and rediscoveries of great truths of Scripture which had been hidden or lost over the centuries, especially during the Dark Ages, they were not given to understand all the truths of sacred Scripture. Some were to remain to be discovered or rediscovered in a later day. “The priesthood of all believers” is one of those misunderstandings that arose from the Reformation.

Having said that, I do understand how the misunderstanding came about. The Reformers were in a reaction mode to the Roman Catholic church, with its hierarchy of priests. In protesting that, the Reformers said: “We don’t need your priests; we are all priests.” That is true, in the sense that we do not need to go through some other man, some mediator, in order to talk to and have a relationship with God. In that sense, the “priesthood of all believers” is true. But not in the fuller sense.

The priesthood and rulership referred to in the Revelation, chapter 5, applies to the overcomers and not to all of the church. Stated in terms of the types and shadows, the right to rule applies to those in the barley company, not to those Christians in the wheat company.

In a similar manner, many Christians have the mistaken idea that once a person “gets saved,” that he is automatically, then and there, transformed into a “son of God. “This is not the case, as we will show in this study. Sonship is the result of a path of experience, and in that sense, it is analogous to or similar to the path of the believer which we studied in our series on the tabernacle in the wilderness. Sonship and priesthood are related ideas, as we will show later.

In the tabernacle in the wilderness, there were three main parts to the structure. The innermost part was the Holy of Holies (alternately called The Most Holy Place), the outer compartment was the Holy Place, and outside of that tent structure itself was the open-air area enclosed by the linen fence which was called the Outer Court.

During the course of our Tabernacle studies, I posed the question concerning someone who had just entered through the gate in the Outer Court: “is he saved?” And the answer was both yes and no, or “sort of, but not really.” And then the pilgrim moved on to the altar of burnt offering and from there to the laver, and from there he entered inside the Holy Place, and at each step along the way we would ask the same question: “Is he saved?”

And always, the answer was both yes and no. Yes, because the salvation process that God has begun in a person, He will complete. No, because none of us are at the final stage of salvation yet where we have been awarded vivification—a term which in the biblical context refers to our resurrected body which possesses both immortality and incorruptibility.

We have a very similar situation here with the question of sonship. When a person first becomes a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, is he a son of God? And we could answer: sort of, but not really. In other words, he is a son in the sense that he has begun proceeding down the path which will culminate in actual sonship. That is why that phrase “the priesthood of all believers” has an element of truth to it.

But…I believe that there is a very important distinction that needs to be made here. I believe that everyone travels the path of salvation and eventually brings forth Christ in them, and thus they are born again (eventually) into immortality and incorruptibility. They all become sons of God. However, I believe there is a distinction between a firstborn company of the sons of God and all the other groups of sons born later.

This corresponds exactly and directly with the concept of the overcomers in contradistinction to the rest of the church; that is, the barley company as opposed to the wheat company. In other words, there are great privileges and honors which are bestowed upon that group of saints called the firstborn sons of God which the rest of the sons of God who are born into immortality later will not receive. We will develop this theme as we proceed in our study. But just to whet your spiritual appetite, this is what the apostle Paul was referring to when he said: I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 3:14.)

We also discovered in our study of the tabernacle in the wilderness the multiplicity of threes. They were associated with the three compartments of the tabernacle. We had the Outer Court, the Holy Place, and the most Holy Place. We had the feasts of Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. We have the salvation of our spirit, our soul, and finally the salvation of our body at the Feast of Tabernacles. We have the three stages of salvation: justification, sanctification and glorification. The saints bring forth fruit to different degrees: some 30-fold, some 60-fold, and some 100-fold.

We will now focus in on another trio as we begin our studies on sonship. It is that each of the three compartments can not only be related to the processes of justification, sanctification and glorification, but that the three compartments also correlate to the three stages defining our relationship to the Father while we are on our the path to complete and full sonship.

These three relationships are found in the epistle of 1 John, chapter 2. There John uses the terms little children, young men, and fathers. Before we examine that passage, let me just make this point for the record. It is something that was never necessary until relatively recently in our history. It concerns the distinctions between genders.

With all of the political correctness being force-fed to us in our culture these days, it becomes a necessity for me to point out that when the Scripture speaks of sons, or young men, or other such terms specifying the masculine gender; that it should be clear by the context, that members of the female gender are equally included. This used to be understood and accepted by everyone in our society.

For example, when we would say mankind, everyone understood that it included women. Now there even some modern Bibles which are trying to be politically correct by being what they call “gender inclusive.” They start the Lord’s prayer like this: “our father/mother which art in heaven…” Well, I can easily get off on a tangent here discussing the gender of God, which deserves a teaching by itself, but the point that I am making is that Paul says in:

Galatians 3: 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

And thus, when we’re talking about obtaining sonship, it applies equally to males and females. Enough said on that. (To be continued.)

Further information for those desiring in-depth Bible studies.

Concerning the restoration of all things and the sovereignty of God, my 38 lectures are available in a series of four CD albums, which can be ordered individually, or all four albums as a set called God’s Plan for Man. This is a progressive study; therefore, we recommend hearing them in sequential order, lowest numbered album first. The individual albums in the God’s Plan For Man series are:

A-101    The Doctrine of the Eons and the Laws of Jubilee 6-CD set. $24

A-102    The Sovereignty of God 10-CD set, charts. $40

A-103    It’s Hell…or Nothing! (This presents [and disposes of] the case for eternal torture and/or the final annihilation of the unsaved.)10-CD set. $40

A-104    Universal Reconciliation 12-CD set. $44 (This presents the case for why God will ultimately save everyone.)

PACKAGE PRICING for all four of the above CD albums for $99. Save $49!

The Tabernacle in the Wilderness series is a progressive study; therefore, we recommend hearing them in sequential order, lowest numbered album first. The individual albums in the Tabernacle in the Wilderness series are:

A-105    Introduction, The Court, The Brazen Altar 6-CD set, includes charts. $24

A-106    The Laver: Baptism and Circumcision 10 CD set, charts. $40

A-107    The Holy Place 8 CD set, charts. $24

A-108    The Holy of Holies 6 CD set, charts. $24

PACKAGE PRICING for all four of the above CD albums, plus D-101 for $95; SAVE $23.

D-101 DVD, a visual survey and introduction by Dr. Bruggeman of all the furniture associated with the Tabernacle. Approx one hour.

While our online store is under reconstruction, you can order via postal mail to: PO Box 5695, Asheville, NC 28813.

We left off last time as we began to introduce the concept of “Levirate marriage.” There are a couple of examples of this in the Bible. One is a negative example and the other is a positive example. You could call it “the law of the brother-in-law.”

Genesis 38:6 And Judah took a wife for Er his firstborn, whose name was Tamar.

7 And Er, Judah’s firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him.

8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother’s wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9 And Onan knew that the seed [offspring, son(s)] should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother’s wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10 And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

Here Judah’s firstborn son, Er, died before he had any sons himself. There was no one to carry on the family line for Judah’s firstborn son. Keil and Delitzsch’s commentary tells us that this custom of what we are calling the law of the brother-in-law is found in different forms among the Persians, the Indians, and other nations of Asia and Africa. And remember, this is all prior to the giving of the law on Mount Sinai.

So Onan refuses to carry on the family name on behalf of his brother, Er. It is quite likely that Onan foresaw that if he succeeded in producing a son for his brother through Tamar, that the greater portion of the family wealth of Judah would then not go to himself, but to that firstborn son of Er’s widow, Tamar. So he took advantage of the physical pleasure with Tamar, but did not conclude the deal, so to speak.

We should note that the word marry in verse 8 is not same as elsewhere. Usually, we don’t find the word marry but rather the expression “to take to wife.” The word marry here has the special meaning of performing the duty of a brother-in-law…. Although, I must say, that based on the example of Boaz and Ruth, which is the positive example, that the brother-in-law can marry the widow and they can be husband and wife in every sense of the word, as Boaz and Ruth were.

I will not take the time to look at that story here since I gave an hour and a half video Bible lecture on that subject some years ago. It is available from us on DVD. Ask for D-102, Ruth, the Israelite – by Dr. James W. Bruggeman. Enclose $12 + $4 shipping. (Presently, not available in our online store, but you can send a donation through PayPal and an email directly to us to order it, if you wish.)

I also want to point out in this passage, that in verse 8, the term “raise up seed” is the equivalent of saying “to beget sons.” So the word seed means sons, or offspring, or children or descendants. That is something we want tuck away in our mind and remember for the studies to come. Now let us go to Deuteronomy, chapter 25, and look at the law of the brother-in-law.

Deuteronomy 25:5 If brethren dwell together, and one of them die, and have no child, the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband’s brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife, and perform the duty of an husband’s brother unto her.

6 And it shall be, that the firstborn which she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead, that his name be not put out of Israel.

There, in verse 6, we are given the purpose of this institution: to perpetuate the family name in the nation.

7 And if the man like not to take his brother’s wife, then let his brother’s wife go up to the gate unto the elders, and say, My husband’s brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband’s brother.

8 Then the elders of his city shall call him, and speak unto him: and if he stand to it, and say, I like not to take her;

9 Then shall his brother’s wife come unto him in the presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face, and shall answer and say, So shall it be done unto that man that will not build up his brother’s house.

10 And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.

Obviously, under the Mosaic law, the penalty for refusing to follow the law of the brother-in-law was simply disgrace and shame. But Onan got the death penalty. However, we do not know what else Onan might have done to warrant being slain “by the Lord” when he refused to perform the duty of the brother-in-law.

By the way, did you know that “Onan” is the brand name of one of the most common or largest manufacturers of electrical generators? …Which I find quite ironic, since Onan in the Bible refused to become a generator of a family line for his brother, Er. Consequently, Onan died (or perhaps was killed by Tamar—we are not told how the LORD slew him). I wonder what that “coincidence” says about electricity as a source of generative power. Do you think our Father has something better planned for us in terms of energy in the future? I do. Think Tesla and zero point energy! I want to leave you with a couple of related thoughts.

Genesis 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

I don’t know how many times I have heard it said that a woman does not have “seed.” Now let us bring 1 Samuel, chapter 2, into the picture. This is the story of where Elkanah and his wife, Hannah, had given their son, Samuel, to the service of the Lord under the tutelage of the priest Eli. In turn, Eli blesses them, and here is what he says:

1 Samuel 2:20 And Eli blessed Elkanah and his wife, and said, The LORD give thee seed of this woman for the loan which is lent to the LORD. And they went unto their own home.

Of course, we all understand that women do not produce the seed, in the sense of the sperm. A woman produces the eggs; the man produces the sperm. But in both of these cases—Genesis 3 and here in 1 Samuel— the word seed is not referring to the physical sperm, but it is a figurative turn referring to offspring or descendants or sons.

Of course, the pre-eminent “son of the woman” referred to in Genesis 3 is Jesus Christ himself. And now for the final point in this introduction to biblical sonship. In Isaiah, chapter 53, we find the famous passage usually titled “The Suffering Servant,” descriptive of the passion and death of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.

9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.

10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

Jesus never married and he died on the cross before he had any offspring, didn’t He? Those who becomes the “sons of God” will also be the brothers of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Scripture says: “and he was not ashamed to call them brethren.” Do you suppose that the law of the brother-in-law will be in effect here? In that light, consider this:

Isaiah 62:5 For as a young man marrieth a virgin, so shall thy sons marry thee: and as the bridegroom rejoiceth over the bride, so shall thy God rejoice over thee.

You see, I believe that the sons of God will have the privilege of generating spiritual offspring along with, and on behalf of their elder brother Jesus. As you can see, this opens up a whole new area of study. For we have the bride… and a bridegroom. Some Christians will be part of the bride company and others will be part of the bridegroom company. Both are great blessings, but wouldn’t you like to be among the firstborn sons of God and part of the bridegroom company? I would. God speed the day! This concludes merely the introduction in our studies in sonship. More to come soon.

To reiterate a premise of this study: When the Bible talks about sons, we need to understand it in the context of the very high value that ancient societies placed on sons. In the Scriptures, the primary, pre-eminent and paramount image of a son has to do with perpetuating life…the life of the father and thereby, the life of the family of which the father was the head.

“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair…” That opening line from Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities certainly seems to apply to America today.

On the one hand, we seem to be so blessed. We have such material abundance, such an amazingly high standard of living, so many modern conveniences—from central air and heat, not only in our homes, but in our automobiles. Our rapid modes of transportation has made it possible for families to live great distances from each other and yet still be within a day’s travel by airliner.

But we are paying a great cost as well, to which many people seem to be oblivious. It is the breakdown of the family unit. Indeed, even the word “family” is being re-defined, as is the word “marriage.” Next week voters in my state of North Carolina will say “yea” or “nay” to a state constitutional amendment defining “marriage” as meaning the union of one man and one woman. And North Carolina is far from the first state addressing the definition of “marriage.” Over 35 other states have already passed such amendments.

Also symptomatic of the breakdown of the family is the fact that in this “enlightened” 21^st century, having children no longer seems as important to younger people as it was in the days of our forefathers of even a half-century ago.

In the days of our ancient biblical forefathers, the life of the father was seen as continuing on in a son. A man could accumulate great wealth and great power, but yet still feel a great vacancy in his life if he had no son. Hence, for a woman to be barren was considered to be a great curse. Every man had as one of his primary goals to have a son to perpetuate his lineage. It was a type of immortality through the family’s descendants. Consider this:

Genesis 15:2 And Abram said, Lord GOD, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus? [NOTICE: steward = ben; son, offspring]

3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.

4 And, behold, the word of the LORD came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

As I look at my generation and the offspring of my generation, it almost makes me want to weep. So many of us in this generation—and many more in the young adult generation have no idea and no conception of the importance of family and perpetuating the lineage. It is a great loss. I believe it will take a rather chaotic jolt to our whole society before men and women once again realize its importance.

In ancient biblical times, there were several customs and practices which became institutionalized in their societies for this very purpose of perpetuating the lineage, or the “name,” as it were, the name of the father. In addition to the traditional husband, wife, and children of the so-called “nuclear” family; there were also the options of polygamy and concubinage, Levirate marriage, surrogate motherhood and adoption.

Let me hasten to add that I do not think polygamy is a very good idea. I am not saying that it is a sin, because I do not find anywhere that it is a violation of God’s law, but given the society we live in, including the fact that it is a violation of civil law, practicing polygamy creates a host of problems. As the 2012 U.S. presidential campaign heats up, notice how both the Obama team and the Romney team are trying to gain political advantage by pointing out the alleged polygamy in the other’s family tree.

We know about the examples of polygamy in the Bible: Jacob, David, Solomon and others. Remember that Jacob was tricked into polygamy. Nevertheless, he did take the two handmaids as his concubines. As for Abraham, I find no evidence that Abraham was polygamous. He obviously had sexual relations with Hagar, but perhaps it was only for the purpose of bringing forth a son, Ishmael. If that were the case, then it was not a case of polygamy, but rather of surrogate motherhood.

So we know what polygamy is; we know what surrogate motherhood is, and we understand what adoption is, at least in modern terms. But how many of us have ever even heard of the term “Levirate marriage?” There are a couple of examples of this in the Bible. (To be continued.)