Odd Thing We Say to the Bereaved Spouse (Matthew 23 and the Sadducees)

The same day the Sadducees, who say that there is no resurrection, came to Him and asked Him, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry his wife and raise up children for his brother.’ Now there were seven brothers with us. The first died after he married and, having no children, left his wife to his brother. Likewise the second and third, on to the seventh. Last of all, the woman died also. Therefore, in the resurrection, whose wife shall she be of the seven? For they all had her.” Jesus answered, “You err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven. But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

-Matthew 23:23-32

My mother passed away in 2019. We knew her passing was near so, fortunately, locally and via Face Time we were able to have much of the family with her. She spent her last several years in a Catholic assisted living facility in the next town. My grandmother was in the same facility in the mid 1990s until she passed. In the intervening years, my mother would often visit residents and lead a singalong. She was well-known at the facility.

The overseers of this facility were primarily Irish nuns. Fairly conservative from what I could tell. I didn't interact with them much. I spent my time with the day to day staff. I only note that as this entry concerns a brief moment I had with the nun I assume was the Abbess. 

When my mother finally breathed her last, this nun whispered in my ear, "She's with Michael now." "Michael" referring to my father who had passed away in 2014. Obviously at that moment, I wasn't going to engage in a theological discussion with the nun, but she should have known that was she was saying was, in light of long-standing, codified, common Catholic teaching, nonsense. Worse that that, it was terrible heresy deserving of condemnation (anathema).

If anyone says that after the grace of justification has been received the guilt is so remitted and the debt of eternal punishment so blotted out for any repentant sinner, that no debt of temporal punishment remains to be paid, either in this world or in the other, in purgatory, before access can be opened to the kingdom of heaven, anathema sit [“let him be anathema” or excommunicated].

-Council of Trent (Sixth Session, Canon 30, fully affirmed in by the Second Vatican Council and the current Catechism of the Catholic Church

She was putting both my mother and father into heaven (in her understanding of it). This is not a study on the doctrine of Purgatory, but even if my father had somehow finished paying for his venial sins in God's torture chamber by then (five years being a rather light sentence, for the record), unless that nun somehow had a confirmed vision that my mother was a "Saint," my mom had just enter her own torture chamber.

As we noted in a previous study, the Catholic Church isn't quite sure what Purgatory is. Some say it is not necessarily a fire. These same teachers, who would point to "Saint" Thomas Aquinas and his Summa Theologica in defense of other aspects of their faith, would then be questioning his definitive statement that punishment in Purgatory is, indeed, "fire." But whatever they teach on any given day, it is stated that they do know this, "it is painful." But whatever it is, they must affirm the doctrine. 

"Saint" Augustine (note that some Reformed theologians like RC Sproul hold Aquinas and Augustine among the greatest Christian thinkers and theologians despite this horrific denial of the work of Christ) had this to say of Purgatory (stating clearly as did Aquinas that Purgatory is a fire):

"This fire of Purgatory will be more severe than any pain that can be felt, seen or conceived in this world." -Augustine (xli De Sanctis, as quoted by Aquinas)

That being the fate of both my parents, it would not be a very fun reunion. The nun affirming my parents were both somehow already in heaven was a dual sin for which she will pay her own debt in fire (according to their own teachings). It could be argued she is excommunicated which carries and even greater danger according to her own church.

But we can expect such confusion (or deception) from the Catholic Church. In terms of Evangelical believers (who hold and affirm the complete and sufficient work of Christ), their confusion (although not as abhorrent to Christ) is also found in statements they say about the deceased.

My believing Father-in-Law passed away several years ago leaving a believing widow. She has moved into a Christian retirement village and is free to marry again. If she does not, I am certain (as I've heard the equivalent at other funerals) many will speak of her reunion with her late husband. But what if she had remarried? What do we say then? (The Catholic nun has this problem as well, but since their heresies are far greater, it is of less concern.)

This illogical (unbiblical) understanding of the state of the dead, namely that believers are in a bodiless, conscious state in what they understand as "heaven" immediately upon death, should be easily dismissed. But the latter error (which still presents the remarriage problem) poisons not only our understanding of death, but our appreciation of what Christ accomplished on our behalf (what he conquered for us). Our victory is in resurrection and the celestial body and in a future immortality.

There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies. The glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another.

-1 Corinthians 15:40

For this corruptible will [future] put on incorruption [celestial body], and this mortal will [future] put on immortality. When this corruptible [terrestrial] will have put on incorruption [celestial], and this mortal will [future] have put on immortality, then [future] the saying that is written shall come to pass: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”  

“O death, where is your sting?
O grave [Greek: "Hades," the state of the believing dead], where is your victory?"

-1 Corinthians 15:53-55

 

We have covered the issue of death before, but we note again here that the doctrine of bodiless entry directly into a mythical version of the real "heavenly places" makes the resurrection of no importance. The doctrine of the immortality of the soul leads to many errors ("making the word of God of no effect through your tradition" -Mark 7:13).

Next time we will briefly address why we cannot currently enter the heavenly places. 

Back to our example from the surviving partner remarrying. Christ addressed this issue when the Sadducees tried to trick him. Their trick didn't work on him, but what would Evangelicals say today? Note the Lord goes straight for resurrection, not some mythological intermediary state. 

Jesus answered, “You err, not knowing the Scriptures nor the power of God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like the angels of God in heaven. But concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was spoken to you by God, ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

In resurrection (when the believer becomes immortal after his time in the grave, the state of the dead, that is, in Hades, 1 Cor 15:55), there is no marriage. Now, I'm the first to admit I cannot grasp what that is like as I am now walking in a body of death for which God has provided the marriage relationship. But it is true nonetheless. In resurrection, we become like the angels in that particular aspect. That is, angels neither marry nor are given in marriage. 

But the error of bodiless "souls" will be perpetuated until the end of all things both in both Catholic and Evangelical circles. 

The State of the Soul Upon Death in Light of Resurrection

When addressing the resurrection of the Lord, many teachers fail to mention that the resurrection is an undoing of the curse. That is so foundational, it’s disappointing, but not surprising, that it is often left out. Yet the omission strikes at the very foundation of the faith and reduces what Christ accomplished on our behalf as we hope to show you.

The fact that the Lord did not decay in the grave is mentioned 5 times in the Acts. 

What many will do is run immediately to 2 Cor 5:8 (the most misquoted verse in scripture). We have covered that elsewhere on this blog and briefly in video.

• The Most Misquoted Verse
• Larry Ollison Misquotes Scripture (Among Other Errors) -Video

As Tyndale argued, by putting “souls” directly into heaven, we diminish the resurrection; his and ours. The Reformation from Tyndale to Luther started with this foundational truth, yet it was abandoned by the state churches (see: King James, etc.) and the doctrine of the “immortal soul” was reinstated.

And ye, in putting them [the departed souls] in heaven, hell, and purgatory, destroy the arguments wherewith Christ and Paul prove the resurrection. … And again, if the souls be in heaven, tell me why they be not in as good case as the angels be? And then what cause is there of the resurrection?'

The true faith putteth [setteth forth] the resurrection, which we be warned to look for every hour. The heathen philosophers, denying that, did put [set forth] that the souls did ever live. And the pope joineth the spiritual doctrine of Christ and the fleshly doctrine of philosophers together; things so contrary that they cannot agree, no more than the Spirit and the flesh do in a Christian man. And because the fleshly-minded pope consenteth unto heathen doctrine, therefore he corrupteth the Scripture to stablish it.'

-William Tyndale

In sum, we make the resurrection an asterisk when we put bodiless souls anywhere. And by diminishing our own hope of resurrection (the undoing of the curse as laid out in 1 Cor 15), we diminish what Christ did on our behalf by dying in our place. The Lord Jesus took the curse, and then undid it! Others (like Lazarus) were raised from the dead, but Christ alone was resurrected.

So they kept this word to themselves, questioning what the rising from the dead meant.

-Mark 9:10

Israel (the Pharisees, etc.) understood the hope of resurrection (Acts 23:6, John 11:24, etc.). They knew nothing of anything else. So, when scriptures tells us they were confused when the Lord said he would rise from the dead in resurrection (Mark 9:10), we miss the point in English. The Greek speaks of a resurrection “out from among the rest of the dead.” Ek-anastasis (or ex-anastasis). The Lord said in Mark, “ek nekron anaste.” This is what they did not understand.

Two Greek words are employed in connection with resurrection that must be kept distinct, otherwise gross error will result.  The words are anastasis and its cognate words exanastasis and anistemi, and egeiro and its cognate egersis.

-Charles Welch (An Alphabetical Analysis, excerpt Vol 4)

This helps explain the statement by Paul in Philippians concerning the “attaining” of resurrection.

that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead.  Not that I have already attained, or am already perfected; but I press on, that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has also laid hold of me.

Paul is not striving to “attain” the free gift of redemption or “life through his name” (John 20:30-31). Paul had absolute assurance of that (1 Thess 4:14-17, 1 Cor 15:51-56, etc.). He is teaching us to strive for the “exanástasis,” a resurrection “out from among the rest of the dead.” It is a resurrection of reward at the judgment seat.

There is an order and rank in resurrection (1 Cor 15:23). As of today, no one but Christ has been raised into his celestial body. There are only two bodies (1 Cor 15:40), terrestrial (earthly, subject to death & decay) and celestial (resurrection body, free from death & decay).

All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of animals, another of fish, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies and terrestrial bodies; but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory of the sun, another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars; for one star differs from another star in glory.

-1 Corinthians 15:39-41

Paul notes in 2 Timothy that he had finished the race given him and he knew there was a crown that awaited him (2 Tim 4:8). He didn’t suddenly realize he was redeemed. Again, free gift versus an attaining of reward. 

Resurrection (free gift), Resurrection out from among the rest of the dead (reward).

Luther reminds us that death is like sleep in that we have no idea of time passing. The dead in Christ will rise as though no time has passed.

Salomon judgeth that the dead are asleep, and feele nothing at all. For the dead lye there accompting neyther dayes nor yeares, but when are awaked, they shall seeme to have slept scarce one minute…

But we Christians, who have been redeemed from all this through the precious blood of God's Son, should train and accustom ourselves in faith to despise death and regard it as a deep, strong, sweet sleep; to consider the coffin as nothing other than our Lord Jesus' bosom or Paradise, the grave as nothing other than a soft couch of ease or rest. As verily, before God, it truly is just this; for he testifies, John 11:11; Lazarus, our friend sleeps; Matthew 9:24: The maiden is not dead, she sleeps. Thus, too, St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, removes from sight all hateful aspects of death as related to our mortal body and brings forward nothing but charming and joyful aspects of the promised life. He says there [vv. 42ff]: It is sown in corruption and will rise in incorruption; it is sown in dishonor (that is, a hateful, shameful form) and will rise in glory; it is sown in weakness and will rise in strength; it is sown in natural body and will rise a spiritual body.' …

Thus after death the soul goes to its bedchamber and to its peace, and while it is sleeping it does not realize its sleep, and God preserves indeed the awakening soul. God is able to awake Elijah, Moses, and others, and so control them, so that they will live. But how can that be? That we do not know; we satisfy ourselves with the example of bodily sleep, and with what God says: it is a sleep, a rest, and a peace. He who sleeps naturally knows nothing of that which happens in his neighbor's house; and nevertheless, he still is living, even though, contrary to the nature of life, he is unconscious in his sleep. Exactly the same will happen also in that life, but in another and a better way

-Martin Luther (excerpts)

The lost do not have life. They remain under the curse by their own choosing. That is, they shall die and return to dust (Gen 2:17; Gen 3:19; 1 Cor 15:21-23). There are a few verses that can be interpreted to mean that some of the dead are “raised from the dead,” but none of the lost will experience “resurrection.” Lazarus was raised from the dead, but he died again. he will experience “resurrection” “at the last day” (John 11:24).

Lazarus was both dead and not dead. This is how we are to understand believers when they die.

These things He said, and after that He said to them, “Our friend Lazarus sleeps, but I go that I may wake him up.”  Then His disciples said, “Lord, if he sleeps he will get well.” However, Jesus spoke of his death, but they thought that He was speaking about taking rest in sleep. Then Jesus said to them plainly, “Lazarus is dead.”

Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?

We sleep in death, yet we “never die.” We are “dead,” yet still alive.

The lost do not have life, thus they do truly die.

As an aside, the Pope declared the immortality of the soul and condemned any notion (and any person arguing) that it is not. The Reformers objected to that position noting it is pagan and not biblical.

Quick Take:

Heaven or Hell, Saved or Lost Bad Theology

Quick Take:
The Simplistic Heaven/Hell Theology and Immortal Soul Paganism

Pope Leo, Gates of Hell, Lord's Day,

Weeping and Gnashing on Social Media

God's Mercy is the Undoing of Death in Resurrection for All Who Believe in Any Age

Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear Him,
On those who hope in His mercy,
To deliver their soul from death,
And to keep them alive in famine.

Our soul waits for the Lord;
He is our help and our shield.
For our heart shall rejoice in Him,
Because we have trusted in His holy name.
Let Your mercy, O Lord, be upon us,
Just as we hope in You. 

-Psalm 33:18-22

When we seek to glean truth from God's word, we have to mine on several levels. But no matter the level, if we do not seek to "rightly divide the Word of Truth" (2 Tim 2:15) we will miss truth on the one hand or we may slip into confusion and doubt on the other.

No matter how often I try to get away from speaking about the plague of "heaven/hell" and "saved/lost" theology (reading every book, chapter, and verse through those false dichotomies) which permeates the professing church, I am almost daily confronted with these errors flowing out of Evangelical Christianity (the only cohort with whom I am concerned). 

As I have covered the larger topic here and elsewhere (podcasts posted below), I want to examine Psalm 33 in light of these errors and in light of right division. When we interpret scripture, we seek to be consistent. Consistent to audience and hope. That is, to whom is it speaking (directly) and what hope is before them. 

• Is it an individual or a group? 
• Are they of the nation or outside he nation?
• Is God dealing with a nation or all of mankind in the age?
• Is the hope before us earthly or heavenly?

In Psalm 33, we have the writer addressing God as Creator

By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
And all the host of them by the breath of His mouth

God, as Creator, focuses us clearly on the seen heavens and earth (Gen 1:1). In the fist two millenia of the story of man, there is no promise of a "nation" or a "land." The hope is the restoration of Paradise lost in Adam and salvation from the curse of death. It is only when the Lord chooses Abraham that he reveals his plan for a land, a nation, and an earthly priesthood (removed from the heavenly priesthood of Melchizedek). 

The Psalmist is looking at all Creation. What should not be lost here is that God always had a plan for the Gentile nations. Before Abraham, all scripture knows is God's plans for all men. No nation above any other. When God chose Israel, he did not abandon the Gentile. His plan for the earth and the earthly Kingdom connected it made provision for the Gentiles. Israel was to be the twelve wells of water for the 70 palm trees (Exodus 15:27).

We note again that the Lord Jesus Christ came to confirm the promises made to Israel in regard to the land and the earthly kingdom and priesthood. He tells us, in no uncertain terms, that he "was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” (Matthew 15:24). And he came to confirm the promises to the same people. 

As the Apostle Paul notes in Romans 15:8-12 this two-fold ministry and plan of the Lord:

Now I say that Jesus Christ has become a servant to the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the fathers, and that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy, as it is written:

“For this reason I will confess to You among the Gentiles,
And sing to Your name.”

And again he says:

“Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His people!”

And again:

“Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles!
Laud Him, all you peoples!”

And again, Isaiah says:

“There shall be a root of Jesse;
And He who shall rise to reign over the Gentiles,
In Him the Gentiles shall hope.”

The House of Israel and the House of Jacob are central to both the Old (Exodus 19) and the New (Jer 31, Heb 8) Covenants. God's plans for the earth are centered on these people and their nations.

In Psalm 33 the lens is pulled back. While God was dealing with men through Israel in that age (no Gentile is seen in scripture unless he comes in contact with Israel or with a Jew), God has never stopped dealing with all nations. 

The Lord looks from heaven;
He sees all the sons of men.
From the place of His dwelling He looks
On all the inhabitants of the earth;
He fashions their hearts individually;
He considers all their works.

God has always seen all nations and has always seen every individual. Scripture deals with the hope placed before men in the restoration of Paradise until the plan for a nation at the head is revealed. The hope from Abraham to the end of the Acts was God's plan of an earthly, righteous kingdom of priests via the nation of Israel. But as scripture lays out the plan of God and his dealings with Israel (and the Covenants given to Israel for the land and the earth), he continues to see all men. This is brought out by the Psalmist.

Behold, the eye of the Lord is on those who fear Him,
On those who hope in His mercy,
To deliver their soul from death,
And to keep them alive in famine.
Our soul waits for the Lord;
He is our help and our shield.

We have a change here toward the end of the Psalm. The focus turns from "those who fear Him" to "our soul" and "our shield." But let us stay on the thoughts for those who fear Him of any nation. We first note that these are those who "hope in His mercy." This is the gospel of grace that has been declared since God spared Adam after he sinned. A righteous man needs no mercy, only the sinner needs mercy. The germ of this truth is found in the declaration of God in Genesis 3:15.

This section of Psalm 33 finishes with a dual identity (as I see it). The Psalmist identifies with ALL men who need His mercy (for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God). And the Psalmist stands here for Israel who also need the Lord's mercy for the nation surely failed the Lord.

In there, we see that every man needs the mercy of God to have his soul delivered from death. What would this mean in a "saved/loss" theology? From what is God "delivering" the "soul?" We can read verse 19 two ways, but either way, the "soul" dying is before us.

One who has God's mercy has the certain hope that his soul (his being) will be delivered from the state of death that all men experience. That deliverance will come when the hope of resurrection is experienced. How this was mercy was to be secured was not fully understood. Blood had to be shed, and God would supply a substitute in his mercy, but this was only seen in type before Christ. But we see the hope of resurrection and immortality (dual freedom from the death of the soul) in Christ!

For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”

“O Death, where is your sting?
O Hades, where is your victory?”

The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.  But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

-1 Cor 15 

We see clearly in Christ what the Psalmist saw in God's mercy. He knew the Lord is merciful. He knew the Lord forgives sin. He knew the Lord would deliver his soul (life) from death (grave and Hades), but he had to look forward. We look back to the finished work of the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ!

If we turn back to Psalm 32, we see the Psalmist rejoicing in the knowledge of sins forgiven. This is BEFORE the "New Covenant" of Jeremiah was revealed. That covenant is not "salvation by grace," for God has saved by grace from the beginning. 

1 Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven,
Whose sin is covered.
2 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord does not impute iniquity,
And in whose spirit there is no deceit.
3 When I kept silent, my bones grew old
Through my groaning all the day long.
4 For day and night Your hand was heavy upon me;
My vitality was turned into the drought of summer. Selah
5 I acknowledged my sin to You,
And my iniquity I have not hidden.
I said, “I will confess my transgressions to the Lord,”
And You forgave the iniquity of my sin. Selah

So, it is the "soul" that is saved from "death" by grace through faith. Once again, scripture testifies that the hope of all in Adam is the hope of resurrection in Christ.

For since by a man came death, by a Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.

-1 Cor 15:21-22

The New Covenant does not create salvation by grace, it has always been there. The New Covenant for "O Virgin of Israel" (Jer 31) and the security of rescue from death are both sealed by the complete work of Christ, but remain independent truths,  

 

The Heavenly Places Where the Principalities and Powers Currently Reside

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. 

-Ephesians 6:12

The principalities and powers are said to be in "high places" here in Eph 6:12. The Greek word translated "high places" in the KJV is epouránios. This word means "heavenly." It is used of the "heavenly [epouránios] Father" by the Lord (Matthew 18:35). Paul uses it 13 times in his epistles. 

Ephesians 6:12 use of epouránios is the same as the other 4 uses in Ephesians. 

1. Blessings in HEAVENLY PLACES (1:3) 

2. Christ in HEAVENLY PLACES (1:20) 

3. Believers in HEAVNELY PLACES (2:6) 

And, 4, Ephesians 3:10

to the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places...

Ephesians 3:10 uses the same Greek words for principalities, powers, and heavenly places as Ephesians 6:12. Christ is in the heavenly places, but "far above" the principalities and powers (1:20-21) and "far above" that level of the heavens (4:10).

• Principlaities = archḗ
• Powers = exousía
• High Places = epouránios = Heavenly Places

This is truth for the current age. From the beginning, Satan has always presented himself as an "Angel of Light" as we saw in the Garden and as Paul reminds us in 2 Cor 11. Paul then adds that since this is true, it is no wonder that Satan's ministers are "the ministers of righteousness." Peter tells us Satan roams about like a lion "seeking whom he may devour." (1 Peter 5:8).

We note these things for a couple of reasons. First, to point us back to the "full armor of God" of Ephesians 6 necessary to defeat the attacks from these powers and secondly to remind us that Satan is not sitting on some throne in a fiery place of torture as tradition teaches.

We have very powerful enemies, but we have even more powerful armor. However, that armor is powered by the Lord. Unbelievers do not have access to this armor and believers can diminish our ability to be properly prepared by allowing sin into our lives or by failing to make our stand.

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace; above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God: praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints...

 Just a small note while we're here. Note Paul's encouragement in that last verse (Eph 6:18). Paul asks us to "watching thereunto with all perseverance and supplication for all saints." The word "supplication" is the Greek word "déēsis" which means "prayer, request, petition" [Mounce]. The context of the verse is prayer, but even this last urging by Paul, on its own, teaches that we are to pary for the "saints" [Gk: hágios].

The word translated "for" is the word "perí" which means "in regard to" or "concerning." There is no idea here of praying to some group of the dead called "Saints." Paul uses the word 15 times in this epistles. He is clearly references those alive at the time in Ephesus. There may be some debate as to whether the word is singular to those who are part of the Body, but it certainly does not mean some exalted class of believer who has achieved his immediate salvation through his own merits (as taught by many).

And it certainly does not pertain to the dead who can perform miracles on our behalf. We do not pray to either living or dead "saints." We are to pray FOR living saints as Paul teaches here in Eph 6:18. Saints are being perfected while living. 

And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints [hágios], for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ...

That is all we will say on this subject. 

 

Larry Ollison Misquotes Scripture (Among Other Errors)

A short video giving us a good example of how the traditions of men can poison our understanding of scripture and the Plan of God.

2 Cor 5:8 is one of the most misquoted verses in Christianity. We have taken pagan ideas related to death and have forced the scriptures to affirm what we already believe instead of allowing scripture to teach us. The doctrines of the "immortal soul" and the "intermediate state" rob from what our Lord accomplished on Calvary by dying, being buried, not decaying, and rising again. 

In his salvific work, the Lord reversed the curse of death and decay. Scripture teaches that death is our enemy, not our friend. Dr. Ollison also carelessly handles the parable of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16. Almost his entire presentation in this clip is from human and pagan traditions. For more on this topic (and related) click on the links at the end of the video or visit bibleunderstanding.com

A Fresh Look at the Bema

We have looked at the future judgment of Christians for our service several times before. But this is a topic which has interested me quite a bit in the last few years and it's worth revisiting from time to time. Our future judgment (assessment) is spoken of in multiple places in the Greek canon (commonly called the New testament) and there is a case for finding it in the Hebrew canon as well (Old Testament). I will quote from the two most direct verses concerning the Bema, but know there are references from the Gospel accounts all the way through Paul's Post Acts ministry.

But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

-Romans 14:10


For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.

-1 Cor 5:10

I chose to use the KJV for these verses because I wanted to highlight a common misrepresentation. Or, to be more precise, the possibility of a misunderstanding from the use of the phrase "judgment seat." The words don't do great violence to the sense of the passage, but in our world we think of "judgment seat" differently than it would have been understood half a millennium ago. 

We throw around the word "judge" today as meaning "condemnation." We all know one of the favorite verses of the Libertine and the unbeliever alike is "judge not lest ye be judged." The implication of "judging" is standing above another in condemnation. Whereas that could the determination of a judgment, it certainly is not a foregone conclusion. We have courts where men are judged and acquitted. Not only do we find acquittal as a possibility, we can have a judgment to one's advantage.

Judge me, O Lord, according to my righteousness

-Psalm 7:8
 

Open your mouth, judge righteously, And plead the cause of the poor and needy.

-Proverbs 31:9

We will leave that there. 

The "judgment seat" in Romans and 1 Corinthians is more correctly the "Bema Seat." That is, it is the place where a race is examined or a case is heard and an umpire (of sorts) makes an assessment. In Nehemiah it is even likened to a pulpit (8:4). It carried the idea of a "step up," a place from which to determine if a competitor competed by the rules of the game. The Bema is the place from which such a pronouncement is made.

We have the idea of running a race according to the rules in Paul's epistles

Do you not know that in a race all the runners compete, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. Well, I do not run aimlessly, I do not box as one beating the air; but I pommel my body and subdue it, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.

-1 Corinthians 9:24-27.

And also if anyone competes in athletics, he is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules.

-2 Timothy 2:5

We are not competing for the free gift of Life. That is absurd and a denial of the finished work of Christ. We are competing (as it were) for prizes, crowns, rewards, commendations, position, etc. This is not a study of those different rewards, but rather of the event of the assessment itself.

We have to interject here and warn, once again, the dangers of the "heaven/hell" and "saved/lost" approach to scripture. We've noted many times that the warnings of scripture are almost all aimed at believers. Three errors result from this which we will simply note here.

• The fear that one might lose the free gift of life and be enslaved to a system which puts faith in the works of our own hands and not in his finished work. Grace is no longer grace (Rom 11)

• The use of the free gift of Life by grace as an excuse to live a life indulging the flesh (Gal 5)

• Failing to study and rightly divide the Word of Truth as a workman (2 Tim 2)

Hanging over many Christian heads is the mythological idea of God torturing people with fire. We have covered that as well elsewhere, but suffice it to say, once we get past that and back to scripture, we can focus on our service and not on our fear. The one who finds no rest and no security in the finished work of Christ will often remain a babe, focusing all his efforts on not "losing" a free gift. This proves a hindrance to building on the sure foundation of Christ.

For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.

-1 Corinthians 3:11-15

It is what we build on the foundation that will be tested.

Since our sin was judged in Christ, our sin will not be present on that day. However, that is not a license to sin. Sin has a two-fold effect in a believer's life. First, if left unconfessed, God will chasten his own. In some cases, it may even bring premature death. Now, in man's tradition, that would be a ticket to glory and unimaginable bliss, but that is not death as scripture presents it. When you're dead, you're dead. 

So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup. For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep [died]. But if we [judge] ourselves, we would not come under such judgment. Nevertheless, when we are judged in this way by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be finally condemned with the world. 

-1 Corinthians 11:27-32

The context here is the Lord's Supper. First we note that these conditions no longer apply. God is not punishing with sickness and even death those who take the bread or cup unworthily. But the Lord's dealings here are similar in our age. It is possible in the present age for a believer to sin in such a way the Lord ends his life. However, in the Post Acts Age, the Lord's work is done in silence. Disobedient  Christians dropped dead in the Acts. The return of the King to Israel was imminent. In our age, the Lord may still bring sickness or death, but his hand his slower to move and his intervention subtle. 

But direct, harsh judgment that is not all that is seen here. Note the discipline (chastisement) of the Lord in the passage. If we are in a pattern of sin or we commit serious sins, the Lord may chastise us. 

I want to be careful to note what this passage teaches about judging ourselves. If we come under conviction of our sin and judge ourselves, we may escape death or sickness, but we may still be chastened of the Lord. In this age, with God working more subtly, it is very important that we examine our daily walk often. But if we do find ourselves mired in the world or in sin that we judge ourselves and accept the chastisement of the Lord.

The end is not the restoration of a lost free gift (as we have seen, that is not in view here), but a turning back to the race before us. God chastises his own. A child remains in the family even in punishment.

“My son, do not regard lightly the discipline of the Lord,
nor lose courage when you are punished by him.
For the Lord disciplines him whom he loves,
and chastises every son whom he receives.”

It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons; for what son is there whom his father does not discipline? If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. Besides this, we have had earthly fathers to discipline us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live? For they disciplined us for a short time at their pleasure, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant; later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.

-Hebrews 12:5-11 

So, we are not judged at the Bema for our sin, we are judged for the house we build on the sure foundation. What goes into building this house in this present age? Might I suggest a few building blocks (not an exhaustive list).

• Right Division of the Word
• Preaching the Word
• Relationship with our fellow believers
• Relationship to the world

 

Remember, the Bema is not about sin, but about service. We looked at how evil Christians can be if we walk according to the flesh (the old nature), and we are warned repeatedly to walk in the new nature (spirit). For we cannot build a worthy house except by the spirit.

In our service for the Lord, we are not to do anything for the praise of men. I covered this dangerous current trend in Christendom to "virtue signal." Such a practice is solely so men will approve of us. We must resist the temptation to be seen as acceptable by the world. This drive leads us to try and find an interpretation of scripture and of the faith that will not offend. 

Whereas something done in the flesh such as adultery is an "evil" which will both lead to the Lord's discipline (if we are blessed with his hand of discipline and open to his leading) and the stunting of our service for him. But any parallel "bad" service resulting will be revealed at the Bema.

Whatever your task, work heartily, as serving the Lord and not men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive the inheritance as your reward; you are serving the Lord Christ. For the wrongdoer will be paid back for the wrong he has done, and there is no partiality. 

-Colossians 3:23-25

The word translated "wrong" here is the Greek word adikéō. It appears 27 times in Greek canon. It carries with it the idea of acting "unjustly." The idea behind the passage is that "whatever a man sows, that shall he also reap" (Gal 6). Contrast this with Paul's use of kakós in his warning to believers in Colossians 3:5. Bullinger defines this word as "depraved." 

Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.

Surely, all these things are connected. The Christian who chooses to walk in the old nature and fall into a depraved lifestyle (obviously possible from this any many other passages) will not be able to offer good service. His house will be a weak and unstable one.

But imagine with me the carnal, adulterous Christian who manages to hide his sin from the world. He may even have an outwardly "successful" ministry. But we know from Paul that even if he is the one sowing and watering, it is God who gives the increase (1 Cor 3:7). It is the Word which convicts and converts men. We are but instruments. And the Lord, on occasion, has even used wicked instruments. 

So, to man this worker may seem "blessed" of the Lord and the creator of a glorious house of gold, but of the true value of his work, "the Day will bring it to light." He may be left with a burning structure and nothing to offer to God for his life's service. We are not the judge of another man's servant. Outward appearances may be deceiving. God judges the intent of the heart. 

The Lord sees not as man sees; man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the heart.”

-1 Sam 16:7b

There are probably countless "good and faithful" servants of the Lord that toiled in relative obscurity, forgotten by history, even mocked by contemporaries. We will not know until that Day reveals all.

Looking back at our select bulleted list of building guidelines, we now expand on these ideas:

 

• Right Division of the Word - We must teach and live by the rules of the age in which we live. Men may strive to please God by the commands of another age, but to God, he is deceived and unworthy of reward. In the worst case scenario, he falls into pious conceit and drags others into his error. These outward religious acts of another age, "have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting rigor of devotion and self-abasement and severity to the body, but they are of no value in checking the indulgence of the flesh."

• Preaching the Word - "be urgent in season and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching" even though most of professing Christendom has abandoned the place of the scriptures alone as the only infallible source of truth.

• Relationships with our fellow believers - We are to "Bear one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. For if any one thinks he is something, when he is nothing, he deceives himself." And while we examine all by the Word of God, it is not our place to judge the intents of the heart of God's servants. And if we find a brother or sister in sin, we are to restore such.

• Relationship to the world - We must not love nor cavort with the world. Paul noted that we must deal with the world for we live in the world, but we must not be part of its systems; especially its religious systems. The ways of the wicked are obvious, less so the religious world, "If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the universe, why do you live as if you still belonged to the world? Why do you submit to regulations, 'Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch '(referring to things which all perish as they are used), according to human precepts and doctrines?" 

How many in Christendom cleave to things like Advent and Lent with their outward piety and (in the case of Lent) the self-abasement of the body? How many in our day participate in outwards displays of virtue for the praise of men? These traditions of men only sidetrack the believer from the difficult task of building his house.

We will stand before the Bema and our houses will be inspected. Make sure you are building with the correct materials and you build only for the one to whom we will all answer. Men (saved and unsaved) may mock. Denominations may seek to put you into bondage. The world may seek to entice. Satan may present you a religious path which has an appearance of wisdom and piety. But in the end, we all stand alone at the Bema. Do not forfeit your home to the whims of another.

A Quick Response to Accusations Against E.W. Bullinger

 Dr. Bullinger doesn't need me to defend him. He was a humble man who gladly accepted critiques of his work. He famously told Charles Welch, after Mr. Welch pointed out a concern in regard to Dr. Bullinger's exegesis of the Pauline epistles, that he would have to denounce half his own writings! He did so with a laugh. The critique was valid. He humbly accepted it. If one is to accuse him of error, he had better be precise. Publicly bearing false witness against a brother in Christ is a serious matter.

This will not be an exhaustive post in regard to one such public critique, but I did want to address a few issues. Specifically, false charges and blasphemy against E.W. Bullinger,  

Let all bitterness and rage and anger and clamour and blasphemy be put away from you, along with all malice,

-Ephesians 4:31

 

I refer to to this post by Dan R. Smedra: The Anglo-Catholic Errors of E.W. Bullinger

I write from the perspective a former, devout Roman Catholic. I was born, raised, and educated in the Catholic Church. Catholic school, altar boy, acolyte. Religious Education Teacher, Youth Leader, etc. I even made a trip to the Vatican. I can usually spot Catholic influence a mile away. That is why the title of Mr. Smedra's post struck me.

Again, I'm not embarking on a line-by-line defense, but I do want to address some of his accusations. We have noted before Harry Ironside's atrocious attack on Mr. Bullinger's teachings (accusing us of being universalists). That attack contained downright lies. What I see in the above referenced post is a similar mischaracterization or misinterpretation of Dr. Bullinger's teaching. 

The irony here is that Bullinger (possibly more than any other teacher), very much different from what is taught in the Catholic Church, stressed the absolute singleness and individuality of Bible Study. That is, the responsibility for rightly dividing the word of truth rested solely with every individual believer. Let me quote from the conclusion to his monumental work, "How To Enjoy The Bible."

All Bible study must in the end be individual. As with ordinary bodily food: others may prepare the food and serve it up in various forms: they may cook it in more senses than one: they may present it in "made dishes": they may carve it, and cut it up, and even put it in the mouth, as with babes; but, after all, there is no more that they can do. They cannot eat it or digest it for us; they cannot assimilate it for us; even so it is with the spiritual food of the Word of God. Notwithstanding all that has been said in the foregoing pages, the great necessity remains: the work of Bible study must be, to the end, intensely personal and individual. Each one must look out the reference for himself. He must trace the words through all their occurrences where these are given; he must consider their usages; he must read the contexts; he must make his lists and tables, and do his countings for himself: for so only can he feed upon the Word and the words, and be nourished, and be strengthened himself, and grow thereby: so only will he be able to say with Jeremiah: "Thy words were found, and I did eat them; And thy word was unto me the joy and rejoicing of my heart." [E.W. Bullinger] 

emphasis mine 

Now let us turn to a few points from Mr. Smedra (and as we always do, we encourage the reader to read the original post, linked above, in its entirety).

Mr. Bullinger did not clearly acknowledge the necessity of the Holy Spirit's sovereign illumination of the Text.  Either he believed that the Fall wasn't serious enough to render man incapable of grasping truth with one's natural abilities, or he believed in the Wesleyan doctrine of common grace, thus siding with Roman Catholicism rather than the Reformation or historic dispensationalism.  [Dan R. Smedra]

This is a sweeping and irresponsible conclusion to draw simply because Dr. Bullinger taught that the believer can and should study the Word diligently. I turn back to the conclusion of Bullinger's book noted above where we find this utterly clear statement in regard to understanding scripture:

It is assumed, from the first word to the last, that the readers have passed from death unto life, and have the Divine gift of a spiritual "understanding," apart from which all that has been said will be useless. We must be able to say: "We know that the Son of God hath come, and hath given us an understanding, that we may get to know HIM that is true, and we are in Him that is true, even in His Son Jesus Christ" (1 John 5:20). We have not written to convince unbelievers, though God may over-rule our work to that end. We have not written in defence of the Bible, for not only does it not need any defence of ours, but it is our own "shield" (Psa 91:4) and "sword" (Eph 6:17), without which we are defenceless indeed. We have written only for those who have "peace with God" (Rom 5:1), and enjoy "the peace of God" (Phil 4:7), and know "the God of Peace" (Rom 15:33). Only such have leisure to be occupied with God. Only such can "sit at the Lord's feet and hear His Word" (Luke 10:39, RV). All others must be "cumbered about much serving." 

They must needs be occupied with themselves: either as sinners taken up with their sins, or as penitents with their repentance, or as believers with their faith, or as saints with their holiness. Unless and until we know our completeness in Christ (Col 2:10), and "believe God" when He declares that "He hath made us to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light" (Col 1:12), we shall be in such a condition of conscience, and heart, and life as will not leave us any time for occupation with God. Instead of going on our way "giving thanks to God" for what He has done, we shall be giving way to mourning for what we have not done. We shall be like David when he "sat in his house" and was occupied with what he would do for the Lord. For, not until we learn what the Lord has done and purposed to do for us, shall we be ready, with David, to go in and sit before the Lord (2 Sam 7:1,18). In the former case David's thought was, "Who I am"; in the latter he was exclaiming, "Who am I, O Lord God?" [E.W. Bullinger]

emphasis mine 

 

Could he be more clear? There is not one scent of "common grace" here. Quite the opposite! Absolutely no one in his natural state can possibly understand scripture is the argument. He says of this extensive work on tools for understanding scripture, that the passing from death unto life by faith is absolutely necessary and "apart from which all that has been said will be useless." That is, Dr. Bullinger clearly taught that the natural man cannot understand spiritual things. 

Summation of the excerpt: Without the new nature from God, which comes with a Divine Gift of Spiritual understanding, study is useless.

How could Mr. Smedra accuse Bullinger of teaching that man can "grasp truth with his natural abilities" or that he somehow believed all men have the benefits of "common grace?" Such irresponsibility! Either his scholarship is sloppy, his research incomplete, or (like Ironside before him) he chooses to grind his axe based on his assumptions, desired conclusions, and a personal disdain for Dr. Bullinger. 

We end this section with Dr. Bullinger's reference to the necessity of God's hand in the use of Bullinger's own book:

May the Lord deign to use these pages, and make them to be that "guide" to a better understanding and a greater enjoyment of His own Word.

Let us now turn to the attack in regard to what Mr. Smedra calls "spiritual death."

 

Most seriously, [Mr. Bullinger and his followers] failed to understand the biblical truth of "spiritual death".

I find the use of quotation marks interesting. They are curiously used as the phrase is nowhere found in the pages of the Bible nor is any spirit ever said to have died. It is a doctrine of the Reformers and Reformation theology which is itself a product of Catholicism and its doctrine of "spiritual death."  

Ironically, the concept of "spiritual death" has as one of its proponents, John Wesley. In doing so, Wesley (as have countless others) denies the words of the God in Genesis and promotes a lie. The phrase could be said to be a "Wesleyan doctrine," but not a "biblical" doctrine. 

From John Wesley's Explanatory Notes on Genesis:

That is, thou shalt lose all the happiness thou hast either in possession or prospect; and thou shalt become liable to death, and all the miseries that preface and attend it. This was threatened as the immediate consequence of sin... Not only thou shalt become mortal, but spiritual death and the forerunners of temporal death shall immediately seize thee.

Furthermore, those that teach that unbelievers are tortured by God by fire, without hope and without end, are teaching that man is immortal. They teach that he "will not surely die." It is the lie of Satan as is the doctrine of bodiless bliss at the time of physical death. All men are mortal, believers and unbelievers. It is only in resurrection that believers "put on immortality," (1 Cor 15:54).

Christ came that men might have life. Without Christ, men have no life in them. Read the story of Lazarus in John 11. Is there any doubt that Lazarus was dead? Is there anything in the text that suggests he was waiting in bliss somewhere? What is the only hope spoken of there by Martha or by the Lord himself? RESURRECTION. 

Who Is Promoting Catholic Doctrines?

The idea of a fiery pit wherein God tortures the lost is UTTERLY Catholic. It is creation of the "Early Church Fathers," borrowed from Greek mythology. It is these men to whom the Reformers and the Catholic Church bow and forsake their responsibility to study. 

Bullinger, in no uncertain terms, stated that Bible Study is an INDIVIDUAL responsibility, it requires hard work, and that ONLY BELIEVERS have any hope of understanding scripture. 

We are called to be WORKMEN who must STUDY in that way that we be APPROVED and not ASHAMED. Is that Catholicism? Is that a denial of the role of the Spirit? Is that "common grace?" Of course not. Bullinger calls us to do the WORK and in no way implies this is an accomplishment of the carnal nature. 

Mr. Smedra quotes Lewis Sperry Chafer as though he is in conflict with Dr. Bullinger's understanding. Ironically (again), a right division of scripture reveals that instant understanding and having the words to answer all men is a Pentecostal Age truth. The Catholic understanding of the Pentecostal gifts and the Pentecostal ordinances is far more inline with Mr. Smedra than with Dr. Bullinger.

Do we imagine that Chafer would suggest that no study is of any value? That any and all believers only understand scripture in accordance with whatever the Lord gives them at the time of conversion? Of course not. 

Perhaps Mr. Smedra should concern himself less with the judgment of unbelievers and his desire to see God torturing billions of men and women (torture Reformed teacher R.C. Sproul says we'll all rejoice in watching some day) and worry about his own judgment at the Bema Seat. All of us need to be concerned. 

As we have noted in regard to study of the Word, we must go about it as "WORKMEN" that we may be "APPROVED" and not find ourselves "ASHAMED." 

Are we to conclude from Smedra's argument that anyone, including himself, who quotes scripture in defense of, or in proposition, of, or refutation of any doctrine is denying the work of God in us? Is it an appeal to "free will" if we do so? That is, for me to refute my previous Catholic doctrines, I have to study the Bible. Such knowledge is not magically bestowed on all believers. If that were so, Paul wouldn't waste time either warning us about false teachers or warning us about being ashamed for lack of proper studying. 

After quoting two lines from Bullinger's massive library of writings, Smedra states:

Again, not a word about the Holy Spirit's sovereign ministry of revealing truth (John 16:13) nor of the natural man's inability to understand spiritual things, as expounded by the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 2.

So, let us apply his reasoning to this assertion.

By quoting John 16:13 as part of his argument, Dan is assuming we can understand it. He must conclude that we either know the truth there or do not know the truth there based on whether God has illuminated us to its meaning. In quoting from scripture, Dan thus denies God's hand and exalts the free-will of the reader over the work of the Spirit. 

That sounds like intellectual crap, because it is. But I would argue it is in line with the accusation that Dr. E.W. Bullinger taught that understanding scripture is independent of a work of God. We have clearly dispelled that blasphemy against the man. 

Here is a summation of the position and it should be clear for all to see from Bullinger's writings:

A. No one can possibly understand scripture without the new nature which is a gift of God by grace through faith alone. 

B. Each of us is workman who is instructed to read and study the Word of Truth for which we will answer, having our work found approved or ourselves found ashamed.

To say that by teaching the second statement, one is denying the first is nonsense and food for weak minds ready to hate.

Final irony here, Dan refers to Bullinger as "Mr. Bullinger." Yes, Dr. Bullinger's title was honorary, but Dan chose to slight him since he did not receive this honor from a university. Conversely, he quotes as an authority "Dr. L. S. Chafer" who also received only honorary doctorates.

The Spirit Works Through Study (A Basic Concept)

And we are left to ask, if ALL understanding of scripture is solely by the illumination of the Sprit apart from any effort on our part, who is to determine whether Bullinger, Chafer, or Smedra are correct on any point of doctrine? How can any Christian disagree on anything?

Denying the personal responsibility of the individual to do the hard work of a Bible student leaves us all vulnerable to pronouncements of men who claim illumination by the Spirit. A Pope and his Council, perhaps? And let me assure you, the discouraging of study on the premise that all such work is useless is a very Catholic concept. 

Bullinger's critics would argue  they are not teaching this, but if not, their attacks on Dr. Bullinger must be abandoned. For he taught 

1. the inability of the natural man to understand scripture
2. necessity of the creation of the new nature by God as an act of grace
3. and the responsibility of the one with the new nature to feed that nature by diligent Bible Study  

Dr. Bullinger encourages all of us who have the new nature to INTESELY study God's word. In doing so, in no way does he discount the necessity of either the New Nature or the role of the Spirit. 

I refer readers to an excerpt from Dr. Bullinger's  "The Two Natures of the Child of God." Could he be more clear on his belief that the natural man (old nature) cannot understand truth? If a man is to understand anything, God must "deign" he do so?

“The Natural Man.” And we are told that “the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he get to know them because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor.2:14).

In the structure of this portion of 1 Corinthians, verse 14 stands in correspondence with verse 8; which tells us that “none of the princes of this world knew the wisdom of God”, i.e., the great Secret–the Mystery–for it was “hidden” in God (Eph. 3:9), and no eye had ever seen it, or ear heard it. And even when now it is “revealed” (1 Cor. 2:10), the natural man cannot get to know it, because it is only discerned by the spirit, or the new nature within us, created and enlightened by the Holy Ghost. This is conclusive as to the character, power, inclination and condition of “the natural man”; which means man by nature, as he is born into the world.

Another of Smedra's charges, "failure to clearly understand or articulate the truth of spiritual blindness" is refuted by the statement above as here as well:

“The Old Man.” And what about him? He, we are told “is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts” (Eph. 4:22). The old man is full of desires or lusts. These lusts are deceitful and deceiving. They are in all things contrary to God, contrary to His Spirit, and His Word; and to the new nature, the spirit, when it is once implanted within us. In this connection, it is called...

“The Heart” i.e., the natural heart, which is “deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked” (Jer. 17:9), so deceitful that it constantly deceives and betrays us: so deceitful that none but God can really know it. The Lord Jesus has some “teaching about the heart” of the natural man in Matthew 15:19. “Out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.”

Do any of these quotes suggest that Bullinger fails to understand the spiritual blindness of the carnal nature? 

Accusing Dr. Bullinger of teaching "common grace" or enlightenment apart from the Holy Ghost is blasphemy.

More from Dr. Bullinger on the sad state of the natural man:

 

In the light which shined out of darkness (Gen 1:2,3) we shall see the light which has shone "in our hearts to give the knowledge of the glory of God in the face (or person) of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor 4:6). No wonder that those who know nothing of this spiritual light of the New Creation know nothing of the light that was created on the first day as revealed in the record of the old creation. The natural man sees only a myth and an old wives' fable in the Creation record, and seems actually to prefer the Babylonian corruption of primitive truth. These "other Gentiles walk in the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart" (Eph 4:17,18). Woe be to those who follow these blind leaders, for "they shall both fall into the ditch" they have prepared for themselves by their fleshly knowledge and worldly wisdom." 

One last thought from me; the doctrine of eternal, fiery torture is both "Babylonian" and "Catholic." And it is Mr. Smedra who promotes this human Catholic tradition (along with the Satanic lie that men shall ever live), and not Dr. Bullinger. He seems to be a victim of the traditions he claims to reject.

Here a few other blog entries on this and related topics:

• Deconstruction Don Perkins' Introduction to "Hell" - Part 1
• Deconstructing Don Perkins' Introduction to "Hell" - Part 2
• How to Prevail Against the Gates of Hell
• Traditions That Interfere With True Understanding
• Another Look at "Gehenna" (Hell)
• More on the Traditional Doctrine of Hell
• Animals Are Souls And You Are Not Immortal
• The State of the Dead
• Scripturally Comforting the Bereaved - Part 1
• Scripturally Comforting the Bereaved - Part 2

Where is Judas?

This will not be an extensive study on Judas. To be honest, I'm not sure of his eternal fate, but if I were pushed, I'd be on the side of arguing Judas has resurrection life.

I want to look at this issue by examining two opposite ends of the spectrum in Christendom: The Papacy and the (as far as I can tell, their About Us page doesn't have anything about them I can find) the Reformed Anabaptist folks at Pulpit and Pen.

As is my practice, I will link the referenced article so you can read it for yourself. I do this as a courtesy, in the name of fairness, and because I try to treat others as I wish to be treated.

• On the Papacy Side: Judas is in Heaven
• On the Reformed Side: Judas is being tortured by God with fire "in his own place."

Anybody familiar with this blog knows what I believe about the pagan, blasphemous belief concerning God torturing people with fire. I'll post a sampling of links to related articles at the end of this brief post. So let me pull back the lens to quickly dispense with both arguments.

No one is in Heaven except God and very few believers have that as their hope. In fact, I am of the opinion that no one has actual "heaven" as his hope. We just covered this topic in a recent entry. We see in scripture those who inherit the Earth. We see those who have a Kingdom on Earth. We see those who will reside in the New Jerusalem, which does come down from heaven, but it settles on earth and sky. Finally, we see a small company who have blessings and hope in the "far above the heavens" or "in heavenly places."

As for Judas being in "his own place," let's look at that passage. It is found in Acts 1 connected to the selection of Matthias to replace Judas. The article relies heavily on commentaries. I am not opposed to quotations (I use them if something is worded well), but they are not authoritative. And many are tainted (as is Strong's concordance, which I use) by the traditions of men.

Here is an excerpt:

Acts 1:25 makes it clear…

That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place. 

Barnes Notes Commentary says, “The expression “to go to his own place” is one which is used by the ancient writers to denote “going to an eternal destiny.” Thus, the Jewish Tract, Baal Turim, on Numbers 24:25, says, “Balaam went to his own place, that is, to Gehenna,” to hell. Thus, the Targum, or Chaldee Paraphrase on Ecclesiastes 6:6, says,” Although the days of a man’s life were two thousand years, and he did not study the Law, and do justice, in the day of his death his soul shall descend to hell, to the one place where all sinners go.” Thus, Ignatius in the Epistle to the Magnesians says, “Because all things have an end, the two things death and life shall lie down together, and each one shall go to his own place.” The phrase his own place means the place or abode which was suited for him, which was his appropriate home.”

First, their reliance on extra-biblical texts for a ministry which seems to hold the Textus Receptus and the King James Bible as the "superior" and most reliable texts is odd. They defer to "Baal Turim" for Numbers 24:25? Jacob ben Asher? Really? And then defer to the Targum paraphrase for Eccl 6:6? Well, it makes sense if you realize we're talking about mystical and allegorical works as tradition's "hell" is pagan.

The KJV reads:

And Balaam rose up, and went and returned to his place: and Balak also went his way. 

-Num 24:25

Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place? 

- Eccl 6:6

Yes, we do all go to "one place." ALL of us. We go to Sheol, Hades, Hell. That is, biblical "hell" (Hades), not Greek Mythology's "hell." It is a state of being rather than a place. In a nutshell, the dead are dead. All the dead.


What sayeth the Textus Receptus (Hebrew, right to left)?

 וַיָּ֣קָם בִּלְעָ֔ם וַיֵּ֖לֶךְ וַיָּ֣שָׁב לִמְקֹמֹ֑ו וְגַם־בָּלָ֖ק הָלַ֥ךְ לְדַרְכֹּֽו׃ פ -Number24:25

וְאִלּ֣וּ חָיָ֗ה אֶ֤לֶף שָׁנִים֙ פַּעֲמַ֔יִם וְטֹובָ֖ה לֹ֣א רָאָ֑ה הֲלֹ֛א אֶל־מָקֹ֥ום אֶחָ֖ד הַכֹּ֥ל הֹולֵֽךְ׃ - Eccl 6:6


I'll leave you to do your own translating. But I can tell you this, you will not find what is found in the corrupted versions quoted by Pulpit & Pen. I reference again their article.

Barnes Notes Commentary says, “The expression “to go to his own place” is one which is used by the ancient writers to denote “going to an eternal destiny.” 

Even if I accepted this as being accurate (in regard to eternal destiny), it's nonsense. We do not see resurrection yet. Until that day, all who die go to the grave. It is only in resurrection that we experience immortality (1 Cor 15:54). The dead go "to the same place" as we just saw in Ecclesiastes 6:6. And what do we do with the following verses?

So they sent and gathered together all the lords of the Philistines, and said, Send away the ark of the God of Israel, and let it go again to his own place, that it slay us not, and our people: for there was a deadly destruction throughout all the city; the hand of God was very heavy there... And the ark of the Lord was in the country of the Philistines seven months. And the Philistines called for the priests and the diviners, saying, What shall we do to the ark of the Lord? tell us wherewith we shall send it to his place.

-1 Samuel 5:11; 6:1-2

Note: I'm not breaking down the Hebrew here, I'm simply relying on the King James.
I would contend that Acts 1:25 does make something clear, but that something is not that God is torturing his friend. What it makes clear is that Matthias took his place among the twelve apostles. This was necessary as the Kingdom in Israel will have 12 thrones. That kingdom (its restoration) was still possible in the Book of Acts as the Lord taught his disciples for 40 days after his resurrection and after he opened their minds (Acts 1:6) and just as Peter preached to Israel after Pentecost (Acts 3:17-26).


Acts 1:25, is about Matthias not Judas. You have to understand the parenthetical.

And they proposed two: Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed and said, “You, O Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which of these two You have chosen to take part in this ministry and apostleship (from which Judas by transgression fell), that he [Matthias] might go to his own place.” And they cast their lots, and the lot fell on Matthias. And he was numbered with the eleven apostles." 

Matthias went to his own place among the Apostles just as the ark in 1 Samuel went to its own place in Jerusalem. Judas doesn't have "his own place." That makes no sense in the context. Judas fell from his place among the Apostles. Man puts him in tradition's "hell" and thus they mangle that verse.

The Apostles in Acts 1 are asking God to show them which of the two he has chosen so that the chosen one can take his rightful place.

Pausing to catch our breath... So, Judas is neither in heaven (as no one is except the Lord currently) and he is not in tradition's hell. So what is his fate?

Judas was chosen by the Lord. He performed miracles. He is called the Lord's "friend." Do we not believe that eternal life is a free gift by faith? Are we now to argue that Judas lost that gift by his works? 

The only legitimate argument for Judas not having life (we're ignoring the mythology of fiery torment) is that he never placed his faith in the Lord. But I don't know that. Christians are capable of horrible wickedness. So I don't know Judas' fate. Why men must have him being tortured is a reflection of our wicked, pagan, vengeful blood-lust. 

• Heretical Timeline of Those Who Say the Lord Tortures the Lost
• The Horrible Doctrine of Man's Traditional Hell
• Deconstruction Don Perkins' Introduction to "Hell" - Part 1
• Deconstructing Don Perkins' Introduction to "Hell" - Part 2
• How to Prevail Against the Gates of Hell
• Traditions That Interfere With True Understanding
• Another Look at "Gehenna" (Hell)
• More on the Traditional Doctrine of Hell
• Animals Are Souls And You Are Not Immortal
• The State of the Dead
• Scripturally Comforting the Bereaved - Part 1
• Scripturally Comforting the Bereaved - Part 2

A Fresh Look at Hebrews 9:27

I recently heard a somewhat disturbing message. There was nothing in the message that I have not heard a thousand times before, but the source was troubling. I found the recording at a site which has a similar theological understanding as I have. That is, they seek to "rightly divide the Word of Truth," and they take what has been described by some as an "Ultradispensational" (Post Acts) understanding of scripture. (I use that word in the description of this blog as that is what men have dubbed our understanding. I much prefer "Consistent Dispensationalism.")

I realize (as do any who regularly read this blog) that we each have our own individual theology. However, among those of us who have come to understand Paul's ministry in the Prison Epistles and in the Dispensation of the Mystery, there are usually a number of commonly held doctrines.

Obviously, Post Acts dispensationalists hold to the teaching that the present administration of God (dispensation) started at the end of the Book of Acts. We also propose that this age was first revealed in holy scripture in the epistle to the Ephesians (and hidden from before the overthrow of the ages). This post is not meant to lay out all those distinctives, but they can be found throughout this blog. Another commonly held understanding is that all who see death, believer or unbeliever, enter a state of silence. The dead know nothing (Ecclesiastes, etc).  The man I heard taught that dead men exist in some sort of bodiless state upon death and most are sent to fiery torture by God.

In light of my unpleasant surprise, I thought I'd quickly review the passage at the root of his error. That error was teaching that Hebrews 9:27 teaches that all men die and immediately face God's judgment of heaven or hell.

Dispensationalism (of any stripe) is the minority not only in greater Christendom (where it is in the extreme minority), but it is in the minority even among those labeled Evangelical or Fundamentalist believers. And among dispensationalists, "ultradispensationalism" is in the extreme minority. While Post Acts believers still have our minor disagreements, we almost all understand Hebrews 9:27 in its context. Unfortunately, this verse (like 2 Cor 5:8) is almost universally incorrectly applied throughout Christendom.

For Christ did not enter into a sanctuary made with hands, which is a prefiguration of the true one, but into heaven itself to be exhibited now in the presence of God for our sakes. And not in order to offer himself repeatedly, as when the high priest enters into the sanctuary each year with blood which is not his, since then he would have had to suffer repeatedly since the overthrow of the world. But now he has been manifested once for the consummation of the ages to annul sin by the sacrifice of himself. And just as it is the destiny for men to die once, and after this the judgment, so too Christ, having been offered once in order to take upon himself the sins of many, will appear a second time without sin to those who eagerly await him for salvation.
-Hebrews 9:24-28

 Verse 27 (highlighted) is generally ripped from its context (like 2 Cor 5:8) and used to teach something which is not present. If you take the verse on its own, it can be used to teach the unbiblical doctrine of bodiless beings being judged immediately upon death. But that is not what this verse teaches at all.

Verse 28 is a comparative. The word translated "so" is from the Greek "hoútō," which means "in the same manner." Christ's final and eternal priesthood is being compared to the priesthood in Israel's Law. The Book of Hebrews (written to Hebrews) is about things that are pictured in the Law which point to Christ and how Christ fulfills the type "better." Christ is better than the Levitical priests. The Faithful sought a better resurrection. The Son is better than the angels. The New Covenant will be better than the Old Covenant, etc.

The men dying in verse 27 are human priests. When the high priest died, any who had fled to a City of Refuge were free. "In the same manner" or "so too," when Christ died, all were set free forever. The cycle ended. In the Law, the cycle began anew with each new high priest. 

So the congregation shall deliver the manslayer from the hand of the avenger of blood, and the congregation shall return him to the city of refuge where he had fled, and he shall remain there until the death of the high priest who was anointed with the holy oil.
-Numbers 35:25

If the death of a mortal high priest, who is replaced by another high priest, is sufficient to free from an avenger of death one who sought refuge, how much more the death of Israel's eternal high priest? Christ's priesthood is perfect. It has no successor. All men have freedom from death (the penalty for sin) in his sacrifice.

The passage as a whole is arguing that temporal priests had to continually offer sacrifices because their offerings could not take away sins forever. They also died and had to be replaced so the sacrifices could continue.

Christ, as the perfect, eternal high priest, offered the never-to-be-repeated sacrifice of his own blood (something the Levitical priests could not do). This is no "ongoing sacrifice" as the sacramentalist churches say they continue to offer daily on their altars. Christ's sacrifice is a finished work! There was no seat in the Holy of Holies for the priest to sit upon as the work was never finished. (Yes, the mercy seat is there, but he was forbidden to sit upon that.)

But what does the scripture say of Christ after he had offered the sacrifice of his blood?

And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool.
-Hebrews 10:11-13

Christ sat down because the sacrifice and the work are complete. When he offered the perfect sacrifice, and sat down, there is no more need of any "ongoing sacrifice." Such a teaching is blasphemy and denial of Christ. To teach that this sacrifice cannot free one from the penalty of sin (whether in man's traditional doctrine of "hell" or "purgatory") is to teach that the work was not completed. 

Let's look at the larger context in Numbers 35.

And they shall be unto you cities for refuge from the avenger; that the manslayer die not, until he stand before the congregation in judgment… Then the congregation shall judge between the slayer and the revenger of blood  according to these judgments: and the congregation shall deliver the slayer out of the hand of the revenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to the city of his refuge, whither he was fled: and he shall abide in it unto the DEATH of the high priest, which was anointed with the holy oil... after the death of the high priest the slayer shall return into the land of his possession"

A man stands before the congregation of Israel and is declared not-guilty, however, he must still wait in the City of Refuge until the death of the anointed high priest. Israel was shown the sacrifice of Christ in type and shadow. But the blood of bulls and goats could never take away sin. The work of the high priest was never complete. He could never sit down.

Christ completed the sacrifice and he sat down.

Let's look at the results of the different deaths:

Death of the Temporal High Priest: and after this the judgment

Death of the Eternal High Priest: so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin, but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.

The repetition is over. The sacrifice is complete and eternal.