|
Some
difficult bible passages made clear and plain
Who wrote the Bible? It is GOD'S holy
Word, but the only portion GOD wrote Himself
are the 10 Commandments and that on enduring
monumental stone. "All Scripture
[Bible] is given by inspiration of GOD."
It is thought- rather than word- inspired!
Bible writers were GOD'S penmen and not His
Pen!!!
All 66 books written by prophets of GOD
spanning over 1000's of years, all agreeing.
Why is the Bible so hard to understand?
Because it is to be studied and reread over
and over again. If it was an ordinary
book, we would read it once and say we I have
read it, I know what it says and that would be
it.
JESUS said, that man should not live by bread
alone, but by every word that proceeds out of
the mouth of GOD [Matthew 4:4].
The
existence of thousand of Greek manuscripts
of the New Testament, offer a compelling
evidence that the text of the New Testament
has come down to us with amazing accuracy.
What is true of the New Testament is equally
true of the Old Testament. The discovery of
the Dead Seas Scroll has shown the amazing
accuracy of the Hebrew text of the OT
Scripture. When comparing the text of some
OT books found in the Dead Sea Scrolls
(written a century before Christ), with the
Hebrew text of the Masoretes (written a
thousand years later), scholars were amazed
at the accurate transmission of the Hebrew
text.
Luke
17: 34-36
"I tell you, in
that night there shall be two men in one bed;
the one shall be taken, and the other one
shall be left. Two women shall be
grinding together; the one shall be taken, and
the other left. Two men shall be in the
field; the one shall be taken, and the other
left."
Secret
rapture advocates take this text as evidence
of a secret coming of Christ to snatch away
His saints. But to get the whole
picture, begin reading in verse 26.
Jesus described Noah's day and Lot's day and
said: "Even thus shall it be when the
Son of man comes." Verse
30. Then He added, "I tell you,
in that night there shall be two men in one
bed: the one shall be taken, and the other
shall be left"
How
was it in the days of Noah and Lot? Some
were taken and some were left. Those
taken were taken to safety, and those left
were left dead. Jesus said: "This
is the way it will be when I come. Some
will be taken and some will be left."
In fact verses 36 and 37 make it very
plain what Jesus meant: "Two men
shall be in the field, the one shall be taken,
and the other left. And they answered
and said unto Him, where Lord? And He
said unto them, Where soever the body is,
thither the eagles be gathered together.
The disciples wanted to know where the
others would be left, and Christ asserted they
would be left dead. In one other text
Jesus used similar language: "For
wheresoever the carcass (dead body) is, there
will be the eagles be gathered together."
Matthew 24:28.
Some may object and say that eagles are not
known to gather in flocks and feed on dead
bodies, but here's what the Bible says
concerning them: "Does the eagle
mount up at thy command, and make her nest on
high?...Her young ones also suck up blood: and
where the slain are, there is she."
Job 39:27-30.
The obvious meaning of Christ's words is that,
just as in Noah's day and Lot's day, the
righteous will be taken to safety and the
wicked slain (by the brightness of His
coming). The Bodies of the wicked will
be scattered over the earth for birds of prey.
There is no secret rapture here. The
term is unknown in the Bible and so is the
doctrine.
"For
Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness
to every one that believes".(Rom.10:4).
Does this text teach that the Ten Commandments
law came to an end through the ministry of
Christ? By no means. The word
"end" is used here in the sense of
"end objective" or
"goal". The goal of the law is
to lead us to Christ same as the schoolmaster
in Gal.3:24.
Please notice how the same word is used in
James 5:11 "Ye have.....seen the end of
the Lord, and the Lord is very pitiful, and of
tender mercy."
Again we read, "Receiving the end of your
faith, even the salvation of your souls."
1.Pet.1:9. Here the end objective, or
goal, of one's faith is the salvation of his
soul. It has nothing to do with coming
to an end.
One more example: "Now the end of the
commandment is charity". 1.Tim.1:5.
It means that obedience to the commandment
will lead one to charity. In the same
sense, Christ is the "end of the
Law" because the Law leads people to
Christ. The Law did not come to an end.
"And
it came to pass, as her soul was in departing,
(for she died) that she called his name Benoni:
but his father called him Benjamin."
(Genesis 35:18).
Since
it is not possible for souls to live outside
of bodies, how do we explain this apparent
contradiction? The word "soul"
is translated from the Hebrew word "nephesh"
which has been translated 118 times in the Old
Testament as "life". The same
word is used in Genesis 1:30 in reference to
animals. It is never used in one single
instance to denote an immortal or undying part
of man.
"And
it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was
carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom:
the rich man also died, and was buried; And in
hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments,
and sees Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his
bosom."
Either
this story about the rich man and Lazarus is
literally true or it is a parable. Here
are four reasons why it could not possibly be
literalistic:
1. The beggar died and was taken by the angels
to Abraham's bosom. No one believes that
Abraham's literal bosom is the abode of the
righteous dead. It is a figurative or
parabolic expression. Incidentally, the
angels will gather the saints, but according
to Matthew 24:31, this will take place at the
coming of Jesus, not at a person's death.
2.
Heaven and hell were separated by a gulf, and
yet the person in each could converse with
each other. There were probably few
individuals in the world who believe that this
will be literally true of the saved and the
lost (Luke 16:26).
3.
The rich man was in hell with a body. He
had eyes, a tongue,etc.(Luke 16:24). How
did his body get into hellfire instead of into
the grave? I know of no one who teaches
that the bodies of the wicked go into hell as
soon as they die. This story could not
be literal.
4.
The request for Lazarus to dip the tip of his
finger in water and come through the flames
and across the gulf to cool the rich man's
tongue is obviously not literal. How
much moisture would be left and how much
relief would it give? The whole story is
unrealistic and parabolic.
The
rich man undoubtedly represented the Jews in
the parable because only a Jew would pray to
"father Abraham." The beggar
symbolized the Gentiles, who were counted
unworthy to receive truth. In Matthew
15:27, the Canaanite woman acknowledged that
her people were beggars at the table of the
Jews.
Christ
probably chose the name Lazarus to use in the
parable because later he would actually raise
Lazarus from the dead. And the climatic
point in the entire parable is found in verse
31: "If they hear not Moses and the
prophets, neither will they be persuaded,
though one rose from the dead."
Sure enough, they didn't believe even when one
named Lazarus was raised in front of them.
The second of the Ten Commandment removed by
the church of Rome, forbids the making of
images even under the ground. That means
that in order for them to bring in the pagan
teachings of hell, limbo and purgatory, they
tempered with God's own holy moral law.
The teaching of purgatory or purging of sin,
shows that they do not really believe that the
blood of Jesus Christ cleanses us from all
sins.
"I
decked thee also with ornaments, and I put
bracelets upon thy hands, and a chain on thy
neck. And I put a jewel on thy forehead
and earrings in thine ears, and a beautiful
crown upon thy head. Thus was thou
decked with gold and silver; and thy raiment
was of fine linen, and silk, and broidered
work; thou didst eat fine flour, and honey,
and oil: and thou wast exceeding beautiful,
and didst prosper into a kingdom."
(Ez.16:11-13).
This
text seems to conflict with scores of other
verses which condemn the use of colorful
cosmetics and jewelry. Yet there is no
real conflict if the context is
considered. This is not a literal
experience, but a symbolism. in verse 3,
God begins the recital of a moving allegory
concerning His people Israel. He depicts
Israel being born illegitimately and cast into
a field to die. No one washed the baby
or cared for it. Then God passed by and
loved the baby. He covered its nakedness
and washed away its filth. He bestowed
upon it love and every possible blessing.
In
allegorizing the material and spiritual
blessings that He bestowed on Israel, God used
a number of symbols which are clearly
interpreted by other Bible
writers. The "fine
linen" of verse 10 is defined in
Revelation 19:8: "The fine linen is the
righteousness of saints."
(Christians) The ornaments and chain of
verse 11 are interpreted in Proverbs 1:9 as
the "ornaments of grace". The
jewel and crown of verse 12 are symbolic of
"lips of knowledge" (Proverbs
20:15). and a "crown of rejoicing"
(1.Thess.2:19), respectively.
All the representations of highest honor,
recognition, wealth and beauty were
incorporated in the allegory to show the
unparalleled blessings which Israel had
received as a nation.
The symbolic ornaments of this allegory in no
way mitigate the force of those texts
forbidding that actual display of such vanity
on the physical body.
"But
the father said to his servants, bring forth
the best robe, and put it on him; and put a
ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet."
(Luke 15:22).
Some have used this scripture to justify the
wearing of jewelry, but remember that this
story is a parable and all the characters and
events are symbolic of spiritual
realities. God is represented by the
father in this story, and the children could
be any of us who profess to be in His family.
Primarily the love and compassion of God is
portrayed in dealing with the
backslider. His willingness to forgive
and accept the repenting prodigal stands out
as major theme. All the actions of the
father towards the returning son represent
specific attitudes of God in restoring those
who seek forgiveness.
The placing of the father's coat around his
son's rags symbolizes the imputed
righteousness of God, which must cover our
miserable sins and failures. The sign of
servitude was removed when the father
commanded that shoe be placed on his feet - an
act signifying acceptance into the rights of
sonship. Then, finally, the signet ring
was placed on the prodigal's finger to
represent the restoration to full authority in
conducting the family business
interests. Such rings were not worn as
ornaments, but for the practical necessities
of signing official documents and discharging
legal obligations (Esther 3:10; 8:2). To
use this parabolic incident to defend modern
ornamentation is totally unreasonable and
unbiblical.
"And
from Jesus, who is the faithful witness, and
the first begotten of the dead, and the prince
of the kings of the earth. Unto him that
loved us, and washed us from our sins in his
own blood." (Revelation 1:5).
The expression "first begotten of the
dead" has caused much perplexity.
Obviously Jesus was not the first one to be
resurrected. Besides Moses, at least
three others were raised by Jesus Himself.
There are two ways the word "first"
may be understood. It can mean either
first in point of time or first in
preeminence. The President's wife is
spoken of as the First Lady-not because she is
the first Lady who existed, but first in honor
and pre-eminence.
Christ was "first begotten of the
dead" because that resurrection took the
pre-eminence over all resurrections and Jesus
has the honor over all resurrected people.
"It
shall be a perpetual statute for your
generations throughout all your dwellings,
that ye eat neither fat nor blood."
(Lev.3:17)
on the basis of this text, some have taken a
position against blood transfusion. But
the position is entirely untenable in the
light of these considerations:
1. The prohibition applied only to animal
blood and fowls (Leviticus 7:25-27). It
does not apply to humans because we don't eat
humans.
2. God gave proper instruction for
slaughtering an animal or fowl so as to not to
eat any blood (Leviticus 17:13,14).
3. God's prohibition against eating blood also
applies to Christians (Acts 15:20).
4. That which is eaten goes through the
digestion into the stomach (Matthew
15:17). Blood transfusion go directly to
the veins and thence to the cells.
5. If we love our neighbours as ourselves, can
we watch him die for lack of life-giving blood
? (Matthew 22:39).
6. Jesus came to save men's lives (Luke 9:56);
why shouldn't we?
7. Since the life is in the blood (Deut.
12:23), Christ condoned the giving of blood to
save a life (John 15:13).
"And
so all Israel shall be saved: as it is
written, There shall come out of Sion (Zion)
the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness
from Jacob."
(Rom.11:26).
The context of this chapter makes it very
plain that Paul was not talking about Israel
after the flesh. Who is Israel who will
be saved? Paul had just finished
spelling it out in verses 16-25. he
described how the Gentiles would be grafted
into the olive tree representing the Jewish
people. As the Gentiles (represented by
the wild olive tree) were grafted in, they
began to partake of "the root and
fatness" of the Israelites (verse
17). "The natural branches, "
or Jews (verse 21), were cut off because of
unbelief, and believing Gentiles were accepted
as spiritual Israel.
In Galatians 3:29 Paul said, "And if ye
be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and
heirs according to the promise."
The picture grows clearer still as we read
Romans 9:6-8. "For they are not all
Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because
they are the seed of Abraham, are they all
children:....That is, They which are the
children of the flesh, these are not the
children of God: but the children of the
promise are counted for the seed."
So it is faith that makes one a spiritual
Israelite, not the accident of physical
birth. In the new birth that places Jew
and Gentile into the spiritual family of God,
all of whom will be saved.
"If
any man see his brother sin a sin which is not
unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give
him life for them that sin not unto
death. There is a sin unto death: I do
not say that he shall pray for it."
(1.John 5:16).
It is very important to understand the context
of this verse. In the two preceding
verses, John has talked about the assurance
that believers prayers will be heard and
answered. Then in verse 16 he applies
that promise to the specific case of prayer in
another's behalf. In doing so, he
discusses two classes of sin-one in which
there is hope for the sinner, and another in
which there is no hope.
In the first case, prayer could lead to the
sinner's recovery and redemption, but the
second situation held no guarantee that prayer
would bring salvation. It seems quiet
apparent that the sin "unto death"
is referring to the unpardonable sin.
Those who are recognized as rejecters of the
Spirit and are hardened by continual
transgression would not be open to further
conviction of their sin. In such a
situation, the positive assurances of verse 14
and 15 could not be applied.
For all other cases, expecting the
unpardonable sin, God will give life to the
one who is being prayed for-contingent, of
course, upon that person's repentance and
acceptance of Christ.
"Now
we know that God heareth not sinners: but if
any man be a worshipper, and doeth His will,
him He heareth."
If God hears no sinner's prayer, then how
can one be saved? It is true that sin
separates a soul from God. "If I
regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not
hear me." Psalms 66:18 But here is
one prayer of the sinner that God will always
hear" And the publican....smote upon his
breast, saying, God be merciful to me a
sinner." Luke 18:13.
The publican obviously was not trying to hold
or "regard" sin in his heart.
He wanted deliverance from it. He was
earnestly and humbly seeking
forgiveness. Such sinners will always be
heard and forgiven. Not only was the
publican's prayer answered, Jesus said:
"This man went down to his house
justified." Luke 18:14. He was
fully accepted, forgiven, and placed in the
family of God.
"Else
what shall they do which are baptized or the
dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why
are they then baptized for the dead?"
This is perhaps one of the most puzzling
thing that Paul wrote in his epistles.
One explanation that fits in perfectly with
Paul's line of reasoning revolves around the
meaning of the word "for". The
Greek word is "huper", and the
general translation is "in behalf
of". But there are exceptions to
this meaning. Sometimes the word is used
in the sense of "considering" or
"in view of".
For example, 2.Thessalonians 1:4 says: :So
that we ourselves glory in you in the churches
of God for your patience and faith in all your
persecutions." Here Paul is
saying, We glory in you considering (or in
view of) your patience and faith. In
Romans 15:9 - which reads: "And that the
Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy"
- it can be translated "considering His
mercy".
Please notice now that this same word "huper",
which is translated "for", is used
both ways in 1.Corinthians 15:29:
"Else what shall they do which are
baptized for (considering) the dead, if the
dead rise not at all? Why are they then
baptized for (in view of) the dead?"
If we substitute this other meaning of the
word "for", the text makes perfect
sense. Paul's whole theme in the chapter
is the resurrection-it's importance and
necessity. He is saying, Why even be
baptized if there is no resurrection from the
dead? The very meaning of baptism would
be nullified. With no resurrection, the
entire symbolism of baptism-death, burial, and
the resurrection-would be reduced to an empty
ritual.
Romans 14:5: Paul
writes: "One man considers one day more
than another; another man considers every day
alike. Each one should be fully convinced in
his own mind." Some people interpret
this passage as allowing Christians to either
recognize or ignore the Sabbath, - or perhaps
to select any day as the Sabbath. But others
suggest from a reading of the subsequent
verses that Paul is discussing fasting here,
not religious observance. They would suggest
that verse 1 of this chapter indicates that
the passage relates to "disputable"
matters (such as when or if to fast); the day
of the Sabbath was not a disputable matter; it
was a commandment from God. The phrase "considering
every day alike" might means that every
day from Sunday to Friday were treated the
same, as in the passage describing the
collection of manna in Exodus 16:4
Hebrews 9:8:
"The Holy Ghost [Spirit] this signifying,
that the way into the holiest of all was not
yet made manifest, while the first tabernacle
was yet standing." This
would indicate that the antitypical Sanctuary
Temple in heaven could not begin operating
Christ's priesthood as long as the one on
earth still "stood". And we know that
the Temple at Jerusalem "stood" until 70 A.D.,
which was about thirty-nine years after the
death of our Lord.
But the original language of this passage
clarifies the difficulty. "While the
first tabernacle having standing" is what it
says in the Greek. It wasn't the
existence of the earthly structure that
mattered as far as GOD was concerned, it was
its position or use. As long as the
earthly Sanctuary retained its standing or
divinely appointed status in the view of
heaven, it continued to serve its intended
role.
The first covenant was made faulty through
their disobedience [Hebrews 8:7,9], but the
second or new covenant can empower us to obey
[vv.10-13]. Which started to operate
after 31 A.D. There is JESUS able to
save us to the uttermost that come unto GOD by
Him, seeing He ever lives to intercede as our
new testament great high Priest [7:25].
"Lo, Michael, one of the
chief Princes, came to help me;........and
there is none that holds with me in these
things, but Michael your prince.[Dan.10:13,21].
For some, it is almost impossible to believe
that this could refer to our Lord JESUS
CHRIST! Michael means, One like GOD! He
has many, many names and just as Satan is the
prince of evil, so JESUS is the prince of
life. In Daniel He is also called "Messiah"
the prince [9:25].
While Satan always wants to exalt himself,
CHRIST is the opposite, He accepts the
lowliest names and positions. in Daniel
11:22 JESUS is also called the prince of the
covenant. In John 12:31 Satan is called
the prince of this world.
In Revelation 1:5 it says: "And
from JESUS CHRIST, who is the faithful
witness, the first begotten of the dead, and
the prince of the kings of the earth.
Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from our
sins in His own blood." While he
humbles Himself into the dust and took our
place, He elevates us to Kings and Priests
[v.6; 5:10; 1.Peter 2:9].
"For unto us a child is born, unto us a son
is given: and the government shall be upon His
shoulder; and His name shall be called
Wonderful, Councilor, The mighty GOD, the
everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace."
[Isa.9:6].
Hell, is it a literal
place?
The word can be translated "Hades", meaning
just the grave! GOD in His second of the 10
Commandments forbids us to make any image or
imagination of anything that is under the
earth, and this includes hell or hades, the
grave. Gohenna is another term used for this
unquenchable fire. It refers to a
rubbish dump [tip] outside Jerusalem where the
purifying fires were kept going day and night.
The fires of hell originate from heaven and
not in some spot below the earth [Rev.20:9]
The wicked shall be totally consumed and not
burn forever [Prov. 10:25; Ps.
37:10,11,20,34,38]. They shall be
consumed to ashes [Mal. 4:1-3]. This
false teaching of eternal hellfire and life
after death, was introduced into Christianity
by the Roman Catholic Church which removed the
second of the Ten Commandments.
Some Clergymen and Pastors told me, that if
they told their people the Bible truth that
there is no hell, half of their congregation
would not come to church anymore. How
sad that fear rather than love is the
motivation!
What about the text which
declare that the wicked burn forever?
We use to have a Muffler company for our cars
exhaust systems that offered an everlasting
guarantee on the product. But when you
took it back for a claim, the salesman would
say, well, the life of the muffler is ended
and so is the lifelong guarantee.
In the Old Testament a slave
was to serve his master forever [Ex.21:6]
Hannah brought her son Samuel to the temple
forever [1.Sam.1:22]. In both instances
the time period was as long as they lived.
Jonah even uses this expression "forever" to
describe his experience in the belly of the
whale [Jon.2:6]. Forever was a limited,
not an unending time in the Bible. It
will be the punishment of the wicked, that it
everlasting, by being consumed [Matth. 25:46]
Burned to ashes, gone forever!
In Jude 7, it says that Sodom and Gomorrah
were burned with an eternal fire. They
are not burning today. The effects are
eternal
The fires which cannot be
quenched, are those which no human hand can
put out!
Satan's original lie: "Thou shalt not surely
die" [Genesis 3:4] is being repeated and
promoted in pulpits today. Question:
"Would you punish your children for eternity
for doing you wrong"? How dare we then
ascribe such a monstrous doctrine of eternal
hellfire to our GOD who loves us so much that
He gave His only begotten Son to die for us,
and rather had His Son tortured in our
stead, than has this done to us.
Acts 10
However, each time the sheet
came down and Peter was asked to kill and eat
the unclean animals, he responded, "Not so,
Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is
common or unclean." Acts 10:14. Notice that
even after three and a half years of listening
to Jesus' teaching, Peter had not received the
slightest hint or impression that eating
unclean food was permissible. It is also
interesting to note that in his vision, Peter
never took anything to eat from the sheet.
Peter's vision of the sheet was never intended
to sanctify the eating of unclean animals.
Peter himself explains the meaning of the
vision in verse 28: "God hath showed me that I
should not call any man common or unclean."
Again in verse 34, Peter summarized the point
of the vision when he said, "Of a truth I
perceive that God is no respecter of persons."
God's message to Peter had to do with
cleansing people, not animals. This vision was
given to impress the Jewish disciples that
they should not call the Gentiles unclean, and
that the gospel was to be freely proclaimed to
all peoples of the world.
Does Prayer Purify Food?
The warning in 1 Timothy 4:1-5 against a
latter-day apostasy involves a number of
heresies--following devils, forbidding to
marry, and commanding to abstain from certain
foods. Perhaps the greatest misunderstanding
has arisen over verse 4, where it is stated
that "every creature of God is good." This
verse means that every created thing has been
made for a purpose. But some suppose it means
that every animal is fit to be eaten if it is
earnestly prayed over and blessed by the
prayer of thanksgiving. This would mean that
praying over a buzzard, cockroach, mole, or
bat would make it good for food. Such an
interpretation would be absurd and dangerous.
"Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for
whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also
reap." Galatians 6:7.
To prevent us from drawing any wrong
conclusions, Paul hastened to add: "For it is
sanctified by the word of God and prayer."
Verse 5. So the Word of God must first approve
it, and then the prayer of thanksgiving will
sanctify it to be eaten.
It is helpful to note that the word "meats" in
the original language is not limited to flesh
foods. The Greek word "broma" simply means
"food." We can know that Paul's discussion
does not involve biblically unclean animals,
because the meats that some had forbidden were
foods "which God hath created to be received
with thanksgiving of them which believe and
know the truth." Verse 3.
It is easy to find in the Scriptures a
description of the food God created to be
received with thanksgiving (Genesis 1:29;
3:18; Leviticus 11:1-22). This passage was
written to those who "believe and know the
truth." God's Word is the truth. Only those
who "believe and know" His Word will be led to
those things that are "sanctified" and created
to "be received with thanksgiving." Those who
"sanctify themselves" while continuing to eat
unclean meats will be destroyed at Christ's
second coming (Isaiah 66:15-17).
Angels are also called Saints
"To the end he may stablish your
hearts unblameable in holiness before GOD,
even our father, at the coming of our Lord
JESUS CHRIST with all his saints."---
1Thess.3:13
Does this text teach that all the righteous
dead will return with CHRIST at the end of the
world? Who are the these 'saints" who
will attend our Lord at His [advent] coming?
By allowing the Bible to explain itself, every
question is answered. JESUS described
those who would come with Him in these words:
"When the Son of man shall come in His
glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then
shall He sit upon the throne of His glory."----Matthew
25:31
Pleas notice that JESUS said "all the holy angels with Him"
instead of "with all His saints," as Paul
described it in his verse. Is there a
contradiction? No. There is
perfect harmony when we put all the texts
together. Angels are actually called
"saints" in the Bible. Moses described
the giving of GOD'S law on Mt. Sinai in
Deuteronomy 33:2 : "The Lord came
from Sinai, and rose up from Seir unto them;
He shined forth from Mt. Paran, and He came
with ten thousands of saints: from His right
hand went a fiery law for them."
Now compare these verses with Psalms 68:17
: "The chariots of GOD are twenty thousand,
even thousands of angels: the Lord is
among them, as in Sinai, in the holy place."
Here the thousands who attended GOD at Sinai
are identified as angels, although they are
called "saints" in Deuteronomy. In the
same way, the saints who come with JESUS in 1
Thess.3:13 are identified as angels by the
Master Himself in Matthew 25:31.
"For if we believe that JESUS died
and rose again, even so them also which sleep
in JESUS will GOD bring with Him."---1.Thess.
4:14
The first reading of this verse seems to teach
that the righteous dead "which sleep in JESUS"
will come with CHRIST when He returns to this
earth. But the next three verses make it clear
that this could not be the case.
Why? Because the "dead in CHRIST" are
raised from their graves when "the Lord
Himself shall descend from heaven."
Verse 16. So it would be impossible for
them to come with CHRIST when He comes to
resurrect them.
The true meaning of the verse is revealed when we read
1 Cor. 15:20,23: "But now is CHRIST
risen from the dead, and become the
firstfruits of them that slept." "But
every man in his own order: CHRIST the
firstfruits: afterward they that are CHRIST'S
at His coming." Paul stated that
JESUS was raised first as a guarantee that the
righteous dead would be raised "at His
coming". JESUS said, Because I live, ye
shall live also."---John 14:19. His
resurrection makes it possible for GOD to
raise us as He did CHRIST.
And this is exactly what Paul says in
1Thess.4:14 "For if we believe that JESUS
died and rose again, even so them also which
sleep in JESUS will GOD bring [from the dead]
with Him [JESUS]." The words "with Him"
do not mean that the resurrected ones will be
brought from heaven with Him at His coming,
but that GOD will "bring" up those who will be
sleeping in their graves just as He brought
JESUS forth from the grave. In Hebrews
13:20, we read that GOD......brought again
from the dead our Lord JESUS." The text
in 1Thess.4:14 says that GOD "will bring"
those who "sleep in JESUS" - an obvious
reference to the resurrection.
Paul is simply declaring that because GOD
brought JESUS from the grave, we have a
guarantee that He will bring sleeping saints
forth in the same way at the time of His
coming.
We are
not to question God's word, but for Christians
to try to understand it.
"The secret things belong unto the Lord our
God, but those things that are
revealed belong to us and our children."
If our God was easily understood by humans, He
could well be an invention of
humans, like the "gods" of Greece and Rome.
But He is often a mystery which
man cannot entirely comprehend. Still, it
pleases Him when we try in faith
to understand all that He has revealed to us.
Because we are faulty and human, we are
sometimes mistaken. We take one
verse, and fail to notice another that would
clarify the first. We may
think we are "defending" God when we battle a
brother who understands a
little differently. But God give us not only
wisdom to understand His
word, but also the love to realize that our
brother who may not understand
as we do may be God's own dear child, just as
we are. And who knows--even
the best of us may be wrong sometimes too!
The immortality of the Soul!
Only GOD has immortality
[1.Timothy 6:15,16]. Often as a young
man I attended funeral services and burials
where I heard the officiating Minister assure
people that the soul has left the body and was
now in heaven looking down. Many
Protestants have inherited this from Roman
Catholicism.
In Matthew 10:27,28 JESUS gave
this warning: "What I tell you in
darkness, that speak ye in light; and what ye
hear in the ear, that preach ye on the
housetops. And fear not them which kill
the body, but are not able to kill the soul;
But rather fear Him which is able to destroy
both soul and body in hell."
This Scripture declares the
soul can be destroyed. This agrees with
Isa. 53:12 which reads: "Therefore will I
divide him a portion with the great and he
shall divide the spoil with the strong;
because he has poured out His soul unto death:
and He was numbered with the transgressors."
The soul that sinneth, it shall
die [Ezekiel 18:4] Immortality is given
only at the last trump [1.Corinthians
15:53,54]. God made us a living soul, He
did not give us one. [Genesis 2:7].
The Administration of death
St. Paul wrote:”
But if the ministration of death, written
and engraven in stones [the 10
Commandments], was
glorious.........................”
[2.Cor.3:7 first part].
From here some
modern teachers conclude that obeying the
Ten Commandments is administering death. It
sounds foolish, doesn’t it. Yet it is Paul’s
way of teaching us that spiritual things are
spiritually discerned and sin becomes more
sinful to us.
In Romans chapter
seven Paul already explained: “Was then
that which is good made death unto me? GOD
FORBID. But sin, that it might appear sin,
working death in me by that which is good;
that sin by the commandment [thou shalt not
covet, see v.7] might become exceeding
sinful.”---Romans 7:13
We can see that
Paul speaks of our carnal sinful nature we
all have inherited and needs to die daily
[Gal.2:20]. Our carnal nature is at enmity
against GOD’S Holy Law [Rom.8:7] Paul
follows up: “For we [born again
Christians] know that the law is spiritual:
but I am carnal, sold under sin.”
---Romans 7:14 This struggle the apostle
brings out in Galatians 5: 17 “For the
flesh lusts against the spirit, and the
Spirit against the flesh; and these are
contrary the one to the other: so that you
cannot do the things that you would.”
GOD FORBID’S
teachers to draw false conclusions from
Paul’s writings: see Romans 3:31; 6:2,15 ;
7:13 Gal.2:17 “Do we then make void
the law through faith? GOD forbid: ye, we
establish the law.” “What shall we say
then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace
may abound? GOD forbid. How shall we, that
are dead to sin, live any longer therein?
Know ye not, that so many of us as were
baptized into JESUS CHRIST were baptized
into His death? Therefore we are buried
with Him by baptism into death: that like
CHRIST was raised up from the dead by the
glory of the Father, even so we also should
walk in newness of life.” [Rom.6:1-4]
"What then?
Shall we sin, because we are not under the
law [it’s condemnation] but under
grace? GOD forbid.” [Rom.6:15].
“Wherefore the law is holy, and the
commandment holy, and just, and good. Was
then that which is good made death unto me?
GOD forbid. But sin that it may appear sin [ful],
working death in me by that which is good:
that sin by the commandment become exceeding
sinful.” [Rom. 7:12-13].
“
But
if, while we seek to be justified by CHRIST,
we ourselves are found sinners, is therefore
CHRIST the Minister of sin? GOD forbid.”
[Gal.2:17]. That glorious law 2.Cor.3:7 is
still called that by James 2:10-12. Only
when Christians refuse obedience to one of
them, is when the light of the Gospel grows
dim to them and they start to teach
otherwise, but GOD FORBIDS
A Interpretation of Acts
chapter10:
Raise, Kill and Eat.
Acts 10 v.11-16 is often taken out of
context - a pretext which is an excuse
especially a false one .The correct
interpretation re the 4 footed animals of
the earth is, they are not literal animals
but are nations, especially in Daniel 7
animals represent nations. Therefore food is
not the issue here but the purpose of the
vision was to preach the gospel to all the
world especially the gentiles. God was
telling Peter to go and convert all the
nations of the world - not only the Jews.
Matthew 24 v 14.
TO RISE
God's commandment to Peter. meaning to
prepare - just as relevant today - to make
oneself available to teach the gospels -
motivating people for evangelism.
TO KILL - means to kill the
old man in order to give new life. In
evangelism preachers must teach converts to
put away the old self so as the new man can
rise to the teachings of Jesus and the
bible. Grenade Analogy - the pastor referred
to the Grenade Analogy on Evangelism that is
--- to change the mind of a convert, the
heart needs to be changed as well --- Take
dead set aim at the heart.
TO EAT means to enjoy the
fruits of one's labour especially if you
grow your own food. Introducing people to
Christ through evangelism means you walk in
their footsteps --- understanding,
forgiving, praying, instructing, loving,
befriending them , etc. Peter, Paul and
Timothy in the early days of the Church were
hunters of souls - especially the gentiles
of the world at that time - as was depicted
in God's vision to Peter. An evangelist
enjoys the fruits of his labour by seeing
people accept Christ as their Saviour and
Lord. . .
soon
as we find the time, we will add many more,
such as, baptism,
Anti-Christ, heaven and hell, Predestination,
re-incarnation, Salvation of Infants, Soul,
spiritualism, Wine, traditions etc. etc. etc..........
|
