Published on

Image description

Every Knee shall Bow and every Tongue Confess




 

by George Sidney Hurd

 

Paul said in Philippians 2:10-11, “that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”

 

How are we to understand this declaration? It clearly refers to every rational creature, whether in heaven, on earth and even under the earth in Hades. Will this be a voluntary act of worship, or a forced confession? Will it result in salvation, or will it be followed by eternal damnation for all except for the few who heard the gospel and confessed Him as Lord during their brief lifetime?

 

The majority position of the Church during the past 1,500 years has been that only those who hear the gospel and bow the knee to Him in this lifetime will be saved, while the rest of mankind will find themselves obligated to bow before Him, only to afterwards be cast away from His presence forever. But is this what the Scriptures actually teach? How did the Early Church Fathers who spoke New Testament Greek understand this declaration? While very few of the writings of the Fathers still in existence make reference to this passage, they make a couple of allusions to it which are quite revealing.

 

Gregory of Nyssa (330 to 394 AD), commenting on 1Corinthians 15:28 where Paul declares that God will be all in all when all have finally become subject to Christ, says:

 

''For it is evident that God will, in truth, be 'in all' then when there shall be no evil seen in existence…when every created being is at harmony with itself and every tongue shall confess that Jesus Christ is Lord; when every creature shall have been made one body then shall the body of Christ be subject to the Father.  Now the body of Christ, as I have often said, is the whole of humanity." [1]

 

Here we see that Gregory of Nyssa understood that when every tongue has confessed that Jesus Christ is Lord, all will then be subject to the Father and God will at that time truly be “all in all.” Ambrose of Milan (340 to 397 AD), also commenting on 1Corinthians 15:28 says essentially the same thing:

 

“When every creature learns that Christ is its head, and that Christ’s head is God the Father, then God is all in all; that is to say, that every creature should believe alike, that with one voice every tongue of things in Heaven and earth and under the earth, should confess that there is one God from Whom are all things.”  [2]

 

Both Fathers believed that for God to truly become all in all, it will require that the whole of humanity and even every created being in heaven, on earth and under the earth, come into subjection to God and that this subjection will be the result of every created being confessing Jesus Christ as Lord. It is logically impossible for God to be all in all if in fact the majority are eternally separated from Him.

 

Also, in addition to their belief that God could not truly be all in all unless the confession of all results in the salvation and reconciliation of all, I believe that they were also aware of a couple of other considerations which militate against this being a forced confession. The first has to do with the prevalent meaning of the word “confess” (ἐξομολογέω, exomologéo), and the second would be the context of the passage in Isaiah 45 which Paul quoted in Philippians 2:11, as well as several other passages of Scripture which declare that all will be saved.

 

1) The meaning of the word “confess”

 

The actual meaning of the word rendered “confess” in Philippians 2:11 is central to understanding the nature of their confession. In our culture a confession is often thought of as simply an admission of guilt. However, in Hellenistic Jewish worship this Greek word for “confess” is ἐξομολογέω which is the strengthened form of ὁμολογέω meaning, “to confess or say the same thing.” The word acquired the meaning of a heartfelt liturgical confession of sins followed by praises to God for His mercy which endures forever. [3] This can be seen in the LXX Greek translation which was what Paul used. Here are a few of examples:

 

 "When your people, the Israelites, sin against you, their enemies will defeat them. But if they come back to you and praise (ἐξομολογέω) you and pray to you in this Temple, 34 then hear them in heaven. Forgive the sins of your people Israel, and bring them back to the land you gave to their ancestors.” (1 Kings 8:33-34 NCV)

 

The NET Bible renders ἐξομολογέω in this verse as renew their allegiance,” which is a definition complementary to what we see in Isaiah 45:23, "every tongue will swear allegiance." The underlying idea seems to be a heartfelt confession of sin, praising the Lord for His mercy and grace. Spiritual songs use ἐξομολογέω as an expression of praise to God for His mercy:

 

“the voice of joy and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, the voice of those who will say: "Praise (ἐξομολογέω) the Lord of hosts, for the Lord is good, for His mercy endures forever" (Jer 33:11)

 

Praise (ἐξομολογέω) the LORD with the harp; Make melody to Him with an instrument of ten strings.” (Psa 33:2) 

 

This combined meaning of confession and praise or thanksgiving is carried over into the New Testament where at times we see believers making a heartfelt confession of their sins (Acts 19:18; Matt 3:5-7), and we also see Jesus using it to express praise to the Father:

 

“At that very time He rejoiced greatly in the Holy Spirit, and said, ‘I praise (ἐξομολογέω)You, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight.’” (Luke 10:21 NASU)

 

Considering this two-fold meaning of confession of sins and praise to God for His mercy, it is easy to see why the Early Fathers saw this confession as resulting in the salvation and restoration of all.

 

2) The context of the parallel Isaiah 45 passage requires that the confession

     result in salvation.

 

A careful consideration of the context of Isaiah 45:23 which Paul cited in Philippians 2:11 makes it clear that he meant to convey the truth that someday all will have bowed to Christ, confessing Him as Lord. The Lord said through Isaiah:

 

Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is no other. 23 I have sworn by Myself, the word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness and will not turn back, that to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance. 24 ‘They will say of Me, 'Only in the Lord are righteousness and strength.' Men will come to Him, and all who were angry at Him will be put to shame.” (Isa 45:22-24 NASU)

 

Here we see that salvation is inseparably linked to all bowing the knee and every tongue swearing allegiance to God, and God has sworn by Himself that no one will remain in an unsaved state forever. His enemies will be ashamed, bowing the knee, saying: “Only in the Lord are righteousness and strength.” This is a confession unto salvation, and surely the Early Fathers understood it as such, especially considering that the meaning of ἐξομολογέω entails a heartfelt allegiance.

 

3) Multiple Old Testament passages require that the confession result in salvation

 

Finally, the Early Fathers would have known very well that the final salvation of all is a theme that runs all the way through Scripture. As Peter said, the restoration of all was prophesied since the foundation of the world (Acts 3:21). These are just a few of the many passages that the Early Fathers would have been aware of:

 

All the ends of the world shall remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations shall worship before You.” (Ps 22:27)

 

“Say to God, ‘how awesome are Your works! Through the greatness of Your power your enemies shall submit themselves to You. 4 All the earth shall worship You and sing praises to You; they shall sing praises to Your name.” (Ps 66:3-4) [4]

 

All nations whom You have made shall come and worship before You, O Lord, and shall glorify Your name.” (Ps 86:9)

 

“Jehovah is gracious, and merciful; slow to anger, and of great loving-kindness. 9 Jehovah is good to all; and his tender mercies are over all his works. 10 All thy works shall give thanks unto thee, O Jehovah; and thy saints shall bless thee.” (Ps 145:8-10 ASV)

 

“And in this mountain the Lord of hosts will make for all people, a feast of choice pieces, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of well-refined wines on the lees. 7 And He will destroy on this mountain, the surface of the covering cast over all people, and the veil that is spread over all nations. 8 He will swallow up death forever, and the Lord God will wipe away tears from all faces…” (Isa 25:6-8)

 

“No more shall every man teach his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' for they all shall know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them, says the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more.” (Jer 31:34)

 

All the ends of the world will remember and turn to the Lord. All His enemies will submit themselves to Him and sing praises to Him. All nations which He has made, which includes everyone, will worship before Him and glorify His name, and all His works shall give thanks to Him. When the Lord removes the veil spread over all the nations, He will swallow up death forever, wiping away tears from all faces. Everyone will know Him, from the least to the greatest and He will forgive all iniquity forevermore.

 

To me, it couldn’t be any clearer. Taking into account such an abundance of scriptural testimony, it is no wonder that the majority of the Church Fathers believed in the final restoration of all during the first five centuries prior to Augustine of Hippo.

 

“For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen.”

(Rom 11:36)

 

 


[1] Gregory of Nyssa, Orat. in 1 Cor. xv. 28, vol. i. p. 844

 

[2] Allin, Universalism Asserted, p. 133.

 

[3] Kittel’s Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. NT:1843

 

[4] The word for “submit” in this verse normally refers to a feigned submission. However, there are no words in Hebrew which express true, voluntary submission. Here it is the context itself which determines its meaning as true submission and adoration in spite of its normal meaning, since feigned submission would never result in His enemies worshipping and praising Him.

 

Published on
00:00
00:00

4Is the receiving of Romans 5 17 Active or Passive?

Image description
 
by George Sidney Hurd
 
“But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man's offense (the) many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to (the) many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man's offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. 18 Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.” (Rom 5:15-18)
 
In the context of Romans 5, is the receiving active or passive? Does the clause “those who receive” refer to those who actively take or receive life and dominion restored now, or does it refer to all those who are the recipients of the life and dominion restored through Jesus Christ, the Last Adam? Many, seeing that the participle “receive” (λαμβάνων, lambanōn) is in the active form, automatically assume that it can only be understood in the active sense in which the individual does, rather than receives, the action.  
 
However, what many overlook is that, although active in form, out of the 258 times the Greek verb λαμβάνω (lambanō) and its cognates occur in the New Testament in the active form, roughly 40 to 60 times (about 15–25% of total occurrences) it leans toward the passive/receptive sense in which the subject is the recipient of that which is given, rather than the one actively receiving or taking it. The actual passive form of lambanō is rare, only appearing a couple of times and is never rendered “receive” but “to be received or taken”: (1Tim 4:4, “to be received”; Heb 5:1, “to be taken”). The verb lambanō prefers the active voice even in passive/receptive contexts. The context alone must determine whether the one who receives actively receives or whether he is the recipient of the action. In many instances it is clear that the subject actively does the receiving. Here are a couple of the many examples:
 
“But as many as received Him (ἔλαβον, active), to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name.” (John 1:12)
 
“Jesus took (λαβὼν, active) bread, and after blessing it broke it..." (Luke 22:19)
 
In these examples it is clear that the subject is doing the action. In the first example we see that the subject actively receives Christ, believing in His name, as illustrated above. Often the active sense is best rendered “take” rather than “receive,” as with Jesus taking the bread, emphasizing the subject’s active role. However, in about 15–25% of the occurrences we see that the subject is the passive recipient of that which is given:
 
“From the Jews five times I received (ἔλαβον, active form) forty stripes minus one.” (2 Cor 11:24)
  • Here the action is done to Paul, not by him, as illustrated above.
 
having received authority (λαβών, active form) from the chief priests.(Acts 26:10)
  • Here the emphasis is on the authority that was given to Paul, not taken by him.
 
"everyone who asks receives (λαμβάνει, active form)” (Matt 7:8) 
  • Here the asking is active, but the receiving is passive.
 
These are just a few of the many examples where the active form of lambanō is used in a passive/receptive sense. The subject is receiving that which is given, rather than actively doing the receiving or taking it. Many are seen to passively receive that which they would never want, such as Paul five times receiving forty lashes minus one, or when the unrepentant receive a just reward for their disobedience (Heb 2:2), or a greater judgment (Luke 20:47). In other instances, the recipient receives that which he was not even anticipating. For example, everyone in the house of Cornelius was surprised when the Gentiles suddenly received the Holy Spirit (Acts 10:47). In these examples it is obvious that the recipient is passive.
 
Therefore, considering the fact that the active form is often used in a passive/receptive sense, the context must be the final determining factor. Taken alone, “those who receive” in Romans 5:17 could possibly be understood as an active receiving in which the subject must actively receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness in order to reign in life through Christ. Certainly, it is true that one does not experientially receive justification, new life and dominion restored apart from appropriating it by faith (John 3:18; 5:24; Rev 22:3-5).
 
However, the context must determine whether it is used in the active or the passive sense, taking into account the surrounding verses. The highly esteemed Greek scholar Marvin Vincent correctly applies the passive meaning to Romans 5:17. He says: “They which receive (hoi lambanōntes). Not ‘believingly accept,’ but simply ‘the recipients.”  [3] Although he does not go into further detail, his rendering of lambanō in the passive sense is necessitated by the context. The contrast throughout from verse 12 to 19 is between that which all men receive in Adam as opposed to what all men receive in Christ - the Last Adam. As all men born to Adam passively receive death, condemnation and loss of dominion through the one man’s disobedience, even so all receive life, justification and dominion restored, through the One man, Jesus Christ.
 
The Arminians, who deny total depravity, argue that the receiving in verse 17 involves only those who actively receive Christ, believing in His name, resulting in justification and new life in Him. Calvinists, on the other hand, often understand it in the passive/receptive sense, rightly pointing out that before we were saved we were dead in our trespasses and sins, and therefore unable to come to Christ without divine intervention, being effectually drawn to Christ. As Jesus said:
 
No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws (ἕλκω, helkō) him; and I will raise him up at the last day. (John 6:44).


Being dead in our trespasses and sins, it is not merely a matter of indisposition to come to Christ without being effectually drawn, but of inability. I further demonstrate man’s inability to independently come to Christ in my blog, Total Depravity and Universal Reconciliation. However, what both Calvinists and Arminians fail to see is that, in time, Jesus will have effectually drawn all unto Himself. Jesus said:
 
“And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw (ἕλκω, helkō) everyone to myself.” (John 12:32 NHEB)
 
What both Arminians and Calvinists fail to see is that Jesus will effectually draw (helkō/helkuō) [1]
everyone unto Himself, resulting in all coming into subjection to Christ, being reunited in Him in the final dispensation of the fullness of the times when God will become all in all entering into eternity (Eph 1:10; 1Cor 15:28). Arminians understand Romans 5:17 as saying that only those who independently and actively receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness now will ever experience new life and dominion restored through Christ, the Last Adam. The Calvinists on the other hand recognize that being dead in our trespasses and sins, we must first passively receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness before we can choose to reign in life. They recognize that the unregenerate, being spiritually dead, must be granted faith through God’s grace alone, believing through grace (Acts 18:27). However, what both camps fail to see is that all who die in Adam will be made alive in Christ, the Last Adam (Rom 5:15,18; 1Cor 15:22); all who have sinned and been condemned in Adam will finally be justified in Christ (Rom 5:16,18; Rom 3:23-24); all who forfeited divinely delegated dominion in Adam will be restored, reigning in life through Christ (Gen 1:26-28 c.f. Gen 3; Psa 8:4-6; John 12:31; Rom 5:17-18; Rev 11:15, c.f. 22:5). Our restoration to dominion in Christ, the Last Adam, will be much greater than that which was originally given to Adam. Adam was given dominion over the earth and he forfeited it to Satan, the ruler of this world, but in Christ we will not only reign in life over planet earth, but over all of God’s creation (Heb 2:5-9). While the Arminians limit Christ’s reversal of Adam’s fall to those who actively receive Christ in this age, the Calvinists limit those who passively receive grace and the gift of righteousness with new life and dominion restored exclusively to the elect of this age.
 
However, the context of Romans 5:12-19 does not allow for those who receive abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness with new life in Christ and dominion restored to be limited exclusively to those who believe in this life, or to the elect first-fruits of this age. In the very next verse Paul makes it abundantly clear that all mankind are the recipients of the free gift of grace, resulting in justification and life for all, not just a few. In verse 18 he sums up what he has been saying throughout the entire passage:
 
Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.” (Rom 5:18)
 
Paul here sums up by saying that, even as Adam’s one act of disobedience resulted in judgment for all mankind, so also the one act of righteousness of one Man, Christ, resulted in justification and life for the same entirety of mankind. The “as” “even so” parallel requires that the “all men” in the first group be the same “all men” included in the second group, otherwise, the equivalent comparison breaks down. To quote Marvin Vincent: “The effect of the second Adam cannot fall behind that of the first.” [2]
 
However, that being said, even as not every man experientially entered into Adam’s death, condemnation and bondage to sin at the moment Adam sinned, in like manner, not everyone experientially received life, justification or dominion restored at the moment when Christ - the Last Adam, died and rose from the dead. Even as man must be born into Adam in order to experience the death, condemnation and bondage to sin he brought upon us all, so also must every man be made alive or born again before experientially entering into that justification and dominion which every man became the recipient of when Christ the Last Adam died and rose again on our behalf. Of the Last Adam’s death and resurrection, it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” (1Cor 15:45). And again, as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.” (1Cor 15:22).
 
Therefore, as I understand Romans 5:17 in the greater context, Paul is using lambanō in the passive/recipient sense. In verse 18 the free gift of justification and life is rendered in the past tense as having already come to all mankind, since it points back to that which all passively received when Christ, the Last Adam obtained our justification and life restored, having died for our justification and risen so that in Him all mankind might come to have new life and dominion restored in Him.
 
While it is true that everyone must actively receive Christ by faith and be born again in order to experience justification, new life an dominion restored, all of mankind became the passive recipients of all that Christ, the Last Adam, accomplished for us on the cross from the very moment He made propitiation for the sins of the world, rising victorious over death and Satan, the ruler of this world.  
 
 


[1] The Word “draw” is helkô which expresses something much stronger that a simple attraction. Strong’s Dictionary defines it: “drag (literally or figuratively).” It appears eight times in the New Testament, and in each case it expresses the idea of being effectually drawn by a force greater than the resistance of the one being drawn: 
 
“Simon Peter went up and dragged the net to land, full of large fish, one hundred and fifty-three; and although there were so many, the net was not broken.” (John 21:11)
 
“… they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the marketplace to the authorities.” (Acts 16:19)
 
“…. Do not the rich oppress you and drag you into the courts?” (James 2:6)
 
“Then Simon Peter, having a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear.” (John 18:10)
 
The other occurrence indicates that none of us would come to him if we weren’t irresistibly znc effectually drawn:
 
“No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him….” (John 6:44)
 
Man, separated from God, is so lost that he must be drawn/dragged to Christ. Otherwise, he would/could not come to Him. Our “free-will” is of no use if we can’t even see or comprehend the glorious gospel, and that is the situation in which God finds every individual. They are incapable of going to Him until He, in their day of visitation draws them to Himself, which He will do for every man in due time (1Peter 2:12; 1Tim 2:6 KJV). In His time, He will remove the veil from the eyes of every individual. Until then, they remain blinded and incapable of finding Him:
 
 

[2] Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament, Romans 5:17
 
Published on
00:00
00:00

3Christ bore Mans two-fold Penalty on the Cross

Image description
 
by George Sidney Hurd
 
The following is an excerpt from the book, The Ways of God.
 
The objective of this article is to demonstrate that Christ’s substitutionary death delivered mankind from two penalties: 1) the penalty for Adam’s original sin which is death, and 2) the penalty for personal sins which, for the unrepentant, are weighed and followed by a measured and just condemnatory sentence commensurate with each individual’s sins.
 
The Death Penalty for Sin
 
The sinless Christ not only suffered and died in our stead for our sins, thereby removing from us all legal guilt and the resulting judicial condemnatory sentence (Rom 8:1; see also my blog, Forensic Atonement in Romans), but His death also freed us from the death penalty which came upon all mankind due to Adam’s original sin. Paul said in Romans 6:23, “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” It is common to hear someone emphasize from this verse that committing just one sin results in death. However, what it is actually saying in the context is that the one sin resulting in death was Adam’s original sin, way back in Eden, which brought death upon all humanity.
 
When the noun “sin” appears in its singular form in a context where no particular sin is in view, it is normally referring to Adam’s original sin and the resulting sin nature which all of us inherited from him as his descendants. This is clear from the context of Romans 6:23 where Paul earlier said:
 
“Therefore, just as through one man (the) sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned — 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come.” (Rom 5:12-14)
 
Paul here says that all mankind sinned (past aorist tense) and the death penalty passed to us all in the garden when Adam originally sinned. To prove this, he points out that, although sins were not imputed in the period from Adam to Moses before the Law was given, they nevertheless all died due to Adam’s original sin. When Adam sinned, he, along with all his descendants, were condemned to die both spiritually and physically. I believe that when Paul said, “the wages (plural) of sin – death” in the original, instead of “the wage of sin – death,” it is because he was referring to both spiritual and physical death as being the result of Adam’s sin.
 
Because of this, even if there were one born of Adam’s seed who never sinned during his entire lifetime, he would have still died due to Adam’s original sin. That is why Jesus could not have been conceived of Adam’s seed. He took on human flesh through Mary, but His conception was by the Holy Spirit, thereby exempting Him from the death penalty from Adam’s original sin. As the last sinless Adam, He was unjustly slain, thereby gaining the victory over death for all mankind:
 
“Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, 15 and release those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.” (Heb 2:14-15)
 
Christ, through death, destroyed him who had power over death and rose victorious, thereby freeing mankind from the death penalty. Death lost its sting and its victory over mankind because in Christ all will be made alive. Potentially, the death sentence for Adam’s sin could have doomed mankind for all eternity. I say potentially because from eternity God had a glorious plan for the ages which culminates in all who have died in Adam being made alive in Christ – the Last Adam:
 
“For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom 6:23)
 
“But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man's offense (the) many died, MUCH MORE the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to (the) many. 16 And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man's offense death reigned through the one, MUCH MORE those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ.” (Rom 5:15-17) [1]
 
“The first man Adam became a living being. The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.” (1 Cor 15:45)
 
“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order…” (1Cor 15:22-23)
 
 “Then He who sat on the throne said, ‘Behold, I make all things new.” (Rev 21:5) [2]
 
Through Jesus Christ’s substitutionary death and resurrection, becoming victorious over death, the many who died in Adam (i.e. “all”) will be finally made alive in Christ – the Last Adam, who in His resurrection commenced a new creation in which all will be made new. Once all have become subject to Christ, bowing the knee to Him, then death - the last enemy, will finally be destroyed (1Cor 15:20-28). If even one soul were left in an eternal state of death or separation from God, it would be an unspeakably tragic ending to God’s creation story. But Christ, the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, made reconciliation for all creation, both visible and invisible (Col 1:16,20). When we finally come to the end of the ages, all will have been made alive in Christ - all death or separation will cease to exist, and God will then be all in all (Rev 21:4; 1Cor 15:28).
 
The Just Punishment for our Personal Sins
 
Christ’s substitutionary death not only delivered us from death – the penalty for Original Sin, but He also bore all our personal sins, suffering our due punishment and dying a criminal’s death in our stead, thereby obtaining free justification for all mankind, which is applied to each sinner the moment he believes on Christ as his Savior.
 
“who Himself bore our SINS in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness — by whose stripes you were healed…. For Christ also suffered once for SINS, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit.” (1Peter 2:24; 3:18).
 
“It (righteousness) shall be imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead, 25 who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised because of our justification.” (Rom 4:24-25)
 
“and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses.” (Acts 13:39)
 
The moment we were regenerated by the Holy Spirit, receiving Christ, we were baptized or immersed into Christ by the Holy Spirit (1Cor 12:13). Having been baptized by the Spirit into Christ, His death to sin became our death to sin (Rom 6:3-4). Not only is His resurrection life now ours through our vital union with Him, but His resurrection is also evidence that His suffering and death on our behalf satisfied in full the just penalty due unto us, both for Original Sin and also for all our personal sins. This is what Paul is arguing in Romans 6 when he says: 
 
For he who has died has been freed (“justified”) from sin. 8 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, 9 knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. 10 For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. 11 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom 6:7-11)
 
In a very real, vital, and also judicial sense, we become united with Christ in His death and resurrection. This is not to be understood as merely a positional truth. The Spirit united us with Christ upon believing, making us one spirit with the Lord (1Cor 6:17). His death to sin is now our death to sin. His resurrection is our resurrection unto His own eternal righteous resurrection life. Judicially speaking, becoming united with Him in His death and resurrection obtained our justification. In Romans 6:7, Paul uses the judicial term dikaiáo, which was erroneously translated as “freed” in the King James Version. The practical benefit of being freed from sin is referred to earlier in chapter 6 when he asks: “How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?” (v.2). However, here Paul is speaking of “justification” or “acquittal” from our sins.
 
The Greek Scholar Marvin Vincent comments on the meaning of dikaiáo in the following manner: “Literally, as the English Revised Version (1885): ‘is justified;’ i.e., ‘acquitted, absolved;’ just as the dead person sins no more, being released from sin as from a legal claim. ‘As a man that is dead is acquitted and released from bondage among men, so a man that has died to sin is acquitted from the guilt of sin and released from its bondage’ (Alford).” [3]
 
To me, the denial of Christ’s penal substitutionary atonement is tantamount to a denial of the gospel of the Scriptures. Paul clearly presents Christ’s substitutionary death, burial and resurrection as being the gospel he preached:  “Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you…that Christ died for (huper “on behalf of”) our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.” (1Cor 15:1,3,4). [4]

When Paul said that Christ died for our sins “according to the Scriptures” what Scriptures was he referring to? He was referring to Isaiah 53 and also the Old Testament sacrificial system by which blood sacrifices were made “on behalf of” the sins of the people. The blood of the innocent was shed on behalf of the guilty. As God says in the Scriptures:
 
“For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.” (Lev 17:11)
 
The New Testament reiterates this saying: “without shedding of blood is no remission.” (Heb 9:22). The blood of the innocent was taken into the Holy of holies and sprinkled upon the propitiatorium (gr. hilasterion) or what we commonly know of as the Mercy Seat, which covered the Ark of the Covenant that contained the 10 Commandments, some manna and Aaron’s rod which budded – all three representing Israel’s sin and rebellion. The blood was sprinkled upon the propitiatorium in order to make propitiation for the sins of the people before God.
 
However, it is not possible that the blood of animals should take away sins (Heb 10:4). The Old Testament sacrificial system only foreshadowed the divine Lamb of God who would come and take away the sins of the world once and for all (Jn 1:29). Christ, the sinless Lamb of God entered into the heavenly sanctuary with His own blood, once and for all, propitiating our sins and obtaining eternal redemption for us:
 
“But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. 12 Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.” (Heb 9:11-12)
 

[1] The highly esteemed Greek scholar Marvin Vincent, correctly applies the passive meaning of “receive” (lambano) here in Romans 5:17. He says: “They which receive (hoi lambanontes). Not ‘believingly accept,’ but simply ‘the recipients.”  (Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament, Romans 5:17). Although he does not go into further detail, his rendering of lambano in the passive sense is necessitated by the context. The contrast throughout is between what all men receive in Adam as opposed to what all men  receive in Christ, the Last Adam. As all men passively receive death, condemnation, and bondage to sin through the one man’s disobedience, even so all receive life, justification, and dominion restored, through the one man, Christ.
 

[2] Our English word “things” does not have an equivalent in Greek. Neither does the neuter form in Greek always indicate objects as in English. When the translators insert “things” in contexts that are evidently referring primarily to persons and not inanimate objects I take the liberty to cross it out in order to keep the focus where it belongs.
 

[3] Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament, Romans 6:7
 

[4] The preposition huper – always carries the idea of substitution “on behalf of” in contexts which speak of Christ’s death for us. Mark 14:24; Luke 22:19,20; John 6:51,10:11; 11:50-52; Rom 5:6; 8:32;

Published on
00:00
00:00

5What about the Doctrine of Conditional Immortality?

Image description


by George Sidney Hurd

 

It is my conviction that those who advocate for Conditional Immortality, as well as many Traditionalists, have greatly misunderstood the proper application of the term “immortality” (athanasía) by attributing the term to spirits – something we never see in Scripture. As I argue here, spirits by their very nature are not subject to death (Luke 20:36). While here I do not go into all the grammatical and contextual arguments for my understanding that the one who alone possesses immortality in 1Timothy 6:16 is Christ in His resurrected glorified immortal body and therefore the only one who presently possesses immortality, rather than it having reference to God the Father as the sole possessor of immortality, I believe that this is the understanding which best harmonizes with the overall teaching of Scripture on the subject. I welcome any further input concerning the proper interpretation of this rather difficult passage.

 

 

The following is an excerpt from the book, Extermination or Restoration?

 

“He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16 who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see, to whom be honor and everlasting power. Amen.” (1Tim 6:15,16)

 

Contrary to the claims to deity made by monarchs and emperors of old, I understand Paul to be declaring here that our God in the person of the resurrected and glorified Son is the only Sovereign ruler, the King of kings and Lord of lords, who presently is the sole possessor of immortality (Rev 19:16; Rom 6:9; 1Cor 15:20). With all their military might and divine titles they were all destined to die as mortals. Annihilationists conclude from this verse that immortality is not inherent to our human nature. They either say that we were not created immortal, or else that we lost our immortality at the fall.

 

Immortality has reference to our Physical Body

 

Since conditional immortality is one of the Annihilationist’s main arguments, they often prefer to be known as Conditionalists. However, since I partially agree with them on the subject of conditional physical immortality, I prefer to refer to them as Annihilationists. They argue based upon their interpretation of first Timothy 6:16 that presently only God possesses immortality. The Greek word translated “immortality” (athanasía) is used in only one other instance, in 1Corinthians 15:53,54:

 

“For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality (athanasía). 54 So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality (athanasía), then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: ‘Death is swallowed up in victory.” (1Cor 15:53-54)

 

Here we see that immortality is something we do not presently possess but are waiting to receive in the future. It is in the resurrection that we will receive the immortality that at present only God the Son possesses in His glorified resurrection body. However, the point of contention has to do with what is being referred to when speaking of incorruption or immortality. In the context it is obvious that Paul is referring only to our physical bodies. The question presented earlier by Paul was:

 

“But someone will say, ‘How are the dead raised up? And with what BODY do they come?’ 36 Foolish one, what you sow is not made alive unless it dies.” (1Cor 15:35-37)

 

For Paul, incorruptibility and immortality clearly have reference to our physical bodies and not our soul or our spirit. Paul refers to the body 9 times in these 9 verses, but not once does he mention the soul of man. Annihilationists would argue that man’s nature is an inseparable whole, and that all conscious existence ends or is suspended when we die. However, the New Testament maintains a clear distinction between the conscious individual person and his fleshly body or “tent” (2Peter 1:13-14; Matt 10:28). Neither our soul nor our spirit are called mortal in the Scriptures. Reference is made to our “mortal bodies” (Rom 6:12; 8:11) and our “mortal flesh” (2Cor 4:11), but never to a mortal spirit or soul. Angels are not mortals with physical bodies: they are spirits, and for that reason, immortality does not apply to them, even though they never die but live forever (Luke 20:36).

 

Immortality was offered to Adam and Eve in the garden. If they had eaten of the tree of life, their bodies would have never returned to dust. After partaking of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, they were kept from eating of the tree of life lest the unthinkable should occur---lest they become immortalized in their sinful flesh:

 

“Then the Lord God said, ‘Behold, the man has become like one of Us, to know good and evil. And now, lest he put out his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever —‘  23 therefore the Lord God sent him out of the garden of Eden…” (Gen 3:22,23)

 

God, contemplating the unthinkable outcome if Adam and Eve were to partake of the tree of life, becoming immortalized in his sinful state, didn’t even complete the sentence. If He were to have finished His statement it would have probably been something like: “lest he live forever and become immortalized in his sinful, unredeemed state, hopelessly independent from us, we must keep him and his descendants from the tree of life.”

 

Rightly understood, keeping man from the tree of life was an act of mercy. If we were to partake of the tree of life in our fallen unredeemed state, we would have been perpetualized in that sinful condition, much like the legendary vampires. At creation, God’s eternal plan to prepare for Himself an eternal bride, made in His own image in a dependent, loving relationship, was set in motion. In order to accomplish this end, He allowed man to fall and suffer the penalty of mortality and death, but only in order to redeem him and create him anew in Christ, receiving eternal life and immortality as a gift of God’s grace. Our fall and His redemption enable us to know and experience dimensions of God’s love, such as His grace, mercy and compassion – virtues which were incomprehensible to Adam and Eve in their innocent state before experiencing the fall and being redeemed and restored by God through Christ.

 

The only body which presently possesses immortality is Christ’s resurrected body – the firstfruits from the dead (1Cor 15:20; Rom 6:9). Moses and Elijah appeared in visible form on the mount of transfiguration, but they were not immortal since they still await the resurrection. Enoch walked with God and was not because God took him. By saying that God took him, it clearly means that Enoch was taken into God’s presence and consciously communes with Him, but he has not yet received immortality. Jesus is the first-fruits of the resurrection: Afterwards we also, as a kind of firstfruits, will be glorified with Him at His Second Coming (James 1:18). But that is not the end. The end does not come until all the residue of men have bowed the knee, becoming subject to Christ, at which time Christ will also subject Himself to the Father and God will then be all in all (1Cor 15:28).

 

Although Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden and deprived of the tree of life, and presently only God in the person of the Son has possession of immortality, life and immortality are now freely given to all who come to God through Jesus. And the good news is that all will finally be drawn to Him and will be made alive or immortalized, although not all at the same time that we, the firstfruits, are made alive:

 

“But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order…” (1Cor 15:20-23).

 

This passage clearly declares that in the end all will have been made alive. All who die in Adam (which includes all mankind) will be made alive in Christ, but each in his own order. Some would argue that only those who are “in Christ” before He comes will be made alive. However, Paul doesn’t say “all in Christ” but “in Christ all.”  It is the same “all” who die in Adam that will be made alive in Christ. This becomes even clearer in Romans 5 where he says “all men,” instead of “in Christ all”:

 

“Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life.” (Rom 5:18)

 

Just as Adam’s one sin places all men under judgment, even so Christ’s one righteous act brought the free gift of justification of life to all men. Here the “all” cannot possibly be limited to those who are presently in Christ. The “all” with the comparative “even so” requires that the last all be equal to the first all. If the “all” of the second group is not the same “all” as the first group, then it wouldn’t make sense to use the parallel comparison “as…even so…” For the sake of illustration, let us imagine that someone was to rob $100,000 from you and it was all you had to your name. Then upon catching the thief you were to say to him: As you took all I had, even so I want you to give it all back.” What would you be demanding of him? A tithe? No. The expression even so following as means the last must be equal to the first.

 

When Paul says that in Christ all will be “made alive,” it is clear from the surrounding context that he is referring to the resurrection of our mortal bodies unto immortality. Also, we can see that “made alive” speaks of immortality due to the meaning of the word “made alive.” The Greek word used here is zoopoiéo. The word “to make alive” in 1Corinthians 15:22 is zoopoiéo. Two other Greek words express resurrection: egeiro and anastasis. These are often used for a temporal resurrection, as when Lazarus was raised to life, only to die again. In contrast, when zoopoiéo describes a bodily resurrection, it means receiving permanent life in an immortal body that all will receive, but each in his own order.  Jesus said: “Behold, I make all things new.” (Rev 21:5) [1] When all have been resurrected to an immortal body, then the new creation which will include all, and began with the resurrection of Christ, will be complete.

 

The Spirit of the Believer already has Eternal Life

 

“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.” (John 6:47)

 

"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life. (John 5:24).

 

“These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life….” (1John 5:13)

 

The believer does not have to wait until the resurrection in order to know whether or not he has eternal life. He already is a new creation in Christ. Obviously, our physical body is not yet immortalized but there is a part of us that has already been born again. That which has been born of God, however, is not our body but our spirit.

 

Jesus said to Nicodemus: “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” Nicodemus had the same confusion as do the Annihilationists – he didn’t know to distinguish between our physical body and our spirit. He said in reply: “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” We can sympathize with Nicodemus since the Old Testament only contained vague hints of any distinction between the material part of man and the immaterial part. Jesus, however, made very clear the distinction between our body and our spirit. He explained to Nicodemus:

 

“Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.  6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” (John 3:5-6)

 

Jesus here explains that there are two births: first our physical birth by means of the amniotic water from our mother’s womb, and then the spiritual birth in which our spirit is regenerated by the Holy Spirit. From this moment on, even though our outer man decays, we already possess eternal life in our regenerated spirit. Our bodies, however, are not born again. When you are born again you may look different in the mirror, but it is only because your new inner man is shining through.

 

Many are confused when they read 2Corinthians 5:17 as commonly translated because it doesn’t seem to line up with their reality: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.” The truth is that our body will not be new until the resurrection, and our soul is obviously not new, although it is in the process of being restored. The confusion results because the translators added “things” and “all things” to the text. The reality is that although the new creation has begun with our regenerated spirit, we are still in need of being renewed in our soul, and we will continue physically dying until our body returns to the dust from which it came. The correct reading clears up this confusion:

 

“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come.” (2Co 5:17 ESV)

 

Our bodies die and return to dust, but our spirit is already new and alive with the eternal life of the resurrected Christ who is now our life (Col 3:3-4). That is why Jesus could say: “whoever lives and believes in Me shall never die” (John 11:26). This is what Paul was talking about when he said:

 

“But if Christ is in you, your body is dead because of sin, yet your spirit is alive because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you.” (Rom 8:10-11 NIV) [2]

 

Even though our body is sentenced to die, our spirit is already alive because of righteousness. The righteousness in view in the context is the righteousness of God in Christ, which is receivednot achieved (cf. Rom 3:21-24). Our born-again Spirit is now one spirit with the Lord (1Cor 6:17). We have already been made perfect forever (Heb 10:14). We are now the Church of the firstborn ones whose spirits have been made perfect (Heb 12:22-23). We are now seated with Christ in heavenly places (Eph 2:6). Obviously, this does not refer to our physical body, but rather to our perfect spirit which is already one spirit with the Lord.

 

Also, the rebirth of our spirits - being made alive with God’s eternal life, guarantees the future resurrection of our bodies. Upon receiving eternal life through the rebirth of our spirit, we also received an irrevocable, incorruptible inheritance – the final salvation, or glorification of our bodies:

 

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.” (1 Peter 1:3-5)

 

The promise of bodily glorification for those who have already been begotten again with eternal life is irrevocable because we are kept by the power of God. That is why Paul could say that those who have been called are already glorified, even though our actual glorification awaits the end of the age (Rom 8:30). Jesus also said: “And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand.  29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father's hand” (John 10:28-29). Once we have received eternal life, we will never perish – no one is able to take that away from us because He who gave us His life is greater than all (c.f. Rom 8:37-39). So we have eternal life in our spirit, and we are also assured of receiving immortality in our bodies in the future.

 

All of these glorious realities are hidden to the Annihilationists, since they believe that man is indivisible, rather than a soul inhabiting a body or “tent,” with a spirit, by which we commune with God. Their error, as I see it, is that they base their anthropology upon the lesser light of the Old Testament and try to confine the greater revelation of the New Testament within the wineskin of the Old Testament. Revelation in the Scriptures is a progressive unveiling. What was obscure in the Old Testament is brought to greater light in the New Testament. The trinity is implied in the Old Testament but not clearly revealed until the New Testament. In the Old Testament era there were only a couple of obscure allusions to God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Isa 63:7-16; Pro 30:4). The same is true with the revelation concerning the makeup of man, as well as death and resurrection. The Hebrew word Sheol – variously mistranslated as “hell” “the pit” or “the grave” by traditional translators, meant little more than the mysterious and unknown place where all the dead went, whether good or bad. Although life after death is implied throughout the Old Testament, they didn’t even have any specific revelation concerning a resurrection until it was revealed through the prophet Daniel, less than 600 years before Christ (Dan 12:2).

 

Many mysteries, hidden to previous generations, are revealed in the New Testament. One of those mysteries, which is relevant to the subject at hand, is the revelation in Christ concerning the gift of eternal life and immortality:

 

“Who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began, 10 but has now been revealed by the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ, who has abolished death and brought LIFE and IMMORTALITY to light through the gospel.” (2 Tim 1:9-10)

 

What is it that was hidden to previous generations, but now has been revealed or brought to light? - That through His death and resurrection Christ would abolish death, bringing to light life and immortality. If the rulers of this age had foreseen this, they wouldn’t have crucified the Lord of glory (1Cor 2:8). If we want to acquire an understanding of life and immortality, we must look to the revelation contained within the New Testament.

 

From the Old Testament we would never be able to fully discover the eternal plan of God in Christ to begin a new creation in Him, making all new (Rev 21:5 lit.). In the New Testament we can see what Nicodemus could not yet clearly see. Now we know that we receive the life of God through the new birth of our spirit and that in Christ our mortal bodies will be glorified, being clothed in immortality when He comes for us. The souls of those who have died in Christ will come with Him and will be reunited with a glorified body, and those of us who are still living in our old mortal bodies will be immortalized – our bodies will be glorified in the twinkling of an eye (1Thess 4:13-17; 1Cor 15:51-52).

 

Biblical Immortality is not Plato’s Doctrine

 

Many Annihilationists try to make a connection between Plato’s belief in the immortality of the soul and the traditional Christian belief that the soul exists forever - whether in the body or out of it. Fudge, in “The Fire that Consumes,” labored extensively to make that connection. However, there are more dissimilarities than similarities between Plato’s belief and the declarations of the New Testament.

 

In the first place, although the soul can exist independently from the body and continues beyond death (as I hope to demonstrate), it is not the soul which is referred to as being immortal in Scripture, as Plato affirmed. Rather, it is the resurrected and glorified body which is said to put on immortality at the Second Coming of Christ.

 

In the second place, Plato taught that the soul was inherently eternal, just like God, whereas the Scriptures teach that our existence and essential nature originated in God at creation and are dependent upon Him. Also, Plato taught that the soul reincarnated, whereas Scripture presents only one physical mortal life and death, followed by a resurrection in a permanent, immortal body, rather than an immortal soul reincarnating in a series of temporal mortal bodies.

 

Plato, and other great minds like him, have made many amazing discoveries based solely upon reason and observation. Plato was the first to postulate that eternity is a reality which exists independently of time. Only recently has science been able to confirm his hypothesis.

 

Plato also would have heard of, or personally experienced, near-death or out-of-body experiences similar to that described by Paul (2Cor 12:2-3). Many centuries before Plato, we see that the living consulted the dead - something they would not have attempted unless they believed that the soul had an existence apart from the body. God forbade consulting the dead without denying the possibility of doing so. Without doubt, Plato formulated his beliefs concerning the soul, based upon universally held beliefs and some form of observation, using his reason.

 

However, any parallels which may exist between his conclusions and biblical revelation are coincidental and neither prove or disprove Christian doctrine, any more than Aristotle’s denial of the existence of the soul apart from the body proves or disproves Conditionalism. Annihilationists frequently complain about being categorized with schismatic cults, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and others who similarly hold to the doctrine of Annihilationism. They rightly point out that, as misguided as the cults may be, some of their doctrines are nevertheless in agreement with the Scriptures and for that reason it is unfair for opponents to appeal to the argument of guilt by association. Nevertheless, they use the same tactics, often dedicating large portions of their books to showing a supposed association of the traditional belief in the immortality of the soul with Platonic philosophy. While not ignoring such parallels, ultimately our beliefs should be embraced or rejected based solely upon the Scriptures, understanding the Old Testament through the greater light of the New.



[1] Our English word “things” does not have an equivalent in Greek. Neither does the neuter form in Greek always indicate objects as in English. When the translators insert “things” in contexts that are evidently referring primarily to persons and not inanimate objects I often take the liberty to cross it out in order to keep the focus where it belongs.

 


[2] Sometimes translators do not correctly make the distinction between our spirit and the Holy Spirit. I cite the NIV since it captures better what Paul was expressing.

 

Published on
00:00
00:00

Does God approve of Slavery?

Image description
by George Sidney Hurd
--
The following is an exerpt from my book, The Ways of God: As seen through the Eyes of a Conservative Restorationist

One of the New Atheist’s favorite points of attack is the issue of slavery in the Bible. They argue that, since God does not outright prohibit all forms of slavery, then He must approve of it. Also, based upon the presupposition that all forms of slavery are immoral, they argue that our God is therefore also immoral, since He did not prohibit its practice.
 
An unhelpful tendency among some Christian apologists is to gloss over the issue, saying that the only form of slavery permitted in the Bible was voluntary indentured servanthood in which the slave or servant signs a contract, agreeing to serve a master for a determined amount of time in order to work off a debt. As we will see, there were also other forms of slavery in the Bible which involved involuntary servitude. But does God’s permission and regulation of slavery in any way imply His approval of it? Are all forms of slavery immoral, as the New Atheists imply, or merely the abuses of slavery which often accompany the practice? Contrary to what Bible critics would have us believe, God’s regulations of slavery do not make Him complicit to the practice. Furthermore, His laws are designed to minimize the suffering caused by the economy of this present age which is governed by Satan in such a manner as to necessitate the continuance of inequities similar to slavery, even to the present day.
 
As to the allegation that God approves of slavery because He doesn’t outright prohibit it, we have already seen that His regulation of certain practices, such as polygamy, divorce and slavery should not be seen as tantamount to His approval of them. In order to see God’s ideal for mankind, we must look back at how it was in the beginning before man fell into sin and rebellion. In the beginning man was free and Adam and Eve enjoyed a harmonious complementary relationship, tending the garden and governing over the earth. It was only after the fall that hard labor became necessary (Gen 3:19). Along with that came sinful selfish-ambition and power struggles in which men sought to conquer and dominate others (Gen 3:16). As with divorce, God hates slavery, and only permits it due to the hardness of men’s hearts. Indeed, in the New Creation, which He began with the resurrection and ascension of Christ, all are being restored as it was in the beginning, where there is no longer discrimination according to race, sex, or social status:
 
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.” (Gal 3:28-29)
 
Here we see that the end-result of the New Creation is the abolition of all inequality and every form of discrimination which exists in our fallen society. Some attribute the abolition of slavery to secular humanism. However, even though the advocates of slavery – ignoring the truth as it is in Christ, made use of the Bible to justify slavery, we see that historically it was the Christians, and not the secular humanists, who were the leading influences in the abolition of slavery. The historian Robert Kenney, although not himself a Christian, states:
 
“Hume, Voltaire, and Kant saw the African – the non-European generally – as beyond the category of human to which the European belonged. Race concerned them (particularly Kant) only to the extent that it could show the superiority of the European. It was not the philosophies of Paris or Edinburg or East Prussia who fought slavery…it was from the Evangelical Revival that the loudest claims for what we now call racial equality came.” (emphasis mine) [i]
 
Without justifying the abuses of so called “Christian” slave owners in the south, their abuses pale before Nazi Germany’s exploitation and slaughter of millions of Jews and other “less evolved” non-Aryan ethnic groups only a generation after the abolition of slavery in concentration camps, working them to death without adequate food or clothing. Less than a century after slavery had been abolished in the western world by applying biblical principles such as we see in Galatians 3:28-29, other countries who were influenced by atheistic secular humanism worked millions of their own people to death under the most inhumane conditions behind the Iron and Bamboo Curtains. The only way to equality and dignity for all is through the gospel truth that we are all equal in God’s eyes - not through the secular humanistic and evolutionary world view held by the New Atheists.
 
Also, it is misleading to label all forms of slavery or servanthood as immoral. It is the abuse of slavery which is immoral, and the provisions in the Law of Moses were all designed to prohibit such abuses. If just one of the prohibitions in the Law had been observed, the new-world slavery that we are familiar with would have never been possible:
 
“He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be put to death.” (Ex 21:16)
 
Under this provision of the Law of Moses alone, not only would the slave-traders who kidnapped African men, women and children to sell as slaves in the west have been executed, but those who bought them knowing they had been kidnapped would have been put to death as well. Certainly, if just this one fundamental law against kidnapping and selling men as slaves had been in force between the 16th and the 19th centuries, the dark history of slavery in Europe and the United States would have never existed. And, to the chagrin of the Bible’s critics, it was largely due to such passages of Scripture that slavery was finally abolished.
 
In reality, many of the forms of slavery or servanthood permitted under the Law of Moses are still practiced to some degree today. We still must serve someone in today’s system – otherwise we would starve to death. Most of us look forward to the day when we can finally retire. In Spanish the word for “retire” means “to enter into jubilee” (jubilarse). Jubilee in Israel occurred every 50th year when slaves received their freedom. The difference is that today we no longer call it slavery, although some aptly refer to themselves as “a slave of the system.” The primary form of involuntary slavery in Israel was a penal servitude similar to today’s prison system. Criminals were often sold into slavery in punishment for their crimes until they served a sentence commensurate to the crime (Ex 22:3).
 
Our armed services also bear some resemblance to slavery in the milder sense of servanthood. The draft system is often employed in time of war, obligating able young men to serve time in the armed forces with little more than room and board. Here in Colombia random checkpoints are set up where young men are taken on the spot and forced to serve military duty. Some might argue that it is an immoral practice, yet it is necessitated by the greater evil of subversive guerrillas. It is deemed a necessary evil in order to avoid the greater evil of a tyrannical communist dictatorship similar to what our neighbors in Venezuela have been subjected to. However, God did not obligate men to go to war against their will since it was He who fought on behalf of His people (Deut 20:1-8).
 
In some professional sports the team managers will sell or buy players who must sign a contract similar to the indentured servitude of the Old Testament. Some would counter that that doesn’t apply since they are rewarded for their service. However, indentured slaves also received certain benefits in exchange for their servitude, albeit less lucrative. Some today who do not pay their debts may have their wages attached until they pay what they owe, in a sense obligating them to serve their debtors as was done to those who did not pay their debts under the Law.
 
Much of what is called slavery in the Bible was voluntary, or at least consenting, and so a more appropriate translation for the Hebrew and Greek terms in such contexts would be servanthood rather than using our stronger word slavery. Many newer translations take this into account, translating ebed and doulos as servant rather than slave when it is obvious that the servitude was not involuntary. It was common for the poor to sell themselves as indentured or contracted servants in exchange for room and board. Others sold themselves or family members because it was the only way to pay off their debts.
 
While it was forbidden to kidnap and sell anyone as a slave, Israel was permitted to buy those of the other nations who offered themselves as slaves.  And once they were purchased, they became their permanent property (Lev 25:44-46). However, God forbade them from subjecting their own Israelite brethren to hard labor as common slaves. They were to be treated as a hired servant or visiting sojourners. Also, Israelites could not be sold to another, and they were to be released, along with their lands and all their debts, on the Year of Jubilee, which was once every 50 years. While foreign slaves were slaves for life, Israelites were only under obligation to serve for a maximum of six years, and on the seventh year they were to go free (Lev 25:39-43).
 
While it seems harsh to put foreigners to do hard-labor like cultivating and harvesting crops, etc., it is not altogether unlike what we see today in the United States where people from poorer neighboring nations offer themselves out of necessity to do the hard tasks which most North Americans are either unable or unwilling to perform. One state outlawed this practice, arguing that it was taking away job opportunities from U.S. citizens. But they soon discovered that outlawing foreign labor was folly. They were unable to find workers willing to bear the heat and the long hours bent over working the fields. They had a hard time getting the crops planted on time and when harvest time came, much of the harvest was lost because they couldn’t get workers to harvest the crops. Having to work by the sweat of one’s brow is a result of the fall which only the most prosperous have been able to avoid and even they are not without their share of burdens and trials.
 
While we see in Scripture that, generally speaking, the people and nations who serve God prosper, Jesus told us that as long as we are living in a fallen world the poor will always be with us (Mark 14:7). Some of the poor are poor simply because they are not willing to work, but most of them do not have the resources or the time available in order to learn a profession that could change their social status. And if all the poor became educated, who would work the fields? Jesus said that the poor would always be with us, not because that is God’s design but because their poverty is a necessary evil in a fallen world. That is simply how Satan’s world system works.
 
However, Jesus says to the poor: “Blessed are you poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you who hunger now, for you shall be filled. Blessed are you who weep now, for you shall laugh.” (Luke 6:20-21). As far as God’s eternal kingdom is concerned, wealth and ease in the present does not guarantee future blessedness. Quite the contrary, Jesus continues with some strong words of warning to those who are wealthy but not rich towards God, saying: “But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation. Woe to you who are full, for you shall hunger. Woe to you who laugh now, for you shall mourn and weep. Woe to you when all men speak well of you, for so did their fathers to the false prophets.” (Luke 6:24-26). We will be surprised to see that many who are now first will be last and many who are least now will be the greatest in the kingdom of God (Luke 9:48; Matt 19:30).
 
When Satan incited the fall, he took dominion over the earth from Adam and Eve and therefore, although God is ultimately in control, Satan is the god of this present evil age (2Cor 4:4; Gal 1:4). God could have easily put an end to Satan’s dominion over the earth – especially in light of Christ’s triumph over him in the cross. However, God has a purpose in allowing evil, suffering, inequity and injustice to continue in this present age. We can only be perfected in suffering. Even Jesus was perfected in that which He suffered (Rom 5:3-4;1Peter 4:1; Heb 5:8).
 
Rather than accusing God of being immoral and unjust for permitting the continuance of evil and suffering, as if He were the cause and source of evil rather than Satan and mankind being the culprits, we should seek to understand His ways and walk in them, that we may be perfected in suffering in this present evil age, thereby coming to know Him as He really is. While it is true that God permits inequity and suffering in this present evil age, including slavery, in order to develop in us eternal virtues, He will not allow us to be tempted beyond measure (1Cor 10:13). His laws concerning slavery were not designed to eliminate slavery but to protect slaves from the excessively inhumane abuses common to that time. A brief consideration of the slavery laws given by God through Moses makes it clear that they were designed to restrict excessive abuses in a less-than-ideal fallen institution.
 
Punishment prescribed for mistreatment of slaves. (Ex 21:12,20,26,27)     

“He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death… 20 And if a man beats his male or female servant with a rod, so that he dies under his hand, he shall surely be punished. 21 Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property… 26 If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. 27 And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.” (Ex 21:12,20,26,27)
 
Verses 20 and 21 are New Atheist’s favorite go-to texts. However, they usually quote them alone, out of their context. It says that if a man beats his servant to death with a rod he will be punished, but if the servant lives a day or two without dying, he will not be punished because the slave was his property. They usually don’t quote verse 12 which prescribes the punishment for voluntary manslaughter: “He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death.” This punishment for voluntary manslaughter was given way back in Genesis 9 where it says: “Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed; for in the image of God He made man.” (Gen 9:6).
 
Since both slave and free equally bear the image of God, their lives are precious in God’s eyes and therefore, in order to protect the sanctity of human life, whoever voluntarily takes the life of another human being was subjected to capital punishment.
 
Verse 21 says: “Notwithstanding, if he remains alive a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his property.” In the case of voluntary manslaughter, the slave-owner beats his servant until he is dead. However, when he gives his slave a severe flogging that was not intended to kill him, even though he later dies as a result of the flogging, it isn’t considered murder but rather involuntary manslaughter and therefore wasn’t punishable by death. In this case his punishment was that he lost a slave.
 
In Israel slave-owners could punish insubordinate slaves but they were not permitted to cause permanent damage or take their lives, as was the case with the surrounding nations of that time. Traditional translators misrepresent God as a slave-owner chopping a rebellious slave in half in Matthew 24:50,51:
 
“the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him and at an hour that he is not aware of, 51 and will cut him in two (dichotoméo) and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” (Matt 24:50,51 NKJV)
 
This rendering presents Jesus as condoning the willful brutal murder of a servant by his master, which would be a gross violation of the Law of Moses and also Genesis 9. That God would Himself administer a punishment more severe than that which He permits in His own Law is a misrepresentation of God all too common with the Traditionalists. Strong’s defines dichotoméo as, “to bisect, i.e. (by extension) to flog severely.” That the analogy given by Jesus did not refer to a master actually cutting his servant in half is evident since, after his initial punishment, he is seen to still be alive. Taking this into account, several translations render it as “punish” or “punish severely.”
 
“and will punish him, and put him with the hypocrites; there men will weep and gnash their teeth.” (Matt 24:51 RSV)
 
“and he shall scourge him severely and shall appoint his part with the actors on the stage of life who play the role of that which they are not. There, in that place, shall be the lamentation and the gnashing of the teeth.” (Matt 24:45 An Expanded Translation by Kenneth S. Wuest)
 
The illustration Jesus used here was of a wicked servant that had been left in charge of the master’s estate while his master went on a journey. While the master was away the slave beat his fellow subordinate slaves and spent the rest of his time partying with the master’s money. When the master returned and saw what he had done, he punished him severely and segregated him. Jesus wouldn’t have used this illustration and applied it to God’s punishment of the wicked if the flogging of wicked rebellious slaves were not at times necessary and permissible under the Law. We need to embrace the fact that, in the presence of evil, God’s love is often severe and correctional and is not always cruciform, as the Progressives would have us believe.
 
We must also keep in mind that many of the slaves assigned to hard labor were not your average citizen but were criminals who had been sold to pay off their debt for crimes committed. Having spent nearly three years in correctional institutions, I am aware of how firm and severe most criminals must be treated in order to maintain some semblance of order. It would be naïve to think that hardened criminals could be managed using a passive cruciform love.
 
Nevertheless, the Law punished the slaveowners for any treatment of slaves which caused them permanent damage. We already saw that the punishment for willfully killing a slave was the death-penalty. Additionally, they were only permitted to punish them by lashes on the back that, although painful, would only cause temporal damage. If they caused any permanent damage that resulted in a blind eye or even a lost tooth, the slave-owner was punished by having to let the injured slave go free: 
 
“If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. 27 And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.” (Ex 21:26,27)
 
So, we have seen that although God permitted slavery as a necessary evil in a fallen and culturally primitive society, His laws were designed in a manner that prohibited the unmerited or excessive mistreatment of slaves as seen among the nations surrounding them. However, Israel’s laws concerning slavery were not God’s ideal. God’s ideal is seen in Genesis before the fall. The regulations given in the Law were just a step in the direction of restoring all mankind to oneness with Himself, where there will no longer be any distinctions based upon race, sex or social status. The New Testament takes us another step further toward this final restoration in its counsel to masters and slaves. The New Covenant principals set forth therein laid the foundation for the abolition of slavery, which was another leap forward in the direction of the final restoration of all.


[i] Kenny, R., The Lamb Enters the Dreaming, p.74
 
Published on
00:00
00:00

Attaining to the Resurrection

Image description
 
 
 
by George Sidney Hurd
 --
“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.” (Philippians 3:10-11)
 
What did Paul mean when he said, “if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead”? I believe that Peter may have had this verse in mind when he said that some of Paul’s statements were hard to understand, upsetting the faith of the untaught and unstable (2Peter 3:14-16). Admittedly, failing to take into account Paul’s unique manner of expressing certain truths, this verse troubled me until recently. It seemed to be in conflict with the context and the overall teaching of Paul. Most of the commentaries I consulted were not helpful. Whatever Paul meant by “the resurrection from the dead,” the conditional phrase “if by any means” (εἴ πως, ei pōs) undeniably expresses his uncertainty as to whether or not he would attain to it and cannot be reasonably explained as mere humility on his part. There was never any doubt in Paul’s mind as to whether or not he, or any other born again believer, would be resurrected at Christ’s second coming. This certainty is expressed in numerous passages:
 
“knowing that He who raised up the Lord Jesus will also raise us up with Jesus, and will present us with you.” (2 Cor 4:14)
 
“For we know that if our earthly house, this tent, is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.” (2 Cor 5:1)
 
“We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed —  52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.” (1 Cor 15:51-52)
 
“For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.” (1 Cor 15:21-22)
 
Paul says that the moment we believed, we were sealed by the Holy Spirit for the day of redemption (Eph 1:13-14; 4:30). Far from merely hoping that by some means he might attain to the resurrection, he said, “I know whom I have believed, and I am certain that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him, against that day” (2 Tim 1:12).
 
It is evident that there was absolutely no doubt in the mind of Paul as to whether or not all born again believers would be resurrected or changed at Christ’s second coming for His Church. Some have argued that the reason for Paul’s uncertainty in Philippians 3:11 was because he believed that only the overcomers would take part in the first resurrection and, for that reason, he couldn’t be certain that he would be resurrected at Christ’s return until he had finished the course. Just imagine! If even Paul was uncertain as to whether or not he would be resurrected when Christ comes for His bride, where would that leave the rest of us?  However, as I point out in my article, The Overcomers, everyone who has been born of God is an overcomer (1John 5:4). The body of Christ is not divided between the overcomers and the rest. All will be resurrected at the end of this age when Christ returns. As Jesus said:
 
“This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.  40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:39-40)
 
I believe that the key to understanding what Paul was referring to in Philippians 3:11 is to see it in context. In verses 7 through 16 he is not talking about our physical resurrection at Christ’s second coming, but rather about our spiritual resurrection from the dead, fully entering into our new resurrection life in Christ, pressing on in order to lay hold of that new life that Jesus Christ has called us to. It isn’t until the end of the chapter that Paul mentions our physical resurrection from the dead, and he presents it as something already certain to occur. He said:
 
“For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, 21 who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself.” (Phil 3:20-21)
 
Obviously, his certainty that he was already a citizen of heaven and that Christ would transform his body, making it like His own glorified body when He comes in glory in verse 20, leaves no room for the interpretation which presents him in verse 11 as though he were uncertain as to whether or not he would attain to his physical resurrection from the dead.
 
While scholars are definitely in the minority who see the resurrection that Paul was striving to attain to in verse 11 as being strictly a spiritual one, this understanding is not unique to me. In Vines Expository Dictionary he said:
 
“In Phil 3:11 καταντάω, katantaō (to attain) is used of the paramount aims of the apostle's life, ‘if by any means,’ he says, ‘I might attain unto the resurrection from the dead,’ not the physical resurrection, which is assured to all believers hereafter, but to the present life of identification with Christ in His resurrection.” [1]
 
Dan Haley Jr. also sees the resurrection Paul was seeking to attain unto as being a spiritual resurrection. Commenting on Philippians 3:11 he says:
 
“this in type is a resurrection from among the dead that are still in their trespasses.”  [2]
 
Aside from the fact that in the same chapter Paul expressed his certainty concerning his resurrection from the dead at Christ’s second coming, what further contextual basis is there for seeing the resurrection of verse 11 as being spiritual rather than physical? I see two main factors which to me indicate that Paul was referring to a spiritual resurrection: 1) Paul’s frequent references to a spiritual resurrection, and 2) The flow of the immediate context.
 
1) Paul’s frequent references to a spiritual resurrection
 
A recurring theme throughout Paul’s epistles is that of our new resurrection life in Christ. In fact, he speaks of our spiritual resurrection more often than our bodily resurrection at Christ’s return. In Ephesians 2:4-7 he says:
 
“But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.”
 
Similarly, in Colossians 2:12-13 he says:
 
“buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses.”
 
Each time he tells us that we were spiritually raised from among the dead, he follows up by appealing to us to live according to our new reality as those who are alive from the dead. In Ephesians 4:17-18 he says:
 
“This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord, that you should no longer walk as the rest of the Gentiles walk, in the futility of their mind, 18 having their understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God, because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart.”
 
Likewise, in Colossians 3:1-5, after telling us in chapter 2 that we have been raised with Christ, he calls upon us to live accordingly:
 
If then you were raised with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God. 2 Set your mind on things above, not on things on the earth. 3 For you died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God. 4 When Christ who is our life appears, then you also will appear with Him in glory. 5 Therefore put to death your members which are on the earth: fornication, uncleanness, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.”
 
This is a recurring pattern in Paul’s epistles. In Romans 6 Paul argues that if we have been united with Christ in His death and resurrection, we should walk accordingly.
 
“Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life” (Rom 6;3-4).
 
Even though we have been spiritually raised with Christ from the dead, we must learn to walk in this new life by faith. Paul continues saying that it is not enough to know that we have been raised with Christ: we must reckon or consider it to be true and, instead of letting sin reign in us, yield our members as those who are alive from the dead:
 
“Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God.” (Rom 6:11-13)
 
So, even though we have been raised from the dead with Christ, we have yet to fully attain to the resurrection from the dead in our daily walk. Paul said: “For we who live are constantly being delivered over to death for Jesus' sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh” (2 Cor 4:11). Every regenerated believer has Christ’s resurrection life within him. However, as long as we are in this body of flesh, we have the law of sin in our members and, for that reason, we must daily present ourselves to God as those who are alive from the dead, making no provision for the flesh to fulfill its lusts. Just as with Paul in Philippians 3, we must seek to attain to that resurrection life, laying hold of that for which Christ Jesus has laid hold of us (Phil 3:11-12).
 
2) The flow of the immediate context indicates a spiritual resurrection
 
“that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, 11 if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. 12 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. 13 Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended; but one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, 14 I press toward the goal for the prize (βραβεῖον, brabeion) of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. 15 Therefore let us, as many as are mature, have this mind; and if in anything you think otherwise, God will reveal even this to you. 16 Nevertheless, to the degree that we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us be of the same mind. 17 Brethren, join in following my example, and note those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern…
20 For our citizenship is in heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, 21 who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body, according to the working by which He is able even to subdue all things to Himself.” (Phil 3:10-21)
 
Here we can see that, while Paul considered our citizenship in heaven and our receiving a glorified body at the Lord’s return as being certain (vv. 20-21), there was a prize to be obtained or apprehended. The moment we were born again we received an incorruptible inheritance and were sealed unto the day of redemption, kept by the power of God until we are changed or resurrected (Eph 1:13-14; 1Peter 1:3-5). Christ’s unending resurrection life is not a prize to be won, but a gift to be received (Rom 5:15; 6:23). In verse 12 he said that he had not yet attained to the resurrection from the dead. That would go without saying if in fact he was referring to his bodily resurrection at Christ's second coming. 
 
Whenever Paul speaks of salvation, it is always presented as a free gift of God’s grace (Eph 2:8-9; 2Tim 1:9; Titus 3:5-7, etc.). However, when he speaks of our participation in sanctification and ministry, he often presents it as though we were athletes in the Greek Olympics, pressing to obtain the prize (βραβεῖον, brabeion) which he refers to as a crown or wreath (στέφανος, stephanos). Since I consider this subject in more detail in my blog, Rewards for Good Works, I will not go into more detail here, except to point out that this is the language he uses here to describe his goal to be conformed to Christ’s death in order to attain to the resurrection from the dead, or the fullness of Christ’s indwelling resurrection life, laying hold of that for which Christ laid hold of him. He repeatedly says that he was pressing on in order to attain to the goal which was the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus. The “upward call” alludes to when the athletic contestants who won the competition were called to ascend to the judgment seat (βῆμα, bēma) which was situated on an elevated platform in the arena, in order to receive their prize, which was a crown (perishable wreath, stephanos). [3] The difference is that we compete for an imperishable wreath (1Cor 9:25).
 
While our works will be tested at the Bema Seat of Christ, it is for rewards or loss of rewards, not salvation, since salvation is a gift of God. If we as born again believers fail to run well, we can be disqualified and not receive a reward (1Cor 9:24-27), but we will nevertheless be saved. As Paul says of all those who have built upon that foundation which is Christ:
 
“Each one's work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one's work, of what sort it is. 14 If anyone's work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. 15 If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire.” (1 Cor 3:13-15)
 
Therefore, 1) understanding that salvation is a free gift of God and that all who have been saved and born again are already citizens of heaven and will be changed or bodily resurrected at Christ’s second coming; 2) considering Paul’s frequent references to a spiritual resurrection, calling upon us to walk in newness of Christ’s resurrection life, rather than allowing sin to reign in our mortal bodies and 3) considering that he presents attaining to this resurrection from the dead as a prize to be attained to, rather than a gift he had already received, it becomes evident that the resurrection from the dead Paul was referring to in Philippians 3:11 was his spiritual resurrection out from among the dead, and not a bodily resurrection.

[1] Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, NT:2658.

[2] Dan Haley Jr., The Out Resurrection, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H149cn5KjYU ,
26:10
 
[3] F. F. Bruce, Philippians, Understanding the Bible Commentary Series, 1989.
Gordon D. Fee, Paul’s Letter to the Philippians, New International Commentary on the New Testament, 1995
Published on
00:00
00:00

$Are Modern Visions of Hell of God?

Image description
 
by George Sidney Hurd
 
“Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits, whether they are of God.” (1 John 4:1)
 
In recent years many have been traumatized by a deluge of books and videos graphically describing vivid terrifying accounts of visions of Hell. For the most part, those outside the Christian faith pass them off, pointing to them as one more justification for rejecting the Christian message.
 
The ones most adversely affected by visions of Hell are children and newborn believers who lack the full assurance of faith, not yet fully understanding that our salvation is not based upon our works but entirely upon the finished work of Christ on the cross.
 
When I first came to know the Lord in 1969, I remember reading certain verses out of context and feeling despair until I continued reading and could see the verse in context. There were no such videos nor internet at that time. I can’t even imagine what it would be like to be a new believer today, aware of your own shortcomings and hearing such graphic testimonies of Christians being tormented in Hell forever for sins you are still struggling with!
 
While some testimonies of Hell, such as the "Well to Hell" or "Siberian Hell Sounds" hoax
have since been exposed as fraudulent, I believe that most of them truly were supernatural visions. However, all too often the source of such supernatural encounters goes unquestioned in Pentecostal and Charismatic circles. Often, just calling into question a vision or a prophecy is treated as equivalent to blaspheming the Holy Spirit. In Scripture we are told not to believe every spirit, but to test the spirits to see whether they are of God. And we have the Scriptures by which to test them. As Peter said of the Scriptures, we have “a more sure word of prophecy” (2Peter 1:19-21). The written Word of God is the only objective standard by which to discern between what is true and what is false. Instead of the declarations of the prophets being beyond question, Paul said: “Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others judge” (1Cor 14:29-30).
 
While each of us must draw our own conclusions, in this article I will be presenting why I do not believe that these visions of Hell are of God: 1) They invalidate the gospel, 2) They present a different Christ, and 3) They do not Correspond with the Biblical Description.
.
 
1) They Invalidate the Gospel
 
The gospel of Jesus Christ is all about what He did for us, and nothing about what we have done or will do for Him. In 1Corinthians 15:1-4 Paul tells us that the gospel is that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose from the dead. When Christ cried out from the cross “it is finished” it was the declaration that He had paid the penalty for the sins of the world. Salvation is the gift of God, freely offered to mankind. We do not work for this gift – we simply receive it by faith. The moment we receive it, we are saved.
 
Some have mistakenly argued that our salvation isn’t consummated the moment we put our trust in Jesus. They point out that “whoever believes” in John 3:16 is present tense, and from that they argue that it should read “whoever continues believing.” Interpreted that way, one could never have assurance of salvation.
 
However, at the risk of becoming too technical, the phrase “whoever believes in Him” (πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτόν) in John 3:16 is a clear example of the gnomic present in Koine Greek. It expresses a timeless, universal truth. In other words, it means that anyone, at any time, who believes in Jesus will receive eternal life. This usage underscores the universal scope of salvation rather than continuous action of believing.
 
This is made even more clear by the example Jesus gave in the previous two verses. In John 3:14-15 Jesus said:
 
“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.”
 
Jesus was referring to Numbers 21 where the children of Israel sinned against the Lord and He sent deadly serpents against them. When Moses interceded for them, the Lord told him to make a bronze serpent and lift it up on a pole, saying that everyone who looked at the serpent would live. Jesus was saying that even as one look of faith at the bronze serpent gave life, even so, everyone who believes on Him will not perish but have everlasting life. Obviously, they didn’t have to keep their eyes on the serpent for the rest of their lives in order to live. In the same manner, the moment we believed we passed from death unto life. This is made even more clear a few verses later where Jesus said:
 
"Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.” (John 5:24)
 
Here, just as in John 3:16, “hears” and “believes” are gnomic present tense participles, referring not to continually hearing, but to those in the category of hearers and believers. If you have heard the gospel and responded in faith, you already possess eternal life and will not come into judgment (i.e., go to Hell). The moment you heard the gospel and believed with your heart, your eternal destiny was sealed. Paul said:
 
“In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.” (Eph 1:13-14)
 
Upon hearing and believing we were sealed until Christ comes to receive us in glory. Paul said: “And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption” (Eph 4:30). If we sin, we grieve the Spirit and may come under chastisement, but God will not break His seal or unborn those who have been born of God. He will not unjustify those whom He has justified: that would be double jeopardy. He will not take back the gift of life once He has given it: “the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:29).
 
The New Testament repeatedly emphasizes that salvation is a free gift of God that one receives upon believing, independent from works. Paul said:
 
“For by grace you have been saved (perfect passive) through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast.” (Eph 2:8-9)
 
Here we see that the moment we believed by grace in what Christ did for us, we were saved. The perfect passive, “have been saved,” indicates that salvation is something we passively received in the past with the enduring result that we remain in a saved state. We make no contribution whatsoever; salvation is entirely the gift of God. As we see in the next verse (Ephesians 2:10), every change within us after being saved is God’s workmanship. In this manner all grounds of boasting are removed. God who begins the good work in us is the one who brings it to perfection (Phil 1:6). He is the one who accomplishes our subsequent full sanctification. Paul says of our sanctification:
 
“Now may the God of peace Himself sanctify you completely; and may your whole spirit, soul, and body be preserved blameless at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. 24 He who calls you is faithful, who also will do it.” (1 Thess 5:23-24)
 
Jude says that God our Savior is able to keep us from falling and to present us faultless before His throne of glory with exceeding joy (Jude 24-25). Praise His wonderful name! We can be at peace, knowing that we have been freely justified once and for all by grace apart from works (Rom 3:21-24; 4:4-5; 5:1). There remains no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Rom 8:1). No one, nor anything, will ever be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord (Rom 8:38-39). Understanding these truths enables us to enter into His rest, ceasing from our own striving for salvation and trusting in His finished work of redemption (Heb 1:3; 4:10; 10:12,14).
 
The testimonies of visions of Hell seek to invalidate this good news of salvation, saying that they saw true born again believers in Hell. One testimony speaks of a pastor who went to hell because he died in an accident after leaving his house before reconciling with his wife after a disagreement. [1] In another testimony, a woman who was faithful and active in her church leadership for years said that she was shown that she would have been in Hell forever just for having supported her pastor’s ministry, knowing that he was beginning to focus more on his ministry than on Christ. [2] Many like Angelica Zambrano, were shown Christians in hell for things such as failing to tithe or listening to secular music. [3] Some who were members of legalistic churches said they saw women in Hell for wearing pants or jewelry and wearing makeup or dying their hair.
 
Mary Baxter’s book, A Divine Revelation of Hell, has sold over 1.3 million copies. In it she tells why born-again Christians were in Hell. One man was in Hell because he didn’t loan money to someone to pay for a funeral. [4] Another said he was in Hell for refusing to give an alcoholic money under the pretext of buying clothes and shoes for his boy. [5] Under these conditions, it would be impossible for anyone here in Latin America to avoid going to Hell, since people are continually asking for handouts, making it impossible to give to everyone who asks.
 
I could give many more examples where the visions of Hell describe born again believers as being in Hell because of one sin they committed without having repented on time. I am convinced that these visions come from the enemy masquerading as an angel of light in an attempt to invalidate the gospel of grace, causing believers to look to themselves for salvation rather than trusting in Christ’s finished work. In Romans 11:6, Paul is emphatically redundant in insisting that if it be by grace, it cannot be by works. He says:
 
“And if by grace, then it is no longer of works; otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it is of works, it is no longer grace; otherwise work is no longer work.”
 
Salvation is either by grace or by works; it cannot be both. It cannot be a 50/50 transaction: it can’t even be a 99/1 transaction. Salvation is 100% a gift of God’s grace. Subsequent works are the fruit of salvation, not that which obtains it. We are His workmanship, and “He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil 1:6).
 
Visions of Hell have caused many a believer to take their eyes off of Jesus and focus on their own performance, as Paul said he did in Romans 7:9-25. The moment we take our eyes off of Jesus, the author and finisher of faith, we fall from the grace-walk into fleshly striving and self-condemnation. Satan is our accuser, and we need to be aware of his strategies. Paul addresses a similar situation in his epistle to the Galatians. Judaisers had “bewitched” the believers in Galatia, causing them to doubt the sufficiency of Christ, saying that if they wanted to be justified, they would have to add their own works. He made it clear that when works are added, it is no longer good news. He said:
 
“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, 7 which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.”
“O foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you that you should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed among you as crucified?”
“I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.” (Gal 1:6-7; 3:1-2; 2:21)
 
If Paul characterized the Judaizers’ addition of works to simple faith in Christ as being a perversion of the gospel, what would he say about the vivid and grotesque descriptions of born again believers in Hell because they lacked sufficient works, or died without having confessed every sin? The closer our walk with the Lord, the more we become aware of the fact that we sin daily in thought and deed. These modern visions of Hell don’t simply “trouble” believers, they often traumatize them, causing them to fall from the grace-walk, setting aside the grace of God, hoping to become righteous enough to escape the horrific everlasting Hell depicted in these demonic visions. Clearly, these visions of Hell invalidate the gospel of grace and are a stumbling block to many sincere Christians.
 
2) They present a Different Christ
 
In many of these testimonies concerning visions of Hell, they claim that Jesus personally took them on a guided tour of Hell. Many fear even considering the possibility that it is not the true Christ but a false Christ, a messenger of Satan disguised as a messenger of light (2Cor 11:14). Jesus warned us of these times, saying:
 
“For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.” (Matt 24:24)
 
As I see it, the primary objective of these visions of Hell is to try to deceive the elect into thinking that their salvation depends upon their own works, rather than resting in the finished work of Christ. Jesus said that many would come in His name, saying “I am the Christ,” deceiving many (Matt 24:5). Most of the present-day appearances of those claiming to be “the Christ” are not a physical person, but are appearances in visions, so we must learn to test the spirits.
 
Several supposed encounters with Jesus in Hell, such as that of the hard rock musician, Tim Ehmann were experienced by non-believers while on drugs. [6]  While that in itself doesn’t rule out the possibility of Jesus actually appearing to someone on drugs, the likelihood that it was a deceiving spirit masquerading as a messenger of light greatly increases.
 
Most describe Jesus in a manner inconsistent with His character as revealed in Scripture. According to Mary Baxter, Jesus took her to Hell for 30 nights, showing her those who were in torments. When those in unspeakable torments cried out to Jesus for mercy, His often-repeated response was, “peace be still.” The only time the Jesus of the Gospels said “peace be still” was when He calmed the sea. To say peace be still to someone in torments, only to leave them in the same condition, would be a mockery and inconsistent with His nature. Also, those taken to Hell are often portrayed as having more compassion than Christ Himself. When Mary Baxter would want to alleviate their suffering, Jesus would say “it’s too late.” In contrast, the Jesus of Scripture says that He will draw all unto Himself, that He will seek and save the lost until the last lost sheep is safe in the fold (Jn 12:32; Luke 19:10; Matt 18:12). Is He not the God who said that He will not cast off any of the children of men forever? (Lam 3:31-33).
 
Also, common to the Jesus of these visions, He often leaves the one He takes to Hell alone to be subjected to the torments of hell so they can experience it for themselves. The following is only the beginning of increasingly horrendous tortures that the Jesus of Mary’s vision abandoned her to in the “jaws of Hell”:
 
“And then I felt my flesh and skin begin to fall off my bones! (For some reason, it seemed like I had flesh.) I screamed in abject horror. “O Jesus,” I called out, “where are You?” [7]
 
Her torments only got worse from here. She said that after being tormented in Hell she was ill and traumatized for several days afterwards. For me, it is hard to imagine the Jesus of the Gospels, who went about doing good and healing all who were oppressed by the devil, subjecting anyone to such horrors, let alone a justified born again believer.   
 
Even worse is what Angelica Zambrano (who was only 18 years old at the time) said that Jesus did to her. According to her account, Jesus told her that on November 7, 2009, he was going to kill her and take her to Hell so she could see what it was like in order to warn others, but that afterwards he would raise her from the dead. She pleaded with him not to kill her, but He insisted that it was His will. She said that when she died and was going down into Hell she was horrified and asked the Lord to take her back, but he said it was necessary. In a manner similar to Mary Baxter, he left her alone to feel the torments of Hell firsthand. She said when he raised her from the dead after 23 hours laying on the floor that it took her two weeks to be able to get out of bed, and demons came into her room and tormented her. And that wasn’t the end of it. She said that Jesus took her to Hell three more times, although on those occasions she didn’t have to die. As could be expected, many have suffered PTSD as a result of what they experienced. I can’t imagine the Jesus of the Bible subjecting a young girl, whose only desire was to please Him, to such a hellish experience. According to her, Jesus even showed her children who were in Hell for having watched cartoons! [8]
 
Considering all of these details, and the fact that the visions present Jesus as negating the gospel by making salvation dependent upon what we do for Him, rather than what He did for us on the cross, I would say that the only logical conclusion we can come to is that the Jesus of these visions of Hell is not the Jesus of the Bible.
 
3) They do not Correspond with the Biblical Description
 
Another reason why I do not believe that these visions of Hell are of God is because there are numerous ways in which they do not correspond with what we see in Scripture. For brevity, I will not point out the distinction between Sheol or Hades, Tartarus and Gehenna fire or eonian fire.
 
            1. Jesus indicated that people will not be persuaded by someone who saw Hell
 
The reason that the Jesus of the visions gives for taking them to Hell is so that others will not go to that place of torment. However, in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, when the rich man implored Abraham that Lazarus be sent back from the dead in order to warn others so that they would not go to that place of torment, Abraham’s reply presents a strong argument against their claim that Jesus took them to Hell and back in order that others would not go to that place of torment:
 
“Then he said, 'I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father's house, 28 for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.'  29 Abraham said to him, 'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.'  30 And he said, 'No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.'  31 But he said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.'" (Luke 16:27-31)
 
If Jesus indicated in this parable that people would not believe even though one should rise from the dead to warn them, why would He be doing that today? Why subject His beloved children to such horrific torments?
 
Jesus is not wringing His hands, hoping that people will come to Him. He said: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:44). Man is so lost and blinded by sin that they could not believe, even if someone were to come back from the dead to warn them. The good news is that, although some will receive their part in the Lake of Fire, being hurt by the second death, in the final dispensation of the fullness of the times, He will have drawn all unto Himself, resulting in God being all in all (Jn 12:32; Eph 1:10; 1Cor 15:28). God has sworn by Himself that all the ends of the earth, including those presently under the earth, will look to Him and be saved, bowing the knee and confessing Jesus Christ as Lord (Isa 45:22-24, c.f. Phil 2:10-11). I further develop these points in my book, The Universal Solution.
 
Therefore, it is very unlikely that the Jesus of the Gospels would be sending His children to Hell and back so that they could warn others not to go there. It is more probable that it is another ploy of the enemy, intended to fill people’s hearts with fear, especially Christians, so that, instead of resting in Christ’s finished work, they will begin to frantically strive for salvation. They will also begin preaching the other gospel which Paul said was in reality not a gospel at all. The result is converts preaching a false gospel of works, making others twice as much a son of hell (Gehenna) as themselves (Matt 23:15).
 
            2. Satan and his demons are not in Hell
 
Many who claim to have been in Hell and back say that Satan himself was in charge and the demons were not in torments but rather were the tormentors. According to these visions, Satan and his demons are never tormented, but are the ones administering torments throughout all eternity. However, Satan and his demons are nowhere shown to even be in Hell at this time. The angels who left their proper abode are not with the dead, but bound in the abyss or Tartarus (Jude 6). Satan is presently the prince of the power of the air (Eph 2:2). It isn’t until Christ returns and sets up His millennial reign that Satan is cast into the abyss (Rev 20:1-3). The only places where demons are seen to be operating in Scripture is in the heavens and upon the earth (Eph 6:12; Luke 11:24). Jesus said in Matthew 25:41 that the eonian fire, equivalent to Gehenna and the Lake of Fire, was prepared for the devil and his angels, but they weren’t there yet. This we can see in Matthew 8:29 where the legion of demons in the demoniac of Gadara cried out to Jesus saying: “What have we to do with You, Jesus, You Son of God? Have You come here to torment us before the time?”
 
Additionally, when Jesus said that the eonian fire was prepared for the devil and his angels, it is obvious that He didn’t mean that God had prepared it as a kingdom for them to rule, as the visions of Hell portray it, but rather they themselves will undergo the fiery torments. They will not be the tormentors, but the tormented. The depiction of demons tormenting souls in Hell as we first see in later Christian literature, such as the 2nd century pseudo Apocalypse of Peter and further expanded upon in the 14th century Divine Comedy by Dante were not derived from Scripture, but from Greco-Roman and Ancient Near Eastern sources. I believe that they are in reality doctrines of demons, overthrowing the faith of some.
 
            3. The descriptions of Hell are contradictory and not biblical
 
There are nearly as many different and conflicting descriptions of Hell as there are people who have had the visions. However, for space, I will simply give a few examples. In R. Cook’s vision he saw that Hell had nine levels spiraling downwards, just as described in Dante’s Divine Comedy.[9] In marked contrast Mary Baxter said that Hell was in the form of a human body and for thirty nights she was taken to different parts of the body of Hell. This is a quote from her book:
 
“Jesus said, ‘We are now about to enter a tunnel that will take us into the belly of hell. Hell is shaped like a human body lying in the center of the earth. The body is lying on its back, with both arms and both legs stretched out. As I have a body of believers, so hell has a body of sin and death. As the Christ-body is built up daily, so the hell-body is also built up daily.” [10]
 
She presents Jesus as saying that, just as Christ is building His body, so Satan is literally building his own body in Hell! It was in the jaws of the body of Hell that she claimed that Jesus had left her alone to be tortured so she could experience firsthand what it felt like to be tormented forever in Hell. However, when Jesus said that the eonian fire was prepared for the devil and his angels, He didn’t mean that Satan himself was the one preparing it (Matt 25:41).
 
In Bill Wiese’s book 23 Minutes in Hell, which has sold over a million copies and was on the New York Times Best Seller list, he said that he didn’t see any children in Hell, and he gave a scriptural explanation as to why there wouldn’t be any children in Hell. [11] However, others, such as Angelica Zambrano, say that they saw children who were in Hell for doing things like disrespecting their parents or watching cartoons! [12]
 
These are just a few brief examples of the inconsistencies between these different visions, but these should serve to demonstrate that we should not believe every spirit but should test the spirits to see if they are of God. Some fear questioning visions due to their supernatural nature. However, in Scripture visions and trances are often seen to be the deception of the enemy. Ezekiel says of the false prophets in Israel:
 
“Her prophets plastered them with untempered mortar, seeing false visions, and divining lies for them, saying, 'Thus says the Lord God,' when the Lord had not spoken.” (Ezek 22:28)
 
The false prophets had visions, but they were false visions. I am not questioning the reality of the visions of Hell or the sincerity of those having them. Some of them, like Mary Baxter and Bill Wiese have made millions from the sale of their books but that doesn’t mean that their motive for writing them was monetary. Nevertheless, the test of truth is the Scriptures, not the motives of those who claim to have experienced them.
 
I am not saying that all visions of heaven and Hell are lying visions. There is a Hell to be shunned and a heaven to be received. However, every vision and every prophecy must stand the test of Scripture. As I argue in my book, The Triumph of Mercy, and my article, Sulfur, Salt and the Refiner’s Fire, the Hell of Scripture, properly called the Lake (or pool) of Fire, is not comparable to Dante’s inferno nor Mary Baxter’s body of Hell. Properly understood, it is the Refiner’s crucible, and it does not last forever but only “until” (Matt 5:26; Rev 21:8; Luke 12:47). I demonstrate that aion and aionios, often erroneously translated “everlasting” or “eternal” when referring to punishment, means “eonian” or “age during” in my article, The Duration of Punishment.
 
In summary, judging the visions of Hell by their fruits, they are not in agreement with what the Scriptures present us concerning Hell, and they negate the gospel of grace, upsetting the faith of many a sincere Christian. I believe that Paul would say concerning them the same thing that he said to the believers at Corinth:
 
“But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.” (2 Cor 11:3)
 


[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mnqPEVo4b-A
 
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ_AXQIom3Y&list=PPSV
 
[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KoTzVVBnAk&list=PLINRBYs9Hc-3qWtkjqtJ1TXYFxo3-F5pt
 
[4] Baxter, Mary K.. A Divine Revelation of Hell (p. 192). Whitaker House. Kindle Edition.
 
[5] Baxter, Mary K.. A Divine Revelation of Hell (p. 194). Whitaker House. Kindle Edition.
 
[6] Ehmann, Tim. I Met God in Hell (p. 76). BroadStreet Publishing Group LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[7] Baxter, Mary K.. A Divine Revelation of Hell (pp. 175-176). Whitaker House. Kindle Edition.
 
[8] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KoTzVVBnAk&list=PLINRBYs9Hc-3qWtkjqtJ1TXYFxo3-F5pt
 
[9] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78QEtegZ90g&t=25s
 
[10] Baxter, Mary K.. A Divine Revelation of Hell (p. 63). Whitaker House. Kindle Edition.
 
[11] Wiese, Bill. 23 Minutes In Hell: One Man's Story About What He Saw, Heard, and Felt in that Place of Torment . Strang Communications. Loc. 1496 - A. Kindle Edition.
 
[12] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5KoTzVVBnAk&list=PLINRBYs9Hc-3qWtkjqtJ1TXYFxo3-F5pt
Published on
Image description
by George Sidney Hurd
“Great King, how much wisdom thy precepts require! I need thee, not only to open my mouth, but also at times to keep it shut.” [1]                                              Charles Hadden Spurgeon
 
The discovery of the scriptural truth of the final restoration of all is so glorious and liberating that we often want to shout it out to the whole world. However, while we should by no means be closet Restorationists, we nevertheless need wisdom and discernment, not only to know to whom, but also when and how to share this precious pearl with others. While there is no substitute for being sensitive to the leading of the Spirit, I believe that there are certain general guidelines which can help us be better stewards of the truth that God has entrusted to us.
 
To whom should we share?
 
Some of the Early Church Fathers who believed in the final restoration of all, practiced reserve, only sharing this truth with those whom they considered to be sufficiently mature to properly receive it. Origen said concerning the restoration of all and the temporal corrective nature of postmortem punishment:
“But the remarks which might be made on this topic are neither to be made to all, nor to be uttered on the present occasion; for it is not unattended with danger to commit to writing the explanation of such subjects, seeing the multitude need no further instruction than that which relates to the punishment of sinners; while to ascend beyond this is not expedient, for the sake of those who are with difficulty restrained, even by fear of eonian punishment (aionios kolasis), from plunging into any degree of wickedness, and into the flood of evils which result from sin.” [2]
So, Origen generally omitted the truth of the final restoration of all when speaking to the masses, emphasizing only the severity of God’s punishment of sinners, believing that only fear of punishment would restrain the common person from his wickedness.  Likewise, his predecessor, Clement of Alexandria, justified the practice of reserve, basing it upon the fact that Jesus warned against casting our pearls before swine, speaking only to the multitudes in parables which He later explained to His disciples in private. Clement said:
“He (Jesus) certainly did not disclose to the many what did not belong to the many; but to the few to whom He knew that they belonged, who were capable of receiving and being moulded according to them.”  
“Some things I purposely omit, in the exercise of a wise selection, afraid to write what I guarded against speaking: not that I thought them to be wrong, but fearing for my readers, lest they should stumble by taking them in a wrong sense; and, as the proverb says, we should be found ‘reaching a sword to a child.’”  [3]
 
While we should never be deceptive concerning that which we believe, we need divine discretion in order to know whether or not an individual or group of people are ready to receive such a glorious revelation. While some Fathers, like Clement and Origen, may have practiced reserve to the extreme, yet as Jude and the Apostle Paul indicated, we nevertheless need to know how to distinguish between the obstinately rebellious, and those who are of a broken and contrite spirit, needing words of hope and comfort (Jude 22-23; 1Thess 5:14).
 
As Jude says, there are godless men who would change the grace of God into a license for immorality (Jude 4). On the other hand, there are those who are broken in spirit, like the Samaritan woman at the well, or the woman who knelt before Jesus, washing His feet with her tears (Luke 7:36-47). The psalmist said: The secret of the Lord is with those who fear Him, and He will show them His covenant” (Ps 25:14). God doesn’t reveal His secrets to just anyone, and we need to be sensitive to His prompting.
 
Another group of people God withholds His secrets from are the proud and self-righteous who lean on their own understanding, rather than being receptive and teachable like the Bereans (Acts 17:11). God even conceals the mysteries of the kingdom from those who do not receive the love of the truth (2Thess 2:10-12). Jesus taught in parables since even when they heard the truth most did not hear with understanding. When His disciples came to Him and asked Him why He taught in parables, He said:
 
"Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given… Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.” (Matt 13:11,13)
I am sure that Jesus would have explained the mysteries of the kingdom to anyone who came to Him and asked with a desire to understand and learn from Him. Jesus referred to all those who were receptive as being “babes” or His “little children, saying:
I thank You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and prudent and have revealed them to babes. Even so, Father, for so it seemed good in Your sight. (Matt 11:25-26)
 
Just prior to this declaration of praise to the Father, Jesus had sent out His disciples to proclaim the kingdom of God, saying: “And whoever will not receive you nor hear your words, when you depart from that house or city, shake off the dust from your feet” (Matt 10:14). Another similar phrase which is often misunderstood is the imperative, “He who is unjust, let him be unjust still” (Rev 22:10-11). From these imperatives we learn that, when it becomes evident that someone is not receptive to a given truth, even though we know it to be true, we are not to persist, since they do not have ears to hear. The best we can do in such cases is to plant a seed and move on, trusting that in due time the Lord would cause it to take root and grow in their hearts. I consider this divine injunction further in my article: What Meaneth the Phrase, “Let the Unjust be Unjust Still”.
 
While Charles Hadden Spurgeon did not believe in the final restoration of all, he had some words of wisdom when it comes to sharing any precious truth with the unreceptive. Commenting on Matthew 7:6 he said:
 
“When men are evidently unable to perceive the purity of a great truth, do not set it before them… When you are in the midst of the vicious, who are like ‘swine,’ do not bring forth the precious mysteries of the faith, for they will despise them, and ‘trample them under their feet’ in the mire. You are not to needlessly provoke attack upon yourself, or upon the higher truths of the gospel. You are not to judge, but you are not to act without judgment.” [4]
 
When should we share?
 
A common mistake many make is to begin sharing their newfound belief in the final restoration of all with others prematurely before having taken the time to fully understand exactly what the Scriptures have to say on the subject. It is not enough that a teaching resonates with us or is logically appealing. We must carefully and diligently search the Scriptures to see exactly what God says. As Paul said:
 
Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing (ὀρθοτομέω, orthotomeō) the word of truth.” (2Tim 2:15)
 
To rightly divide (ὀρθοτομέω, orthotomeō) literally means “to rightly cut a straight line.” The idea is to properly exegete the word of truth, carefully drawing our understanding from the Scriptures themselves, instead of reading our own biased understanding into them – something technically known as eisegesis.
 
The antonym for orthotomeō is στρεβλόω (strebloō), which means “to bend or twist.” Peter used this word to describe the way in which some had handled Paul’s epistles, saying that “untaught and unstable people twist (strebloō) them to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures” (2Peter 3:16).
 
Before we share our beliefs with others on any doctrine, we first need to do a diligent study of the relevant Scriptures themselves in order to rediscover the straightforward teaching of Scripture, as opposed to doctrines of men which have been imposed upon the Scriptures. This often requires considerable time and diligence due to our own inherited doctrinal biases.
 
I didn’t even share the truth of Universal Reconciliation with my wife and children until after nearly a year of studying and prayerfully meditating on the subject day and night for nearly a year, and I didn’t share it with the congregation I was pastoring until after three years had passed and I had written my first book on the subject, The Triumph of Mercy. After publishing it so that they could read it and then doing a series of teachings on the subject, they all likewise became convinced that God’s plan for the ages culminates in the final restoration of all, rather than an eternal dualism with God sustaining the majority of mankind in everlasting torments.
 
In addition to our inherited bias, the fact that there are so many unbiblical varieties of Universalism being promoted can make the task of discerning truth from error seem even more daunting. Much of what is presented on the subject these days in books and on social media fails the test of Scripture in one way or another. The only way to sift through it all and come to a clear understanding of the truth is to test every truth-claim according to what is written in God’s Word. Jesus said of the Scriptures, “Your word is truth” (Jn 17:17). Much of that which is promoted today in social media is not biblical, and for that reason they often seek to undermine the reliability and authority of Scripture as the inspired Word of God. But if we hold the Holy Scriptures in the same esteem as did Jesus and the Apostles, the Holy Spirit who inspired them will lead us into all truth.
 
Peter said that we should always be ready to give a defense (ἀπολογία, apologia) to everyone who asks us to explain the hope that is in us, with meekness and fear (1Peter 3:15). We derived our word apologetics from the word apologia. We should all be apologists, capable of giving a scriptural reasoned defense of our convictions to anyone who asks for it. Social media offers us a great opportunity to glean understanding from others. However, many have become lackadaisical, substituting YouTube and AI for their own personal Bible study. I have found that, while these sources can be helpful, true deep conviction only comes from a personal study of the Scriptures. When you discover a truth in Scripture it becomes a part of you in a way not possible by other means. As Paul said, faith comes by hearing the Word of God (Rom 10:17).
 
So, while we naturally want to shout it from the rooftops, it is usually more wise to exercise restraint until one has come to the point of having a firm conviction of the scriptural validity of the doctrine, being able to distinguish Biblical Universalism from its other heterodox variations of it and capable of giving a reasoned defense of the doctrine to others.
 
How should we share?
 
More important than when or to whom we share the good news of universal reconciliation is the manner in which we do it. We should be knowledgeable enough to be able to give a reasoned explanation for the hope that is in us, but more important than knowledge is the spirit in which we share it. Our primary motivation should be a love for truth the person we are sharing it with. All too often our pride gets in the way, and it becomes more a matter of winning an argument than sharing a precious pearl. Our motive should not be to demonstrate our knowledge, but to bless our hearers. As Paul said: “We know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but love edifies” (1 Cor 8:1).
 
While we should be uncompromising with truth, we should always speak the truth in love (Eph 4:15). We shouldn’t force our own convictions on anyone. As most of us know by experience, long held beliefs are mental strongholds that ultimately only the Holy Spirit can penetrate, and even then, it took most of us a lot of time for the truth to sink in. I have found that very few have been so prepared by the Lord beforehand that they immediately embrace the truth of universal reconciliation the first time it is presented to them. Even those who are open to considering it usually have many objections which need to be resolved from Scripture over an extended period of time. Often in our zeal for truth we try to force-feed people rather than presenting our beliefs to them in a way that awakens in them a desire to receive it. I believe that is what Paul had in mind when he said:
 
“Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer each one.” (Col 4:6)
 
Finally, however pure our motives may be in sharing this glorious truth with others, we should be prepared to experience rejection. I have been a missionary here in the Colombian Amazon for many years. When the news of my belief in the final restoration of all spread to the churches that supported us in the United States, our monthly support dropped drastically. However, for me personally, that was a small price to pay for such a precious truth, and we have learned through the years that the Lord is our provider and He is always faithful to meet our needs.
 
May the Lord grant to each of us the grace to know when, how and to whom we should share this wonderful news of universal salvation.
 

[1] Charles Spurgeon, Commentary on Matthew, 7:6.
 
[2] Origen, Contra Celsius. VI. 25.
 
[3] Clement of Alexandria, Stramata, book I, chapter 1
 
[4] Charles Spurgeon, Commentary on Matthew, 7:3-5
Published on
00:00
00:00

4Untitled ProjectGeorge MacDonald and the Atonement

Image description
 
by George Sidney Hurd
 
George MacDonald was born in Scottland in 1824.  As a young man he decided to pursue the pastorate and in 1850 at age 26 he was appointed minister of Trinity Congregational Church in Arundel England. However, even before entering into the ministry he had rejected many tenets of the dogmatic hyper-Calvinism of the Congregational Church he pastored, especially the belief in the predestination of all the non-elect to eternal damnation, considering such doctrines to be incompatible with the love of God.  He was not well received by his congregation due to his contempt for doctrinal teaching, calling it mere theory, void of duty. He emphasized a more mystical experiential theology saying: “I am neither Arminian nor Calvinist. To no system would I subscribe. [1] After three years of rejection by his congregation he resigned the pastorate, dedicating the rest of his life to writing fantasy novels and poetry.
 
Also, no longer having a pulpit from which to preach, He wrote three series of sermons entitled, Unspoken Sermons. It is from these sermons that I will be considering his views on the atonement (or the lack thereof). Throughout his Unspoken Sermons he is notoriously vocal about the doctrines he rejects, while at the same time refusing to clearly set forth his own beliefs. After vehemently rejecting the doctrine of Christ’s vicarious substitutionary atonement for our sins, he said:
 
“Well, then,’ will many say, ‘if you thus unceremoniously cast to the winds the doctrine of vicarious sacrifice, what theory do you propose to substitute in its stead?’ ‘In the name of the truth,’ I answer, None.”  [2]
 
While this unwillingness to clearly state his beliefs concerning the atonement makes it more difficult to determine exactly what he believed, as I hope to demonstrate, his theory can be ascertained from statements he made throughout his series of Unspoken Sermons. Here we will be determining his view of the atonement considering 1) His definition of atonement, 2) His denial of Christ’s vicarious substitutionary sacrifice, 3) His Denial of Justification through Christ’s Imputed Righteousness. All of these elements taken together make it abundantly clear that his understanding of the atonement is diametrically opposed to the actual Atonement of Christ presented to us in Scripture.
 
1) His Definition of Atonement
 
George MacDonald rejected the historic belief in the atonement as Christ having born in Himself the just penalty due to us for our sins as our substitute, calling it “a low invention,” “a lie” and “a vulgar insult to God.” Instead, he based his understanding of the atonement upon the literal meaning of our English word “atonement” which was a 16th century invention, expressing the idea of at-one-ment or reconciliation. In response to those who believed in Christ’s Penal Substitutionary Atonement he said:
 
“In what you call the atonement, in what you mean by the word, what I have already written must make it plain enough I do not believe… But, as the word was used by the best English writers at the time when the translation of the Bible was made – with all my heart, and soul, and strength, and mind, I believe in the atonement, call it the a-tone-ment, or the at-one-ment, as you please. [3]
 
However, as I point out in my article Defining Atonement, the correct definition of the Hebrew word כִּפֶּר (kippur) and its cognates which were rendered in English translations as “atonement,” do not in themselves mean reconciliation or at-one-ment, but rather “to cover, to expiate or propitiate.” The equivalent for kippur used in the Greek LXX is ἱλασμός (hilasmos) and its cognates, which translate as, “propitiation, appeasement or satisfaction.” In the Old Testament the sacrifices were necessary in order to make propitiation or expiation (kippur) for the sins of the people. The at-one-ment was a secondary result of the sacrifice. Without the substitutionary sacrifice on behalf of the people, making propitiation for their sins before God, at-one-ment or reconciliation would not have been possible (Lev 17:11). In Leviticus 16:34 the Concordant Literal Version expresses well what the Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) sacrifice accomplished. It reads:
 
This will come to be for you as an eonian statute to make a propitiatory shelter over the sons of Israel because of all their sins, once a year. And he did just as Yahweh had instructed Moses.”
 
The sacrifice was necessary in order to cover or make propitiation for their sins, thereby making possible reconciliation or at-one-ment between God and the sinner. Without the shedding of blood there was no expiation, no atonement, no remission of sins (Lev 17:11; Heb 9:22; Matt 26:28). We were reconciled unto God by nothing less than the blood of His cross (Col 1:20).
 
How does George MacDonald respond to this biblical requirement of a substitutionary blood sacrifice in order to make atonement or expiation for sin? He rejects it outright, calling the Levitical sacrificial system a mere human invention. He said of the atoning sacrifices:
 
“God took up and made use of the sacrifices men hadinvented as a way of pleasing him.” [4]
 
MacDonald not only redefines kippur (expiation) so as to simply mean reconciliation or at-one-ment, but he denies that God was the one who instituted the blood sacrifices for the remission of sin, saying that God simply accommodated their human invention. However, in order for him to do this, he must deny the authority of Scripture, since repeatedly throughout the Old Testament we see that it was God Himself who instituted the sacrificial system. God said:
 
“For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement (expiation) for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement (expiation) for the soul.” (Lev 17:11)
 
In spite of the fact that God Himself says that He gave the children of Israel the sacrificial system in order to make expiation or propitiation for their sins; and Hebrews 9:22 says that without the shedding of blood there is no remission; and in spite of the fact that Jesus said that the reason why He shed His blood was for the remission of our sins (Matt 26:28), MacDonald denied that Christ’s atoning death was necessary for the remission of our sins. To those who believed that Christ’s atoning sacrifice was necessary in order to satisfy God’s immutable justice he said:
 
“But you do not believe that the sufferings of Christ, as sufferings, justified the supreme ruler in doing anything which he would not have been at liberty to do but for those sufferings?’ I do not… he is bound in his own divinely willed nature to forgive. No atonement is necessary to him but that men should leave their sins and come back to his heart.” [5]
 
This is a total repudiation of what Paul presents in Romans 3:25-26 explaining why Christ’s atoning sacrifice (propitiation) was necessary:
 
“whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.”
 
Paul here explains that the propitiation that Christ accomplished by shedding His blood for mankind demonstrates how God could be seen to have been just while letting sins committed prior to the cross go unpunished, and also how at the present time He can declare guilty sinners who put their trust in Jesus to be just or righteous and free from guilt without violating His justice. It is because of the Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world that God can justly show mercy without being in violation of His own immutable justice (Rev 13:8; Num 14:18).  
 
If MacDonald denied that Christ’s atoning sacrifice as the Lamb of God took away the sins of the world, enabling God to be just and at the same time justify the ungodly through faith, then what did he believe the atonement involved? He believed in self-at-one-ment. He believed in a Moral Influence model of the atonement in which Christ’s example of unconditional forgiveness helps us at-one ourselves to God and others. He said:
 
I will and can make atonement, thanks be to him who is my atonement, making me at one with God and my fellows!in the sense of the atonement being a making-up for the evil done by men toward God, I believe in the atonement.” [6]
 
So, if the atonement is simply us making ourselves at-one with God, what role did he believe that Christ played in our atonement? MacDonald presents Christ as the head and mediator, showing us how we ourselves can make at-one-ment with God and our fellow man. He said of Christ’s role:
 
“He is the head and leader, the prince of the atonement. He could not do it without us, but he leads us up to the Father’s knee: he makes us make atonement.” [7]
 
So, working from the faulty English word at-one-ment, MacDonald presents an atonement that Christ could not have made without our participation. He presents Christ as simply going before us, showing us how it is done and helping us make our own atonement. This notion of the atonement would not have been possible in any other language. All Spanish versions correctly render kippur as expiación (expiation), as also do the French versions. Likewise, in German kippur is rendered sühne, and katallagē or reconciliation, versöhnung, thereby maintaining a clear distinction between expiation for sins and its resulting reconciliation.
 
Some have mistakenly concluded that MacDonald held to the Christus Victor theory of the atonement. However, the Christus Victor theory teaches that Christ’s atonement gained victory over Satan and the evil powers of the world 2000 years ago at the cross. The statement MacDonald made which has led some to conclude that he held to the Christus Victor model is where he said:
 
“Did he not foil and slay evil by letting all the waves and billows of its horrid sea break upon him, go over him, and die without rebound-spend their rage, fall defeated, and cease? Verily, he made atonement!” [8]
 
Taken alone out of context this does sound similar to the Christus Victor model. However, that quote is in the context of MacDonald saying that it is we ourselves who must make atonement by following His example, thereby overcoming evil with good. Here is a more complete quote, showing the context:
 
Did he not thus lay down his life persuading us to lay down ours at the feet of the Father?... Did he not foil and slay evil by letting all the waves and billows of its horrid sea break upon him, go over him, and die without rebound-spend their rage, fall defeated, and cease? Verily, he made atonement! We sacrifice to God! – it is God who has sacrificed his own son to us.”
 
So, what he is really saying is that Christ facilitated our at-one-ment by setting an example, persuading us to overcome evil through self-denial, not returning evil for evil, just as He as our forerunner modeled to us. In this way evil is conquered by us as we follow His example. As I explain in my article, Complementary Views of the Atonement, there are truths contained in the Christus Victor and Moral Influence theories of the atonement. However, the central truth of the atonement is that “Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures (1Cor 15:3). Therefore, any theory of the atonement which omits Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice for our sins is at best incomplete.
 
2) His Denial of Christ’s Vicarious Substitutionary Sacrifice
 
George MacDonald viewed Christ’s atonement as nothing more than Him suffering evil at the hands of wicked men without sin or retaliation, thereby setting an example for us to follow in making our own atonement or at-one-ment with God. He vehemently repudiated the doctrine of Christ’s substitutionary death, in which He vicariously bore the penalty for our sins on the Cross. He rejected the idea that God’s justice could be satisfied by an innocent man suffering in the place of the guilty. He said:
 
“Rather than believe in a justice that…could be any satisfaction for the wrong-doing of a man that a man who did no wrong should suffer, I would be driven from among men, and dwell with the wild beasts that have not reason enough to be unreasonable. What! God, the father of Jesus Christ, like that! His justice contented with direst injustice! The anger of him who will nowise clear the guilty, appeased by the suffering of the innocent![9]
 
Apart from this statement revealing his misapprehension of the atonement as a Triune endeavor, essentially dividing the Trinity, this is also a repudiation of clear statements of Scripture. In Christ there was no sin. Yet in Isaiah 53:6 it says of Christ that, “The Lord laid on Him the iniquity of us all.” Peter said:
 
“For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit.” (1 Peter 3:18)
 
Christ, the innocent and spotless Lamb of God, bore our sins on the cross (Isa 53:12; 1Peter 2:24; Heb 9:28). Paul said of that transfer of our guilt upon the sinless Son of God:
 
“For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” (2 Cor 5:21)
 
Because Christ bore our sins, the just for the unjust, being made to be sin for us, we have been justified or declared to be the righteousness of God in Him. Having been justified by His blood, we have been saved from the eschatological wrath of God through Him (Rom 5:8-9). The transactional truth of 2Corinthians 5:21 is beautifully expressed in the 2nd century Epistle to Diognetus:
 
“He Himself took on Him the burden of our iniquities, He gave His own Son as a ransom for us, the holy One for transgressors, the blameless One for the wicked, the righteous One for the unrighteous... O sweet exchange! O unsearchable operation! O benefits surpassing all expectation! That the wickedness of many should be hid in a single righteous One, and that the righteousness of One should justify many transgressors!” [10]
 
MacDonald argues that it is not possible for God’s justice to be satisfied by punishing an innocent victim in the place of the guilty.  However, what he fails to consider is the fact that Jesus was not merely an innocent victim. He was not some independent third party suffering on behalf of the guilty. He was God the Son Himself in flesh, bearing our sins and dying in our place as our representative head. The atonement was a Triune endeavor. God the Father was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, and Christ through the eternal Spirit vicariously offered Himself without spot to God (2Cor 5:19; Jn 10:17-18; Heb 9:14). He was the spotless Lamb of God who took away the sins of the world (Jn 1:29).
 
MacDonald rejects Christ’s substitutionary death as a myth in the same way that he regarded as a mere human invention the sacrifices that God instituted to foreshadow Christ’s death in our place as the Lamb of God without spot or blemish. In my article, The Early Fathers and Penal Substitutionary Atonement, I cite numerous Fathers dating from the time of the Apostles, demonstrating that they all affirmed what the Scriptures teach: that Christ bore the penalty for our sins as our substitute, the just for the unjust. In spite of the historicity of the doctrine, MacDonald rejects it, saying that God simply accommodated man’s mistaken notions, just as he claims He did with the sacrifices which were given to foreshadow Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice. He said:
 
“If it be asked how, if it be false, the doctrine of substitution can have been permitted to remain so long an article of faith to so many, I answer, On the same principle on which God took up and made use of the sacrifices men had, in their lack of faith, invented as a way of pleasing him.” [11] They invented a satisfaction for sin which was an insult to God.” [12]
 
The claim that Christ’s atoning sacrifice in which He made propitiation (satisfaction of justice) for our sins is merely a human invention is a denial of Scripture itself. Romans 3:25 says of Christ’s atoning sacrifice: “whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood.” Far from it being man’s invention, it is seen to be God’s provision. MacDonald has no qualms about rejecting the Scriptures when they don’t align with his view of divine justice. To those who challenged his view of justice, saying that God is just in punishing sin, he replied:
 
“You say he does, for the Bible says so. I say, if the Bible said so, the Bible would lie…” [13]
 
3) His Denial of Justification through Christ’s Imputed Righteousness
 
Strangely, in MacDonald’s volume entitled, Justice, he doesn’t mention the words “justify” or “justification” even once. In fact, they don’t appear even once in his entire three volume set of Unspoken Sermons. This is in marked contrast to the Apostle Paul who mentions justification 18 times in the epistle of Romans alone: 16 times he uses “justify” (dikaióo), 14 of which refer to God justifying sinners (Rom 3:20,24,26,28,304:2,55:1,96:78:30,30b8:33), and two times he uses the word “justification or acquittal” (dikaíosis) Rom 4:255:18).
 
The reason why he didn’t mention justification is because he did not believe in it. He believed in salvation by one’s own righteousness, whereas “justification” (dikaíosis) by definition means “acquittal or removal of guilt.” [14] It is something that must be received, not achieved. We were justified the moment we believed. As Paul said:
 
“Therefore, having been justified (perfect passive) by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” (Rom 5:1)
 
Justification in Scripture is not something we attain unto after a lifetime of sanctification, it is something we received the moment we believed. It is a free gift, not the result of works of righteousness which we have done (Titus 3:5-6). In Romans 3:23-24 it says: “For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.”
 
I personally find MacDonald’s repudiation of God’s free gift of justification through the imputation of Christ’s righteousness shocking. He said:
 
“Pray God I have no righteousness imputed to me. Let me be regarded as the sinner I am.” [15]
 
Equally strange is his claim that that the word “imputed” is used only once in the New Testament. He said:
 
“We have the word imputed just once in the New Testament. Whether the evil doctrine may have sprung from any possible misunderstanding of the passage where it occurs, I hardly care to inquire.” [16]
 
The one instance he refers to is Romans 4:3 where it says: "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him (logizomai) for righteousness.”  I find it particularly strange that he would say that, considering that he was supposedly familiar with the New Testament Greek, and logízomai, which means, “to account as or  impute,” is used by Paul in Romans alone 18 times, 12 of which refer to our justification in which Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us (Rom 4:3,4,5,6,8,9,10,11,22,23,246:11).
 
MacDonald not only ignores the recurring theme of Christ’s imputed righteousness in Scripture, but he even goes to the extreme of calling it satanic. He said:
 
“And any system which tends to persuade men that…a man is saved by having his sins hidden under a robe of imputed righteousness – that system, so far as this tendency, is of the devil and not of God.” [17] He will impute to him nothing that he has not.” [18]
 
To say that God will not impute anything to us that we are not is a direct repudiation of the gospel of justification by faith alone apart from works. For brevity, I will just cite one example where we see that even when we were yet ungodly, the moment we believed we were justified, having Christ’s righteousness imputed to us. Our sins were covered, being clothed in the robe of Christ’s imputed righteousness. In Romans 4:4-8 Paul said:
 
“Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted (logizomai) for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes (logizomai) righteousness apart from works: 7 ‘Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; 8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute (logizomai) sin.”
 
Here we see two opposite imputations: we have either been justified by faith, having God’s righteousness imputed to us (v. 5), or we are under condemnation, having our sins imputed to us (v. 8). MacDonald said: “Pray God I have no righteousness imputed to me. Let me be regarded as the sinner I am.” [19] In contrast, Paul says: “Blessed is the man to whom the Lord shall not impute sin.” To this MacDonald retorts: “It would be the worst of all wrongs to the guilty to treat them as innocent.” [20] Who are we going to believe, the Bible or George MacDonald? MacDonald said that if the Bible did not agree with his understanding of justice, the Bible would lie. In contrast, Paul said, “let God be true but every man a liar.” (Rom 3:4).
 
George MacDonald makes numerous other interrelated claims which I believe to be equally contrary to Scripture, such as his denial that God can be both Father and Judge (cf. 1Peter 1:17), that His immutable justice requires a just recompense for every infraction (Heb 2:2) or that God’s justice is indistinguishable from His mercy (Heb 10:28; James 2:13). It is only because of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world that God’s justice has never been in conflict with His mercy. I had intended to consider these additional points here. However, due to space, I will have to leave it for another article.
 
The good news is that Christ died for our sins, was buried and was raised because of our justification (Rom 4:24-25; 1Cor 15:1-3). Sadly, no such gospel can be found in the writings of George MacDonald.
 
[1] Greville MacDonald, George MacDonald and His Wife (London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1924), 155.
 
[2] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 198). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[3] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (pp. 199-200). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[4] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 195). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[5] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III (p. 201). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[6] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 200). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[7] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 200). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[8] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 200). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[9] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 194). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[10] Mathetes, The Epistle to Diognetus, Chapter 9
 
[11] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 195). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[12] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 195). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[13] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 188). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[14] James Swanson, Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament) (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997).
 
[15] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Righteousness (p. 216). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[16] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III (p. 216). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[17] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, The Last Farthing (p. 100). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[18] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 197). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[19] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Righteousness (p. 216). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
 
[20] MacDonald, George . Unspoken Sermons Series I, II, and III, Justice (p. 196). Start Publishing LLC. Kindle Edition.
Published on
00:00
00:00

5Was the Great Commission fulfilled prior to 70 A D?

Image description
by George Sidney Hurd
 
“This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.” (Col 1:23 NIV)
 
In the Great Commission Jesus commanded His disciples saying: “Go into all the world (κόσμος, kosmos) and preach the gospel to every creature, making disciples of all the nations (Mark 16:15; Matt 28:19). He also said: “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world (οἰκουμένη, oikoumenē) as a witness to all the nations (ἔθνος, ethnos), and then the end will come” (Matt 24:14). He told them that they would be His witnesses “in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth (γῆ)” (Acts 1:8).
 
The Church has historically understood Christ’s commission in its most obvious sense as encompassing the entire planet and that our mission will not be completed until the gospel has reached the whole world. However, based upon Paul’s declaration in Colossians 1:23, as well as other verses we will be considering, Preterists argue that the Great Commission was fulfilled prior to 70AD, at which time the end of the age came and Christ returned. In this article we will be taking a closer look at the verses presented by Preterists as evidence that the Great Commission had already been fulfilled in the first century.
 
1) Colossians 1:23
“This is the gospel that you heard and that has been proclaimed (τοῦ εὐαγγελίου…τοῦ κηρυχθέντος lit. “the gospel proclaimed”) to every creature under heaven, and of which I, Paul, have become a servant.” (Col 1:23 NIV)
 
Many translations have erroneously rendered the articular aorist participle τοῦ κηρυχθέντος (tou kēryssentos) as though it were a perfect passive verb (“has been proclaimed”). This rendering makes Paul out to say that the gospel had already been proclaimed to every creature under heaven at the time he wrote the epistle to the Colossians around 60 AD – something that not even Preterists would affirm. The aorist participle’s primary role is to describe the action’s nature, not its temporal sequence. Therefore, context and logic must determine whether the proclamation was something already accomplished or something still being carried out.
 
Paul’s obvious intent was not to say that the gospel had already been preached to every creature under heaven but rather that the gospel which they had heard and received is the gospel “proclaimed” to all under heaven. Many Translations correctly reflect Paul’s obvious intent. The literal translation (LITV) reads, proclaimed”; the CLV, “being heralded”; the Douay-Rheims, “which is preached”; the WEB, “which is being proclaimed.”  In this verse Paul was simply saying that the same gospel they had heard from him was being proclaimed throughout the whole world to every creature, just as Christ had commissioned us to do.
 
2) Colossians 1:5-6
“because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel, 6 which has come to you, as it has also in all the world (τοῦ παρόντος εἰς ὑμᾶς, καθὼς καὶ ἐν παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ, lit. “coming to you, as also in all the world”) and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth.”
 
This verse is also used as evidence that the Great Commission had already been fulfilled prior to 70 AD. However, there are at least two reasons why this passage does not support their claim. In the first place, Paul uses the present tense. It literally says: “the truth of the gospel coming to you as also in all the world.” This passage when properly translated further confirms that Paul didn’t mean to say that the gospel had already been proclaimed to every creature under heaven later in verse twenty-three.
 
In the second place, just as the expression, “every creature under heaven,” is planetary in scope and not restricted to the confines of the Roman Empire, so also is the expression “all the world (παντὶ τῷ κόσμῳ, panti tō kosmō).” In order to substantiate their argument for a pre-70 AD fulfillment of the Great Commission, Preterists try to restrict the term “world” κόσμος (kosmos) so as to only include the Roman Empire. However, in 1John 2:2 it says that Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the “whole world” (kosmos). To be consistent they would also have to limit the atonement to the Roman Empire. Did not Jesus die for all? Is it possible that He didn’t have Asia and the American Indians in mind when He told them that they would be His witnesses unto the end of the earth? Also then, just as now, the term world was at times used in the hyperbolic sense, such as, “now the whole world will know.” (c.f., John 12:19; Romans 1:8). However, kosmos is never used in reference to the Roman Empire.
 
Certainly, when Jesus gave the Great Commission, He meant for it to be proclaimed to all under heaven and not just those who lived within the boundaries of the 1st century Roman Empire! In fact, there is no indication that regions within the Roman Empire such as Gaul (which encompassed France, parts of Belgium, some areas of Switzerland, Germany, and northern Italy) were reached with the gospel prior to 70 AD. It wasn’t until late in the 2nd century that Church Fathers like Irenaeus and Tertullian describe efforts to reach parts of Gaul with the gospel.
 
Therefore, rightly understood, just as with Colossians 1:23, verses 5 and 6 speak of the expansion of the gospel which was underway in the 1st century, rather than it being regarded as a mission already completed.
 
3) Romans 1:8
 “First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world (kosmos).”
 
As already indicated, this is an obvious example of hyperbole. Even if one could limit the term kosmos so as to only include the Roman Empire, Paul couldn’t have meant it in a literal sense because there were still parts of the Roman Empire which had not yet heard the gospel, not to mention the whole world literally speaking about the faith of the believers in the church of Rome.
 
Spain was within the Roman Empire. Yet in Romans 15:20-28 Paul explained to the Christians at Rome that the reason why he hadn’t come to visit them sooner was because he didn’t want to preach the gospel where Christ had already been named, but that he would visit them on the way to Spain. The obvious motive for his trip to Spain was to preach the gospel where Christ was not yet known.
 
4) Romans 10:18
“But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: Their sound has gone out to all the earth (γῆ, gē), and their words to the ends of the world (οἰκουμένη, oikoumenē, “inhabited earth”).”
 
This verse is often cited as evidence that the Great Commission had already been fulfilled by the mid-1st century. They argue that the terms “earth” (γῆ, gē), and “world” (οἰκουμένη, oikoumenē) only refer to the Roman Empire. However, apart from the fact that the entirety of the Roman Empire had not yet been reached with the gospel in the first century, the Psalm that David is quoting is Psalm 19:1-4 where we see that the “they” being referred to are the heavens and the firmament declaring the glory of God to the inhabitants of the entire planet, and not merely to the Roman Empire which did not even exist when the psalm was written.
 
The word used for “earth” (γῆ, gē), has a range of meaning identical to our word “earth.” It can mean the earth, referring to soil, or to a region or land, but most commonly it is simply the proper name for our planet Earth. Here it is clearly used to refer to our entire planet, just as in Psalm 19:4 which he quotes.  The term οἰκουμένη (oikoumenē) normally refers to the entire inhabited world. In one instance it is limited to the Roman Empire. In Luke 2:1 Caesar Augustus issued a decree that “all the world” (oikoumenē) should be registered. It is often used in the hyperbolic sense, much as we would say of a singer: “The whole world came to see her.” 
 
However, clearly “the ends of the world” in Psalm 19:4 which Paul cites must be understood in the normal sense of the entirety of our inhabited planet. When Jesus said that the gospel was to be “preached in all the world (οἰκουμένη, oikoumenē) as a witness to all the nations” in Matthew 24:14, He obviously meant the whole world of humanity that He died for, and not just those within the Roman Empire. When Paul said in Acts 17:31 that God has appointed a day on which He will judge the world (oikoumenē) in righteousness, He was clearly referring to all of humanity and not just Roman citizens. That Paul didn’t consider the whole world as already having heard the gospel is evident since in verse 8 he said that they were still proclaiming it (Rom 10:8).
 
So how are we to understand Paul in his quote of Psalm 19:4? To me, considering that the gospel had not yet reached the entirety of the Roman Empire, not to mention the whole world, and considering that Christ’s atoning sacrifice was for the sins of the whole world (1Jn 2:2) and not just the Romans, it is obvious that it should be understood in the poetic and hyperbolic sense. In this same epistle Paul said that he had yet to travel to Spain in order to preach the gospel where Christ had not yet been proclaimed (Rom 15:20-28), so he clearly did not mean to say that the gospel had already gone out to all the earth.
 
5) 1Timothy 3:16
“God was manifested in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen by angels, preached among the Gentiles (ἔθνος, ethnos), believed on in the world (κόσμος, kosmos) received up in glory.”
 
This verse is sometimes presented as evidence that the Great Commission had been fulfilled prior to 70 AD. However, all that Paul is saying here is that the gospel had been proclaimed among the Gentiles, not that it had been proclaimed to all the Gentiles or ethnic groups, as Jesus commissioned us to do. Some 3 years later in the second epistle to Timothy we still see Paul proclaiming the gospel, enduring all things in order that the elect might obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus (2Tim 1:8; 2:8-10; 4:17). He told Timothy to preach the word and do the work of an evangelist (2Tim 4:2-5). Likewise, while Christ was believed on in the world (kosmos), the kosmos cannot be reasonably argued to be the Roman Empire. Except for instances when it is used in a hyperbolic sense, kosmos refers to the entire planet and it often refers to the entire created universe. Additionally, Paul here doesn’t say that He was believed on in the whole world. In fact, in the same epistle Paul said that he lived an exemplary life as a pattern to those who were yet going to believe on Him (1Tim 1:16).
 
Therefore, the verses that Preterists present to substantiate their claim that the Great Commission had already been fulfilled prior to 70 AD actually indicate the contrary when they are considered grammatically and in context. Neither did any of the Early Fathers consider the Great Commission to have been fulfilled. What we see is the description of their continued efforts to reach the unreached with the gospel within the Roman Empire and beyond.

Categories

______________
The Inerrency of Scripture
The Love of God
The Fear of the Lord
The Question of Evil
Original Sin
Understanding the Atonement
Homosexuality and the Bible
Reincarnationism
Open Theism

Answers to Objections:

Has God Rejected Israel:
God's Glorious Plan for the Ages
The Manifest Sons of God
The Trinity and the Deity of Christ
Eternal Preexistence of Christ
Preterism vs. Futurism
The Two-Gospel Doctrine Examined
Tagalog Articles