So, what are we exactly working towards in faith?

The theological hope behind Romans

The church as the new Olive Tree, Israel of God. That is, “God has chosen and called a people to himself out of all peoples, as Abraham was called out of Ur, and believers have been called by the gospel…As such they are his beloved, and they are holy, placed on God’s side and separated from the world. Just as the name ‘church’…takes the place of Israel as the historical people of God…And all this because of the gracious character of God’s election and because of Christ, who is the seed of Abraham as well as the second Adam: the one in whom the whole church [Jews/Gentiles], has become one body and one new man.” Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, p 333, 361.

 “A second striking feature of Paul's talk of the gospel of Jesus Christ is his concern to insist that this gospel was not an unexpected turn in God's purposes. Quite the contrary. His opening statement in Romans immediately defines "the gospel of God" as that "which was promised beforehand through his [God's] prophets in the holy scriptures" (Rom. 1.1)...the final catena of scriptures (15.9-12) was for Paul no doubt the most fitting way to round off his whole argument… Of course, Paul speaks throughout not only as a theologian, but as an apostle, as a missionary. And his preaching was not simply the impartation of information ("knowledge") that his hearers were spiritual beings who only needed to know the facts for their destiny to be secure. Paul preached for a decision, "with a view to the obedience of faith among all the nations" (Rom. 1.5)…the preacher must be sent to preach so that the hearers may believe (10.14-17)…the ambassador must plead on behalf of Christ,” Dunn, Apostle Paul, p 169, 324.

Romans 15

4 “For whatever was written in former days [i.e., in the OT] was written for our instruction [i.e., us Christians].” [NOTE: the LXX is scripture!]

7 Therefore welcome one another, as Christ also welcomed you, to the glory of God.

8 I maintain that Messiah became a diakonos of the circumcision [Jews] to show God’s truth, the God who guarantees the promises He made to their forefathers.

9 He also came so that the nations could praise God for His mercy, as Scripture says,

“Therefore I will praise you among the nations; I will sing praises to your name.”

10 And also: “Nations, celebrate with His people!”

11 And again: “All you nations, praise the Lord; let all peoples [laoi] praise him.” [LXX, Ps 116.1]

12 And again, Isaiah says, “Jesse’s descendant will come to rule the nations, and place their hope in him.” [Isa 11.10, LXX; cp. “descendant of David”, Rom 1.3]

13 May the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing [faith], that you may overflow in hope, in the power of the Holy Spirit.

·       Paul’s favorite prophet: 80+ throughout his letters; almost 20 in Romans [Bible Exposition Commentary: Prophets, p 13; Moyise, Menken, Isaiah in the NT, p 117f.].

·       Nation [ethnos] used 6 times; in this case means all nations in distinction from Christians [v.11], “the true Israel of God…according to the spirit” [Gal 6.16; cp. “true circumcision”, Phil 3.3].

LXX references:

1.     v. 3 [Ps 68.9];

2.     v. 8-9 [2Sam 22.50; Ps 17.49-50, David’s song of praise for conquering the nations];

3.     v. 10 [“son of Moses”, Deut. 32.43; cp. Ps 67.3,5];

“Rejoice with him, you heavens, and let all of the sons of God [gods, ESV] worship him [NLT following LXX]; Praise [Worship, proskyneo] his people, O you nations [RSV; cp. DRB; “about His people”, CJB], and let all angels of God [NLT] strengthen themselves in him...”

“For the Greek turned the triumphalist Hebrew ("Praise his people, O you nations" — RSV) into something much more to Paul's point: "Rejoice, nations, with his people." The "with" provides just the note of integration which Paul evidently sought.” Dunn, Apostle Paul, p 530. 

4.     v. 11 [Ps 116.1, nations will worship];

5.     v. 12 [Isa 11.10, Davidic descendant rules the nations];

6.     v. 21 [Isa 52.15, suffering servant will be exalted/victorious over the nations].

Why the LXX?

Scattered Jewish-Christians preferred it because it retained its Hebrew flavor and the common [Koine] Greek was easy to understand. Thus, it appeals to both literate and illiterate classes.

The OT theme “alludes to the fact that David will praise the Lord in the presence of the defeated nations when they, as his subjects, bring their tribute payments. Ideally God’s chosen king was to testify to the nations of God’s greatness.” [NET Bible]

“Paul returns to the theme in what is in fact the climactic statement of the gospel and theology expounded in the letter.” Dunn, Apostle Paul, p 529-530.

“Paul takes OT language, which might more naturally hold out hope of (now dispersed [v.9]) Israel’s ultimate dominance over the Gentiles (under the royal Messiah, [v.12]), in fulfillment of God’s covenant faithfulness (v.11), and acknowledged (submissively) by the nations (v.10)… [transforming] it into an expression of [an ideal humanity] (Gentile and Jew) united in worship of the same God and by hope in the same Christ.” WBC, Romans 15.7-13.

·       The Jewishness of Jesus, the Davidic Messiah, is most prominent [v.12]. Why?

“…it means that God’s promises to the fathers are likewise still in place, still secure, even if complete fulfillment is not yet; And the promises of God thus confirmed to Israel were precisely the promises that Abraham would be ‘heir of the world’ and ‘father of many nations’…”

WBC, Romans 15.7-13.

Isa 10.20-34

·       Isa 10.20: an individual foreign [Assyrian?] dictator [antichrist?].

·       Isa 10.22: typical “good news [remnant], bad news [destruction for most]” prophecy; cp. Rom. 9:27–28 using LXX.

·       vv.27-34: The Assyrians on the march towards Zion. [They eventually would destroy Samaria & Northern Israel, c. 720s BC.].

NOTE: context calls for a near fulfillment [“in yet a little while”, vv.25-26].

The theme: “When kings rule by the guidelines of their own ambition and power, God’s purposes are thwarted and judgment awaits.” WBC, Isaiah 11.1-10.

Isa 11

·       v. 1 [cp. v.10]: “root of Jesse” “root of David”; that is, the descendant [WBC, vol. 52, Part 1]; “stump” descriptive of a broken/cut off dynasty recognizing the severely reduced status of the Davidic throne.

·       vv. 2-5: skills needed to reign: “wisdom/understanding, counsel-strategy/heroism-might [cp. el-gibbor, cp. Isa 9.6] and fear/obedience” [basic terms for faith]. A lack of knowledge is a grave sin [Isa 1.3; cp. Hos 4.6]

NOTE: The Assyrian claimed these for himself [power/strength, wisdom/understanding, mighty/valiant one, 10.13].

The theme is one of unbiased justice and rule!

·       vv. 6-9: once fierce creatures [wolf, leopard, cobra], symbolizing the nations, at peace with the saints [lamb]; cp. Dan 7. As well as the restored/re-created world of Eden, from “royal/holy Mount Zion/Jerusalem” to the rest of the world [“waters cover the sea”].

·       v. 10, 12 Messiah as “the signal flag/banner [glory] for all nations to seek”.

“These verses remain among the most beautiful examples of monarchic ritual and poetry in Messianic literature. They shine as a luminous light. The problems come from the generations, including our own, that ‘do not know, do not understand’, who have ‘eyes but do not see, ears but do not hear’, with whom God has to work to reach these goals.” WBC

·       vv. 13-16 God uses the nations to inaugurate the rule of them by His people. The reunification of Israel miraculously removes natural barriers [sea/streams dry up].

NOTE: “That day” 10.20, 27; 11.10-11; Heb. “in the end of the days” [Isa 2.2] yet undetermined future!

True and False Narratives

By Anthony F. Buzzard

God has a Kingdom of God or Restoration movement under way as His Project for man, Plan for Man. This is God’s response to the failure and disobedience of the first Adam. This Gospel (Good News) of the Kingdom project (God’s logos) is an invitation to all who choose to participate. The narrative goes like this. Each participant must embrace the challenge by first believing in the project (“unless you repent and believe the Kingdom of God Gospel as a child, you won’t enter it”); then he must be forgiven for his past. He must then embark on the journey that ends in immortalization and corulership of the new world order which will be the world inaugurated at the last trumpet to be blown as in Rev 11:15 -18. This is the future return of the Messiah to the earth.

For the narrative to be true, the characters in the narrative must be identified correctly. The Man Messiah Jesus is the pioneer participant in the Kingdom project. He is also the announcer of the Project, the Gospel preacher. And he died to forgive all who believe, on his terms. The God who plans and directs the entire project is the God of Israel. of Abraham (Gal. 3:8 ) and Isaac and Jacob, the God of Jesus. Candidates to participate in the Kingdom Project are men and women of all nations, not just Jews.

False narratives are those which do not match the only true narrative, the Biblical one; False narratives fail because they miss the biblical climax by diverting the narrative, taking a wrong turn, by offering the participants a false hope of disembodied existence in “heaven” at death.
This destroys the actual objective of the Kingdom project, which is to govern and administer the world with the Messiah Jesus, when he comes back. Jesus and his associate administrators will be empowered and authorized to subdue the world, that is, the Messiah’s enemies, led by a final antichrist.

The book of Revelation is a concentrated account of that future encounter of Messiah with hostile, resistant man. This is the climax of the whole Kingdom movement, the object and conclusion of the True Narrative and Project. Psalm. 2, in 12 verses, reveals in advance the end-point of the Kingdom project. The hostile world is bidden to submit to the Messiah whom God will have then placed (at the second coming of Jesus) on Mount Zion. Verse 10 bids the hostile world submit to the authority of the arriving Messiah, and not to resist him, lest they be destroyed by the overwhelming authority of God’s agent the Messiah.

Appropriately then v. 9, “the Messiah will break them with a rod of iron and shatter them like earthenware” is recalled 3 times by Jesus in the book of Revelation (2:26, 27; 12:5; 19:15). These passages declare the goal and reward of the Kingdom project: and they remind the reader of the need for human subjection to the great Kingdom project of the one God of Israel. They also describe the authority conferred on Jesus and the saints, recalling Dan. 7:14, 18, 22, 27 (“obey them”) and Dan. 2:44, 45, the Kingdom or world empire which replaces all rivals. All former nation states will then accept the Kingdom of the Messiah and his saints.

The biblical true narrative is falsified when it is never allowed its climax. The project is falsified when it is reduced, shrunk, to a “dying and rising” Messiah project, which allows for no denouement of the grand project -- which is the subjection of rebellious man and governments to the risen and exalted, and returning Messiah and his saints. Thus Ps. 2 finds its fulfillment as the vision of the returning Messiah who takes control of chaotic human societies and turns them (at the future 7th trumpet. Rev. 11:15-18) into the Kingdom of God, which is the end-game of the entire Kingdom project. This is the Gospel as announced by Jesus (Heb. 2:3) and all the NT Christians.

Briefly, any attempt to describe the Biblical narrative without its climax at the future return of Jesus and the resurrection of all the saints (I Cor 1r:23) is a failed and inadequate narrative. not fully true to the Bible.

Bible Study 12.14.14: "Begotten not Made"?

The Origin of the Son of God vs the Incarnation of “God the Son”

 

Ray Brown, Birth of the Messiah: “In Luke 1.35 the begetting is not quasi-sexual as if God takes the place of a male principle in mating with Mary. There is more of a connotation to creativity. Mary is not barren, and in her case the child does not come into existence because God cooperates with the husband’s generative action and removes the sterility. Rather, Mary is a virgin who has not known man, and therefore the child is totally God’s work—a new creation…And this double expression of God’s activity makes it clear that when the child is called “holy” and “Son of God”, these designations are true to what he is and to his origins.”

Fitzmyer, The Gospel According to Luke: “The idea of Incarnation is foreign to Luke, as to Matthew. [In Luke 1.35] ‘Therefore (dio kai)’ expresses a causal connection between the virginal conception and the divine Sonship. It is another indication that Luke does not have a notion of Jesus’ preexistence.”

J.D.G. Dunn, Christology in the Making: “In his birth narrative Luke is more explicit than Matthew in his assertion of Jesus’ divine sonship from birth [1.32-35; 2.49]…it is sufficiently clear that it is a begetting, a becoming, which is in view, the coming into existence of one who will be called and will in fact be the Son of God—not by the transition of a preexistent being to become the soul of a human baby or the metamorphosis of a divine Being into a human fetus…Similarly in Acts there is no sign of any Christology of pre-existence.”

D. Hare, Matthew, Interpretation: “Not only was [Matthew] referred to among Greek-speaking Jews as Genesis but also his phrase ‘the book of the genesis of Jesus Christ’ is strongly reminiscent of the Greek version of Gen 5.1, ‘the book of the genesis of human beings’, and Gen 2.4, ‘the book of the genesis of heaven and earth’…in Jesus Christ, God had made a new beginning. To borrow from the language of Hollywood, the First Gospel could be billed as ‘Genesis II, the Sequel’.”

W.B. Tatum: “Now the origin of Jesus Messiah was thus” (1.18a). Following these words, the First Evangelist demonstrates that the circumstance surrounding Jesus’ origin—both genealogical (1.18b-25) and geographical (2.1-4.16)—are in fulfillment of OT prophecies about the Davidic Messiah.”

N.H. Snaith, The Distinctive Ideas of the Old Testament: “Neither Catholic nor Protestant theology is based on Biblical theology. In each case we have a domination of Christian theology by Greek thought."

 

So What Happened?

“The holy, pre-existent Spirit, that created every creature, God made to dwell in flesh, which He chose.” Hermas, Similitudes, V.6.5.

“For just as, when John says, The Word was made flesh, John 1.14 we understand the Spirit also in the mention of the Word.” Tertullian, Praxeas, Ch 26.

“The Word and Son of God…enters into a virgin; being the Holy Spirit…He us endued with flesh; God is mingled with man.” Cyprian, Idol. Treatise 6.

“The Holy Ghost, descending from above, hallowed the Virgin's womb, and…mingled Himself with the fleshly nature of man...” Hilary, On Trinity, 2.26.

“There is one only physician, of flesh and of spirit, generate and ingenerate, God in man…Son of Mary and Son of God, first created and then uncreated, Jesus Christ our Lord.” Ignatius, Eph. 7:2

“Christ the Lord who saved us, being first spirit, then became flesh…” 2 Clement 9.5.

Athanasius, The Incarnation. “Just as the astronaut, in order to operate [in space] puts on an elaborate space-suit which enables him to live and act in this new, unfamiliar environment, so the Logos put on a body which enabled him to behave as a human being among human beings. But his relation to this body is no closer than that of an astronaut to his space-suit.”

On First Principles, Origen described Jesus as “the only-begotten Son, who was born, but without any beginning…His generation is eternal and everlasting. It was not by receiving the breath of life that he is made a Son, by any outward act, but by God’s own nature.”

Hence Wilberforce: “Origen introduced the phrase ‘the Son’s eternal generation’” and W. Pannenberg, Systematic Theology: “Only with Origen’s doctrine of the eternal begetting of the Son did the concept emerge of an eternal trinity in God.”

Complete WordStudy Dictionary: “The designation of this relationship by words with a temporal notion [“this day have I begotten you”, Ps 2.7] has troubled theologians, who have proffered various explanations. Origen understood this as referring to the Son's relationship within the Trinity and was the first to propose the concept of eternal generation.”

J.O. Buswell Jr. “The notion that the Son was begotten by the Father in eternity past, not as an event, but as an inexplicable relationship, has been accepted and carried along in the Christian theology since the 4^th-century. We have examined all the instances in which ‘begotten’ or ‘born’ or related words are applied to Christ, and we can say with confidence that the Bible has nothing whatsoever to say about ‘begetting’ as an eternal relationship between the Father and the Son.”

Adam Clarke: “the doctrine of the eternal Sonship of Christ is, in my opinion, anti-scriptural, and highly dangerous…To say that he was begotten from all eternity, is, in my opinion, absurd; and the phrase eternal Son is a positive self-contradiction.”  

Cut to: Christ-Mass

The New Encyclopedia Britannica, v. 13, 15^th ed. 1990: “Christian festival celebrated on December 25, commemorating the birth of Jesus Christ and also a popular secular holiday…was celebrated in Rome by AD 336…In Jerusalem, opposition to Christmas lasted longer, but it was subsequently accepted. In the Armenian Church, a Christmas on December 25 was never accepted… The reason why Christmas came to be celebrated…Christians wished the date to coincide with the pagan Roman festival marking the “birthday of the unconquered sun” (natalis solis invicti); In the Roman world the Saturnalia (December 17) was a time of merrymaking and exchange of gifts. December 25 was also regarded as the birth date of the Iranian mystery god Mithra, the Sun of Righteousness. On the Roman New Year (January 1), houses were decorated with greenery and lights, and gifts were given to children and the poor. To these observances were added the German and Celtic Yule rites when the Teutonic tribes penetrated into Gaul, Britain and central Europe. Food and good fellowship, the Yule log and Yule cakes, greenery and fir trees, gifts and greetings all commemorated different aspects of this festive season. Fires and lights, symbols of warmth and lasting life, have always been associated with the winter festival, both pagan and Christian. Since the Middle Ages, evergreens, as symbols of survival, have been associated with Christmas. Christmas is traditionally regarded as the festival of the family and of children, under the name of whose patron, St. Nicholas, presents are exchanged in many countries.

Tree worship, common among the pagan Europeans, survived after their conversion to Christianity in the Scandinavian customs of decorating the house and barn with evergreens at the New Year to scare away the devil and of setting up a tree for the birds during Christmastime; it survived further in the custom, also observed in Germany, of placing a Yule tree at an entrance or inside the house in the midwinter holidays. The Germans set up a Paradise tree in their homes on December 24, the religious feast day of Adam and Eve. They hung wafers on it (symbolizing the host, the Christian sign of redemption); in a later tradition, the wafers were replaced by cookies of various shapes. Candles, too, were often added as the symbol of Christ. In the same room, during the Christmas season, was the Christmas pyramid, a triangular construction of wood, with shelves to hold Christmas figurines, decorated with evergreens, candles, and a star. By the 16th century, the Christmas pyramid and Paradise tree had merged, becoming the Christmas tree.”

Rick Warren, Christianity Today posted 12/19/2008: “The entire reason for Christmas is the love of God. God loves you so much that he came to earth as a human so you could get to know him and learn to trust him and love him back. Theologians call this the Incarnation. God became one of us, a human being, so we could understand what he is really like.”

R.H. Stein, Jesus the Messiah: A Survey of the Life of Christ: “The essence of the Christmas story is not that Mary conceived as a virgin. Nor is the Christmas story a sentimental ode to motherhood. The essence of Christmas is that God’s Son came into the world in human form and dwelt among us. It is the “fact” of the incarnation that is the key to Christmas, not the “how” by which this was brought about…For orthodox Christianity that is self-evident. The Son of God did not come into existence through virginal conception. The Son of God was, is and always will be…”

Karl Rahner: “The representation of a god’s becoming man is mythological, when the ‘human’ element is merely the clothing, the livery, of which the god makes us in order to draw attention to his presence here with us, while it is not the case that the human element acquires its supreme initiative and control over its own actions by the very fact of being assumed by God…The persistence of this idea [ought to make us realize that it] probably still lives on in the picture which countless Christians have of the ‘Incarnation’, whether they believe it or not.”



Bible Study 11.16.14: Hopeless Christianity

Or “No Salvation without Resurrection”!

Preliminaries:

·       The most common description of death is “sleep”: koimao “asleep”[1]. This is described as a deep sleep from which people will one day be awakened (cp. Dan. 12:2).

·       CONSIDER this: ALL the OT kings registered are said to have “died/been laid to rest with their fathers[2]]”, that is, fell asleep [Acts 13.36; cp. Stephen, Acts 7.60].

·       Reformed Judaism, like Christian Orthodoxy, adopted the immortal soul doctrine:

“We reassert the doctrine of Judaism that the soul is immortal, grounding the belief on the divine nature of human spirit, which forever finds bliss in righteousness and misery in wickedness. We reject as ideas not rooted in Judaism, the beliefs both in bodily resurrection and in Gehenna and Eden (Hell and Paradise) as abodes for everlasting punishment and reward.” 1885 Pittsburgh Conference

 

“That classical Judaism firmly believed in the resurrection of the dead—indeed, insisted upon it as a defining tenet of the community—today comes as a shock to most Jews and Christians alike…Abba Hillel Silver [Reformed rabbi and one of the most important figures in American Judaism, in his influential volume Where Judaism Differed], presents the resurrection of the dead as a late and degraded development in Jewish thought, a borrowing from foreign sources ‘to which the Jews added nothing original’…The Christians, vulnerable to a crude superstition about a god-man who came back from the dead, have perverted the Hebrew Bible by introducing something altogether foreign into it.” J.D. Levenson[3]

 

1.     2Cor 5.8; Phil 1.23: “Out of the body to be with the lord”

·       No-body means you’re a nobody!

·       Body + breath of life = “living soul/person” (Gen. 2:7). At the resurrection we will have spiritual bodies (1Cor 15.44-55).

·       2Cor 5.8 death = “naked,”, a fearful, unthinkable and practically incomprehensible state.

“‘For though absent in body, I am present in spirit (pneuma)’ (Colossians 2:5). Was his immortal spirit in one place, and his body was in another while he was alive? If so, then the immortal spirit can leave the body when it wants to, and the body can live without the spirit, but James tells us that the body without the spirit is dead (James 2:26). Was Paul’s body dead for a time while his spirit was gone to be at Colossae? No, he was saying he was with them in his thoughts and heart, not that an immortal spirit had left his body, went to Colossae, and returned.” W.R. West[4] 

“Jesus said, ‘And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also’ (John 14:3). Many say, ‘Not so Lord, we will be with you in Heaven as soon as we die, Your second coming and the resurrection will not be needed for we will already be alive and already with You in Heaven.’ But Paul said, ‘For our citizenship is in heaven, from which also we eagerly wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ; who will transform the body of our humble state into conformity with the body of His glory’ (Philippians 3:20-21). It is us (our bodies) who will be transformed, not something that is in us that is now just as immortal as it could ever be, something that will not need to be transformed, and it is this something that is already immortal that is now in a person that will not wait for the Lord Jesus to come again, but it will immediately go to Heaven to be with Him at death. Both those in Christ who are dead, and those who are living, will together go from the earth to meet the Lord in the air when He is coming from Heaven before we will ‘be with the Lord.’ ‘Then we that are alive, that are left, SHALL TOGETHER with them be caught up (from the earth) in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air’ (1 Thessalonians 4:17-18). How could Paul have said any clearer that those who are now asleep are not now alive in Heaven, but that they will be raised from the dead and meet the Lord in the air as He is returning?”[5]

 

“It is little less than a crime for anyone to pick out certain words and frame them into a sentence, not only disregarding the scope and context, but ignoring the other words in the verse, and quote the words ‘absent from the body, present with the Lord’ with the view of dispensing with the hope of the Resurrection (which is the subject of the whole passage) as though it were unnecessary; and as though ‘present with the Lord’ is obtainable without it.”

Summary: The teaching of some makes Paul be wrong when he said we are “longing to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from heaven” for their teaching says we had it at birth and will always have it even if we go to “Hell”.[6]

 

2.     Luke 16:19-31: The Rich Man and Lazarus:

·       To read this literally would be ridiculous. It doesn’t even work for the “no-body soul” doctrine.

·       Assumes that Judgment, the Last Day, has come and gone.

·       Jesus uses Jewish/Pharisaic “afterlife/parable” stories to make ethical points about the rich and the poor.

“[Miriam] said to him: ‘By the life of your head, Caesar, let the sword come upon my neck and upon his neck together.’ He said to her: ‘Heaven forbid! I shall not do such a thing, as it is written in your Torah: You shall not slaughter it with its young on the same day (Lev. 22:28).’ The child said to him: ‘Wicked one, have you perhaps fulfilled the whole Torah except this verse alone?’ Immediately they snatched him away from her in order to kill him.

His mother said to him: ‘My son, may your heart not faint, and may you not despair. You are going to your brothers, and you will be seated in the bosom of our father Abraham. And tell him in my name: You built one altar and did not sacrifice your son, but I built 7 altars and sacrifice my sons on them. And for that matter, yours was (merely) a trial, but mine was a fact.’” van Henten, Avemarie[7] 

“Naked came he into the world, and naked he leaves it; would that the departure were as innocent as the arrival! ...This day he sits in the bosom of Abraham, said Rabbi; i.e., he died.” P.I. Hershon[8]

“Those who make this parable into a literal story do not accept the main part of it as being literal. They do not accept Abraham’s bosom as being a literal place, but as a symbolic place; his literal bosom had turned to dust many years before, and there would not be room for even one person in Abraham’s literal bosom; therefore, if part of it cannot be literal none of it can be literal, if it is a true story then all of it must be literal. It is a symbolic picture or a true story? It cannot be a mixture of the two; it cannot be part literal and part a true story. Does anyone believe Lazarus was literally carried to Abraham’s literal bosom by angels?

Many want to make this a true story and not a parable to use it to prove Hell, but the only part they want to be a true story is the one word ‘torment’ even though it is clear that the ‘torment’ in this parable is not torment in Hell; the rich man was not being tormented in Hell and Lazarus was not in Heaven.” W.R. West[9]

“We want to know if this was a real experience, and if it teaches the condition of the dead. Let it be remembered, then, according to the philosophy that they are ‘spirits.’ Will you tell me how you reason that a ‘spirit’s tongue’ can be cooled with water? ‘Oh,’ you say, ‘that represents’—hold on, no representations can be in a real circumstance. If you say it is real, stay with it. This policy of making it half literal and half figurative, just because there is an end to gain, is a nature ‘fakir’ in theology. It, therefore, represents nothing if it is a real circumstance, as you affirm. How could Lazarus carry a drop of water on his ‘spiritual’ finger? You say, ‘Oh, that doesn’t mean literal water.’ Well sir, it does or you do not mean what you say, I care not who you are. But reason with me. How could a spiritual tongue be cooled with a drop of water? ‘Oh,’ you say, ‘That must not be pressed too literal,’ no, not too literal, but just a literal as in any real circumstance. If it was a literal fact, then the details, which make it up are literal fact also. And to deny that it to deny your position.” E.D. Slough[10]

 

3.     Luke 23.43: Today in paradise

·       Placement of the comma dictates the doctrine: “I tell you the truth today, you will be with me in paradise.” (cp. Acts 20.26)

·       “Heaven is nowhere the destination of the dying” (J.A.T. Robinson). Comfort in the face of death is always related to the resurrection (cf. John 11:21–26).

·       “Paradise” is not heaven but the future, restored Eden/Kingdom: Rev 2.7; cp. Isa 51:3; Ezek 36:35.

·       Jesus promised to be in heaven with the thief on that very day. NOT SO: 3 days in the grave, on earth after resurrection.

 

“…we have been able to determine at least 3 truths regarding the words spoken here. First, we recognize that Jesus was speaking these words in order to encourage the thief [promising] on that day that when he established his kingdom the thief would be a part [of it]…Secondly, the promise Jesus gave the thief was not realized on that day based on our discovery that Jesus did not go to paradise on the day of his death. Instead, Jesus entered the place of the dead, the grave (Sheol or Hades)… [The thief] too went into the grave and is awaiting the resurrection [1Cor 15.22]…Finally, the promise Jesus gave the thief is a promise for you and me today.” Dr. Warren II[11]

 

4.     Rev. 6.9-11; cp. Rev 20.4-5: Murdered People Crying out

·       Figure of speech[12] known as personification: headless people/souls crying out: Cp. Abel’s blood crying out: Gen 4:8-10. Also the word translated “souls” [psychas] can also mean “life” [psychen]. NOTE: LXX Lev. 17.11, “life [psyche] of the body is in its blood”; cp. Gen 4.10. In other words, “Their life/person is crying out for blood/vengeance.” 

·       Rev 20 shows that these people “lived again,” meaning they were dead!

“The word psyche [soul] has no such fixed meaning as is put upon it by theology and tradition. [It] is often put for person. When we say that the population consists of so many souls, we do not mean ‘soul’ as distinct from body, but we mean so many persons …So there is no reason whatever for adhering to the traditional meaning rendering, ‘soul,’ in this passage as denoting a part of a man. The words simply mean ‘I saw those who had been slain [killed].’ John also hears what they say. Speaking requires the organs of speech…These were the martyred saints personified and represented as waiting. They themselves were dead; for in Rev. 20.4, John sees them again, and it says ‘they lived again’ in the first resurrection.  ‘The rest of the dead lived not again until 1000 years ended’ (Rev 20.5). Why say ‘lived not again’ if, all the time, they were alive in some other place?” Bullinger[13]

TEST ALL THINGS! 

“The assumption that John dispenses with the future resurrection would mean that he has significantly altered the view of ‘resurrection’ found elsewhere in the documents of the NT or in the Judaism of the period…The dead are raised, not ‘spiritually’ or metaphorically, but bodily. It is of course possible that John has done just that: radically reinterpreted the meaning of “the resurrection”, but the data of the Gospel do not bear out the assumption that John has collapsed the future resurrection into a present quality of life...Language of being raised up remains resolutely attached to the future, to the ‘last day’. Resurrection overcomes death…It is that life, construed as fellowship and union with God, that is present for those who believe…The implication is clearly that the “life” one has in the present is as much promise as possession. The full possession of life awaits the promise of the resurrection… [Bringing to] fruition what the Father offers through the Son, the gift of life [in the age to come].” M.M. Thompson[14]

 

Reference/Recommended Readings:

·       E.W. Bullinger, Commentary on Revelation; Figures of Speech Used in the Bible; The Companion Bible.

·       T.S. Warren II, Dead Men Talking.

·       W.R. West, Resurrection or Immortality, online: http://www.robertwr.com/resurrection.pdf

·       M.M. Thomson, The God of the Gospel of John.

·       J.D. Levenson, Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel.

---

[1] Mat 9.24; 27.52; Mar 5.39; Lu 8.52; Jn 11.11-13; Acts 7.60; 13.36; 1Cor 11.30; 15.6, 18, 20; 1Thess 4.13-15; 5.6, 10; 2Pe 3.4.

[2] 1 K 11.21; 14.20; 15.8; 16.6; 22.40; 2K 8.24; 10.35; 13.9; 14.16; 13.7; 16.20; 20.21; 21.18; 24.6; cp. 2Chro 9.31; 12.16; 14.1; 16.13.

[3] Resurrection and the Restoration of Israel, pp 1-3.

[4] Resurrection or Immortality, pp 101-102.

[5] Ibid., 186-187.

[6] The Companion Bible, Bullinger.

[7] Martyrdom and Noble Death, ‘The Story of Miriam and her Seven Martyred Sons’, Lamentations Rabbah, pp 146-150.

[8] The Pentateuch according to the Talmud. Genesis.

[9] Resurrection or Immortality, pp 716.

[10] Eternal Torment or the Second Death, the indictment of eternal torment. The self-negation of a monstrous doctrine, tried, judged and condemned out of its own mouth by the arguments and admissions of its staunchest advocated, 1914.

[11] Dead Men Talking, pp 42-46.

[12] “A figure by which things are represented or spoken of as persons; or, by which we attribute intelligence, by words or actions, to inanimate objects or abstract ideas.” Bullinger, Figures of Speech In The Bible, p. 861.

[13] Commentary on Revelation: Or, the Apocalypse, pp 263-265.

[14] The God of the Gospel of John, p. 82-83, 2001.