Jefferson Vann

looking at 1 Thessalonians 5:10

The Holy spirit has given us a masterpiece of precision in the Bible. Its words are crafted with such care that readers usually stumble upon the correct meaning of texts without much preparation and study. On the other hand, the human brain is a complex organ, and capable of creative interpretation. Sometimes we get rather creative in how we read the Bible.

1 Thessalonians 5:10 provides evidence of this proposition. Paul tells the Thessalonian Christians that Christ “died for us so that whether we are awake or asleep we might live with him.”[1] Exegetes need to ask (at least) two questions of the text here: “What does ‘awake’ and ‘asleep’ mean in this context?” and “Is this verse an affirmation of dead believers consciously living with Christ before the resurrection?”

“awake” and “asleep”

The passage within which this verse is found is 4:13-5:11. The primary subject matter is the second coming of the Lord. Paul writes “we do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about those who are asleep, that you may not grieve as others do who have no hope.”[2] In that verse, those considered awake are alive, and “those who are asleep” have died. The question had begun to present itself to believers as to what is happening to their loved ones who died after Jesus’ ascension. Paul does not tell them that it is none of their business. He has an answer to their questions. He does not want his readers assuming (as the godless do) that the dead are gone forever. He wants them to have hope, and a specific hope – not just the anticipation of some kind of life beyond the grave.

The basis for the believer’s hope in life after death is the fact “that Jesus died and rose again.”[3] It is not based on something about human nature, or the existence of something essentially immortal within all human beings. If Jesus had not physically rose from the dead and walked out of his tomb, the hope would not be there. Jesus had been asleep in the tomb, and brought out of that sleep by a resurrection. Paul promises that Jesus will be the means by whom God will bring all the dead in Christ out of their sleep. Jesus said the same thing to Martha. He said that he is “the resurrection and the life.” He spoke of that coming resurrection day when he said that whoever believes in him, will live then, even if he is dead now.[4] He went on to promise that whoever is living at the time of that resurrection, and believes, will never die. So, for both Jesus and Paul, there are only two classes of believer, the living (or awake) and the dead (or asleep). Both await Christ’s second coming.

Paul assures his readers that Christ is not going to return and set up his kingdom on earth without first raising those asleep in him. He says that “that we who are alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will not precede those who have fallen asleep.”[5] Perhaps someone had taught the Thessalonians that the dead would stay buried until after the millennial reign, or some other event. Paul says, no, when Jesus returns, raising the dead is the first thing on his list.

The second coming will be an unmistakable cataclysmic event. It will be preceded by three unmistakably loud sounds: a command shouted from the Lord himself, the voice of the archangel, and the trumpet call. Then, all the dead will burst from their tombs.[6] When God acts to raise the dead, everyone will know it. It has not happened yet, but we will know it when it does.

with the Lord?

Those believers who are “awake” at the second coming of the Lord will be caught up in the air, together with the resurrected believers. From that time on, all believers will be “with the Lord” always.[7] This is an interesting way for Paul to put it. Many today assume that all believers have to do to be “with the Lord” is to die. But for Paul, being “with the Lord” requires Christ’s return. Until then, neither the “awake” or “asleep” believers are with the Lord. The awake are alive “in the Lord” and the dead die “in the Lord” (en kuriō),[8] but neither are “with the Lord” (sun kuriō) until his return.

So, what did Paul mean when he told the Corinthians that he “would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord”?[9] He meant, simply, that he would rather be away from his present mortal body (his earthly tent) and, at the same time at home with the Lord (pros ton kurion). That is not going to happen until the resurrection, when this temporary mortal “tent” is replaced by his eternal “building from God”.[10] Since this resurrection does not occur until the return of Christ, Paul’s theology is consistent. The hope he speaks of to Corinth and to Thessalonica is the same: a reunion with Christ at his return.[11]

parousia

The New Testament describes the coming of the Lord as a “parousia,” his physical presence, as opposed to his physical absence. It is the combination of ousia, meaning substance or being, and para, meaning close proximity. It’s opposite is apousia, meaning absence.[12] This meaning is implied throughout the uses of parousia in the New Testament. It always applies to Christ’s physical reappearance at his second advent. This is made clear by the New Testament uses of the word when it do not refer to the second coming, but to someone else’s physical presence.[13] For Paul, the hope of the saints is not some spiritual presence at death, but the actual physical presence of Christ at his second advent. At this parousia, those who belong to Christ will be raised to life again.[14] At this parousia, Paul will rejoice over those he has won to Christ.[15] That is because the parousia will be the time when our Lord will appear “with all his saints.”[16] In this verse, 1 Thessalonians 3:13, the English word “coming” – the most popular word used to translate parousia – leads us astray. Popular teaching – based on this mistranslation – has Jesus coming from heaven with the disembodied souls of his saints. Then he reunites these souls with their resurrected bodies. Paul is not saying that Jesus will come with the saints. He is saying that Jesus will appear with the saints. One little word shows that this is the correct interpretation: the word all. All the saints includes those who are alive (awake) as well as those who are dead (asleep). At the parousia, these two groups will be reunited with the Lord.

alive or alert?

Midway in Paul’s description of the second coming, he starts using the words asleep and awake in a different sense. He teaches that Christ will come suddenly, like a thief. On the basis of that sudden coming, he instructs the Thessalonians “let us not sleep, as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober.”[17] His contrast has changed. Instead of contrasting the two categories of believers (living saints and dead saints), he now contrasts unbelievers (those who will be caught sleeping at the parousia) and believers (who live in the light, and so will be ready when Christ comes.

This change in the use of the awake/asleep metaphors has some interpreters concluding that Paul is not referring to the death state at all. The New English Translation renders 1 Thessalonians 5:10 as “He died for us so that whether we are alert or asleep we will come to life together with him.” This translation takes Paul as rendering assurance to believers who are not ready for Christ’s return! One commentator writes “This destiny not only belongs to those Christians who are wide awake when Christ comes, but also to those who are sound asleep.”[18] But Paddison argues that even though the verb translated “to be awake” in 2 Thessalonians 5:10 can mean to be alert, the theological logic of Paul in the entire section argues that Paul is using it in reference to the alive in Christ.[19]

Christ will come for all believers, regardless of their spiritual condition at the moment of his coming. Yet, it is not clear that Paul is giving that assurance in this text. He is, in fact, warning the Thessalonians not to be caught sleeping. It would make no sense for him to turn around and say, in effect, that regardless of their obedience to this command, Christ will accept them anyway.

the intermediate state

What does this verse tell us about the intermediate state – the state of the dead between death and the resurrection at Christ’s parousia? It does not say that believers who are asleep in Christ are presently living with him. It affirms that Christ died “for us” – and that his death is applied equally to all believers, whether living or dead. But only (as the context makes clear) at the parousia will the subjunctive clause become indicative. Only then will both categories of believers live with him. The NLT puts it well: “Christ died for us so that, whether we are dead or alive when he returns, we can live with him forever.”

What this passage does affirm about the intermediate state is that there is a contrast between believers who are living and those who are dead. While both will live with Christ when he returns, only those who awake are living now. The dead in Christ are asleep. While their eternal inheritance is assured, their present walk has been cut short by death. They are unconscious, awaiting the parousia, when we will all be “gathered together to him.”[20] Those of us who have lost loved ones can take courage, because Christ’s death on the cross assures us that their rest is temporary, not eternal.

[1] 1 Thessalonians 5:10 ESV.

[2] 1 Thessalonians 4:13 ESV.

[3] 1 Thessalonians 4:14 ESV.

[4] John 11:25.

[5] 1 Thessalonians 4:15.

[6] 1 Thessalonians 4:16.

[7] 1 Thessalonians 4:17.

[8] Revelation 14:13.

[9] 2 Corinthians 5:8 (NIV).

[10] 2 Corinthians 5:1.

[11] For a more comprehensive treatment of 2 Corinthians 5:1-10, see “Away from the body” (http://www.afterlife.co.nz/2011/bible/away-from-the-body-2-corinthians-5-8/).

[12] In Philippians 2:12, Paul contrasts his presence (parousia) with his absence (apousia).

[13] 1 Corinthians 16:17; 2 Corinthians 7:6-7; 10:10; Philippians 1:26; 2:12; 2 Thessalonians 2:9.

[14] 1 Corinthians 15:23.

[15] 1 Thessalonians 2:19.

[16] 1 Thessalonians 3:13.

[17] 1 Thessalonians 5:6.

[18] Keith Krell, “No Sleep Walking” (https://bible.org/seriespage/no-sleep-walking-1-thessalonians-51-11).

[19] Angus Paddison, Theological Hermeneutics and 1 Thessalonians, (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 186.

[20] 2 Thessalonians 2:1.

bigger barns

Today’s message at Relevant Church in Williamsburg, Virginia

Then he said, “Beware! Guard against every kind of greed. Life is not measured by how much you own.” ¹⁶ Then he told them a story: “A rich man had a fertile farm that produced fine crops. ¹⁷ He said to himself, ‘What should I do? I don’t have room for all my crops.’ ¹⁸ Then he said, ‘I know! I’ll tear down my barns and build bigger ones. Then I’ll have room enough to store all my wheat and other goods. ¹⁹ And I’ll sit back and say to myself, “My friend, you have enough stored away for years to come. Now take it easy! Eat, drink, and be merry!”‘ ²⁰ “But God said to him, ‘You fool! You will die this very night. Then who will get everything you worked for?’ ²¹ “Yes, a person is a fool to store up earthly wealth but not have a rich relationship with God.” (Luke 12:15-21 NLT).

_________________________________________

I’m a fan of time travel stories, and often wander what it would be like to go back in time and see how people reacted to the words that Jesus said. I suspect that the reactions were not “oh, how wonderful!” or “my, how profound!” No, I suspect that Jesus made most normal people scratch their heads in confusion, and he made most “important” people bang their heads against the wall in anger.

Today’s text is a good example of this. Two things prompt Jesus to tell this little parable. First, he had warned his disciples (with thousands looking on and listening in) not to follow the example of the Pharisees, because they were hypocrites. They were acting like they had right relationships with God, but they were really serving self. Their outward religion was a cover for inward corruption. Jesus told his disciples to beware of their leaven. In other words, don’t touch a Pharisee with a ten foot pole. They are unclean. The odd thing about that is that the popular understanding that people had in Jesus day was that the Pharisees were spiritual supermen. They were the ones who got it right, and that was why they were rich. Jesus said, no, that’s not right. The “normal” people scratched their heads.

The Pharisees themselves were convinced that they were following the rules. They saw wealth as a blessing from God, given precisely because they had followed the rules. When John the Baptist – and then Jesus – opposed them, they got mad. “How dare these ‘prophets’ condemn us. Can’t they see that we are blessed by God? They must be demon possessed.” The “important” people got angry at Jesus.

The second thing that prompted Jesus to tell this particular little parable is a request that someone from the crowd gave him.

“Teacher, please tell my brother to divide our father’s estate with me.” (Luke 12:13 NLT).

Now, the Bible does not give us the details of that man’s issue. He may have had a legitimate legal grievance with his brother. Or, he may have been trying to get Jesus to intervene over his father’s wishes. Those details are not really important to Jesus right now. The point is, the man was trying to gain from his association with Jesus. So, Jesus asks “Friend, who made me a judge over you to decide such things as that?” (Luke 12:14 NLT).

Jesus is not Santa Claus. We’re not going to get what we want just by sitting on his lap and spilling our Christmas list. That is not why he came to this earth. When we really start realizing this, a lot of stuff is going to be taken off our prayer lists.

OK, with that established, let’s look at today’s text:

Then he said, “Beware! Guard against every kind of greed. Life is not measured by how much you own.” (15).

That statement is just as radical today as it was two millennia ago. Today the popular belief is that those who have the most stuff have the best life. The rich are idolized no matter what they believe, and no matter who they serve.

Then he told them a story: “A rich man had a fertile farm that produced fine crops. He said to himself, ‘What should I do? I don’t have room for all my crops.’ Then he said, ‘I know! I’ll tear down my barns and build bigger ones. Then I’ll have room enough to store all my wheat and other goods. And I’ll sit back and say to myself, “My friend, you have enough stored away for years to come. Now take it easy! Eat, drink, and be merry!”(16-19).

This was the man’s 401K – his retirement plan. He said “I got some good stuff. I’m going to make bigger barns, so that I can hold all my stuff. Then I’m going to kick back, go to Barbados, and get some sand between my toes.” Well, that was the plan. But God knew something that the would-be retiree did not know:

But God said to him, ‘You fool! You will die this very night. Then who will get everything you worked for?’ (20).

The man was rich, resourceful, productive, and successful. He had made a plan that would provide for his needs and (presumably) those of his family. He would have been praised by the popular culture of his day, and ours. But in just one moment – one last heartbeat – he was going to lose all that he had ever gained.

“Yes, a person is a fool to store up earthly wealth but not have a rich relationship with God.”(21)

This is the moral of the story. Jesus tells his disciples and the others who have ears to hear “don’t waste your life just collecting stuff. Bigger barns are not the answer.” So, what is the answer? The answer is “a rich relationship with God.” But how do we get that? Jesus told another parable that explained that:

“…the Kingdom of Heaven is like a merchant on the lookout for choice pearls. When he discovered a pearl of great value, he sold everything he owned and bought it’ (Matthew 13:45-46 NLT).

The “pearl of great value” in Matthew 13 is that “rich relationship with God” of Luke 12. Once you discover that it exists, you also discover that it is going to take everything you have, and everything that you can ever get to obtain it. You then have a choice: you can be like the Pharisees, and just pretend to have it, but still keep building bigger barns for yourself. Or, you can invest in God. That’s a crude way of putting it, but it is what it is.

Big Idea: Invest in a rich relationship with God, instead of more stuff.

I started investing in my relationship with God when I was ten. I regret that I wasted ten years of my life on building useless barns. But, as long as you are alive, it’s not too late. What made the rich fool a fool was that he died before he got the chance to do what he was made for.

Here are a few investment tips:

1. Pay very close attention to what God says.

The Bible just happens to be God’s word. As such, we can find out what God wants, what he does not want, what he has planned – things like that. If you are serious about getting a rich relationship with God, start there.

For me, paying attention to what God says means spending regular quality time reading and studying the Bible. Some of you know that I write a devotional blog. I read a Bible passage every morning and comment on it. It was really hard at first, but now I cannot wait to do it every morning. Sometimes it is easy, and sometimes it is not. This has been the hardest year in the plan, because this year covers the prophets of the Old Testament. These guys often had to give voice to God’s heart when his heart was hurt by his people’s sin. As a result, there are a lot of negative confessions, and threats of judgment. No one is comfortable with this because it goes against our cardboard cutout of God. God is supposed to be a peaceful good shepherd, not a wrathful, vengeful destroyer. But the more I pay attention to his whole word, the more I realize that he is both.

2. Spend quality time in conversation with God.

I’m still working on this one. I don’t pray as often as I should, but I suspect that everyone who is honest says that. Prayer is hard to do because it is like talking to the school principal when you are in the 3^rd grade, and have just been sent to his office.

The good news is God is like a grandfather when it comes to prayer. I love to hear Jeffrey and Elena and Simon and Quenton speak. Even when they have been bad, I love to see them and hear them.

Notice what Paul told the Philippians about prayer:

Don’t worry about anything; instead, pray about everything. Tell God what you need, and thank him for all he has done. Then you will experience God’s peace, which exceeds anything we can understand. His peace will guard your hearts and minds as you live in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 4:6-7 NLT)

Paul is talking about what happens when we pray. Prayer is a way of exchanging our worries for his peace. We may go into prayer like a third grader expecting punishment, but we can leave the throne with a smile from grandpa!

3. get involved with the church.

Jesus Christ has two bodies. He has a body in heaven at God’s throne, and a body on earth: the church.

There are three foundational commands in scripture: Love the LORD, love your neighbor as yourself, and make disciples. In the church and as the church, we can obey all three of those commands.

As the church, we are gathered together for the purpose of intentional investment in God and his kingdom. A rich relationship with God includes fellowship with each other, and ministry to one another. John said: “We know what real love is because Jesus gave up his life for us. So we also ought to give up our lives for our brothers and sisters.” (1 John 3:16). Investing in God implies investing in our fellow believers too.

______________________

When we come to the communion, we celebrate Jesus’ willingness to give up his bigger barns in heaven and to invest in us. That investment cost him his life. As we take these emblems, we can celebrate and be thankful that he cared enough to invest his life in us. We can also remember his challenge for us to invest in a rich relationship with God.

ACST 61: The Advents

The patriarch Jacob, an old man, gathered his sons together and told them what would happen to their families “in days to come.”[1] He told Judah that his descendants would have the scepter, and the ruler’s staff, and to him shall be “the obedience of the peoples.”[2] It would be many days, indeed many centuries before that prediction became fulfilled by David. He would lead not only his own people, but many other nations (peoples) would obey him as well.

Yet David did not completely fulfill this prophecy. Jesus is the “Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David.”[3] He will lead both Israel and the nations. By his blood he has “ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation.”[4] He has “made them a kingdom and priests to our God, and they shall reign on the earth.”[5] So, Judah’s son is also God’s Son, and the King of kings.

When Jesus came as a babe in a manger, some recognized him as heaven’s king. The angels described him as a “Savior” and “Christ the Lord.”[6] The term “Christ” is Greek for anointed one: the title of a king. Even as a child he was recognized as Judah’s heir, and God’s king. The wise men went to Herod and asked “Where is he who has been born king of the Jews?”[7] Herod recognized the threat that this child posed for him, and sought to destroy him. Pilate asked Jesus “Are you the King of the Jews?”[8]

Advent

At the end of every year, much of the world celebrates a season which some call Advent. It is a season which church tradition has championed for the purpose of remembering the first coming, or advent of Christ. For Advent Christians, this season is all the more special because we celebrate not only our Lord’s first advent, but the promises it brought of his second advent. Much of the world celebrates Christmas without this hope. Like the Jews who missed their Messiah, much of the world sings “Joy to the World” without recognizing its future implications.

The first advent of Jesus Christ was predicted for thousands of years, in numerous ways, and detailed in hundreds of scripture texts. Yet many of the Jews who had access to the predictions either ignored them or misinterpreted them. Likewise, the second advent of Christ is detailed fully in both Testaments, but Christians differ widely on their expectations. A survey of the predictions and fulfillments of the first advent will yield principles that help us know what to expect as we read the predictions of the second advent.

Incarnation

The Christ expected was to be a real and completely human being, yet also God’s unique Son in human flesh. The eternal Logos, the second person of the divine trinity, would become a human being by being conceived miraculously (without a human male partner) in the uterus of Mary. Isaiah said “Look! The virgin will conceive a child! She will give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel– ‘God is with us.’”[9] When told of this reality, Mary said “But how can I have a baby? I am a virgin.”[10] Matthew explained “All of this happened to fulfill the Lord’s message through his prophet: “Look! The virgin will conceive a child! She will give birth to a son, and he will be called Immanuel (meaning, God is with us).” Joseph … brought Mary home to be his wife, but she remained a virgin until her son was born. And Joseph named him Jesus.”[11]

This incarnated Christ would be the unique seed of a woman, his human nature descending directly from Mary. God told the serpent that “From now on, you and the woman will be enemies, and your offspring and her offspring will be enemies. He will crush your head, and you will strike his heel.”[12] Paul explained that “when the right time came, God sent his Son, born of a woman.”[13]

This incarnated Christ would be the direct descendant of Abraham, the means by whom Abraham would bless the whole planet. God promised Abraham that he would bless those who bless him, and curse those who curse him. He said “All the families of the earth will be blessed through” him and his family.[14] So, people had every right to expect this awaited Messiah to appear in Abraham’s family line. The first verse in the New Testament says “This is a record of the ancestors of Jesus the Messiah, a descendant of King David and of Abraham.”[15]

As already mentioned, this incarnated Christ would qualify as ruler over the people of Israel (and all peoples) since he would legally descend from the ruling tribe of Judah. Jacob predicted “The scepter will not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from his descendants, until the coming of the one to whom it belongs, the one whom all nations will obey.”[16] Luke informs his readers that “Jesus was known as the son of Joseph. Joseph was the son of … Judah.”[17] Matthew puts it the other way around: “Judah was the father of … Joseph, the husband of Mary. Mary was the mother of Jesus, who is called the Messiah.”[18]

This incarnated Christ would be a direct descendant of King David. Isaiah predicted that the Messiah’s “ever expanding, peaceful government will never end. He will rule forever with fairness and justice from the throne of his ancestor David. The passionate commitment of the LORD Almighty will guarantee this!”[19] The angel Gabriel told Mary that “He will be very great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David.”[20]

From these predictions and fulfillments of our Lord’s first coming, we can derive this principle: the Lord’s advent will be a very real human presence, but will be the result of an unprecedented divine miracle. When speaking of his second advent, the New Testament uses two Greek words which also point to this principle: parousia, the word for a real visible human presence,[21] and epiphaneia, the word for a miraculous divine appearance.[22] Like his first coming, then, our Lord’s second advent will be a combination of physical visible presence and a miraculous, powerful event which defies the ordinary. It will be the same Jesus who came as a baby, but it will not be an ordinary day. He next coming will be noticed!

Preparation

Christ’s first coming was not a single event. It was an era in which the newborn Christ grew to manhood, and prepared for his earthly ministry as a discipler, and as the divine atoning sacrifice. The entire era was orchestrated by God and revealed in his word. Micah predicted that he would be born in Bethlehem.[23] When the timing was right, the LORD orchestrated events so that Joseph and Mary moved from Nazareth to Bethlehem.[24] Mary gave birth in Bethlehem even though they had no home there, because God was in the process.[25]

The Holy Spirit continued to be involved in the preparation process, ensuring that Jesus would spend his early childhood in Egypt, out of harm’s way. Hosea had hinted at this move when he said “I called my son out of Egypt,” and that hint was made more clear by the Angel of the Lord at the proper time.[26] Mary and Joseph traveled and stayed in Egypt until after Herod’s death, and then returned.[27] By so doing, they escaped Herod’s attempt to kill Jesus by ordering the deaths of all the young male children in the village of Bethlehem. That massacre had been predicted by Jeremiah.[28]

The Holy Spirit brought about the birth and orchestrated the ministry of John the Baptist, whose task it was to bring revival to Israel, preparing them for the appearance of their king. Malachi had predicted a coming messenger,[29] and Jesus admitted that John was “the man to whom the Scriptures refer when they say, ‘Look, I am sending my messenger before you, and he will prepare your way before you.’”[30] John was the forerunner – who introduced an expectant nation to their true king. He was a part of what God was doing during that 33 year period.

God had in past ages declared the identity and unique relationship he had with Christ to the angels.[31] But at a crucial point in that 33 year period, God himself identified Jesus as his unique Son to the watching world. Matthew records “After his baptism, as Jesus came up out of the water, the heavens were opened and he saw

the Spirit of God descending like a dove and settling on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, and I am fully pleased with him.”[32]

One of the characteristics, then, of Christ’s first advent was that over a period of time and a series of events, the LORD worked out his plan and accomplished his purpose. Rather than being a singular event, the first advent was an entire era, consisting of a series of events in which the Holy Spirit prepared the world for its Savior, who had come. It is not unreasonable to suggest that the second advent will be a similar inter-related series of events.

Demonstration

During his first advent, Jesus showed the world who he is by what he did. His miracles demonstrated and affirmed the audacious claims he made about himself. He began by bringing God’s light to the darkest region of Palestine: Galilee of the Gentiles.[33] He brought his message of deliverance and healing to the enslaved and infirmed, proving his message by setting them free from demons and sickness.[34] The incidents of physical healing and deliverance themselves demonstrated the freedom Christ had to offer through his gospel message.[35] He preached that gospel by many means, including sermons, parables,[36] and fits of wrath against the hypocrites who opposed him.[37] By so doing, he demonstrated that he, himself, is the focal point of God’s plan. Those who refuse to believe in him will be rejected by God, no matter what nation they were born into.

In the same way, the second coming of Christ is described in the New Testament as a tremendous demonstration of Christ’s power, revealing his true identity. Jesus predicted that when he comes “all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”[38] He warned the Council (seated in judgment against him) that they will some day “see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power, and coming with the clouds of heaven.”[39]

Peter writes “For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.”[40] He is intentionally ambiguous. It is not clear whether he is talking about descriptions of Christ’s first coming in power, or predictions of his second coming in power. Rightfully so, because both of Christ’s advents will be characterized by a demonstration of power.

When he comes again, Christ will demonstrate his power over sickness and death not by raising some, but by emptying all the graves. He said that “a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice.”[41] He had told Martha that he is the resurrection and the life.[42] We believe that by faith, but we also look forward to the day in which he will demonstrate its truth.

When he comes again, Christ will demonstrate his power over Satan and all his kingdom of darkness. He has delivered some from bondage, but he longs to set the whole world free. The battle is raging now, and we are fighting it by means of the victory won for us at the cross.[43] But when the king comes, he will demonstrate his power by defeating Satan, casting him into a bottomless pit,[44] undoing his corruption of this world, and ultimately throwing him into the lake of fire, which is the second death.[45] That snake will be revealed to be something entirely different than the immortal god he claimed to be. Christ will demonstrate his supreme power over him.

Opposition

When Jesus first appeared and identified himself as the Savior of the world, he faced rejection, humiliation, and opposition from almost everyone. The more clear he became about what his kingdom entailed, the more people turned away from him. The psalmist had prophesied “Why do the nations conspire and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers gather together against the LORD and against his Anointed One.”[46] Luke wrote that “The leading priests and teachers of religious law were actively plotting Jesus’ murder.”[47] Even though Jesus had demonstrated who he was, his own nation would not accept him. He was betrayed by one of his close friends.[48] They mocked and crucified him.[49]

Sadly, that is going to be the case on a cosmic scale as well. In the end, the vast majority of those whom Jesus died for will say “no thanks” to his salvation. They will take sides with the devil and his kingdom, and reject their Savior. Only, in the second advent, this choice will not lead to Christ’s death on the cross, but the second death of all sinners who rejected his love. The lake of fire is a very real event, and it will mean irrevocable destruction to all who have opposed its alternative: Christ, the life.

Exaltation

The Gospels do not end with the death of Christ on the cross, but they tell the amazing story of his resurrection and ascension. The psalmist predicted that the Messiah would say “For you will not leave my soul among the dead or allow your godly one to rot in the grave. You will show me the way of life, granting me the joy of your presence and the pleasures of living with you forever.”[50] The Lord, once brought down low, would ascend on high.[51] The first advent ended with the exaltation of Christ to heaven’s throne. The second advent will see Christ exalted as king of kings and Lord of Lords.[52] His is the name above every name that is named in the whole universe.[53]

The prophecies fulfilled when Jesus came to this earth the first time set a pattern that help interpreters learn what to expect when the prophecies of his second advent are fulfilled. We know to expect a series of events in which the Holy Spirit works out God’s eternal plan, and exalts his eternal Son. We can expect mighty miracles, in demonstration of who Christ is, and his real physical presence among us. We will see the ultimate battle with Satan, and his ultimate demise. We will see heaven intervene in the affairs of men, and hell destroy the wickedness and evil in this world.

In the first advent, Christ came as God with us. In the second advent, the world will be transformed so that we will finally be with him. The “kingdom of the world (will) become the kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever.”[54] In the first advent, Christ brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.[55] At the second advent, believers will put it on like a garment.[56]

One of the men who was privileged to see his first advent also heard him promise “Surely I am coming soon.” His response is ours: “Amen. Come Lord Jesus.”[57]

[1] Genesis 49:1.

[2] Genesis 49:10.

[3] Revelation 5:5.

[4] Revelation 5:9.

[5] Revelation 5:10.

[6] Luke 2:11.

[7] Matthew 2:2.

[8] Matthew 27:11; Mark 15:2; Luke 23:3.

[9] Isaiah 7:14 NLT.

[10] Luke 1:34 NLT.

[11] Matthew 1:22-25 NLT.

[12] Genesis 3:15 NLT.

[13] Galatians 4:4 NLT.

[14] Genesis 12:3.

[15] Matthew 1:1 NLT.

[16] Genesis 49:10 NLT.

[17] Luke 3:23,33 NLT.

[18] Matthew 1:3, 16 NLT.

[19] Isaiah 9:7 NLT.

[20] Luke 1:32 NLT.

[21] Matthew 24:3, 27, 37, 39; 1 Corinthians 15:23; 16:17; 2 Corinthians 7:6f; 10:10; Philippians 1:26; 2:12; 1 Thessalonians 2:19; 3:13; 4:15; 5:23; 2 Thessalonians 2:1, 8f; James 5:7f; 2 Peter 1:16; 3:4, 12; 1 John 2:28.

[22] Thessalonians 2:8; 1 Timothy 6:14; 2 Timothy 1:10; 4:1, 8; Titus 2:13.

[23] Micah 5:2.

[24] Luke 2:4-5.

[25] Luke 2:7.

[26] Matthew 2:13.

[27] Matthew 2:14-15.

[28] Jeremiah 31:15; Matthew 2:16-18.

[29] Malachi 3:1.

[30] Luke 7:27.

[31] Psalm 2:7.

[32] Matthew 3:16-17 NLT.

[33] Isaiah 9:1-2; Matthew4:13-16.

[34] Isaiah 53:4; Matthew 8:16-17.

[35] Isaiah 61:1-2; Luke 4:18-21.

[36] Psalm 78:2; Isaiah 6:9-10; John 16:25; Mark 4:11.

[37] Psalm 69:9; Mark 11:15-17.

[38] Matthew 24:30 ESV.

[39] Mark 14:62 ESV.

[40] 2 Peter 1:16 ESV.

[41] John 5:28 NIV.

[42] John 11:25.

[43] Revelation 12:10-12.

[44] Revelation 20:2.

[45] Revelation 20:10, 14.

[46] Psalm 2:1-2 NIV.

[47] Luke 22:2 NLT.

[48] Psalm 41:9; Luke 22:47-48.

[49] Psalm 22:7-8; Luke 23:35; Isaiah 53:12; Mark 15:27.

[50] Psalm 16:10-11 NLT.

[51] Psalm 68:18; Mark 16:19.

[52] Revelation 19;16.

[53] Ephesians 1:21; 2:9.

[54] Revelation 11:15 ESV.

[55] 2 Timothy 1:10.

[56] 1 Corinthians 15:53-54.

[57] Revelation 22:20 ESV.

ACST 60: The Body

The church confuses many people. Viewed as a worldwide reality, she seems too complex and diverse. Compared to Christ, who is often portrayed as a simple preacher from Galilee, the church is too many things all at once. Liturgically, she is high, low, and no. She has members who seem to live in the atmosphere of the miraculous, and other members who can apparently get along without the supernatural. She has members who reflect their socio-economic and political background almost identically to their non-Christian neighbors, and members who rebel against their culture at every point.

Granted, there are some individuals who consider themselves part of the church of Christ who are not. Some extremists are either deluded, or hypocritical. Some “churches” are missing vital elements which put them outside the parameters as well. But given that, there is still a staggering amount of difference within the churches who claim allegiance to Christ.

tradition

This complexity within the church and churches of Christ is sometimes explained by reference to various traditions which have emerged through her long history. A denomination, for example, can be traced back to a movement where some believers adopted a fellowship among themselves based on shared beliefs, standards and experiences. In most cases, the denomination formed does not seek to deny the validity of other traditions and other churches. Instead, the urgency of the perceived mandate from the Lord encourages the believers to form into a distinct unity amid the diversity.

In the case of the Advent Christian denomination, that mandate was to preach the imminent return, — the second advent of Christ. We were products of several diverse traditions who came together as Adventists because we believed that Jesus was going to literally return to this planet, and soon. In the mid nineteenth century, many of the mainline churches considered the Adventists fanatics, and would disassociate from them. This resulted in more denominations forming, Adventist denominations. This, of course, added to the complexity of Christendom as well.

evolution

Some see a parallel between the changes taking place in the churches and those that evolutionary theory suggests happens in biology. Over time, minute differences become more prominent, and eventually result in the creation of new species. At any given time, there are strains of DNA which are in the process of mutating, and hold promise for the emergence of some new variety or species. In evolutionary biology, there are two major factors at work in these mutations: the coding within the DNA itself, and the environment with its various promptings acting on it. One does not have to be an atheist or secularist to see that something similar to that happens to churches.

pragmatism

Another way that people try to explain why churches emerge and change, thrive or die, unite or divide, is pragmatism. Things change because the way things are does not seem to work well. When the dissatisfaction over perceived uselessness reaches critical mass, churches split, people relocate, new organizations form. When the present structure is no longer serving its intended function, the usual solution is to form new structures, or stay the same, and eventually cease to exist.

explaining diversity

Neither of these comparisons explain fully all of the dynamics of ecclesiastical diversity, but each is a component to the explanation. There is within each individual believer an impulse to rebel and a separate impulse to preserve. There is a fierce drive to preserve the code, and an urge to mutate. There is comfort amid similarity, and a desire to try something different – something that might work better.

In the church cosmos, we use different terms for these realities. We talk about orthodoxy and heresy, traditional and conservative, radical and old-school, and use a host of other labels. Whatever terminology we avail ourselves of, it is clear that we are describing a complex and diverse corpus, which is undergoing a constant process of change.

Here, then, is the puzzle. How can we reconcile this picture of what the church is with all of the other descriptions of the church revealed in the scriptures? The church is one body, chosen from among the nations, saved from among the lost, transformed into a new unity by one Holy Spirit, gathered into a unified fellowship and purpose, calling out to the world with one voice, proclaiming the one gospel. With all of these emphases of unity, how do we explain biblically the constant splitting, forming and reforming that has characterized our history?

For some, the only explanation is that we (at present) are right and they (in the past) are wrong. The current rediscovered tradition is biblical, while all that came before are unbiblical, and all current challenges to change are of the devil. They spend their lives defending the code against mutations. They know what works, and will not listen to evidence to the contrary. Others are equally convinced that the old traditions are what is killing the church. They see a fresh start as the only way to preserve the species. They see themselves in a congregation of Pharisees, and seek rescue in change. The conflict among these two polar opposites within the church often repels people.

church government

The competing methods used for church government has long been an example of how this polarization has affected us. Some of the major movements that have produced large and long-lasting denominational entities have focused on a particular method of church government. The Episcopal and Roman Catholic churches emphasize a structure where each local assembly is under the guidance and control of leaders in a military-like chain of command. The Presbyterian denominations have championed a leadership of delegated elders who lead by consensus and cooperation. Congregationalist churches have stressed the need for democracy, and the protection of the rights of individuals against their potential abuse by those in power.

The tendency has been for these major ecclesiastical movements to attack the others and defend themselves on the grounds that only one method of church government can be the biblical method. Behind that argument is the assumption that the early church had only one method of governance. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Evidence from the New Testament suggests that there were many methods of governance used simultaneously among local fellowships and in the body as a whole.

Pentecost

Already, at the very genesis of the New Testament church, there was an overlapping combination of governance systems in place for believers. The eleven apostles who had been appointed by Christ himself added to their number in order to replace the betrayer. These appointed missionaries continued to serve as leaders throughout the early church, and other apostles appear to have been appointed by the Holy Spirit in that role as well.[1]

But the Pentecost saints were Jewish believers, who were used to being represented by elders within their communities and in the synagogues. It is clear from the book of Acts that elder rule continued to play an important role throughout the early church.[2] So, already there are at least two systems, with no clear chain-of-command among them. The elders of the Jewish/Christian communities were not forced to denounce their role, nor were they gathered together and burned at the stake. The more complicated dual method of governance was allowed to exist, with no need for correction implied.

the diaconate

Within a matter of days, the rapidly growing church, reaching out to the Hellenist communities, felt the need to further expand its leader structure.

Now in these days when the disciples were increasing

in number, a complaint by the Hellenists arose against

the Hebrews because their widows were being

neglected in the daily distribution. And the twelve

summoned the full number of the disciples and said,

“It is not right that we should give up preaching the

word of God to serve tables. Therefore, brothers,

pick out from among you seven men of good repute,

full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we will

appoint to this duty. But we will devote ourselves

to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” And what

they said pleased the whole gathering, and they

chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy

Spirit, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and

Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of

Antioch. These they set before the apostles, and

they prayed and laid their hands on them.[3]

The leadership dynamics revealed in this incident are very telling. The apostles were seen as spokesmen for the body as a whole, but there was already a group of godly, Spirit filled men who were serving as heads of the bodies within the body. Although not mentioned by name here, it seems clear that these were the elders. But the influx of an entirely different group of believers from a different cultural context has lead to a need for a different kind of leadership, or at least a modification of the existing system.

It appears that the people are suggesting that the apostles take over the role of overseeing the distribution of funds/food. They were not willing to do this, since it would involve less time preaching and teaching – work within the original parameters of their call. The better response to the people’s appeal was to establish a new leadership structure.

Now, the apostles could have responded to this appeal for reform by rejecting it. They could have told the complainers that they have elders and that is all they are going to get. Instead, they saw the current crisis as an opportunity to improve on the system by making it more complex, thereby more flexible. They appear to have been more motivated to meet the needs of their people rather than to preserve their standard operating procedures.

These new leaders are not given titles in the text. While some see this as the beginning of the office of deacon, the new leaders are not specifically titled as such. More likely, they were called elders. Yet, it is obvious that the role of deacon, which would become more prominent later in the New Testament, has its beginning here. These early deacons were elders, but had a specific administrative role. At least one New Testament text indicates that this became the case for other churches in the New Testament period: Paul addresses his letter to the Philippians “To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Philippi, with the overseers and deacons.”[4] There is no mention of elders, presumably because by that time the position had divided into two roles: overseers (with spiritual authority) and deacons (with practical administrative authority).

Acts 6 shows a kind of evolutionary process occurring in church government. As the needs develop, the church is allowed to adjust itself to meet those needs. There is an interplay between several different types of authority structure here. There are appointed apostles, delegate elders, appointed administrative elders/deacons, and there is the congregation as a whole, or “the whole gathering” which is allowed to have its say as well.

Council

A few chapters later, another example of this multi-faceted leadership displays itself. A Council convenes in Jerusalem to decide how Jewish one has to be to qualify as a Christian. When the decision is made, it is announced as the result of a collaborative effort from three groups of leaders: “the apostles and the elders, with the whole church.”[5] So, although the apostles are appealed to, the leadership roles of the community elders are not side-stepped, nor is the will of the entire body. Throughout history, there will be many councils convened. Sadly, some of them will not seek the kind of consensus that was evidenced at the one recorded in Acts 15.

complexity breeds confusion

The evolution toward more complex leadership structures has resulted in some negatives. The original meaning and purpose behind some of the early titles has been lost or replaced. Elders (presbuteroi) were not merely lay leaders whose responsibility was to keep the clergy honest. Bishops (overseers: episcopoi) were not originally one level above local church leadership, but had oversight of local congregations. Deacons (deaconoi) were not one rank below elders, but elders with a different function than that of overseers (episcopoi). Both deacons and bishops were elders. Apostles (in the generic sense, roughly equivalent to the modern term missionary) were not limited to the twelve. Yet, in each of these cases, the meaning of the term has become obscured or changed as new leadership structures emerged, and roles changed for those who took on the titles.

the “biblical”pattern

As a result of this evolution, and the confusion that exists about the meaning of leadership titles, it is a very dangerous thing to argue for only one kind of leadership structure on the grounds that it is the biblical pattern. Vast amounts of time and effort have been wasted attempting to do just that. The assumption that the LORD wants us to return to some original design for leadership as depicted in the New Testament churches is flawed for two reasons: 1) there is no monolithic leadership structure ever revealed in the New Testament as a whole, 2) the New Testament reflects a pattern of change within its leadership to respond to the needs of the churches’ members, and to reach the world with the gospel.

the body

The best explanation of this reality is found in a metaphor the New Testament uses to describe the church. She is the body of Christ.[6] A body has one head, but it is also a combination of inter-related systems, with different purposes and functions. The Church government puzzle cannot best be solved by means of tradition,evolutionary theory, or pragmatism. The best answers to the puzzle come when believers take the body of Christ metaphor seriously, and see themselves as a combination of interrelated systems designed not to have dominion over each other, but to equally submit to the head. When we ask the question of who among the members is in charge, we risk belittling someone’s role and function.

For the body does not consist of one member

but of many. If the foot should say, “Because

I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,”

that would not make it any less a part of the

body. And if the ear should say, “Because I am

not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” that

would not make it any less a part of the body.

If the whole body were an eye, where would

be the sense of hearing? If the whole body

were an ear, where would be the sense of

smell? But as it is, God arranged the members

in the body, each one of them, as he chose.

If all were a single member, where would the

body be? As it is, there are many parts, yet

one body.[7]

The multi-systemic approach, allowing for multiple different types of church government (operating simultaneously) best preserves the body analogy. It also allows for all-important checks and balances against tyranny and spiritual abuse. It also allows different church organizations, missions, and conferences to emerge which function within their cultural norms, instead of being forced to operate the way their parent church or mission did.

There will be dangers in such an approach. A church which is constantly redefining herself can be distracted from her primary mission. A multi-systemic approach can lead to fighting for prominence among the various types of leaders. Confusion can occur as to who is responsible to whom. Yet, all of these problems existed in the early church, and still she was remarkably successful at her mission. The genius of a multi-systemic approach is that it is flexible enough to adjust to the needs of the present, instead of being trapped in outdated structures inherited from the past.

A body changes over time. At certain phases in a body’s development, certain functions become more important, more protected. When those phases are over, other functions take the lead. This fluidity and flexibility is what makes growth possible. It preserves the organism, and prevents stagnation and decay. It allows the body to continue to be what it is. A flexible approach to governing the church will ensure that she continues to be the LORD’s chosen, saved, transformed, gathered body, speaking with his voice.

[1] Acts 1:2, 26; 2:37, 43; 4:33, 36; 5:12, 18, 29, 40; 6:6; 8:1, 14; 9:27; 11:1; 14:4, 14; 15:2, 4, 6, 22f; 16:4; Rom. 1:1; 11:13; 16:7; 1 Cor. 1:1; 4:9; 9:1f, 5; 12:28f; 15:7, 9; 2 Cor. 1:1; 11:13; 12:12; Gal. 1:1, 17, 19; Eph. 1:1; 2:20; 3:5; 4:11; Col. 1:1; 1 Thess. 2:6; 1 Tim. 1:1; 2:7; 2 Tim. 1:1, 11; Titus 1:1; Heb. 3:1; 1 Pet. 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:1; 3:2; Jude 1:17; Rev. 2:2; 18:20; 21:14.

[2] Acts 4:5, 8, 23; 6:12; 11:30; 14:23; 15:2, 4, 6, 22f; 16:4; 20:17; 21:18; 22:5; 23:14; 24:1; 25:15.

[3] Acts 6:1-6 ESV.

[4] Philippians 1:1 ESV.

[5] Acts 15:22 ESV.

[6] 1 Corinthians 12:27; Ephesians 4:12.

[7] 1 Corinthians 12:14-20 ESV.

Some Guidelines for Prayer

A chapel message at Oro Bible College

Cagayan de Oro, Philippines

Based on James 5:13-20

1. Pray what you feel (13).

“Is anyone among you suffering? Let him pray. Is anyone cheerful? Let him sing praise.”

So many of our prayers are just reciting formulas and words that we have learned. The LORD is more interested in our being honest with him. He wants to hear our complaints when we are suffering, and our praises when we are happy. He’s our Father and he wants to hear our voice.

2. Get help when you need it (14-15a) (16a).

“Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him” “pray for one another”

Sometimes our pride keeps us from getting the benefits of prayer, because the LORD wants others to minister to us, but we want to do everything ourselves. The LORD loves us all, and he is pleased when we pray for others, and others pray for us.

3. Unconfessed sin can ruin your prayer life (15b-16a).

“if he has committed sins, he will be forgiven.” “Therefore, confess your sins to one another”

Sin puts a barrier between us and the One we are praying to. It cuts off the connection. Nothing destroys relationships like guilt. We need to keep short accounts with God, so that our prayers are not hindered.

4. Pray for both spiritual and physical healing (16b) (19-20).

“pray for one another, that you may be healed” “whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death.”

Sin and sickness are both evidence that there is something wrong with this world we live in. God created the universe in a state of perfection, but when our ancestors rebelled, sin and sickness and death entered in. Our prayers are not always going to stop people from sinning, being sick, or dying. But we do know that reconciliation and restoration can happen, and the LORD encourages us to keep praying until it does.

5. You do not have to be a spiritual giant to pray powerfully; you just have to pray in tune with God’s desire (17-18).

“Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed fervently”

Elijah was an ordinary man whom God used. The LORD is looking for ordinary men and women who are willing to pray. That way, he gets the glory for his work, not the instrument he uses. When we find out what God wants, we pray accordingly, and let God be God. But, even then, there are no guarantees. That is why it is called the prayer of faith.