jeffersonvann

coaching for the mission in Jewish Galilee

The prophet Isaiah had predicted that the northern territories, once the possession of the tribes of Zebulun and Naphtali, would have a special place in God’s messianic plan. This land of Galilee, so surrounded by Gentiles and Samaritans that it was called “Galilee of the nations” would be the first to see the Messiah.[1] In their land of darkness, the light of Christ and his gospel would dawn first.

This light dawned in three phases. First, our Lord, Jesus grew up in Nazareth, a city in the region of Galilee. Second, when Jesus began his mission of preaching his coming kingdom, he chose Capernaum, another city in Galilee, as his headquarters.[2] Then, in a final attempt to get the message out to this region, Jesus appointed his twelve disciples as missionaries to them, and sent them out to permeate the region with the message about him.

Matthew 9:37 – 10:4

³⁷ Then he said to his disciples, “The harvest is plentiful, but those working at it are few; ³⁸ therefore pray for the Lord of the harvest to send out more workers into his harvest.” ^10:1 Then he called to him his twelve disciples and gave them the right to cast out unclean spirits, and to the right to heal every illness and every injury. ² The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; ³ Philip and Bartholomew; Thomas and Matthew (who had been a tax collector); James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; ⁴ Simon the Cananaean, and Judas Iscariot, who later would betray him.

Jesus had a larger group of disciples who followed him, and a smaller group of disciples whom he had been training. He first commanded the larger group to pray for the Lord of the harvest (the owner of the field) to send workers who could complete the harvest in Galilee.

Next, as Lord of the harvest, he chose his workers – the twelve whom he had been training. He coached them in how to tell all the Galileans that the kingdom from the sky had approached, and that its king was here. Their evidence: deliverance from demons and healing.

Jesus and John the Baptist had planted the seed.
Jesus had trained the twelve harvesters.
Jesus authorized them to deliver and heal.

All Jesus asked the larger group of disciples to do was pray.

These prayer warriors would back up the teams who went out to preach. We do not know if these evangelists went out in pairs, like the seventy-two he later sent out with a similar mission in Judea. [3] If they did go in pairs, that would make six teams, and Jesus himself would be a seventh.

Matthew 10:5-11

⁵ These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Do not go to the Gentile regions and do not enter any town of the Samaritans, ⁶ but go instead to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. ⁷ And preach as you go, saying, ‘The kingdom from the sky has approached.’ ⁸ Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse lepers, cast out demons. You received without paying; give without pay. ⁹ Do not purchase gold or silver or copper for your belts, ¹⁰ nor a bag for your journey, nor two tunics nor sandals nor a staff, because the worker deserves his food. ¹¹ And whatever town or village you enter, search for someone worthy in it and stay there until you leave.

These apostles had been prayed for, trained, empowered for service, and sent out with a specific target in mind. They were to go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Now, they had to trust that the LORD who sent them on a mission would provide for them while serving him. During harvest, the Lord of the harvest feeds his workers.

So, Jesus tells the twelve not to weigh themselves down with extra provisions. They were to just go, find people to feed them where they went, and keep preaching Jesus until the job was done. These were not the instructions Jesus always gave to those he sent out, but they applied in this case. The Israelites had claimed that they were looking for their Messiah, now it was time for these Galilean villages to prove where their hope was.

Matthew 10:12-16

¹² As you enter the house, greet it. ¹³ And if the house is worthy, let your blessing of peace come upon it, but if it is not worthy, let your blessing of peace return to you. ¹⁴ And if anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. ¹⁵ Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town. ¹⁶ “See, I am sending you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, so be wise as serpents as well as innocent as doves.

The twelve could expect rejection and opposition, even violence. That is why they had to be wise about who they approached. They had to be cautious like a serpent to whom everyone is deadly. Those who would not listen were to be left, and the LORD would judge them. But the workers needed to be innocent, honest, people of integrity. They were sheep sent out to witness to wolves. Without integrity, they would never win their lost neighbors to Christ. Those Galileans had plenty of experience with dishonest religious leaders. They needed to see the real thing.

Matthew 10:17-22

¹⁷ Be attentive of men, for they will send you to court and punish you in their synagogues, ¹⁸ and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, for the purpose of testifying before them and the Gentiles. ¹⁹ When they take you to court, do not worry about how you are to speak or what you are to say, for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour. ²⁰ For it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. ²¹ Brother will deliver brother over to death, and the father his child, and children will betray their parents and have them put to death, ²² and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved.

There is a difference between fearing someone, and being aware of what they might do. Jesus wants his workers to know what they have gotten themselves into. He wants them to know that although some will accept their testimony about him, others will oppose it, even violently so. It is possible that anyone going out to proclaim Christ might be going to his death.

What a pep talk! But Jesus was not going to sugar-coat this. He wanted them to know that there is always a possibility of betrayal, rejection and violent death when his missionaries go out to proclaim the word of life. Too much is at stake for the Adversary to allow our mission to succeed without retaliation.

And these are mostly Galileans – all except Judas! These men would be in danger from their own countrymen. Imagine then, what we should expect if we dare to tell foreigners of God’s word.

Matthew 10:23-28

²³ When they pursue you in this city, escape to the next, for honestly, I tell you, you will not have finished with all the cities of Israel before the Son of Man comes. ²⁴ “A disciple is not over his teacher, nor is a servant over his master. ²⁵ It is sufficient for the disciple to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master. If they have called the master of the house Beelzebul, how much more will they mistreat those of his household. ²⁶ “So do not fear them, for nothing is covered that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be made known. ²⁷ What I tell you in the dark, say in the light, and what you hear whispered, proclaim on the housetops. ²⁸ And do not fear from the killers of the body (who are unable to kill the soul). Instead, fear the one who is able to destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.

Even though Jesus knew that the Galilean mission would be somewhat successful, he wanted the apostles he sent out to know that there is always a possibility of betrayal, rejection and violent death when they go out to proclaim the word of life. Too much is at stake for the Adversary to allow our mission to succeed without retaliation. Yet, there is a fact that should cause us to check our fear of these body-killers. That fact is hell.

Oh, I am not referring to the hell that was dreamed up in the minds of pagans, where disembodied souls are tormented constantly for eternity. I’m talking about the hell Jesus talked about here — Gehenna. Gehenna is not a temporary place of torment that disembodied souls go at death. It is the final state of the lost — it is the lake of fire that follows the great white throne judgment.^{^[4]} The purpose of Gehenna is not to inflict pain as punishment. It is to destroy – to utterly kill – to annihilate. This is something that only God can do.

The pagans thought that even God could not kill the soul, but they were wrong. They thought that souls continue to live after death, making death a lie. Jesus taught that death is real. He warned his apostles that when they dared to proclaim him, the world would treat them like they did him. We all know what they did to Jesus. But then something wonderful happened. He rose from the dead. They had killed his body, but his soul (his whole being) came to life again at his resurrection. He had no reason to fear the killers of his body, because God would raise his soul from that death.

The right fear is the fear of God. Jesus instructed his workers in the Galilean mission to choose this fear, and let it override their fear of persecution. Yes, they could be put to death. Over the centuries since this message was given, many a body has been killed for sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ. But the same God who raised Christ from the dead will also raise their souls to life again. Their death is real, but only temporary. The death we should all fear is the death without Christ, without faith, and without God. That death is destruction of both soul and body in Gehenna. It is what the Bible calls the second death.^{^[5]} It is to be feared because it is permanent. When God destroys, he utterly destroys. The prophet Malachi said that “the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble. The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the LORD of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch.”^{^[6]}

Fearing Gehenna hell, and fearing the God who can destroy people there, does not need to make us love him any less. Jesus is talking about putting our earthly fears in perspective. The dangers that await us for obedience to him need to be contrasted with the dangers that await those who reject and disobey him. We serve out of love. We proclaim his grace because we have been won over by that grace. Reality is that we might die for proclaiming that grace.

But Jesus teaches his disciples here that the gospel message and what is says about the future are all going to be revealed in the end. Nothing that is hidden is going to stay hidden. The enemies of the gospel are not going to destroy it. What the disciples hear Jesus saying in the dark, they can feel free to say in the light. What they hear whispered, they can proclaim on the housetops. Those truths are not going to go away, regardless of how fierce the opposition to them. Our confidence in the power of God can help us to overcome fear of man.

Matthew 10:29-33

²⁹ Are not two sparrows sold for an assarion?^{^[7]} And not one of them will fall to the land without your Father’s permission. ³⁰ But even the hairs of your head are all accounted for. ³¹ Do not fear, then; you are more valuable than many sparrows. ³² So everyone who admits knowing me in the presence of men, I also will admit knowing in the presence of my Father who is in the sky, ³³ but whoever denies knowing me in the presence of men, I also will deny knowing in the presence of my Father who is in the sky.

Jesus was sending his apostles out to preach the gospel of his kingdom to their neighbor towns in Galilee. Many of the people knew something about Jesus, but these apostles who already knew Jesus personally had the responsibility to represent him, providing truth instead of rumors. That is why it would be essential for the apostles to be honest about their relationship with God through Jesus Christ.

Jesus had already warned them that they would face persecution, and to be prepared for violent, even fatal opposition. He had first told them to be true because not even death is as bad as forsaking God. Death at the hands of men is temporary, but the second death in Gehenna is permanent.

Now he gives them another reason why that reaction to their message should not deter them from proclaiming it. The Father in the sky values the lives of all his creatures, giving his permission before even a common sparrow dies. But a believer has a special relationship with God through Christ. For these special people, even the hairs on our heads must be accounted for.

The gospel message we now preach is the whole story of what Jesus Christ accomplished when he walked this planet, including the work he accomplished as our Savior by dying on the cross as an atoning sacrifice, and being raised from the dead as the firstfruits, guaranteeing our future resurrection and his future kingdom. The message of a future king and kingdom coming down from the sky was crucial to the apostles’ ministry in Galilee, so it had to be proclaimed only by those who had really enlisted in the kingdom. The apostles had to own up to their new relationship with God through Christ, or else Jesus would not own up to them in the presence of his Father.

Matthew 10:34-37

³⁴ “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the land. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. ³⁵ For I have come to divide a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. ³⁶ And a man’s enemies will be those within his own household. ³⁷ The one loving father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and the one loving son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Christianity is a family-friendly faith. Jesus does not call on believers to renounce membership in their families, or to declare their family members enemies because they do not accept his kingdom. That is not what he declares here. The gospel message of grace heals families, and reconciles the broken relationships within them caused by sin, shame, and selfishness.

Yet, Jesus did warn his apostles that as they set about proclaiming the gospel of his coming sky kingdom in Galilee, they will find that much of the opposition to their message will come from their own families. The message of peace that they bring will feel very much like a sword. It will divide the very families it is designed to make whole.

Their neighbors might have the distance that will allow them to avoid these religious fanatics, but the people in their households will not. They will feel the pressure both ways. The believers in the family will keep at it until the unbelievers make a decision, the unbelievers will urge them not to get carried away with this Jesus thing. Pressure produces friction, and the closer one is to the source of pressure, the more friction will be felt. That is why preaching the gospel can be a source of family upheaval and strife.

Curiously, Jesus does not give us a quick, five step program for resolving this conflict. But, to be fair, that is not the issue he is teaching about here. These words are instructions to missionaries who are sent to their own hometowns to share the gospel. Since that is true, he instructs them to make their love and loyalty to him a priority – even over their love for family.

There is a general application here for Christians who have unbelievers in their families. It is that Jesus wants our love for him to be our first love priority. If Jesus and his coming kingdom from the sky is not our first priority, then we are still on the outside of that kingdom, looking in. He taught us to “seek first the kingdom from God and desire his righteousness, and all these other things will be added to you”^{^[8]} A strong, healthy family is something we all want, but we have to get the priority right, or even that might become a curse rather than a blessing. On the judgment day, we all will appear before Jesus Christ as individuals. Of concern that day will not be how strong or unified our families were. What will matter will be our personal relationships with Christ.

Matthew 10:38-42

³⁸ And whoever does not take his cross and follow behind me, he is not worthy of me. ³⁹ Whoever finds his soul will destroy it, and whoever destroys his soul for my sake will find it. ⁴⁰ “Whoever welcomes you welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes him who sent me. ⁴¹ The one who welcomes a prophet because he is a prophet will get a prophet’s wages, and the one who welcomes a righteous person because he is a righteous person will get a righteous person’s wages. ⁴² And whoever gives one of these little ones even a cup of cold water because he is a disciple, truly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his wages.”

This final part of Jesus’ commissioning sermon for his apostles as they go out to their Galilean ministry focuses on their purpose as representatives of the Lord and his coming kingdom. It has two sections. In the first, verses 38-39, Jesus challenges his disciples to follow him fully. He is going to his cross; they should be following behind him with their crosses. If the apostles are not willing to risk their lives to preach Christ, they are not worthy of him.

It is in this context that Jesus tells them to destroy their souls. I know, it is usually not translated that way, but the translation is accurate,^{^[9]} and fits the context. Of course, if one’s theology will not accept the idea of a destroyed soul, he will have problems accepting this translation. But practically all translations render the word psuché here as life, which is what Jesus means. A soul is a life. There is nothing immortal about this life. That is the point. To serve the Lord faithfully, workers must be willing to go to their crosses and destroy their souls, trusting that he can raise them to life again.

But along with the tremendous responsibility of representing Christ, there is also the tremendous blessing of representing him. In the second section, verses 40-42, Jesus tells his apostles that those who welcome them and accept their message will be greatly blessed. When they welcome the apostles, they are not just welcoming the apostles, they are welcoming the Lord they represent. When they welcome Christ, they are welcoming God whom he represents. As such, they participate in the LORD’s ministry, in the same way that someone who welcomes a prophet participates in that prophet’s ministry. Even a cup of water given to these faithful little ones who share their faith will be repaid by their master.

So, on the judgment day, those who dared welcome these itinerant evangelists into their homes, providing for their needs, and accepting their teachings – will find that they have earned the wages that these apostles earned. What are those wages? The wages of sin is death, bit the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.^{^[10]}

After their evangelistic campaign in Galilee, the apostles returned and told Jesus what they had experienced,[11] but neither of the Gospel authors tell us what that experience was. All we know is that after this point, Jesus withdrew from those cities and concentrated his ministry elsewhere. We also know that a concentrated rejection of Jesus and his ministry happened in those Galilean cities immediately afterward.

Matthew 11:20-24

²⁰ Then he began to denounce the cities where most of his miraculous works had been done, because they did not repent. ²¹ “Tragedy is coming to you, Chorazin! Tragedy is coming to you, Bethsaida! Because if the miracles done in you had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. ²² But I am telling you, things will be more bearable on the day of judgment for Tyre and Sidon than for you. ²³ And you, Capernaum, will you be exalted to the sky? You will be brought down to Hades. For if the mighty works done in you had been done in Sodom, it would have stayed alive until this day. ²⁴ But I am telling you that things will be more tolerable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom than for you.”

Was the harvest botched? Did the apostles fail their first major assignment? No, they did not fail. They successfully completed their assignment, sharing both Christ’s love and his power among their neighbors in Galilee. But the cities that heard that message still eventually chose to reject it. Chorazin, Bethsaida and Capernaum had seen more proof of the power of Jesus than any other place. They had seen the Holy Spirit at work. Yet they were rejecting Jesus and his message. Jesus pronounced judgment upon them – a terrible destructive tragedy that they will experience on the judgment day. Even the three cities famous for being destroyed by God in the Old Testament (Tyre, Sidon & Sodom) will fare better on judgment day than them. It is a terrible thing to reject what the Holy Spirit is doing.

But the apostles did not lose their reward. They had remained faithful when their families and communities rejected their message, and persecuted them. They kept true to the promise of the coming kingdom from the sky. They were willing to go to their own crosses and destroy their own souls for the sake of that promise. They feared the permanent destruction of their souls by God in Gehenna more than the temporary killing of their bodies by men. When judged by the faithfulness of the apostles to the coaching they had received from Jesus, the mission in Jewish Galilee had been a success.

Some of us have been privileged to serve the LORD as missionaries on foreign fields, but all of us have had the call to share him among our friends, neighbors, and family. We have all been given a mission like that of the apostles to Jewish Galilee. When all is taken into account, it will not be the numbers that we have reached which will determine how successful we were. Like these apostles, our success will be measured by how well we followed Christ’s instructions. Our reward will be given based on the extent to which we were faithful in representing him.

[1] Isaiah 9:1-2.

[2] Matthew 4:13; 11:23.

[3] Luke 10:1-17.

[4] Revelation 20:11-15.

[5] Revelation 2:11; 20:6,14; 21:8.

[6] Malachi 4:1.

[7] about an hour’s wage (1/16^th of a denarius, a day’s wage for unskilled labor).

[8] Matthew 6:33.

[9] The word apóllumi is rendered destroy in Matthew 2:13; 9:17; 10:28; 12:14; 22:7; 27:20. It is a better translation than the typical word “lose” in verse 39 because the cross (verse 38) is a method of destruction.

[10] Romans 6:23.

[11] Mark 6:30; Luke 9:10.

soul searching

I’m involved in a translation project now, which will take me a few years. As I go from text to text of scripture, it gives me opportunity to test my presuppositions about the meaning of certain words. One of those words is “soul.” I trust the Bible to give me an understanding of what a soul is, and what it does. I do not trust the popular understanding of the term. I think the popular understanding draws from the wrong well. We will see.

The Hebrew word translated “soul” in the Old Testament is nefesh, and its Greek equivalent in the New Testament is psuché. The Hebrew term appears 757 times in 686 verses, and the Greek term appears 103 times in 93 verses. However, most of those references do not really help to define the word. They simply use the term in reference to people, either saying that so and so is a soul, or using the phrase “my soul” or “his soul” as another way of saying “me” or “him.” That is, they use the word pronominally.

Of particular importance to me are those instances where the terms are not translated “soul” by the ancient and modern translators. These texts where the terms are present in the original but “hidden” in translation are significant. Their numbers are significant as well. If one looks at the total occurrences of nefesh/psuché (860) compared to the number of times a translation renders it as “soul” this is what one finds:

None of the translations use the word “soul” exclusively to translate nefesh/psuché. The version that is the most literal is (of course) Young’s Literal Translation, but even it translates with some other terms besides “soul” 35% of the time. The older versions tend to use the term “soul” more readily than the newer ones do. But even the older versions had trouble translating a significant percentage of texts where nefesh/psuché appear utilizing the English word soul.

I am guessing that the problem these translators had related to their theological understanding of the word soul. If they assumed that a soul is an immortal, imperishable inner being of a human person, they would have trouble using the term if the passages they are translating rule out or do not suggest that idea.

My original question as a translator was “how shall I translate these terms?” I have decided to try to be consistent with a word-for-word approach, and see what happens. My theological understanding is that there is no immortal entity thriving inside each human body. For that reason, I assume that the word “soul” will not give me the translation problems others have struggled with. As I said, we will see.

Examples from Genesis

And God said, “Let the water swarm with swarms of living souls, and let birds fly above the land across the divider of the sky.” So God created the great sea creatures and every living soul that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. [1]

The very first instances of nefesh are indicative that the popular definition needs help. It appears before the creation of Adam, so does not refer to human beings at all. God uses the term to indicate fish and other sea animals. The Geneva Bible translates the plural of nefesh here as “every creeping thing.” Most translations simply render it as “creatures.” There is no hint of immortality here.

And God said, “Let the land bring forth living souls according to their kinds- livestock and creeping things and animals of the land according to their kinds.” And it became that way.[2]

The land was filled with living souls too, before humanity. Here again, most translators chose to render the word as creature or living thing. If having a soul makes one immortal, then the animals are too.

And to every beast of the land and to every bird of the sky and to everything that creeps on the land, everything that has a living soul in it, I have given all flora for food.” And it became that way.[3]

Anything capable of eating a salad has a soul in it. That hardly narrows the definition. It certainly does not exclude anything but humans.

And out of the ground the LORD God had formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. And whatever the man called every living soul, that was its name.[4]

Adam named every living soul. Of course, if only humans are souls, that would be easy. All he would have had to say was “Adam.”

But you shall not eat flesh with its soul, that is, its blood. And for the blood of your souls I will require the same: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require the same for killing the soul of man.[5]

Fast-forward to the story of Noah, and God is telling us not to eat animals with their souls still in them. In other words, do not eat anything that is still alive, with their blood still pumping through their veins. He also warns all his creatures that he will vindicate those who are murdered. He implies that such murder is killing the soul. Our translations could not handle this way of putting it, so they steered away from the idea of killing a soul.

Then God said to Noah and to his sons with him, “See, I establish my covenant with you and your offspring after you, and with every living soul that is with you, the birds, the livestock, and every beast of the land with you, as many as came out of the ark; it is for every beast of the land. I establish my covenant with you, that never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood, and never again shall there be a flood to destroy the land.” And God said, “This is the sign of the covenant that I make between me and you and every living soul that is with you, for all future generations: I have set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be a sign of the covenant between me and the land. When I place clouds over the land and the rainbow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant that is between me and you and every living soul of all flesh. And the water shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh. When the rainbow is in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living soul of all flesh that is on the land.”[6]

God establishes his covenant with Noah, his family, and every living soul on the planet. But there were no humans besides Noah and his family left alive. Who were those living souls? They were the animals who came out of the ark. Once again, the translators could not be consistent, but the texts are. They show that “living soul” refers to anything alive, not just humans.

So Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their possessions that they had accumulated, and the souls that they had made in Haran, and they set out to go to the land of Canaan.[7]

OK, now it gets really interesting. The translators consistently interpret the reference to souls here as the servants acquired from outside the family, and added to Abram’s household while they were sojourning in Haran. But the verb they usually translate as “acquired” is the simple verb “to make.” It is translated that way numerous times in Genesis prior to this text.[8] But the translators must have had problems with the idea of Abraham’s clan making souls. So, instead, they translate the verse as if it refers to new servants being added to the clan. Actually, it seems to refer to new souls being born into the clan. If a soul is simply a living being, not an immortal essence given by God himself, there is no problem to speak of making that soul through the reproductive process. Chew on that for a while!

Say you are my sister, that things may go well with me because of you, and that my soul may be kept alive for your sake.[9]

Young’s translates the word soul, but all the others surveyed use the word life instead. Abram obviously was not in fear of losing his immortal essence (as if he had one). No, he was afraid that the Egyptians would see his life as an obstacle to getting what they wanted – his beautiful wife. So he asked her to tell them that she was his sister. Saving his soul meant keeping himself alive. That is all it has ever meant.

And the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give me the souls, but take the property for yourself.[10]

The king of Sodom used the term soul consistent with how Moses uses it elsewhere in Genesis – in reference to a living being as opposed to a piece of property. But the translators of our Bibles (even Young, here) could not bring themselves to do so. For them, the word soul was a technical theological term describing the inward being, not a general term identifying a person. But it is clear that the king of Sodom is asking for the persons, not the property. So, all of the translators use the term persons or people for nefesh here.

Traditionalist theologians have grappled with this problem. They usually respond to it be saying that the term as used here is an example of metonymy: where a term indicating a part of a thing is used to signify the whole. Thus, they say, the souls are the inward beings of these men, but the king would ask for them, knowing that the bodies would come with them. That is inferring a great deal of modern theological understanding on the part of this ancient near eastern king. It is also an unnecessary assumption. The translators are right, of course, if by accident. Souls does mean persons in this case. But the translators’ refusal to use the term souls in this verse also shows that they probably have bought into an unproven theological premise about the nature of human souls.

Any uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul will be cut off from his people by death; he has broken my covenant.[11]

This is one of the many circumstances where reference to a person as a soul is simply taken by the translators as pronominal. But it is significant that the LORD refers to people’s souls being cut off – a metaphor for death. Parents who dare not circumcise their children are marking them for death. The soul dying is a reference to the whole person dying.

And as they brought them out, one said, “Escape for your soul. Do not look back or stop anywhere in the valley. Escape to the hills, so you will not be swept away.” But Lot said to them, “Oh, no, my lords. See, your servant has found favor in your sight, and you have shown me great kindness in saving my soul. But I cannot escape to the hills, or the disaster will overtake me and I will die. See, this city is near enough to flee to, and it is a little one. Let me escape there- is it not a little one?- and my soul will be saved!”[12]

The angels rescuing Lot from Sodom apparently felt that Lot’s soul was in danger of being destroyed, not just his body. This makes perfect sense if destruction kills the soul. If the soul is impervious to death – not so much. But translating this passage literally would entail giving an entirely unacceptable meaning to saving one’s soul, and that would never do. So, some of the translators hid the idea of soul using other language. Kudos for the ancient translations (Geneva and King James) and for Young’s, who kept the word soul, regardless.

And he said to them, “If your souls are willing that I should bury my dead out of my sight, hear me and entreat for me Ephron the son of Zohar, that he may give me the cave of Machpelah, which he owns; it is at the end of his field. For the full price let him give it to me in your presence as property for a burying place.”[13]

Sarah has died and Abraham is negotiating a burial place with the Hittites. This use of nefesh is taken by all the translators as pronominal, and rightfully so. It was not necessary for them to exclude the term soul, but it is understandable. For so many, the term soul has an exclusive meaning that does not fit all of these generic uses. My point is that that exclusive meaning flies in the face of hundreds of times, like this, when it appears in the Bible. We should be taking our understanding of its meaning from its uses in the texts. Instead, translators have brought their understanding to the text, and so often avoid using the term soul if that understanding does not fit the text. That is a translation fault and is a product of eisegesis.

Examples from Matthew

The New Testament use of psuché is just as telling as the Old Testament use of nefesh is. How do the translators fare in their literal rendering of it, and in what circumstances do they find it necessary to use some other word? We shall see.

But after the dying of Herod, see, an angel of the Lord appears in a dream to Joseph in Egypt, He is saying, “Get up, take the child and his mother and go to the land of Israel, for those who wanted to kill the soul of the child are dead.”[14]

Herod was doing a little soul searching of his own. Matthew described him as pursuing the soul of baby Jesus in order to kill it. It is quite obvious why traditionalist translators would steer away from a literal rendering here. It suggests that even Jesus had a mortal soul that could be killed by a soldier’s sword. This statement Matthew makes is consistent with Moses’ uses of the term in Genesis. The soul is a life that can be taken. That is what Herod wanted to do.

“Therefore I tell you, do not be distracted by your soul, what you will eat or what you will drink, nor by your body, what you will put on. Is not the soul more than what it eats, and the body more than what it wears?[15]

Wow, Matthew is confused. Could Jesus have ever made that mistake? Matthew has him saying that the body wears clothing, but it is the soul that eats food. Huh? The translators help Matthew with his embarrassment by consistently rendering the word psuché as life here. He really flubbed up there.

But, wait a minute. Luke records Jesus as saying essentially the same thing!

And he said to his disciples, “Therefore I tell you, do not be distracted by your soul, what you will eat, nor by your body, what you will put on.[16]

Could it be that Jesus himself did not know that souls are incorporeal, and cannot eat anything? Didn’t he read Plato in Rabbi school? It seems clear that Jesus is using the term psuché in a way that is consistent with the Old Testament usage of nefesh, but inconsistent with the way the Greeks conceived the soul. Plato regarding the soul as an incorporeal entity inside the shell of the body, destined to be set free from bodily restraints and appetites by death. But Matthew has told us (so far) two things about the soul that oppose that view: the soul can be killed by a sword, and the soul needs food to live.

Whoever finds his soul will lose it, and whoever loses his soul for my sake will find it.[17]

Here, Jesus is telling us that if we really want to find our souls, we have to be prepared to lose them. The Greek concept of psuché is quite clear on the subject: you cannot lose your soul. Even if you die, your incorporeal entity is going to hang around forever, being essentially you without an outer shell. So, this use by Jesus of the term psuché is problematic for the translators as well. They consistently substitute the word life for psuché, even though they all use the word soul for the same word eleven verses earlier in the same chapter.

Because whoever wants to save his soul will lose it, but whoever loses his soul for my sake will find it. For what would it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what shall a man give in return for his soul?[18]

This is essentially an elaboration on the previous text, six chapters later. The phrase appears four times in the two verses of text. Each version surveyed always uses the word life to translate psuché in verse 25. Five of the versions then consistently retranslate that same word as soul in verse 26! Three of the modern translations (ESV,NET, and NRSV) at least consistently use the phrase his life in all four occurrences. Why the consistent inconsistency? Well, one answer would be that the translators felt that it was possible to forfeit one’s soul (to hell), but not possible to lose it (because it stays alive even in hell). Their traditionalist theology prevented them from translating the same term consistently in four connected statements. However, eliminate the foreign presupposition of the soul’s immortality, and these two verses can be translated quite easily.

…just as the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve, and to give away his soul as a ransom for many.[19]

Here is another text in which the translators consistently use the word life instead of soul. Jesus said that he came for the purpose of giving away his soul as a ransom for the lost that his sacrifice will save. But traditionalist theology sees giving away one’s soul as an entirely negative thing. It is forfeiting one’s soul to burn in hell. Jesus did not do that. He was talking about his death on the cross. His bodily death on the cross was what he described as giving his soul as a sacrifice. The translators all recognize that, so they – again, consistently — translate the word psuché in the text as life. My point is that the fact that requires the translators to render psuché as life here is the theological misunderstanding of the translators. Rather than accept that Jesus was talking about giving away his soul, they purposely chose a term that they could use which would not challenge their understanding of the meaning of psuché.

Jesus anticipated his soul dying. In Gethsemane, he told his disciples that his soul was very sorrowful, “crushed with grief to the point of death.”[20] The translators did not mess with that one. But it, too, speaks of the psuché as potentially dying. Every reference to psuché in Matthew speaks of the soul as dying along with the body, with the apparent exception of Matthew 10:28.

And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Instead, fear him who can destroy both soul and body in Gehenna.

Traditionalist theology makes much of this verse, which appears to show a distinction between the body and the soul. At first glance, it seems to be saying what Plato said about the human soul, that it cannot be killed, and so will live on forever, no matter what it believes, or whom it fears. But, wait, that cannot be right either. The verse goes on to say that God can destroy the soul, and will do so in hell. That is why we should fear him, and not the people around us.

People are able to “kill the body” but only God can kill the soul. So, rather than saying that hell is going to be filled with undying souls, this verse teaches that it will be filled with dead souls – destroyed souls and bodies. It will be a lake of fire that consumes everything thrown into it.

Responding to this, traditionalists simply choose to redefine yet another word – the word destroy. They say that God will destroy souls in hell by keeping them alive forever in agony. Someone has already translated away all of those pesky passages for them that might indicate that souls can die, so they seem to have no choice but to hold this view.

Here are the words of Jesus as Luke recorded them:

“I tell you, my friends, do not fear those who can only kill the body, and after that have nothing more that they can do. But I will advise you whom you should fear: fear him who, after he has killed, has the right to cast you into Gehenna. Yes, I tell you, fear him!”[21]

Matthew’s text is an abbreviation of what Jesus said, as recorded in Luke. Also, Luke, being a Gentile, and more acquainted with the Greek concept of the immortal soul, took pains not to give it credence. Jesus is contrasting not two parts of humanity, but two kinds of death. The death of the body is real, but not permanent. Death in Gehenna hell will be permanent. Therefore, fear God, not man.

Our soul searching has shown us evidence which has been hidden in many texts of scripture – evidence that the soul can be killed, lost, taken away, or given away as a sacrifice. That evidence contradicts the doctrine of humanity that many Christians believe. It contradicts, Plato, Augustine, Calvin, Wesley and many others. But it is right there in the texts of the Bible where those of us who dare to look can see. Will we dare to let the text triumph over tradition?

[1] Genesis 1:20-21.

[2] Genesis 1:24.

[3] Genesis 1:30.

[4] Genesis 2:19.

[5] Genesis 9:4-5.

[6] Genesis 9:8-16.

[7] Genesis 12:5.

[8] Genesis 1:7, 16, 25f, 31; 2:2ff, 18; 3:1, 7, 21; 5:1; 6:6f, 14ff; 7:4; 8:6; 9:6; 11:4; 12:2.

[9] Genesis 12:13.

[10] Genesis 14:21.

[11] Genesis 17:14.

[12] Genesis 19:17-20.

[13] Genesis 23:8-9.

[14] Matthew 2:19-20.

[15] Matthew 6:25.

[16] Luke 12:22.

[17] Matthew 10:39. {I have not forgotten 10:28. We will come back to that. This survey is of those passages which contain psuché but which the translators typically use some other term besides soul to translate it.}

[18] Matthew 16:25-26.

[19] Matthew 20:28.

[20] Matthew 26:38 NLT.

[21] Luke 12:4-5.

ACST 65: The Reign

When Jesus began his earthly ministry among us, he urged people to repent – not so that they could go to heaven, but because God’s kingdom was coming down from heaven.[1] The gospel he preached was the good news of the inauguration and soon arrival of that kingdom. It was called the gospel of the kingdom.[2] Yet, the church has seldom emphasized the future reality the Bible refers to as the kingdom. In fact, Christian scholars have questioned whether the phrase “kingdom of heaven” implied some future event:

“For many years scholars argued over the Greek expression most commonly translated, “the kingdom of God”, as to whether it might better be translated, “the reign of God.” The argument revolved around whether Jesus was speaking of a geographical realm into which the faithful will enter at his future coming, coincident with the resurrection and judgment, or whether he was referring to a dynamic reign already present and active in human history, and expanding with his ministry.”[3]

Some of Jesus’ statements can be read as if he was referring to this dynamic reign, this dominion over a domain. He commanded his disciples to seek the kingdom.[4] He compared the kingdom to a field currently planted with various seeds,[5] a mustard seed currently sprouting in a field,[6] and yeast currently permeating a loaf of bread.[7] There is obviously a current aspect of the kingdom.

Yet, much of what Jesus said about the kingdom is profoundly future oriented. Those who are poor in spirit and persecuted now are promised the kingdom as an inheritance later.[8] Those who uphold the commandments will be called great in the coming kingdom.[9] Many who think they are religious will, in fact, never enter this kingdom.[10] Many who claim that Jesus is their Lord will not enter it.[11] Jesus taught us to pray for this kingdom to come, and when it does, what God wants will happen on earth, just as it is happening in heaven now.[12] Burge urges us to put what the Bible says about both aspects of the kingdom in perspective:

“the vast majority [of texts] look toward the coming of God’s kingdom to this earth, when Messiah, David’s greater son, will sit on the throne of David in Jerusalem and reign over Israel and the world forever. … Our modern fascination with the present should not be allowed to obscure this fact, nor cause us to miss so much of what the Lord has revealed to us, for our benefit, about his coming kingdom.”[13]

Christ’s spiritual/physical reign over the earth will begin immediately upon his return, but will manifest itself in a number of special events: The last world war (Armageddon), The greatest reunion (The Marriage Supper of the Lamb), and the restoration of all things (The Millennium). This will be a time for redeemed humanity to undo all the damage done to this earth by Satan since the fall. It will also be an age of warfare against all the spiritual beings who have fostered rebellion against Christ and his kingdom.

Most of what we know about this millennial reign is found in the first six verses of Revelation 20:

“Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, holding in his hand the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain. ² And he seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil and Satan, and bound him for a thousand years, ³ and threw him into the pit, and shut it and sealed it over him, so that he might not deceive the nations any longer, until the thousand years were ended. After that he must be released for a little while. ⁴ Then I saw thrones, and seated on them were those to whom the authority to judge was committed. Also I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for the testimony of Jesus and for the word of God, and who had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ for a thousand years. ⁵ The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. This is the first resurrection. ⁶ Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ, and they will reign with him for a thousand years.”[14]

Some believers honestly question whether the statements in Revelation 20 should be interpreted as referring to a literal reign of Christ on this earth. They question the need for such a limited reign, not seeing why the earth must be subjected to another earthly reign after Christ returns. Those objections should be taken seriously, and answered from Scripture. The following is an attempt to do so:

objection #1 There is no need for a millennium

We are used to seeing Christ’s return as the culmination of the eschaton. His return will bring about the judgment of the lost, and the eternal reward of the saved. Placing a millennial reign before the judgment and restoration suggests another event, and one wonders why it is necessary. Paul taught the Corinthians that we will all be changed in the blink of an eye at the sounding of the last trumpet.[15] Since both the resurrection and the rapture/ translation of the saints occurs immediately at Christ’s parousia, why place an earthly reign between the parousia and the eternal reign?

The answer to this objection can also be found in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians. He told them that Christ must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The reign must precede the end.[16] The order is as follows 1) Christ returns, 2) the dead in Christ are raised immortal, 3) they reign with him until he puts all his enemies under his feet (destroys them), 4) Christ hands the kingdom over to his Father.

Also, many prophecies relating to the reign of Christ over Israel require the kind of environment one would expect in the millennium.

“’Nevertheless, I will bring health and healing to it; I will heal my people and will let them enjoy abundant peace and security. I will bring Judah and Israel back from captivity and will rebuild them as they were before. I will cleanse them from all the sin they have committed against me and will forgive all their sins of rebellion against me. Then this city will bring me renown, joy, praise and honor before all nations on earth that hear of all the good things I do for it; and they will be in awe and will tremble at the abundant prosperity and peace I provide for it.’”[17]

“Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles. If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, they will have no rain.”[18]

“And you will be called priests of the LORD, you will be named ministers of our God. You will feed on the wealth of nations, and in their riches you will boast.”[19]

objection #2 there is no place for a literal millennium

Peter said that the earth will be destroyed on the day of the Lord’s return.[20] Some have objected to a literal millennium because there will be no old earth in which to reign. Christ will make all things new.

But 2 Peter 3 is the very passage that compares a day with the Lord to 1000 years. That day will begin with the Lord’s sudden appearance “like a thief.” It will conclude with the heavens and the earth being destroyed and laid bare.[21] The sequence of events is precisely the same as in Rev. 20. The day that Peter describes is the whole sequence of events, and is not limited to a single 24 hour period.

objection #3 there will be no time for a literal millennium

A similar objection is based on what Jesus said about the resurrection, implying that the resurrections of both the righteous and the wicked take place at the same time.[22] In the Revelation 20 text, the millennial reign occurs between these two resurrections.

Again, the context of John 5 shows that Jesus uses the term “time” in a way that allows for it to mean a long period of time. In verse 25 he speaks of this present time in which the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live. He speaks not of resurrection but of salvation. This “time has lasted for thousands of years. So, it is not without reason to assume that the time of the resurrection that Jesus refers to in John 5:28-29 might begin at the resurrection of the saved and end at the resurrection of the lost one thousand years later.

objection #4 there is no purpose for a millennium

Paul taught that the moment Christ returns, believers will be reunited with their Savior, and will never be absent from him again.[23] For some, teaching an earthly reign just takes away from the majesty of that reality. They see no purpose to a mundane kingdom on earth when eternity has already began for believers as soon as their bridegroom appeared.

But Paul was not outlining the whole of the eschatological timetable in 1 Thessalonians 4. He was addressing the question of what has happened to those believers who had fallen asleep (died) before the return. Paul taught that when Christ returns, He will raise the dead in Christ and rapture the living in Christ. From that time alone, believers will never be separated from Christ again. The millennium will not change that reality.

But the earthly reign has a purpose. The earthly reign is God’s fulfillment of his promises to his people. He promised that we will reign with Christ, and assist him in the overthrow of his enemies.[24] The millennium is God’s affirmation of human dominion over the planet. It is not necessary. Jesus could destroy all sin and sinners the moment he returns. But his destiny and ours is to reign together, and together clean up what Satan has done to this planet.

[1] Matthew 4:17.

[2] Matthew 4:23.

[3] David Burge, Heaven is Not My Home. (Auckland: Resurrection Publishers, 2010), 9.

[4] Matthew 6:33.

[5] Matthew 13:24.

[6] Matthew 13:31.

[7] Matthew 13:33.

[8] Matthew 5:3,10.

[9] Matthew 5:19.

[10] Matthew 5:20.

[11] Matthew 7:21.

[12] Matthew 6:10.

[13] Burge, 11.

[14] Revelation 20:1-6 ESV.

[15] 1 Corinthians 15:51-52,

[16] 1 Corinthians 15:22-25.

[17] Jeremiah 33:6-9 ESV.

[18] Zechariah 14:16-17 ESV.

[19] Isaiah 61:6 NIV.

[20] 2 Peter 3:10-14.

[21] 2 Peter 3:8-12.

[22] John 5:28-29.

[23] 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.

[24] 2 Timothy 2:12; Revelation 20:6.

ACST 64: The Apostasy

Chapter 62 introduced the argument that the worldwide apostasy predicted by the apostle Paul has already begun. In fact, Paul taught that elements of the apostasy were already present in his time. He said that “the hidden power of lawlessness is already at work.”[1] Someone was “holding him back” in the first century, but that someone would soon be “taken out of the way.” The reformers believed that that “lawless one” was the head of an apostate movement which essentially took the place of the visible church for over 1000 years.

The Protestant Reformation was an attempt to take the visible church back from that apostasy. It was not entirely successful. There is still a visible church today which has as its foundation a gospel other than the gospel of grace, a head other than Christ himself, and a way to God other than the Way. We evangelicals have pretty much ignored this. In our desire to get along with others who claim Christ, we have been careful to avoid speaking of this apostasy, which the Bible predicted, and has come to pass.

In fact, we have been guilty of following popular teachings which lead readers to other conclusions about the Antichrist and his rebellion. The popular teaching that he will not appear until after the rapture is one such teaching. In that take on 2 Thessalonians 2, the one who holds back the Antichrist is the Holy Spirit, who will be taken out of the way when the church ascends. Two major facts argue against this interpretation:

1. The Lord’s coming will not pave the way for the Antichrist. Instead, at his coming, Jesus will destroy the Antichrist “by the breath of his mouth” and wipe him out “by the manifestation of his arrival.[2] Paul was not teaching that the world would wait until the second advent for the apostasy to happen. He taught that the Apostasy was a very real threat for professing believers themselves. Those who professed faith in Christ but actually “have not believed the truth but delighted in evil”[3] would be the recipients of “all kinds of miracles and false wonders” and “every kind of evil deception” from the Antichrist.[4] Since they refuse to believe the gospel, God himself will send a deluding influence upon them, so that they fall for the claims of the apostasy.[5]

2. The Holy Spirit can never be taken out of the way. One of the foundational truths taught in Scripture is that God’s Holy Spirit is omnipresent. Even when the church is taken up into the clouds for the marriage supper of the Lamb, the Holy Spirit will still be here, empowering the avenging angels as they war against God’s enemies at Armageddon. No, the reformers understood that the power that held back the apostate church was not the Holy Spirit, but was the Roman empire. As the empire dissolved, the Roman Catholic Church emerged as both a political and religious power, and effectively took over.

Daniel’s Fourth Beast

In Daniel 7, the world’s empires are presented as four enormous beasts. The lion represents Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylonian empire. After him comes the bear, the empire of the Medes and Persians. Then, comes the Macedonian empire, represented by the leopard with four wings. Finally a great, unnamed beast emerged, which would be the final world empire before the Ancient of Days gave dominion of the earth to “one like a son of man.” Daniel wrote of this Messiah “And to him was given dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all peoples, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom one that shall not be destroyed.”[6]

the little horn

But just before this happens, something will happen within the fourth empire. A little horn will emerge. Daniel says: “and behold, there came up among them another horn, a little one, before which three of the first horns were plucked up by the roots. And behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man, and a mouth speaking great things.”[7] This is the last event Daniel sees before he sees the second coming of Christ. What does Daniel predict Christ will do when he comes? He says “I looked then because of the sound of the great words that the horn was speaking. And as I looked, the beast was killed, and its body destroyed and given over to be burned with fire.”[8] It is no coincidence that both Daniel and Paul speak of Christ coming and destroying the Antichrist.

Combining the aspects of both Daniel’s prophecy and Paul’s prophecy, one is left with this timeline:

1. The Roman empire is replaced by another kingdom, but which is still Roman.

2. This king will speak great things, and will deceive those in the church who are not true believers in the gospel.

3. Christ will return and destroy this beast, taking over the nations of the world for his legitimate rule.

It should also be noted that both in Daniel’s day, and in Paul’s day, there was no clear distinction between sacred and secular. All the world’s emperors claimed to be divine and to be ruling by divine appointment. In a sense, all of them were usurping the legitimate authority of the Messiah. What the apostasy did was replace Christ’s legitimate authority as king of kings with the authority of a church.

John

The apostle John, like Paul, also addressed a church on the verge of becoming part of the apostasy. He reveals that many antichrists were already beginning to deceive the church in his time:

“Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour. 19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. 20 But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge. 21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth. 22 Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son. 23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also. 24 Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you too will abide in the Son and in the Father. 25 And this is the promise that he made to us- eternal life. 26 I write these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you. 27 But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything- and is true and is no lie, just as it has taught you- abide in him.”[9]

The Church was already being led astray by deceiving influences, and John called these deceivers antichrists. Probably the deceivers to whom John referred were Gnostics, who denied the deity of Christ. But John did not say that the future Antichrist would be a Gnostic. He merely implied that the future Antichrist would be a deceiver, and would, like the Gnostics, try to get people to accept another gospel.

John warned his readers against accepting such deceivers into their households:

“For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist. 8 Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward. 9 Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. 10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, 11 for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.”[10]

The Apostasy would be a replacement church with a replacement gospel, but its adherents would seek to convince true believers to join them in their apostasy. The difference that John encouraged believers to look for was a doctrinal difference. The apostates will have gone ahead and stopped abiding in the teaching of Christ. The teaching of Christ was the gospel of salvation by grace.

The Roman Catholic Church replaced sharing the gospel of grace with obeying the law of the Church. They replaced repentance with penance. They replaced forgiveness by the blood with merit through works. The replaced the headship of Christ with the headship of the Pope, who is called the Vicar of Christ. Antichrist means not “against Christ” but “instead of Christ.” They replaced the hope of resurrection with the despair of purgatory. They replaced believer’s baptism with the christening of infants, who cannot profess faith because they do not yet have a faith to profess. The Lord’s Supper was a meal where we are supposed to remember what Christ did for us. They turned it into an animistic ritual where adherents repeatedly sacrifice Christ all over again. Christ had told his disciples to lead by serving. The Roman Catholic Church produced leaders who lord it over their followers, and provided everything for them. They also replaced the purity of worshipping Christ alone to the idolatry of praying to and venerating the “saints.”

In the book of Revelation, John showed that this Apostasy would be a prostitute bride. She would ride the beast of Rome, and give glory to that empire, not the coming reign of Christ. Instead of unifying the church in the gospel, she would unify them under the Latin culture:

‘Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the judgment of the great prostitute who is seated on many waters, 2 with whom the kings of the earth have committed sexual immorality, and with the wine of whose sexual immorality the dwellers on earth have become drunk.” 3 And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was full of blasphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. 4 The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and adorned with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her sexual immorality. 5 And on her forehead was written a name of mystery: “Babylon the great, mother of prostitutes and of earth’s abominations.” 6 And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints, the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her, I marveled greatly.”[11]

“Then I saw another beast rising out of the earth. It had two horns like a lamb and it spoke like a dragon. 12 It exercises all the authority of the first beast in its presence, and makes the earth and its inhabitants worship the first beast, whose mortal wound was healed. 13 It performs great signs, even making fire come down from heaven to earth in front of people, 14 and by the signs that it is allowed to work in the presence of the beast it deceives those who dwell on earth, telling them to make an image for the beast that was wounded by the sword and yet lived. 15 And it was allowed to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast might even speak and might cause those who would not worship the image of the beast to be slain. 16 Also it causes all, both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, to be marked on the right hand or the forehead, 17 so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark, that is, the name of the beast or the number of its name. 18 This calls for wisdom: let the one who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man, and his number is 666.”[12]

The letters of the Greek word lateinos, a designation for a person of the Latin language and culture, added up to 666. The Church Father Irenaeus pointed to this as the “probable solution” to the number, as it referred to “the name of the last kingdom.”[13] The prostitute is a symbol from the Old Testament, indicating not a foreign power, but an apostate religion – and sexual immorality was a symbol of idolatry. The mark of the beast was a mark of protection. Just as God marked Cain to protect him from vengeance,[14] and marked those who would survive the judgment during the exile,[15] so the Antichrist would mark his own to protect them from God’s judgment,[16] but it will not work.

Although the Protestant Reformation did much to swing the ecclesiastical pendulum back toward sola scriptura and sola fide, the church remains in danger of succumbing to this apostasy. Regardless of what we call ourselves, we are in danger of joining the apostasy when we get our eyes off the coming Christ and put all our hopes in the present church. We are in danger when we add our own works to the finished work of Christ on the cross. We are in danger when we seek unity by borrowing beliefs from the world around us, instead of trusting the sure word the Holy Spirit gave us.

a word to the offended

Those who are members and leaders of the Roman Catholic Church are obviously offended at such teaching. Perhaps this offense is the reason so many of our other Protestant brothers have stopped teaching it. In this age of relativism, it seems somehow wrong to attack another church, and brand it as part of the Apostasy. Yet, this very relativism is a sign that we do not have to wait until after Christ returns. The Apostasy is here, now. If the Roman Church is not the Apostasy, what is? No other worldwide religious body has keep the world under its control for over a thousand years. No other church has been responsible for such comprehensive syncretism and violence against true faith.

The true catholic (universal) church is not Roman. It belongs to Christ, extends to all nations, and is made up of people representing all cultures. When Jesus comes, he will set the record straight. Until then, it is the responsibility of his present church to preach Christ, not itself. It is our responsibility to stay true to the gospel, not human traditions. It is our responsibility to proclaim faith in God’s grace through Christ’s sacrifice. We cannot afford to replace that responsibility with any other.

[1] 2 Thessalonians 2:7 NET.

[2] 2 Thessalonians 2:8 NET.

[3] 2 Thessalonians 2:12.

[4] 2 Thessalonians 2:9-10.

[5] 2 Thessalonians 2:11.

[6] Daniel 7:14 ESV.

[7] Daniel 7:8 ESV.

[8] Daniel 7:11 ESV.

[9] 1 John 2:18-27 ESV.

[10] 2 John 1:7-11 ESV.

[11] Revelation 17:1-6 ESV.

[12] Revelation 13:11-18 ESV.

[13] Irenaeus, Against Heresies (Book V, Chapter 30). (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103530.htm).

[14] Genesis 4:15.

[15] Ezekiel 9.

[16] Revelation 16:2; 19:20.

a different mission

“So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.”” Acts 1:6-8 ESV

______________________________________

I would not blame anyone for being a little distracted right now. There is a great deal going on globally, and things here in the United States seem a bit shaky. I would not be surprised if the history books list this as a crucial time, a time when major decisions were made with lasting effects.

I am going to ask you to go back with me in time to the first century AD, the time when the words of this text were first spoken. They were given in a time like this. They were spoken when powerful men made decisions that plunged the world into war, decisions that cost millions of lives, and brought pain and ruin to the lives of millions of others.

All of these words were spoken in Jerusalem, a city whose inhabitants were convinced that they would someday rule the world. The believers in Jesus got together and were sure that now was the time for them to take over. Jesus had demonstrated his power over everything. Even death could not stop him. Logic dictated that the believers form armies and overcome their oppressors. Jesus said no.

Jesus did not object to the theology behind his disciples’ question. He implied that some day his people would join him in a reign over all the earth. Jesus objected to the mission implied by their question. He commanded that they gear themselves up for a different mission.

That mission is still ours today. In fact, it is the only mission we have. Jesus’ great commission was essentially the same. We were commanded to make disciples of all nations, and this was to begin in Jerusalem. It was a mission that would be ours until the end of the age,[1] and we are not to stop until we have reached the last unreached place on earth.

A HOLY MISSION

The power behind our mission is the Holy Spirit himself. The believers at Pentecost were empowered by the Holy Spirit to reach Jerusalem for Christ. They were filled with the Holy Spirit and began telling the mighty works of God in different languages. Those who heard their words responded to the gospel as preached by Peter, and came to Christ themselves. Soon, the whole region was filled with the message. Then the Holy Spirit moves Philip to preach in Samaria, and Peter and John get in on the action, “preaching the gospel to many villages of the Samaritans.”[2] Then The Holy Spirit sends Peter to Joppa, and sets aside Paul & Barnabas to preach the same message to other gentiles. So, the book of Acts records how the Holy Spirit began accomplishing the mission.

Wherever the Holy Spirit goes, holiness happens. He takes our ordinary lives and reboots them, restoring them to their originally intended function. Wherever the gospel goes, people are confronted with their own sinfulness, because they meet Christ. He does not demand that we change, he offers grace. But his grace changes us.

A JESUS MISSION

From that point on, life ceases to be about us, and what we are about. Life becomes about letting the world know that Jesus lives, who he is, and what he has done. That is what it means to be a his witness. A witness is someone who testifies of something that he has seen and experienced.

You cannot be Jesus’ witness until you actually experience him. Once you experience him, you cannot help being his witness. You may not do it well, but you already are his witness.

A WORLD MISSION

The scope of our mission is always global. No matter who you are, no matter what your gifts, no matter what your background, Jesus challenges you to have an impact on every nation on the planet.

We are living in a time when that is more possible than it ever has been. Although we travel every year, there is no way for Penny and I to visit even the seven Asia –Pacific countries whose ministries we oversee for the denomination. But we can still be regularly involved in the ministries of those countries because of this remarkable time we are living in. We keep in regular contact with church and mission leaders in 20 countries, as part of the Global Training Initiative. I write and post articles and devotions on the internet that are being read by people in over 90 countries.

You and your church are making a global impact when you pray for missionaries and national leaders. You are making a global impact when you give to missions. I applaud you for doing that. But I want to challenge you to go beyond that. There is no telling what you and your church could do if you caught on to what it means to be a world Christian today.

[1] Matthew 28:16.

[2] Acts 8:25.