Judges 6 and the Hebrew Masoretic Vocalization of ADNY – Trinitarian Arguments Challenged

By: Joe Jerde

Key:

MS – Manuscript

MSS – Masuscripts

MT – Masoretic Text

TJon – Targum Jonathan

LXX א – Septuagint Codex Sinaiticus

LXX A – Septuagint Codex Alexandrinus

LXX B – Septuagint Codex Vaticanus

VetLat – Vetus Latina, Old Latin

Vg – Latin Vulgate

Pesh – Syriac Peshitta

This paper is inspired by a few different areas of debate all relating to each other and correlating to answer, “what is the correct Hebrew vocalization for the second “Lord” of Psalm 110:1?” I will also go over what I dub the “Masoretic Vocalization Conspiracy” being put forth by Trinitarian proponents in regards to the validity of the Masoretic[1] vocalization of the Hebrew root word  אדני (ADNY). I’m assuming that you already have a basic understanding of the subject matter as this paper is not meant to cover all the basic details. If you are not familiar with the theological background of this debate, there are basically two sides (I’ll be arguing from the Unitarian position):

1) Trinitarians (who believe Jesus is God) take the position that the Hebrew word אדני in Psalm 110:1 reads, “YHVH says to ‘adonai’ (a title given to God).”  Which in turn supports the position that the second Lord in this passage is Messiah Jesus as part of the triune God.

2) Unitarians (who don’t believe Jesus is God) take the position that the Hebrew word אדני reads, “YHVH says to’ adoni’ (a title not given to God).”  Which in turn supports the position that the second Lord is not God, but rather the exalted human Messiah Jesus.

The difference between the vocalizations, adonai and adoni, is one vowel at the end of the word אדני (ADNY) which gives the word not only it’s specific sound, but also its specific meaning. ‘Adonai’ is a title given to God. ‘Adoni’ is a title that is never given to God, but can be ascribed to angels and man. So you can see where the debate inlays as to whether the Masoretes did indeed write the vowel markings correctly. If the Masoretes did indeed correctly vocalize the second Lord in Psalm 110:1 as ‘adoni,’ it is evidence against the Trinitarian ideology that the second Lord is God. This is why the Trinitarian side has been hard at work to try and discredit the MT. What does the evidence say? What Trinitarian arguments are used to support the claim that ‘adonai’ is the correct Hebrew vocalization for the second Lord in Psalm 110:1? Let’s start with an argument from Trinitarian Dr. Michael Brown.

The reason I chose Dr. Brown in this paper, is because I’m going to answer a argument made by him that is in relation to a claim made by Dr. James White which was brought up in a video debate against Unitarians, Sir Anthony Buzzard and Joseph Good[2]. White claims that the Masoretes had a bias toward Christianity and a Triune God, so they purposely positioned the vowel points to support a ‘adoni’ vocalization for the second Lord in Psalm 110:1.

I first came across the argument made by Dr. Brown from a apologetic response he was directing to Rabbi Tovia Singer in one of his books, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, vol. 3. I’m going to quote a few paragraphs from Brown’s statements and give you my responses below each of his statements:

Dr Brown: “First, he [Rabbi Singer] is INCORRECT in stating that “my Lord” is reserved “for the profane, never the sacred.” Just look in Joshua 5:14, where Joshua addresses the angel of the Lord as “my lord” (‘adoni). Yet this divine messenger is so holy that Joshua is commanded to remove the shoes from his feet because he is standing on holy ground, just as Moses was commanded when the angel of the Lord – representing Yahweh himself – appeared to him (Exod. 3:1-6). This is hardly a “profane” rather than “sacred” usage! Similar examples can be found in Judges 6:13 and Zechariah 1:9, among other places…”

My response: These three occurrences that Dr. Brown cites (Josh 5:14, Jud 6:13, Zech 1:9) of angels being called ‘adoni’ are warranted  because the angels are not yet actively being spoken through by God. Why would Joshua, Gideon, or Zechariah call an angel ‘adonai’ (a title given only to God) if they are at the time speaking to the angel? The title ‘adoni’ in these cases would be proper for the angels, as they are being given a title of superiority and respect, but not as God almighty. It is when an angel is speaking on behalf of God that the angel can take on the name of God. The occurrence in Exodus 3:1-6 is a perfect example in this regard as God is speaking directly through the angel to Moses, not the angel speaking on his own accord.

Dr. Brown: “…Second, Singer’s WHOLE ARGUMENT HINGES ON THE MASORETIC VOCALIZATION, which did not reach its final form until the Middle Ages. As every student of Hebrew knows, BIBLICAL HEBREW WAS WRITTEN WITH CONSONANTS AND “VOWEL LETTERS” ONLY; the VOWEL SIGNS were added hundreds of years later. Yet both ‘adonai (used only for Yahweh) and ‘adoni (used for men and angels, as we just noted) are SPELLED IDENTICALLY IN HEBREW, consisting of the four consonants a-d-n-y. How then can Rabbi Singer make such a dogmatic statement about the differences between these two forms in the Bible? His argument stands only if we accept the absolute authority of the Masoretic vocalization, which in some cases follows the original Hebrew by almost two thousand years [footnote] 277.”

My response: This is the part where Dr. Brown injects an assumption I dubbed “The Masoretic Vocalization Conspiracy.” While his statement is correct that the Masoretic vowel markings were introduced relatively late compared to the earliest Hebrew manuscripts, however, this is hardly evidence against whether the vocalization is accurate or not. As we will see in a moment as I continue to write on in this paper, Dr. Brown’s statements are full of over-generalization, and lack proper manuscript research.

Dr. Brown: “…Third, it is not really important whether we translate with “my Lord” or “my lord”, since Yeshua’s (Jesus’) whole argument [in Mat. 22] was simply that David called the Messiah “lord”, meaning that the Messiah had to be more than David’s son.”

My response: While I agree with this statement in a Christian apologetic way to “Counter Messianism,” it downplays the context of what is being written. Saying that the second Lord in Psalm 110:1 is God, and saying that the second Lord is simply an identity being more than David’s son, are two very different claims.

Dr. Brown: “…[Footnote] 277: …Interestingly, ‘adonai (with qametz) in Judg. 6:15 is rendered with “my lord” in the LXX (kyrie mou) as opposed to simply Lord (kyrie, as it is usually rendered with reference to Yahweh), a rendering possibly reinforced by Judg. 6:13, with ‘adoni. This, then, could point to a change in the Masoretic vocalization of ‘adoni’. – Taken from Michael L. Brown’s, Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus, vol. 3, Messianic Prophecy, section 4.29.”

My response: The phrase from Judges 6:15 in question here is the formula בי אדני, “Please, my lord!” is translated in the sense of imploring/prayer to a superior. Essentially Dr. Brown’s whole argument in this case, is to cast doubt upon the vowel usage in the MT by pointing out that the phrase in Judges 6:15, בי אדני, differs with the LXX (not all LXX MSS agree as we will find out), and that this creates a sort of ambiguity between the two vocalizations. Remember, the Trinitarian position also claims that there is a long time period between the original LXX and the MT. Though they fail to mention that there are many ancient MSS that agree with the MT’s reading of ‘adonai’ in Judges 6:15.

Below is a list that shows which MSS support either an ‘adoni’, or ‘adonai’, translation in Judges 6: 15:

MSS supporting a “adonai” translation in Jud 6:15:

• MT – בִּי אֲדֹנָי  – Approx 9th century CE
• LXX A – εν εμοι κυριε – Codex Alexandrinus 400-440 CE
• TJon -בבעו יוי  - Approx 1st century CE
• VetLat – in me, domine – Prior to 3rd century CE

MSS supporting a “adoni” translation in Jud 6:15:

• LXX B – εν εμοι κυριε μου – Codex Vaticanus 325–350 CE
• LXX א – εν εμοι κυριε μου – Codex Sinaiticus 330-360 CE
• Pesh – ܒܥܐ ܐܢܐ ܡܢܟ ܡܪܝ  - Approx 1st century CE
• Vg – obsecro, domine mi – Late 4th century CE

Next we also see that most MSS (exception of the Vg in which there are variant readings) agree with the MT use of ‘adoni’ in Judges 6:13:

MSS supporting a “adonai” translation in Jud 6:13:

• Vg – obsecro, domine

MSS supporting a “adoni” translation in Jud 6:13:

• MT – בִּי אֲדֹנִי
• TJon – בְבָעֻו רִבוֹנִי
• Pesh – ܒܥܐ ܐܢܐ ܡܢܟ ܡܪܝ
• VetLat – in me, domine mi
• LXX א – εν εμοι κυριε μου
• LXX B – εν εμοι κυριε μου
• LXX A – εν εμοι κυριος κυριος

Before we go any further, let’s contrast how these same MSS translate the same Hebrew phrase, בִּי אֲדֹנָי, from 6:15, that’s also found in Judges 13:8[3]:

MSS translations of ‘bi adonai’ in Judges 13:8:

• LXX A – εν εμοι κυριε
• MT – בִּי אֲדֹנָי
• TJon – בבעו יוי
• VetLat – in me, domine
• LXX B – εν εμοι κυριε
• LXX א – ?
• Pesh – ܒܒܥܘ ܡܪܝܐ
• Vg – obsecro, domine

Now, a few things to point out from the MSS evidence in the lists above.

First, although the addition of the MT vowel markings come several hundred years later after the vowel-less Hebrew, we have several earlier MSS (LXX A[4], TJon[5], VetLat) that coincide with the MT rendering in Jud 6:15. These other MSS don’t give us the Hebrew vocalization, but they do give us an idea what the correct translation is. Using these MSS helps us to fill in the gaps from the time of the DSS to the MT. The assumption, that the Masoretes conspired to change the vocalization to fit their bias against a Trinity God, has now diminished under the weight of these MSS. Unless, somehow one can prove that these early MSS writers (many of them Christian) were all in on a conspiracy that spanned over several hundred years.

Second, the MSS that happen to disagree with the MT translation of ‘adonai’ in 6:15 end up being inconsistent. Remember how we contrasted the same Hebrew phrase, בִּי אֲדֹנָי, found in 6:15, that is also found in 13:8? Well it turns out that the opposing MSS (LXX B[6], LXX א, Pesh, Vg) that supported ‘adoni’ in 6:15 now agree with the MT “adonai” in 13:8. Not only that, the MSS that agreed with the MT in 6:15 makes them consistent in their translation of 13:8.

Third, now that we have taken a look at the MSS evidence, what about the context of Judges 6? Let’s start with when the angel appears to Gideon:

12 And the angel of the LORD appeared unto him, and said unto him, The LORD [is] with thee, thou mighty man of valour. 13 And Gideon said unto him, Oh my Lord, if the LORD be with us, why then is all this befallen us? and where [be] all his miracles which our fathers told us of, saying, Did not the LORD bring us up from Egypt? but now the LORD hath forsaken us, and delivered us into the hands of the Midianites.

In vs13, Gideon calls the angel by the title ‘adoni’ realizing that the angel is not God. God then interjects and begins to speak to Gideon in vs14:

14 And the LORD looked upon him, and said, Go in this thy might, and thou shalt save Israel from the hand of the Midianites: have not I sent thee? 15 And he said unto him, Oh my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? behold, my family [is] poor in Manasseh, and I [am] the least in my father’s house.

And as we see in vs15 above, Gideon then responded directly to God, therefore, warranting the use of the vocalization given to God, ‘adonai’. Why some manuscripts are inconsistent in this passage could be due to confusion as to who Gideon is addressing. The angel didn’t leave Gideon’s presence until vs.21, so perhaps certain translators thought that Gideon was still addressing the angel and therefore in vs15 put ‘adoni’, a proper title for an angel. Either way we look at this, there is a clear distinction between when God is not directly present to Gideon (vs13), to when God is directly present to Gideon (vs14 “Lord looked upon him”). This would suggest that the Masoretes did in fact render the usage of ‘adonai’ correctly in vs15.

Certain scribes of the LXX may have also translated vs15 incorrectly from the vowel-less Hebrew. It’s possible to see how this could have happened as there are two occurrences of the root ADNY are in close proximity with each other. There would have been no vowels to go off of, so essentially they could have easily mistaken ‘adonai’ in vs15 to be referring back to the Angel in vs13, therefore translating as kurios mou (adoni). Or, given that not all of the LXX codices agree, and that the LXX A agrees with the MT in regards to Jud 6:15, perhaps scribal copyist error crept into MS copies over time. In the overall scope of this study, nothing is empirical as to what the original MSS read, but with the research into what many of the best ancient MSS we have, and with a understanding of the context, we can draw strong conclusions.

Does the Trinitarian argument cast doubt on the MT vowel pointings in accordance to ‘adoni’ and ‘adonai?’ Not at all. As I have just shown, it’s a weak position to take up given the overall manuscript evidence and plain context of the passages. I find it rather sloppy and dishonest in the face of the scholarly and laymen community, that Dr. Brown and Dr. White would make such bold claims against the MT without doing the proper research into what the overall MSS and context will reveal to them. This, BTW, is a point in which, I myself, have difficult times writing up Theological studies. I understand that what seems to be fact can change. This paper is not meant to be the end all empirical standard. If there are any errors that I have made, or new sources come to light, I will be happy to revise.

And finally, how does all this relate to Psalm 110:1? It clarifies for us that indeed the Masoretes, and prior scribes, had a sure understanding of the distinction between ‘adoni’ and ‘adonai.’ This adds to even more proof that the second Lord in Psalm 110:1 cannot be, and is not, God. I know there is much I didn’t go over concerning Psalm 110:1 as I wanted to focus on Judges 6 in this paper. If you are interested into further reading of this debate inquiring more detail on Psalm 110:1, I recommend reading a article done by Jaco van Zyl entitled, “Psalm 110 and the Status of the Second Lord – Trinitarian Arguments Challenged”… http://www.21stcr.org/multimedia-2011/1-pdf/jz-psalm_110_LXX.pdf.

Footnotes and References:

[1] Masoretic comes the the word Masoretes. The Masoretes (ba’alei hamasorah, Hebrew בעלי המסורה) were groups of mostly Karaite scribes and scholars working between the 7th and 11th centuries, based primarily in present-day Israel in the cities of Tiberias and Jerusalem, as well as in Iraq (Babylonia). Each group compiled a system of pronunciation and grammatical guides in the form of diacritical notes on the external form of the Biblical text in an attempt to fix the pronunciation, paragraph and verse divisions and cantillation of the Jewish Bible, the Tanakh, for the worldwide Jewish community. Since the creation of these writings there has sparked much debate in theological circles as to the accuracy of these vowel markings and if they represent the true Hebrew.

[2] Video clip from a debate between Dr. Michael Brown and Dr. James White vs. Sir Anthony Buzzard and Joseph Good… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sE2llq2AtFI

[3] The Targum of Judges – Willem F. Smelik – E.J. Brill, pg. 275

[4] See image of LXX A MSS showing a εν εμοι κυριε translation… http://www.berryosfiles.com/adoniqam/images/LXX-A-Judges6-15.jpg

[5] The Targum Jonathan renders Judges 6:15 with the יוי abbreviation for the Hebrew tetragrammaton in Aramaic… http://cal1.cn.huc.edu/get_file_info.php?coord=5100706  Interestingly, is that vs13 of the TarJon also agrees with the MT reading of ‘adoni’ by using the Aramaic, ‘רבוני,’ for ‘my lord.’ See the entire chapter here… http://cal1.cn.huc.edu/get_a_chapter?file=51007&sub=06&cset=H

[6] See image of LXX B MSS showing a εν εμοι κυριε μου translation… http://www.berryosfiles.com/adoniqam/images/LXX-Sinaiticus-Judges6-15.jpg

Jesus is given many “titles”, or “designations”, in Scripture. Most of those titles are well known to Christians. However, from what I have seen, the exact meanings of those titles are not very well understood by many Christians.

In other words, some Christians do not understand the meanings of some of Jesus’ titles – and that can cause Christians to draw inaccurate conclusions about who Jesus actually is.

Of course, it stands to reason that followers of Jesus should want to have an accurate understanding of his identity. So, let’s examine some of the most common titles that are given to Jesus – and then explore what those titles actually mean.

Three very common titles

First, here are some titles that the apostle Peter gave to Jesus:

Matthew 16:15-17 (ESV):

¹⁵ He [Jesus] said to them, “But who do you say that I am?” ¹⁶ Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” ¹⁷ And Jesus answered him, “Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

Acts 2:36 (ESV):

³⁶ Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”

There are three distinct titles given to Jesus, in the above passages:

- “Christ”

- “Lord”

- “Son of God”

As it turns out, those same three titles are also given to Jesus by the other apostles, in numerous places. Here are some examples of this, from John, Paul and James:

John 20:30-31 (ESV):

³⁰ Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; ³¹ but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

1 Corinthians 8:6 (ESV):

⁶ yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

Galatians 2:20 (ESV):

²⁰ I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

James 2:1 (ESV):

¹ My brothers, show no partiality as you hold the faith in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory.

There are many, many other places in Scripture where those same three titles are given to Jesus as well. So, since those particular titles are so common, it appears worthwhile to take a closer look at them.

The title of “Christ”

The title of “Christ” is probably the most familiar title of Jesus, to Christians who live in English-speaking countries. In fact, Jesus is quite frequently referred to as “Jesus Christ” by many Christian churches.

Unfortunately, from my experience, many Christians are not familiar with the meaning of the title of “Christ”. In fact, in some cases, Christians are not even aware that Christ is actually a title, at all -  instead, some people think that Christ is simply the last name (surname) of Jesus!

The English word “Christ” comes from the Greek word Christos. The word Christos, in turn, is the Greek translation of the Hebrew mashiyach. (The English rendition of mashiyach is “messiah”.)

In any case, Christos and mashiyach both mean the same thing – their basic meaning is “anointed”; as in “one who has been anointed”. The word “anointed” comes from the Hebrew verb mashach – to anoint.

Here are the basic definitions of mashach (to anoint), mashiyach (messiah) and Christos (Christ), from Strong’s lexicon:

4886 mashach maw-shakh’ a primitive root; to rub with oil, i.e. to anoint; by implication, to consecrate; also to paint:–anoint, paint.

4899 mashiyach maw-shee’-akh from 4886; anointed; usually a consecrated person (as a king, priest, or saint); specifically, the Messiah:–anointed, Messiah.

5547 Christos khris-tos’ from 5548; anointed, i.e. the Messiah, an epithet of Jesus:–Christ.

As shown above, mashiyach and Christos both mean anointed – i.e. Christos is the Greek “version” of mashiyach.

Here is additional information about mashiyach, from Strong’s lexicon:

1) anointed, anointed one

      a) of the Messiah, Messianic prince

      b) of the king of Israel

      c) of the high priest of Israel

      d) of Cyrus

      e) of the patriarchs as anointed kings

So, the title of “messiah” (or Christ) refers to a person who has been anointed – that is, consecrated for service to God. In other words, God chose the person in question for His service; and then He had that person officially “consecrated”.  This consecration usually – but not always – begins with a ceremony involving the smearing of oil on the person.

As listed above, the kings and priests of ancient Israel were all anointed ones – i.e., they were all messiahs of a sort! So, the title of messiah is not unique to Jesus – many other people have held that title as well.

Also note that all of the kings and priests of Israel were literally smeared with oil, as part of their initial consecration to God.

Another item that is very interesting from the above list is that Cyrus – i.e., king Cyrus of ancient Persia – was also given the title of messiah (anointed)! Here is the verse that contains that title for Cyrus:

Isaiah 45:1 (ESV):

¹ Thus says the LORD to his anointed, to Cyrus,
whose right hand I have grasped,
to subdue nations before him
and to loose the belts of kings,
to open doors before him
that gates may not be closed:

It is quite interesting that Cyrus is given the title of anointed (i.e., messiah) – because Cyrus was not even an Israelite! Not only that, but Cyrus did not have oil smeared on him, as part of his consecration for God’s service. So, evidently there are some cases in which people can become consecrated into God’s service – and therefore, can become messiahs – without going through the “usual channels”.

In addition to the kings and priests, the Hebrew Scriptures also speak about one specific, special messiah, who will save all mankind from their sins. For example, in Genesis 3:15 God states that the “offspring of the woman” shall “bruise the head” of the serpent. In Deuteronomy 18:15, Moses tells the Israelites that “God will raise up a prophet like me from among you, from among your brothers – it is to him you shall listen”. Finally, in Isaiah 53, the prophet describes – in great detail – the sufferings that this special messiah would undergo, to allow all of us to be saved.

Of course, this one specific, special messiah is Jesus – and that is why he is given the title of the Christ (i.e., the Messiah) in the Greek Scriptures. In other words, Jesus was also consecrated into God’s service – just like the kings and priests of ancient Israel were. In the case of Jesus, though, he was given the completely unique role of being the savior of all mankind – something that the ancient kings and priests could never do.

So, from what I can see, Jesus’ title of “the Christ” means: “The one who was chosen by God, and consecrated into God’s service – in order to become the savior of mankind”.

The title of “Lord”

Most Christians are also familiar with the title of “Lord” for Jesus. For example, in English-speaking countries, one will frequently see signs that have “Jesus is Lord” on them.

Once again, though, many Christians are not very familiar with the meaning of the title “Lord”, when it is used in reference to Jesus. From what I have seen, the vast majority of Christians believe that the title “Lord” is completely interchangeable with the title “God”. In other words, most Christians think that “Lord” and “God” are synonyms – i.e., that they mean the same thing.

Of course, since most Christians think that “Lord” means “God” – and since Jesus is given the title “Lord” – most Christians conclude that Jesus, himself, is actually Almighty God.

One reason why Christians confuse the meanings of “Lord” and “God” is because of the rendition of God’s personal name, in English translations of the Bible. The personal name of Almighty God is written in the Hebrew Scriptures with the four Hebrew consonants yod, hey, vav, hey, as follows (note that Hebrew is written right to left):

יהוה

Those four consonants are often referred to as the “tetragrammaton” – which simply means four letters.

Of course, there is an enormous amount of debate about how, exactly, the tetragrammaton should be pronounced. Most scholars appear to favor the pronunciation of “Yahweh”. A common Anglicized pronunciation is “Jehovah”.

In any case, there is no question that God does have a personal name – as specified by the four letters above. However, almost all English translations of the Bible do not even try to provide a personal name for God. Basically, most English Bible render the tetragrammaton as the word LORD – with small capital letters. As a result, most Christians are not even aware that God has a personal name – because English translations have replaced His name with LORD!

Not only that, but by replacing God’s name with LORD, most English translations lead Christians to believe that “God” and “Lord” mean the same thing. That, in turn, causes many Christians to conclude that Jesus is actually God, because one of Jesus’ titles is “Lord”.

The Greek word that is rendered as “Lord” in reference to Jesus is kurios. Here is Strong’s lexicon on the meaning of kurios:

2962. kurios koo’-ree-os from kuros (supremacy); supreme in authority, i.e. (as noun) controller; by implication, Master (as a respectful title):– God, Lord, master, Sir.

In other words, the term kurios does not necessarily mean God – it simply indicates a person who has been granted a position of authority. Certainly, Jesus has been granted authority by God, as specified by Peter:

Acts 2:36 (ESV):

³⁶ Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”

In other words, God granted Jesus the title of kurios – lord. That is, God gave Jesus authority over us. However, that does not mean that Jesus is actually Almighty God.

After all, consider this – if kurios and God actually were synonyms – i.e., if the tile of kurios always meant Almighty God – then Acts 2:36 would read as follows:

Acts 2:36 (ESV):

³⁶ Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both God (kurios) and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.”

In other words, if kurios actually meant God, then the above verse would read “God has made him God“… That doesn’t make much sense, does it?

So, from what I can see, Jesus’ title of “Lord” refers to the fact that God has given Jesus authority over us.  In other words, God has made Jesus our “master”, or “boss”, if you will.

The title of “Son of God”

Finally, we come to the title “Son of God”. Generally speaking, most Christians are aware that Jesus has the title “Son of God”. However, from my experience, most Christians do not usually refer to Jesus by that title. Instead, most Christians simply refer to Jesus as “God” – partially because of the confusion over the title of “Lord” (as mentioned above).

Another reason why usage of the “Son of God” title is relatively rare is because of the Trinity doctrine. Basically, the Trinity states that there is just one God; but that He exists as three co-equal and co-eternal “persons”: “God the Father”, “God the Son”, and “God the Holy Spirit”.

As a result, people who are schooled in the Trinity tend to avoid the Scriptural title of “Son of God” for Jesus; instead, they reverse that title to “God the Son”! Note that the phrase “God the Son” does not appear anywhere in Scripture…

The title of Jesus that does appear in Scripture is the “Son of God”, so let’s concentrate on that title. So – what, exactly, does Scripture mean, when it states that Jesus is the Son of God? Fortunately, Scripture explicitly defines what the title “Son of God” means, in reference to Jesus. Take a look at this passage:

Luke 1:26-35 (ESV):

²⁶ In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God to a city of Galilee named Nazareth, ²⁷ to a virgin betrothed to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. And the virgin’s name was Mary. ²⁸ And he came to her and said, “Greetings, O favored one, the Lord is with you!” ²⁹ But she was greatly troubled at the saying, and tried to discern what sort of greeting this might be. ³⁰ And the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. ³¹ And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. ³² He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, ³³and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”

³⁴ And Mary said to the angel, “How will this be, since I am a virgin?”

³⁵ And the angel answered her, “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy—the Son of God.

A succinct “synopsis” of the above passage is as follows:

- The angel Gabriel told Mary that God will cause her to conceive – in other words, that He will cause one of her eggs to become fertilized.

- Therefore, the resulting child – Jesus – will be called the Son of God.

In other words, God caused Mary to become pregnant with Jesus – and as a result, Jesus is called the Son of God. This concept is quite simple – and yet, most mainstream Christians reject it out of hand. Needless to say, I put more trust in what the angel Gabriel tells us, than in the speculation of human theologians.

So, from what I can see, the reason why Jesus is given the title “Son of God” is as follows: God caused Jesus’ mother to become pregnant with him.

Note that a much more detailed discussion about the title “Son of God” can be found at this link.

Conclusion

In a few cases in the past, people have asked me who, exactly, that I think that Jesus is. In that type of situation, it is rather tempting to say things like: “Well, he certainly is not the ‘second person of the Trinity’”. However, that type of response does not really serve anyone’s ends – i.e., it does not prompt anyone to try to research – for themselves – the identity of our Messiah.

Instead, it occurs to me that an appropriate response to that type of question would be as follows:

“I believe that Jesus is exactly who the apostles told us he was. For example, I believe – as the apostle Peter said – that Jesus is the Christ – the Son of the living God. In addition, I believe – as Peter told us – that God has made Jesus our Lord”.

That type of response would hopefully allow the questioner to do his or her own research. After all, since none of us is omniscient, the best that we can hope for is that people will approach this issue with an open mind, right?

Biblical Common Sense – Death – Who Possesses Immortality?

One might ask, is anyone naturally in possession of immortality? Yes! Scripture in fact clearly indicates who already has immortality.

1 Timothy 1:17 “Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.”

1 Timothy 6:15-16  “which He will bring about at the proper time– He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord of lords who alone possesses immortality and dwells in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. To Him be honor and eternal dominion! Amen.”

In 1 Timothy 1:17 we are told that God is eternal and immortal. And then later in 1 Tim 6:16 we learn that God “alone” is the possessor of immortality. So here’s where we once again employ the use of common sense and are able to ascertain that if God ALONE possesses immortality, then nobody else has it.  Alone is a simple word and means just that.  In such a usage it has the definition of: “to the exclusion of all others or all else – unaccompanied“. Therefore with nothing but basic common sense we can deduce that if God is the only one who possesses immortality, then we humans do not.  And that makes perfect sense if we die.  Being immortal by definition means “not subject to death”.  If we are subject to death – which we obviously are since we do die, then we are NOT immortal. A very easy, very simple concept if you let the actual words of Scripture mean what they say!

Next: “Death is an end”

Biblical Common Sense Series:

1. Intro

Jesus:

2. Jesus – God’s Son

3. Jesus – “This is MY Son”

4. Jesus – The Anointed of God

5. Jesus – The Messiah is suppose to be…

6. Jesus – Jesus Was Seen!

7. Jesus – Two Adams

8. Jesus – Not Equal, Not the Same!

Death:

9. Death – Patterns of Adam & Eve

10. Death – Who Possesses Immortality? (current page)

Like the first section on Jesus (started on KR here: Biblical Common Sense – Intro – What & Why), this has several sub-sections that are best published in smaller, easier to read sections here on KR.  So for my next several posts, I’ll add the sections that follow one another.  I’ll also try to provide all the links at the end of each post to the entire series just for reference.

Biblical Common Sense – Death – Patterns from Adam & Eve

Death is certainly a cold, hard reality for us as human beings.  It affects us all in some way during our short lives and will claim us at some point in time.  A lyric in the song “Do You Realize” by the Oklahoma Alternative band The Flaming Lips says “Do You Realize – that everyone you know…… someday……. will die?” It is poignant and unfortunately true. Just is a line from a famous pop culture film that says “On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero”.  Again, horribly all-too-true.

For the living the death of those near and dear to us hits us like a massive wrecking ball that we never truly recover from.  It affects our lives with a profoundness that is typically life-altering.  The finality of it is un-escapable. I know the loss of my father 30 years ago when I was 15 altered my life like nothing else save for the death of my mother 8 years later.  Being an only child then left alone, her death shook me to my core and has had a lasting impact on so many aspects of my life to this very day.

What can we learn about death from The Bible? Well if we take off the blinders of post-biblical traditions and utilize a common sense approach to it, we can glean a clear picture of God’s truth about death and what it means for us.

Patterns from Adam & Eve

The story of mankind’s beginnings presented in Genesis tell us why death exists. Adam and Eve’s sin brought death upon the human race and each and every descendant of them on down to all of us alive today. We all share in that same fate.  But many people who read this story and understand where and why death came to exist, fail to recognize the biblical truths that lay out the stark simplicity of death as well as our true human makeup.

Genesis 2:7 in describing the creation of man says that God “formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul”.  Nothing from the account indicates that man was made with anything already immortal. Nothing says that God gave man a soul that was immortal. It just says that Adam became a living soul – a living being.  Further still, once Adam and Eve sinned and God told them that the penalty they would then suffer was that they would “return to the ground, because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return” (Gen 3:19). God then took an additional step.  A scant few verses later in Genesis 3:22 & 24 we see that God made sure to not only kick Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden, but He also stationed an angel with a flaming sword that turned in all directions to prevent humanity from being able to eat fruit of the tree of life and live forever. With the facts presented here, shouldn’t common sense tell us that man was made mortal and it was the tree of life that was the key to being able to live forever?  The details presented show that once man was denied access to the tree of life – with an angel placed to fully ensure no one ever ate from it again, mankind became completely subject to death.  The Tree of Life was the necessary element for our human parents to be capable of living with God eternally. God going to the trouble of preventing man from ever eating from the tree of life and living forever makes zero sense if humanity already had the innate capacity of living forever past the death of the body as an immortal soul.

Also noticeably absent from the story of mankind’s beginnings is any mention of what happens after physical death.  Where is the basic info of what happens after their bodies died? Where are the instructions about going to Heaven or Hell?  That’s pretty important information that God neglected to tell Adam and Eve.  If Hell is truly the ultimate penalty for sin, then why is only death mentioned?  God told Adam back in Genesis 2:17 that if he disobeyed God’s instructions (committing sin), then the penalty he would suffer was “you shall surely die”.  Shouldn’t God have told them that disobedience would lead to punishment that they would physically experience for all eternity? Why didn’t God say something like “not only are you not going to live forever here on earth in your physical body, but since I made you with an immortal soul (which is nowhere mentioned in Scripture), you will have to be tortured in hell for all eternity (or for the more modern, PC, immortal soulist – “suffer eternal separation from God in some dark corner of the universe)?” Why did God not lay this out for humanity from the beginning? If mankind was made immortal, then just being told you’re going to “return to dust” is not really the full truth.  God would have to be seen as more than just a little negligent in this all-too-important missing detail of humanity’s makeup. 

I think common sense should help us to recognize that if death is explained as simply dying and returning to the base organic elements that are a part of us (termed “dust”), and this was the only penalty given by God, then such a death is all that occurs.

Next: “Who does possess immortality?”

Biblical Common Sense Series:

1. Intro

Jesus:

2. Jesus – God’s Son

3. Jesus – “This is MY Son”

4. Jesus – The Anointed of God

5. Jesus – The Messiah is suppose to be…

6. Jesus – Jesus Was Seen!

7. Jesus – Two Adams

8. Jesus – Not Equal, Not the Same!

Death:

9. Death – Patterns of Adam & Eve (current page)

Here are some straightforward words from Francis Chan’s book “Crazy Love” (page 42):

“Worry implies that we don’t quite trust God is big enough, powerful enough, or loving enough to take care of what’s happening in our lives.

“Stress says that the things we are involved in are important enough to merit our impatience, our lack of grace towards others, or our tight grip of control.

“Basically, these two behaviors communicate that it’s okay to sin and not trust God because the stuff in my life is somehow exceptional. Both worry and stress reek of arrogance. They declare our tendency to forget that we’ve been forgiven, that our loves here are brief, that we are headed to a place where we won’t be lonely, afraid, or hurt ever again, and that in the context of God’s strength, our problems are small, indeed.

“Why are we so quick to forget God? Who do we think we are?”

And Jesus says:

“For this reason I say to you, do not be worried about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing?  26 “Look at the birds of the air, that they do not sow, nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not worth much more than they?  27 “And who of you by being worried can add a single hour to his life?  28 “And why are you worried about clothing? Observe how the lilies of the field grow; they do not toil nor do they spin,  29 yet I say to you that not even Solomon in all his glory clothed himself like one of these.  30 “But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the furnace, will He not much more clothe you? You of little faith!  31 “Do not worry then, saying, ‘What will we eat?’ or ‘What will we drink?’ or ‘What will we wear for clothing?’  32 “For the Gentiles eagerly seek all these things; for your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things.  33 “But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness, and all these things will be added to you.  34 “So do not worry about tomorrow; for tomorrow will care for itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own. [Matthew 6:25-34]

Be encouraged today that our God is faithful and knows what we have need of even before we ask (Matthew 6:8)!  Exalt Him in your heart and mind today, and not your problems, worries, or fears!  Lets put the time and energy that we spend on worry instead into seeking first His Kingdom!

Two words that basically mean the same thing.  To be jealous means to be “resentful against a rival, a person enjoying success or advantage, etc., or against another’s success or advantage itself.”

Let’s face it, we’ve all felt that little green eyed monster arise quietly within us, when we hear of another’s success or even when we see someone who is close to us, receive an award or a new material object that we were yearning for.  We might not acknowledge this feeling to ourselves, or to anyone else for that matter, but the telltale sign that we are feeling jealous of that person’s good life or good thing is that we can’t wish them well or congratulate them.  Or if we do, we do it with a feeling that there’s something about them that is a little bit annoying to us… or something underneath that we don’t quite like about them.  We start looking for character traits in them that we don’t like and start picking at them.  Perhaps, we will just subconsciously begin to distance ourselves from them or talk about them behind their backs, to make ourselves feel better and elevate ourselves above them.  It’s not pretty.  In fact, I cannot think of anything else that makes a Christian woman more unattractive, than envy.

To blog about JEALOUSY is to bring it out of the closet and shed light upon it.  No one wants to be called out for being jealous and most often, we would rather not have to talk about it.  When we ‘confess our sins to one another‘ we like to choose sins that don’t make us look so ugly.  You know, we’d rather confess to problems of controlling our tongues, losing our patience with our kids, or not prioritizing our lives better.  To admit to feeling jealous towards another woman and what she has, and we don’t?  It sounds dreadfully petty, spiteful and doggone ugly of us.  Yet, it’s running rampant through our churches and our homes, and spreading like wildfire.

Proverbs 27:4 tells us “Wrath is fierce and anger is a flood, but who can stand before jealousy?”  This verse means that its a whole lot easier to deal with someone who is mad at you than jealous.  When someone is mad at you, you can address it openly to resolve whatever issue is the problem.  But when someone is jealous of you, it is a quiet, insidious enemy that is often held in secret and you don’t even know what the problem is, yet it begins to cause strife and stealthily create problems in a relationship or friendship, slowly eroding away the intimacy you once shared.

When we feel envy towards a person, it’s actually breaking one of the Ten Commandments:

“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife or his male servant or his female servant or his ox or his donkey or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”  Exodus 20:17.

If we are being secretly eaten up with jealousy and envy, then we are not going to be a good friend full of love for others.  This feeling of jealousy is not Christ-like in any way! Jesus wants us to rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who are weeping.  He wants us to feel compassion, love and empathy for others, not be so eaten up with jealousy that we can’t stand someone any longer! That is definitely not love!  If we are Christians, we’re going to walk in the Spirit and love others.  To be jealous of someone, is to be hanging out in the flesh and allowing our own ugly sin to take over.  Sadly, I’ve seen this kind of jealousy in little girls, teen girls, Christian women, Christian moms, worship leaders, Bible teachers, pastors, and pretty much everyone I’ve ever met, including myself.  To allow this ugly, divisive sin to continue growing in our hearts, our families and our churches, is just plain wrong.  Plain and simple, jealousy and envy are sins that we need to rid our hearts of, and I mean, right now.  Today.

So what do we do?

1. First, acknowledge those feelings.  You can’t eliminate something that you won’t admit is there.  Be honest with yourself of how you are feeling and why.
2. Ask for God’s strength to overcome these feelings.  As soon as a thought or feeling comes into your heart that is not kind or loving, capture it and then make it obedient to Christ. “We destroy every proud obstacle that keeps people from knowing God. We capture their rebellious thoughts and teach them to obey Christ.”  2 Corinthians 10:5.
3. Begin praying for your enemies.  We might not admit that our friend of whom we are jealous is our enemy, but that’s what they are, when we are envying them.  We are not able to feel happy or celebrate their blessings in their life, so they become our unacknowledged enemy.  You have a major problem if you cannot ask God to bless that person and pour more abundant blessings down into their lives.  Begin to pray for them.
4. Know who YOU are in Christ Jesus.  Jealousy stems from the insecurity in our lives and the feeling of being threatened in whatever position we want to be in.  For example, if you sing on the worship team at church, and suddenly, someone else is singing and getting more attention, more compliments, and has more musical gifts than you, you might begin to resent them and inwardly envy what they have.  The green eyed monster of jealousy roars its ugly head, and instead of acknowledging that you wish you could sing better than you do, like ‘her,’ (although that’s a tough one to admit!), you begin to dislike her and problems arise.

Instead, if you realize that God has made you just the way He wants you to be, with the gifts and talents He has provided you, then you can be confident in knowing that you are His, in Christ, and you can use whatever gift or talent that He has given you to the potential that He wants you to use your gifts.   “And such confidence we have through Christ toward God.  Not that we are adequate as coming from ourselves, butour adequacy is from God.”  2 Corinthians 3:4-5

You don’t have to compete or be the best, but you can be content and joyful, relaxing in the awesome knowledge of who you are in Jesus.  It’s the only way to overcome your own insecurity and your feeling of jealousy towards others.  Otherwise, we are constantly comparing ourselves to other people, wishing we had what they had, whether it’s their looks, their brains, their husband, their kids, their house, their car, their job, their personality, their popularity, their income, or their talents.  When we don’t have what they have, we can begin to envy them and ultimately end up disliking them for it.

Or on the flip side, we can compare ourselves to others, and as long as we are the best or the prettiest or the most gifted in the room, we find ourselves falsely and proudly propping ourselves up to a “I’m better than you” prideful mentality that is just as bad and sinful.  We might not be feeling jealous of anyone, but our pride and feelings of superiority are ugly sins, too.  At this point, we are only feeling secure based on who we are hanging out with. However, if someone more talented or beautiful or thinner, enters the room, we suddenly become insecure and feel that seed of jealousy begin to take root again within our hearts.

The only way we can overcome this, is to get our confidence in knowing that we are beautifully and wonderfully made by our Heavenly Father and resting peacefully in this knowledge.  When we finally come to terms with who God made us to be, what He has given us, and the circumstances in which He has placed us, then we can begin to work on becoming the best we can be and accomplishing the purpose for which He has created us.  We can then rejoice when others accomplish something neat; be happy for them when they get something new, or celebrate when something fantastic happens to them!  This is when we can be a great friend to them and rejoice with them when they rejoice [Romans 12:15]. That, my friend, is love at its intended best!

Jealousy. 
Jealousy:  It’s not pretty, but if we can acknowledge this sin in our lives and root out the cause of it, our relationships can be restored; we can have healthier and happier friendships that are honest and not built on a fake-nice that hides our envy; and then we will be released and freed to be all that God wants and desires for US to be, without the strife and without the constant comparison with others.  Let our focus only be on Jesus and allowing him to work in us and through us, to overflowing capacity!  Only then, can we experience life without the misery and hateful, spiteful feelings that jealousy can cause.

There is liberty in Christ Jesus.  Let us grasp it and run free!  Oh, what an awesome adventure awaits for us, my friends, if only we will deal with this beastly green eyed monster called JEALOUSY!   Let us spur one another on today, to be all that God has called us to be and begin to taste and experience all the joy that accompanies that knowledge!

“If God is a Trinity, then we would expect to find certain things in the New Testament.” —Robert Morey, The Trinity, Evidence and Issues, p. 247

The following is representative of the way key scriptural passages arguably should or might have been expressed if the Doctrine of the Trinity was central to the Christian faith and if acceptance of the Doctrine was an essential condition of human salvation. The texts presented below in the following forms were not put together in a spirit of sarcasm but in all seriousness, for if the latter orthodox doctrine of the Trinity is really grounded in, and in agreement with, the doctrine of the New Testament, it is, in fact, completely reasonable that the clearest “confessional statements” presented by these well-known and central-to-the-Christian-faith texts would have been expressed in the following or similar ways:

Peter’s confession: Matthew 16:13-17

When Jesus went into the region of Caesarea Philippi he asked his disciples, ‘Who do people say that the Son of Man is?’ They replied, ‘Some say John the Baptist, others Elijah, still others Jeremiah or one of the prophets.’ He said to them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Simon Peter said in reply ‘You are God the Son, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity.’ Jesus said to him in reply, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father—the fist person of the Trinity—who is in heaven.”

Matthew 28:18, 19

“And Jesus came and said to them, ‘As God, second person of the Trinity—co-equal and co-eternal with the Father—I possess all authority in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, the one God.’”

Mark 12:28-30

“…one of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, asked him, ‘Which commandment is the most important of all?’ Jesus answered, ‘The most important is, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one essence, three persons (or ‘the Lord our God is one what and three whos’). And you shall love the triune God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind…’

or,

“Jesus answered, ‘You have heard that the ancients were told: ‘The Lord is our God, the Lord is one,’ but I say to you, ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is three persons—one essence…’”

John 1:1

“In the beginning was God the Son, the Word, and the Word was with the person of the Father, the first member of the Trinity, and the Word shared the essence of the Father.”

John 4:23, 24

“…the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the one God in spirit and truth, for God is seeking such people to worship him. God is a tri-unity of persons, and those who worship God must worship in spirit and truth, as three persons in one essence, for the three persons of the Trinity are looking for such like ones to worship them together as the one God.”

John 3:16

“For God the Father so loved the world that he gave God the Son, so that whoever would believe in his deity should not burn in hell forever but go to heaven.”

John 8:24

“Unless you believe that I am God in the flesh you will die in your sins…”

John 8:58

“Truly, truly I say to you, before Abraham was born, I have eternally existed as God the Son, the second person of the Trinity.”

John 17:3-5

“And this is eternal life, that they may know you, Father, as the only true God, the Son, sent by the Father, as God, and the Spirit as God—three distinct persons, one God. I glorified you on earth, having accomplished the work that you gave me to do. And now, Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you as God the eternal Son in eternity past.”

John 20:30-31

“Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is God the Son, the second member of the triune Godhead, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”

Romans 8:3

“For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do, when God himself took on a body of flesh and, for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh…”

Romans 10:9

“If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is God, the second person of the Trinity, and believe in your heart that the Father raised him from the dead, you will be saved…”

Romans 15:4-6

“For whatever was written in former days was written for our instruction, that through endurance and through the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus, that together you may with one voice glorify the one God—Father, Son and Holy Spirit—the blessed Trinity.”

1 Corinthians 8:4-6

“Therefore, as to the eating of food offered to idols, we know that ‘an idol has no real existence,’ and that ‘there is no God but one.’ For although there may be so-called gods in heaven or on earth—as indeed there are many ‘gods’ and many ‘lords’— yet to us there is one God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, three persons, one essence.”

1 Corinthians 15:27-28

“For ‘The Father has put all things in subjection under his feet.’ But when it says, ‘all things are put in subjection,’ it is plain that he is excepted who put all things in subjection under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son’s manhood will also be subjected to the one who put all things in subjection under him, that the triune God may be all in all.”

1 Timothy 2:5, 7

“For there is one God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and one mediator between the Father and mankind, the God-man, Christ Jesus…For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth—the salvation of man rests on the acceptance of this doctrine.”

1 John 4:2, 3; 5:1-13

“By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is God in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus as God incarnate is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already…Everyone who believes that Jesus is God the Son, the second person of the Trinity, has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever is eternally generated of him. Who is it that overcomes the world except the one who believes that Jesus is God the eternal Son? This is he who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not by the water only but by the water and the blood. And the Spirit is the one who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and these three are one God. If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of the Father is greater, for this is the testimony of the Father that he has borne concerning God the Son. Whoever accepts Jesus as God the Son has the testimony in himself. Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that the Father has borne concerning God the Son. And this is the testimony, that God gave us eternal life, and this life is attained through faith in the doctrine of the Trinity, and belief in God the Son. Whoever has God the eternal Son, the second member of the triune God, has life; whoever does not have God the Son does not have life. I write these things to you who believe in the name of God the Son, that you may know that you have salvation.”

Colossians 1:15, 16

“He is the image of the invisible Father, the creator of the universe, for by (Gk. hupo) him were created all things, everything, heaven and earth.

Hebrews 1:3

“He [the Son] is the radiance of the Father’s glory and an eternal partaker of the Father’s divine essence.”

Philippians 2:5-11

“Have the same mind in you which was also in Christ Jesus; although he eternally partook of the same divine essence as the Father, he did not consider substantial co-equality with the Father something to exploit for his own gain, but he made himself of no reputation, combining the essence of God with a human nature, so that he would become the God-man…Therefore the Father has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory the triune God.”

Revelation 5:13, 14

“And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all that is in them, saying, ‘To the one that sits on the throne (the Father), to the Lamb (Jesus, the Son), and to the Spirit, be blessing and honor and glory and might forever and ever!’ And the four living creatures said, ‘Amen!’ and the elders fell down and worshiped the blessed Trinity.”

Of course, none of the above passages appear in Scripture in the forms presented. However, a serious consideration of these may prove beneficial to those studying the controversies surrounding the Trinitarian dogma, for they clearly and vividly illustrate how far removed modern-day, “mainstream Christian” doctrine is from the emphases and language of the New Testament Scriptures, as originally expressed by Jesus himself, and the apostles and Christians of the first century. The statement is true: “If God is a Trinity, then we would expect to find certain things in the New Testament”—yet we do not find them.

One of the most famous Biblical concepts is that of the “Golden Rule”. A common way of expressing that rule in English is as follows:

“Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.”

The Golden Rule is explicitly stated in the New Testament, in the following verses:

Matthew 7:12 (ESV):

¹² “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Luke 6:31 (ESV):

³¹ And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

Both of those verses appear to correlate to the following verse from the Torah:

Leviticus 19:18 (ESV):

¹⁸ You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD.

In fact, Jesus quoted Leviticus 19:18, when he stated that “love your neighbor as yourself” is the second most important of the commandments of the Law:

Matthew 22:36-40 (NIV):

³⁶ “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

³⁷ Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ ³⁸ This is the first and greatest commandment. ³⁹ And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ ⁴⁰ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

There is an obvious “connection” between Matthew 22:40, and Matthew 7:12. In Matthew 22:40, Jesus states that “all the Law and the Prophets hang” on the two most important commandments – and one of those commandments is to love your neighbor as yourself. In Matthew 7:12, Jesus states that it “is the Law and the Prophets” to do to others, what you would have them do to you.

As a result, it certainly appears that the Golden Rule is right at the “heart” of how followers of Jesus should try to treat each other. So, let’s examine that concept in more detail – in order to try to draw some conclusions from it.

The “positive” and “negative” aspects of the rule

Some people tend to think of the Golden Rule in strictly “positive” terms – i.e., they think of it as only referring to good things, that we should do for others. Certainly, that is one aspect of the rule – we definitely should try to do good to others. In fact, one of Jesus’ most famous parables – the parable of The Good Samaritan – encourages that very behavior. Here is that parable:

Luke 10:30-37 (ESV):

³⁰ Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. ³¹ Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. ³² So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. ³³ But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. ³⁴ He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. ³⁵ And the next day he took out two denarii and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ ³⁶ Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” ³⁷ He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.”

However, there is another aspect to the Golden Rule as well – a “negative”, or “prohibitive” aspect. In other words, the rule also applies to bad things, that we should not do to others. This concept can be seen in another one of Jesus’ parables – the parable of The Unforgiving Servant:

Matthew 18:21-35 (ESV):

²³ “Therefore the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants. ²⁴ When he began to settle, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. ²⁵ And since he could not pay, his master ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made. ²⁶ So the servant fell on his knees, imploring him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.’ ²⁷ And out of pity for him, the master of that servant released him and forgave him the debt. ²⁸ But when that same servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii, and seizing him, he began to choke him, saying, ‘Pay what you owe.’ ²⁹ So his fellow servant fell down and pleaded with him, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you.’ ³⁰ He refused and went and put him in prison until he should pay the debt. ³¹ When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their master all that had taken place. ³² Then his master summoned him and said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. ³³ And should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?’ ³⁴ And in anger his master delivered him to the jailers, until he should pay all his debt. ³⁵ So also my heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart.”

In other words, the servant in this parable should not have treated his fellow servant so harshly – because he himself did not want to be treated that way. So, this gives us an example of not doing bad things to others.

Interestingly, Judaism tends to focus on this “negative” aspect of the Golden Rule. A famous rabbi named Hillel, who lived during the time of Jesus, “summed up” the entire Torah as follows:

“That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.”

In addition, some of the Jewish writings in the last few centuries before Jesus also mentioned this negative aspect. Here is an example of this, from the book of Tobit:

Tobit 4:15 (New American Bible):

Do to no one what you yourself dislike.

So, it appears to me that we should keep both aspects of the Golden Rule in mind, when dealing with other people. We should certainly strive to do good things for others – but we should also try to avoid doing bad things to others.

A rather “subjective” rule

Almost all of the commandments in the Bible are completely “objective” in nature. In other words, those commandments are not “open to interpretation” – i.e., they do not require “value judgments”. Instead, they are very “black and white” statutes, that everyone must follow. Here are some examples of “objective” commandments:

Exodus 20:15 (ESV):

¹⁵ “You shall not steal.

Ephesians 4:28 (ESV):

²⁸ Let the thief no longer steal, but rather let him labor, doing honest work with his own hands, so that he may have something to share with anyone in need.

Exodus 20:14 (ESV):

¹⁴ “You shall not commit adultery.

Hebrews 13:4 (ESV):

⁴ Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.

Exodus 20:17 (ESV):

¹⁷ “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male servant, or his female servant, or his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor’s.”

Luke 12:15 (ESV):

¹⁵ And he said to them, “Take care, and be on your guard against all covetousness, for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of his possessions.”

However, the Golden Rule is not completely objective – instead, it has a subjective aspect to it as well. In other words, people do need to make “value judgments”, in order to obey the Golden Rule.

To explain this “subjective” nature, take another look at the way that the Golden Rule is stated, in Matthew 7:12 and Luke 6:31:

“So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them.

Basically, in order to obey the Golden Rule, each and every individual needs to determine how he, himself wants to be treated – and then he must try to treat others in that way. This is the very definition of a “subjective” rule – i.e., it is a rule that is affected by each person’s opinions and beliefs.

As a result, in at least some cases, it is possible that two individuals will treat others in two different ways – and yet, both of them will be obeying the Golden Rule!

Here is a simple example of this: Person “A” may may enjoy being involved in very loud, intense debates about theology – and therefore, he will be very loud and intense towards others, when he is involved in those debates. However, person “B” may prefer very calm, subdued discussions about theology – and therefore, he will be calm and subdued towards others, during such discussions.

In the above example, person A and person B both obeyed the Golden Rule – because they both treated others in the way that they, themselves wanted to be treated. However, the exact way that person A treated others was different than the way that person B treated others – because person A wants to be treated in a different way than person B does.

Some practical examples of the Golden Rule

Here are some hypothetical situations, which provide some “practical examples” of using the Golden Rule.

First, here are some “positive aspect” examples:

- If I can’t get my car started in the morning, then I would want my neighbors to offer to jumpstart my car. Therefore, if I see that one of my neighbors is not able to start his car, then I should offer him a jumpstart.

- If I suffer a heart attack while walking down the street, then I would want other people on the street to assist me. Therefore, if I witness someone else having a heart attack, then I should assist him.

Now, here are some “negative aspect” examples:

- If I get angry and shout at someone, then I would not want him to “hold a grudge” against me, for the rest of my life. Instead, I would want him to forgive me, after I apologized for my outburst. Therefore, if someone gets angry and shouts at me, then I should not hold a grudge against him – instead, I should forgive him.

- If I steal something from a store, then I would not want the authorities to amputate my right hand (which is the penalty for stealing in some countries). Instead, I would want to be offered some way of providing restitution to the store, without being maimed. Therefore, if someone steals something from me, then I should never agree that his hand should be amputated; instead, I should allow him to provide simple restitution.

A very dramatic example

Here is another hypothetical situation, which will also demonstrate the use of the Golden Rule. Needless to say, this example is quite dramatic – and severe.

Let’s say that at some point in the future, I go completely “berserk” – and as a result, I try to murder a newborn baby with a knife.  If that horrific situation ever occurred, what would I want other people to do?

Certainly, I would want other people to prevent me from murdering the baby – because I do not want to murder anyone. However, what are the exact actions that I would want others to take, while they are in the process of stopping me?

It occurs to me that there are four separate, sequential actions that I would want other people to execute, in order to prevent me from committing the murder. Here are those actions:

1. First of all, I would want people to use verbal persuasion, to try to stop me. In other words, I would want people to convince me not to murder the baby, by simply talking to me. (That is, I would want people to “talk me down”.) If that action works – so that I stop trying to commit the murder – then that is the ideal resolution. Unfortunately, though, verbal persuasion does not always prevent crimes from being committed.

2. If verbal persuasion did not stop me, then I would want people to use non-violent force to try to stop me. In other words, I would want people to physically restrain me – so that I would be unable to commit the murder. For example, if another person can wrestle me to the ground – and if he can keep me incapacitated indefinitely – then that would allow time for the police to arrive at the place in question, so that they can arrest me. However, it may not be possible for another person to physically restrain me – because I may be larger and stronger than whoever is trying to stop me.

3. If non-violent force did not stop me, then I would want people to use non-lethal force to try to stop me. In other words, I would want people to wound me in such a way that would prevent me from committing the murder – and that would not kill me. For example, in this scenario, if I am more than a few feet away from the baby, then shooting me in the legs may be able to prevent me from committing the murder – because it would prevent me from moving around very much. However, if I am right next to the baby, then shooting me in the legs will not prevent the murder – because in that case, I would still be able to stab the baby with the knife, even with leg wounds.

4. If non-lethal force did not stop me, then I would want people to use lethal force to stop me. In other words, if every other action to stop me has been tried – and has failed – then I would want people to use lethal force, to prevent me from committing the murder. In other words, I would rather have other people kill me, than allow me to murder a newborn baby.

The above list describes the actions that I would want other people to take against me, if I tried to murder a newborn baby. As a result, if someone breaks into my house, and tries to murder a newborn baby that I am taking care of, then the above list also describes the actions that I would take against that person.

Of course, as mentioned above, the Golden Rule is rather “subjective” – i.e., it takes into account people’s opinions and beliefs. Therefore, it may very well be that other people will have different opinions about what they would want people to do to them, if they tried to murder a newborn baby. If so, then that would certainly alter what those people would do to others as well.

In any case, there are several reasons why I came up with the four steps, above. First of all, there is one explicit reference in Scripture, which deals with the situation of an intruder breaking in to a home:

Exodus 22:2-3 (ESV):

² If a thief is found breaking in and is struck so that he dies, there shall be no bloodguilt for him, ³ but if the sun has risen on him, there shall be bloodguilt for him.

The above passage states that if a theif breaks in to a person’s home at night – and if the householder kills the intruder – then the householder is not guilty of murder. In other words, in that case, it is permissible for the householder to kill the intruder. However, if it is daytime, then it is not permissible for the householder to kill the intruder, just because he broke in to the home.

Note that the above passage simply states that it is permissible for the householder to kill the intruder, during nighttime. In other words, that passage does not specify that the householder should or should not kill the intruder – it simply gives “leeway” to the householder in that case.

So, if someone broke into my house at night, then I would try to determine what his intentions were. If he tries to murder my infant daughter, then I would certainly follow the four steps listed above, in order to prevent the intruder from committing that murder. This certainly appears to be in line with the following verse:

1 Timothy 5:8 (ESV):

⁸ But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

From what I can see, part of “providing” for my family is providing for their safety. As a result, I would definitely do all that I could to prevent any members of my household from being murdered by an intruder breaking in.

However, if the intruder only wants to steal my property, then my actions would be much different. In that case, I would still try to verbally persuade him not to steal anything – but would not go any further than that. This appears to be in line with the following verse:

Luke 6:30 (ESV):

³⁰ Give to everyone who begs from you, and from one who takes away your goods do not demand them back.

So, my exact actions would vary, depending upon the intentions of the intruder.

Conclusion

The “Golden Rule” is certainly a very familiar Biblical concept. However, some of the “ramifications” of that rule are not so obvious. For one thing, the fact that there are both “positive” and “negative” aspects of that rule is a foreign concept to many people.

The even more important item to note, though, is that the Golden Rule appears to be at least partially “subjective”. In other words, each individual person needs to determine how he, himself wants to be treated, in order to be able to obey that rule. Since different people may want to be treated in different ways, that means that the way any given person obeys that rule may be different from the way any other person obeys it.

Before Christmas I uncovered in a packed-away attic box – a TON more pamphlets, books, leaflets, and other treasures of theology that my parents had collected back in their day.  There’s a ton of stuff from individuals, Advent Christian publishers, The Restitution Herald (in Oregon Illinois), and the Layman’s Home Missionary Movement.  This particular one here is from the Layman’s – or LHMM for short.  There’s no copyright or published date on it so I’m not sure from when it originates.  But I’d guess from the 1940′s – 1960′s.  I saw the title listed on another site associated with the LHMM, but not the actual content of the piece.  Therefore I thought I would re-publish it to the world-wide-web for all to enjoy.

THIEVES IN PARADISE

DO YOU KNOW:

That one of the two thieves who were crucified with Jesus asked to be remembered by Him when He would come into His kingdom, and that Jesus assured him that he would be with Him in paradise (Luke 23:42, 43)?

That due to Jesus’ and His disciples’ widespread and repeated preaching, the people in general’ including this thief, knew of this coming kingdom?

That the kingdom has two phases:
(1) its invisible, heavenly phase: Jesus and His Church, His Bride, the Little Flock (Rev. 21:2; Eph. 5:23-32; Luke 12:32), and the Bridesmaids, the Great Company (Psa. 45:14, 15; Rev. 7:9-17; 19:9);
(2) its visible, earthly phase: the Worthies (Heb. 11:39, 4O; Gen.13:14, 15; Acts 7:5; Matt. 11:11; Luke 13:28-30) and its subjects-mankind in general (Psa. 37:9-11, 22, 29, 34; Isa. 6O:21; Amos 9:14, 15)?

That by teaching His disciples to pray, “Thy kingdom come; thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven,” Jesus showed that His kingdom on earth was future?

That the fulfilment of Bible prophecies shows that this reign of righteousness and peace over all the earth (Dan. 2:35, 44; 7:13, 14, 18, 27; Zech. 14:9; Hag. 2:7; Heb. 12:27, 28; Isa. 9:6, 7; 2:2-4; Jer. 3:17) wlll soon come?

That, contrary to the views of some, the thief never asked Jesus to take him to heaven?

That he did not ask Jesus to remember him on the day they were crucified, but-rather at a future time – “when thou comest into thy kingdom”?

That in reply Jesus solemnly assured-him that his request would be granted, that He  would indeed remember him when He would come into His kingdom saying: “Verily [amen, or, it shall be so; that is, your request is granted] I say unto thee today, Thou shalt be with me in paradise”?

DO YOU KNOW:

That the word paradise, meaning garden, is used in the Bible to refer to:
(a) the garden of Eden, ‘the garden of God” (Gen. 2:8-15; Ezek. 28:13), i.e., the perfct abode of Adam and Eve while sinless;
(b) God’s abode. in heaven (Rev. 2:7;
(c) the earth after the kingdom is set up on it,and after its curse of sin and death is increasingly removed (Rev.22: 1-3, comp. Gen. 2:9, 10; 1 Cor. 15:26), and it becomes incresingly (Dan.2:35) “like the ‘garden of Eden” (Ezek. 36:35), i.e., Paradise Lost, becomes Paradise Regained, which the new earth was seen in vision and prophecy together with the third, the new heaven – the spiritual control of Christ (2 Cor. 12:1-4; 2 Pet. 3:6, 7, 12, 13; Rev. 21:1-3) – that will supplant the spiritual control of Satan, “the god of this world” (2 Cor. 4:4; Gal. 1:4; Eph. 2:2)?

That of the three Biblically-mentioned paradises,
(a) was destroyed long before Jesus’death. and (c) is still future; hence (b) alone existed when Jesus died; but on the third day thereafter He stated that He had not yet gone there (John 20:17), nor did He go there until 40 days later (Acts 1:3-11)?

That therefore the comma should have been placed after the word “today” in Luke 23:43, and not before it, as is done in many Bible translations?

That placing the comma belore the word “today” (thus: “I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise”) would make Jesus a falsifier, for it would mean that He promised the thief that he would be with Him in paradise on the same day they were crucified, when He knew from the Scriptures that He was not going there that day, but on that day was to pour out His soul unto death (Isa. 53: 10, 12) and His soul was to descend into hell (hades – the death state – Acts 2:30-32), from which He would not be raised until the third day (Luke 18:31-33)?

That placing the comma after the word (thus: “I say unto thee today, Thou shalt be with me in paradise”) creates no such difficulties, for it shows that Jesus merely made the promise to the thief on that day, through the promise would not be  fulfilled until Jesus would come into His kingdom?

DO YOU KNOW:

That commas and other punctuation marks, found in various Bible translations to aid the reader, were not placed there by Divine inspiration, since they are not found in the original Greek manuscripts of the New Testament – in fact, punctuation marks were not even invented until the ninth century after Christ – so there is nothing at all in the Divinely inspired record that requires the comma to be before instead of after the word “today”?

That heaven is a prepared place (John 14:1-3; 1 Cor. 2:9; Heb. 10:34) for prepared people (Rom. 9:23, 24)- i.e., those only who by self – and world denial and taking up their crosses become Jesus’ disciples (Matt. 16:24; Luke 14:26, 27), who are begotten of the Holy Spirit (1 John 5:1, 18; 1 Pet.1:3; John 3:3-8), and who then faithfully follow in His steps (1 Pet. 2:21; 1 John 2:6), by patient continuance in well-doing, including bringing forth the fruits of the Spirit, seeking for immortality, eternal life (Rom. 2:7; Gal. 5:22,23; Heb. 12:14; James 1:4; 2 Pet. 1:5-11)?

That God holds all accountable for the sins they commit (Matt. 12:36; 1 Tim. 5:24) and, commands them to repent (Acts 17:30; 3:19)?

That Jesus appreciated the dying thief’s manifestation of reverence for God and true repentance for sins committed (Luke 23:40, 41), and therefore on that dark day graciously granted his request and gave him the comforting assurance that he would be with  Him in paradise – the earthly phase of His Kingdom – when it is established, for it is evident that the thief’s repentance, so close to the time of his death, did not give him time to be properly prepared for a place in the heavenly, spiritual phase of the kingdom?

That God did not promise that any who will be in the kingdom’s heavenly phase or its earthly phase-including the penitent thief – would be rewarded at death; rather, He showed that they would sleep in death (1 Kings 2:10; Dan. 12:2; John 11:14, 44; 1 Cor. 15:6, 18, 20; 1 Thes. 4:13-17) and get their rewards at the time of Jesus’ Second Advent, in the resurrection awakening (John 14:3; Matt. 16:27; Luke 14:14; 2 Tim. 4:8; 1 Pet. 7:13)?

DO YOU KNOW:

That at Jesus’ return in His kingdom (Luke 19:11, 12), His reward is with Him (Rev. 22:12), and “all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth,” either “unto the resurrection of life”, or “unto the resurrection of judgment” – for “there shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust” (John 5:28-29; Acts 24:15)?

That THEN Jesus will remember the penitent thief – He will awaken him from Adamic death with the “unjust”, who were not previously on trial for life, for whom also He died (Heb. 2:9; 1 John 2:2), and He will give them a knowledge of the Truth (1 Tim. 2:4) and a trial for life during His reign on earth (Rev. 5:10; 20:4, 6), in the Thousand-year Judgment Day (2 Pet. 3:8), when He will “judge the world in righteousness” (Acts 17:31; Psa. 96; 98) and make the entire earth into a Paradise?

That “whosoever will” (Rev. 22:17) of these will gradually attain human perfection on the highway of holiness then cast up – “they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away” Isa. 35:8, 10; 62:10); all found worthy (the unworthy will be destroyed – Isa. 65:20; Rev. 2O:7-9; 2l:8; Psa. 145:20) will inherit everlasting life, not in heaven, but in the paradise on earlh (Matt. 25:31-46)?

Introduction

From my experience, most mainstream Christians have a rather limited understanding about the topic of death. Essentially, most Christians believe that death is a one-time, permanent event. In other words, most Christians hold that when a person dies, his physical body disintegrates – and that his body will never be re-created, ever again.

It appears to me that Scripture gives us much different information about death – and the possibility of life after death – than the belief listed above. So, let’s take a look in Scripture, to see what is listed there about that subject.

Two different descriptions of death

First of all, Scripture contains two very different “descriptions” of what death is. In some cases, Scripture refers to death as “sleep”; while in other cases, Scripture calls death “destruction”. Here are some examples of this:

Places where death is called “sleep”

Psalm 13:3 (ESV):

Consider and answer me, O LORD my God; light up my eyes, lest I sleep the sleep of death

1 Kings 1:20-21 (ESV):

²⁰ And now, my lord the king, the eyes of all Israel are on you, to tell them who shall sit on the throne of my lord the king after him. ²¹ Otherwise it will come to pass, when my lord the king sleeps with his fathers, that I and my son Solomon will be counted offenders.”

John 11:11-13 (ESV):

¹¹ After saying these things, he said to them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep, but I go to awaken him.” ¹² The disciples said to him, “Lord, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover.” ¹³ Now Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought that he meant taking rest in sleep.

Acts 7:59-60 (ESV):

⁵⁹ And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” ⁶⁰ And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

Places where death is called “destruction”

Psalm 92:6-7 (ESV):

⁶ The stupid man cannot know;
the fool cannot understand this:
⁷ that though the wicked sprout like grass
and all evildoers flourish,
they are doomed to destruction forever

Matthew 7:13-14 (ESV):

¹³ “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. ¹⁴ For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

Philippians 3:18-19 (ESV):

¹⁸ For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ. ¹⁹ Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things.

2 Thessalonians 1:9 (ESV):

They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might

Ramifications of the two “death types”

From all of the above information, it appears that are two completely different “types” of death. For lack of better terms, I call those two types “sleep-death”, and “destruction-death”.

Certainly, there are some similarities between the two “types” of death. In particular, both types of death cause a person to become completely unconscious; and both of them cause our physical bodies to disintegrate.

However, there are also many differences between sleep-death and destruction-death. The sections below contain three of the most prominent differences.

1. Sleep-death happens to everyone – but destruction-death only happens to enemies of God

Scripture indicates that everyone will eventually undergo sleep-death – that is, followers of God, and enemies of God, will both encounter it. The only exception to this is that followers who are still alive, when Jesus returns, will never encounter sleep-death. Consider these passages:

Ecclesiastes 9:2-3 (ESV):

² It is the same for all, since the same event happens to the righteous and the wicked, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to him who sacrifices and him who does not sacrifice. As the good one is, so is the sinner, and he who swears is as he who shuns an oath. ³ This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that the same event happens to all. Also, the hearts of the children of man are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead.

Hebrews 9:27 (ESV):

…it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment

1 Corinthians 15:51-52 (ESV):

⁵¹ Behold! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, ⁵² in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.

However, destruction-death only happens to people who refuse to follow God; i.e., faithful followers of God will never undergo that  type of death. Consider the passages below. In those passages, the word “gehenna” apparently symbolizes destruction-death. This is because gehenna was a garbage dump outside of Jerusalem, where trash was completely burned up. So, if something is “cast into gehenna”, it symbolizes complete destruction of the object in question.

Matthew 5:21-22 (Young’s Literal Translation):

²¹`Ye heard that it was said to the ancients: Thou shalt not kill, and whoever may kill shall be in danger of the judgment;  ²²but I — I say to you, that every one who is angry at his brother without cause, shall be in danger of the judgment, and whoever may say to his brother, Empty fellow! shall be in danger of the sanhedrim, and whoever may say, Rebel! shall be in danger of the gehenna of the fire.

Mark 9:47 (YLT):

⁴⁷And if thine eye may cause thee to stumble, cast it out; it is better for thee one-eyed to enter into the reign of God, than having two eyes, to be cast to the gehenna of the fire

Luke 12:4-5 (YLT):

⁴`And I say to you, my friends, be not afraid of those killing the body, and after these things are not having anything over to do;

⁵but I will show to you, whom ye may fear; Fear him who, after the killing, is having authority to cast to the gehenna; yes, I say to you, Fear ye Him.

2. Destruction-death only occurs in the next age – not in this age

Another item to note is that destruction-death only occurs in the next age (the “Kingdom” age) – not in this current age. Consider the passages below, which discuss destruction-death. All of those passages describe events that will occur after Jesus returns – which means that they will occur in the Kingdom age.

Matthew 13:40-42 (ESV):

⁴⁰ Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. ⁴¹ The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, ⁴² and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 25:41,46 (ESV):

⁴¹ “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

⁴⁶ And these will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”

Revelation 20:14 (ESV):

Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.

Note that Revelation 20:14, above, refers to destruction-death as the “second” death. This implies that the other type of death – sleep-death – is the “first” death, so to speak.

3. Sleep-death is temporary – but destruction-death is permanent

From what I can see, the most important difference between sleep-death and destruction-death is the fact that sleep-death is temporary – while destruction-death is permanent. In other words, if a person undergoes sleep-death, he will eventually come back to life again, at some point in the future. However, if a person undergoes destruction-death, then he will never come back to life again – i.e., destruction-death is a permanent end of life.

The fact that destruction-death is permanent can be seen in many of the Scriptural passages that are listed above. For example:

- Psalm 92:7 states that evildoers “are doomed to destruction forever“.

- Matthew 25:46 states that enemies of God will “go away into eternal punishment” (referring to permanent destruction).

- 2 Thessalonians 1:9 states that evildoers will “suffer the punishment of eternal destruction”.

However, many Scriptural passages tell us that sleep-death is temporary – i.e., that people who have undergone sleep-death will eventually come back to life! Consider these passages:

Daniel 12:2 (YLT):

²`And the multitude of those sleeping in the dust of the ground do awake, some to life age-during, and some to reproaches — to abhorrence age-during.

Isaiah 26:19 (ESV):

¹⁹ Your dead shall live; their bodies shall rise.
You who dwell in the dust, awake and sing for joy!
For your dew is a dew of light,
and the earth will give birth to the dead.

John 5:28-29 (ESV):

²⁸ Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice ²⁹ and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.

Acts 24:14-15 (ESV):

¹⁴ But this I confess to you, that according to the Way, which they call a sect, I worship the God of our fathers, believing everything laid down by the Law and written in the Prophets, ¹⁵ having a hope in God, which these men themselves accept, that there will be a resurrection of both the just and the unjust.

As it turns out, the fact that sleep-death is temporary appears to be exactly why Jesus told people not to be sad or afraid, if one of their loved ones had undergone sleep-death! For example, take a look at this passage:

Mark 5:35-36,39-42 (ESV):

³⁵ While he was still speaking, there came from the ruler’s house some who said, “Your daughter is dead. Why trouble the Teacher any further?” ³⁶ But overhearing what they said, Jesus said to the ruler of the synagogue, “Do not fear, only believe.”

³⁹ And when he had entered, he said to them, “Why are you making a commotion and weeping? The child is not dead but sleeping.” ⁴⁰ And they laughed at him. But he put them all outside and took the child’s father and mother and those who were with him and went in where the child was. ⁴¹ Taking her by the hand he said to her, “Talitha cumi,” which means, “Little girl, I say to you, arise.” ⁴² And immediately the girl got up and began walking (for she was twelve years of age), and they were immediately overcome with amazement.

So, if the “sleep-death” and “destruction-death” information listed in this post is correct, then it appears that Jesus was saying something similar to the following, in Mark chapter 5:

“Don’t be sad about your daughter, because she has not undergone destruction-death. Instead, she has only undergone sleep-death – and as a result, I can raise her from the dead.”

Conclusion

Here is a summary of the two “types” of death, listed above:

Sleep-death: This type of death happens to everyone (no matter how closely we follow God); and it is only temporary. In other words, people who undergo sleep-death will eventually come back to life. This type of death is evidently the “first” death.

Destruction-death: This type of death only happens to people who explicitly refuse to follow God. In addition, this death only occurs in the next age (the Kingdom age) – not in this age. Finally, this type of death is permanent – i.e., people who undergo this death will never come back to life. This type of death is referred to as the “second” death.

One item to take away from this post is as follows: As noted above, destruction-death evidently only occurs during the next age – not in this age. Therefore, all of the deaths that have occurred so far are apparently sleep-deaths.

As a result, every person who has already died will presumably come back to life, in the next age! Not only that, but if any of those people did not have the opportunity to follow God and Jesus during this age, then they will have that very opportunity, during the next age! In other words, people who were “ignorant” of God and Jesus during this age, will have the opportunity to repent and be saved in the next age.

Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah, everyone!