Articles, Sermons

Sermon Wednesday – What is Hell Like?

1 Comment

Today, we continue our series on “Fundamentals of the Faith,” and today’s topic is one that a lot of people really don’t like to think about–Hell.

Introduction:

Wouldn’t it be nice if we could take all the uncomfortable parts out of the Bible?  You know, things like be thou faithful unto death?  Things like, all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution?  Or what about hell?

What about hell?

Does hell really exist?  If so, does it last forever or is it only temporary?  Would a loving God punish someone eternally for a comparatively short life of sin?  How is hell described in the Bible?

These are questions that people have about hell, and it’s up to us to be ready to show them what the Bible has to say on the matter.

Does Hell Really Exist?

Sadly, the reality of hell–which was once almost universally believed–is being rejected by many people in many religious groups.

The Jehovah’s Witnesses all deny hell exists.  Their doctrine is that all evil people simply cease to exist when they die.  Thus, you can live your life as evil as you want, and when you die there is no punishment at all.

There are even those within the church who deny the existence of hell.  This isn’t limited to liberal or conservative either, as there are those on both sides who hold this view.  We’ll consider some of the arguments they use a bit later in the lesson.

The most important thing we need to remember when discussing any Bible topic is this: it doesn’t matter who believes it or how widespread that belief is; what matters is what the Bible says about it.

Acts 17:11-12a – These were more noble than they of Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed…

It is also extremely important that if we believe something, we know why we believe it.

“Because that’s what my preacher said” isn’t good enough.

“Because that’s what mom and dad believed” isn’t good enough.

We need to be able to show from the Bible why we believe what we believe.

So, you may believe there is a hell—but can you prove it from the Bible?

Hell is not always called hell in the Bible.

In fact, if you (like me) use the King James Version, you could get confused pretty quickly, because the word hell in the KJV doesn’t always mean hell.

  • Acts 2:27 (KJV) says that Jesus’ soul went to hell.
  • Revelation 20:14 (KJV) tells us that hell was cast into the lake of fire…which generally speaking is believed to be hell.

So, hell was destroyed in hell?  That makes no sense.

So, we need to make some observations before we get too far into this discussion.

In the Old Testament, the word “hell” is always the Hebrew word Sheol.  Some translations actually just render it Sheol.  It means “the abode of the dead” (Thayer).  Sometimes it refers to a place of torment, other times not.  Without considering the context of each section, we cannot gain much insight on the topic of “hell” from these passages.

In the New Testament, there are two words translated hell.  One is Gehenna (see Matthew 5:22, 29-30).  This word is a reference to a place of fire and torment, as is obvious from the passages mentioned.

The other is Hades (see Matthew 11:23, 16:18).  This is the Greek equivalent of the Hebrew word Sheol.  This word simply means the unseen realm, or the abode of the dead, and is used ten times in the New Testament.  Though it can include the idea of a place of torment (Luke 16:23), it also describes where Jesus’ soul went after His crucifixion (Acts 2:27, 31).  It is a general word that includes all the unseen realm—including a place of paradise and a place of torment.

Hell is a place of torment reserved for the wicked after their time on earth.

Though the word hell isn’t always used, the concept of a place of punishment after death is clearly taught in the New Testament.

Luke 16:19-31 tells the story of the rich man and Lazarus.  They both died, and the rich man awoke in torment—conscious torment (16:23).  While in torment, he was conscious, proven by the fact that he was able to hold a conversation.  It was a place of flame (16:24).

“You can’t use that passage, preacher! It’s a parable, not a real story.”

It doesn’t say it’s a parable, and even if it was, Jesus never gave a parable that described things that didn’t actually happen.

“Well, you can’t use that passage because it’s speaking of Hades, not hell.”

I say that the man has obviously been judged because he is now in torment.  But if you want to discard that passage, we’ll just have to go somewhere else.

Matthew 25:41-46 describes the judgment scene.  Jesus calls the ones on his left “cursed” and sends them into “everlasting fire” (24:41).  He doesn’t use the term “hell,” but this is a description of the same place.

Mark 9:43-48 describes hell as a place of punishment for those who sin.  Jesus uses the word “hell” (Gehenna, the place of fiery torment) in verses 43, 45, and 47.  He describes it as a place “where the worm dies not and the fire is not quenched” (verses 44, 46, 48).

Revelation 14:11 speaks of some who were condemned, and says of them “the smoke of their torment ascends up for ever and ever, and they have no rest day nor night…”  This, again, is a description of hell.

Jude 7 describes the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrha as “suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”  Literally, it means they have suffered and continue to suffer the vengeance of eternal fire.

So, the question now is this: does the Bible describe a place of torment for the wicked after their death?

Without a doubt, such a place is described in the Bible.

How long does hell last?

Some people, when faced with the reality of hell, try to soften the impact of it by declaring that it is only temporary.  Some people say that it’s a place of torment until judgment day, and then all those who were in hell will simply be destroyed and cease to exist.

Others say that hell is a place of torment after judgment day, but that each person will be punished for a specific period of time based on their sins, and then they will be put in heaven after they’ve learned their lesson.

The problem with both of these theories is that neither one of them is found in the Bible.

As we’ve already seen from several passages, hell is a place of “everlasting” torment.  It’s a place where torment lasts “for ever and ever.”  It’s a place where the fire is never quenched (Mark 9:43-48).

If hell ceases to exist at any point, then the Bible has just lied!  You hear me? If hell ceases to exist—ever—then the fires were quenched, and the Bible has lied.

Think about that carefully, and understand what that means.

If you say that hell is a temporary place, then you are calling God a liar.

It is a place that is every bit as eternal and everlasting as heaven itself.

Matthew 25:46 says “And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.”  The words “everlasting” and “eternal” in that verse are the EXACT SAME WORD in Greek.

So, however long “life eternal” is, that’s the same length of time “everlasting punishment” is.  So, if hell is temporary, then so is heaven.  If hell will have an end, so will heaven.  If heaven is eternal, so is hell.

Hell is a place of unending torment reserved for the wicked.

But a loving God would not punish someone eternally for a short time of sinning!–Right?

That’s the argument, and it’s a very emotional one.

A 20-year old lives a life of fun and pleasure, never giving any thought to religion, and he’s hit and killed by a drunk driver.  Is a loving God really going to torment him eternally for what amounts to only about 10-12 years of sin? (because when he’s a small child, he has no clue what sin is).

A preacher that I know, called me one evening, struggling with this question.  He said, “Brad, I know what we’ve always taught, and what the church believes, but someone hit me with this question, and I’m at a loss.”  He expressed that he was having a very difficult time rectifying the idea of a loving God and eternal punishment.

And I’ll tell you the same thing I told him.

If a loving God will not punish someone eternally for a short life of sin, then a just God will not reward someone eternally for a short life of obedience.

Did you get that?

The logic works both ways.  A just God will not reward someone eternally when they’ve only spent a few years in His service, right?

Do we call the justice system unfair because it punishes someone for the rest of their life for a one-time action?  Someone intentionally shoots an innocent person—something that takes less than a second—yet we punish them for perhaps 60 years!  The punishment is absolutely deserved.

If you go to hell, it’s because you deserve to go there!

Whoa! Isn’t that a bit harsh?  No, it’s not. It’s the Bible.

All of us deserve to go to hell because of our sins.  However, those who take advantage of the blood of Christ can avoid hell and all its terrible torment.

If you don’t take advantage of it, whose fault is it?

But let’s dig a bit deeper into this idea of deserving to go to hell.  Ecclesiastes 12:13 says, “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.”  The whole duty of man. The whole purpose of man. This is the meaning of life.  This is the entire reason man was put on this planet was to fear God and keep His commandments.

When you look at Job 1-2, you see God and Satan at war.  The individual battles are waged in the lives of humans.  In these chapters, Job is the battlefield.

You are the battlefield between God and Satan.  You determine who wins and who loses in your life.  We were designed and put here as the instruments by which God defeats Satan.

Fear God and keep His commandments, for this is the whole duty of man.

If you have a tool, designed for a specific purpose, and it won’t do what it’s supposed to do, you get rid of it.  Now, imagine that your tool can talk, and that it says to you, “I know what you want me to do, what I’m designed to do, but I don’t want to, and I’m not going to do it.”

You beg and plead with it, and still it indignantly refuses, and tries to keep other tools from working for you.  Eventually, you’re going to destroy that tool; and it will deserve it.

As humans, whose entire purpose is serving God and keeping His commandments, what do we deserve if we refuse to obey Him?

Yes, we deserve hell.

How is hell described in the Bible?

If we could just for 5 seconds peel back the lid on hell and experience it for just that short amount of time, I am convinced that we would serve God and never look back.

Hell is a place that God has created to torment Satan and his messengers forever (Matthew 25:41).

You know what Satan deserves because of his opposition to God.  Satan deserves the worst possible torment imaginable.

And if you aren’t a faithful Christian, you will be joining him forever.

Hell is a place of fire.

Mark 9:43-48 describes it as the place where the fire is never quenched.  Revelation 20:14-15 calls hell “the lake of fire.”

Ten years ago, a man was clearing out trash that was on the edge of his back yard.  He starts a small burn pile to get rid of the trash and leaves.  And being the guy that he is, he adds more and more, trying to get it done quicker (that, and he likes seeing the fire).

Then came an extremely loud pop!  Something in the fire shoots out and lands on the man’s hand, and he looks on in horror as he sees his skin literally start to melt.  The searing pain rushes through his whole body, and he screams.

He grabs something and as quick as he possibly can, he scrapes the burning material off his hand (causing even more pain in the process).  He grabs his hand, trying to stop the pain, but nothing works—in fact, if anything, it gets worse.

Slowly, he removes his grip and looks at his hand, and at the place that was tormenting his entire body.  The spot of pain was less than half the size of an M&M, but the burning tormented his entire body.

That was me.

But the fires of hell are not confined to one small part of you.  It’s not just a spot on your hand.  It’s not just a finger or a toe.

If you go to hell, you are in the lake of fire.  Imagine yourself in the middle of a lake of water, and you’re drowning, thrashing around trying to stay afloat.

Now, as you have that image in your head, watch as the water turns to flames, and you are completely immersed in fire, thrashing about, trying in vain to escape the pain.  Is it any wonder that john the Baptist promised that Jesus would baptize some people in unquenchable fire? (Matthew 3:10-12)

You know the pain of fire when you get burned on one part of your body.  Now imagine it continually burning every part of you.

Hell is a place of darkness.

To the person trapped in an underground cave with no light, even a small speck of light is a sign of hope.  But with no light, living in complete darkness, there is no way to see what might be around you—what could be trying to attack you.

Paranoia can easily creep in when someone is in complete blackness.  Mentally, being in complete darkness for an extended period of time can actually drive someone insane.

You are thrown into a coffin, the lid shut, and then you are put in the ground and covered in earth…and you’re still alive.  It’s completely black and you’re freaking out, hyperventilating, sweating, and the heat inside the coffin is quickly rising.

Then you find a flashlight and turn it on.  Instantly, things have improved because there is some light—even though your condition hasn’t improved, the light has a somewhat calming effect.

In hell, there is no light.

Hell is called the place of “outer darkness.”

  • Matthew 8:12 – the children of the kingdom shall be cast into outer darkness, where there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
  • Matthew 22:13, 25:30 both describe hell in the same way.
  • I Peter 2:9 may have this idea in mind as well, God “hath called you out of darkness” [perhaps, freed you from the punishment of hell].
  • Jude 13 describes the fate of false teachers as “the blackness of darkness forever.”

Hell is not just a place of pain, but of mental anguish as well.

There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 8:12, 22:13, 25:30).  There will be anguish because each person in hell will understand that they brought it on themselves.

There will be anguish over lost opportunities to obey the gospel.

There will be anguish over each and every sin committed.

Hell is described as a place with a foul stench.

Worms (literally, we’re talking about maggots) thrive there (“where the worm dieth not”).  Maggots are found around rotted meat–and you probably know that smell well.

It is a place of fire and brimstone.  If you’ve smelled sulphur, you know how nauseating the stench is.

Some experts believe Gehenna (the Greek word for hell) was also the name of a continually burning garbage dump outside Jerusalem.  It would have had dead animals, rancid meat, human waste, and many other foul odors constantly going through the air.

The smells of hell will attack your senses to the point where you can hardly breathe, causing you to hyperventilate, taking quick, shallow breaths in an attempt to keep from being as affected.

And as the smells get through, your stomach is turned and you’re not just fighting the smell, you’re fighting not to throw up.  All of this horrid stench is attacking you, and you can’t see where its coming from because it is completely black.

And there’s no way to get away from it.

And the black flames burn over your entire body, and no matter how you move, you can’t stop the pain even for a moment.

And there’s no getting out of it.

Conclusion:

Today is the day, and now is your chance.  You can avoid the fires of hell by becoming a Christian.  Do it now, before it’s too late!

 

Announcements, Articles, Books

Habakkuk: An Introduction

Leave a comment

To celebrate the release of our latest book, Wait, Not THEM!  A Study of the Prophecy of Habakkuk, we are going to give you a sneak peak–a just-for-you look at the introduction of the book.

But before we do, let me take just a few seconds to tell you about what’s in the book.

  • Thorough, in-depth, yet easy-to-understand notes on every verse in the book.  It’s even broken down by sections–sometimes by words–so that you know exactly what Habakkuk is talking about.
  • Keeping it in context.  One of the things that we have striven to do with our commentaries is to never take a verse out of context.  We show the explanation of the verse based on how it fits in the book.  If there are New Testament uses of some of the verses, then we point that out and show the greater meaning.
  • Modern-day application.  We make it a point throughout this book (and all of our commentaries) to show what it meant to the original readers, and how those same principles also apply to us today.
  • Offering of different interpretations.  On some passages, words, or phrases, sometimes the exact meaning isn’t completely clear.  When this is the case, we present any possibilities that seem plausible and that also fit the context.  We give the pros and cons of each view, state which one we prefer and why, but leave it to the reader to make their own judgment.

It was written to be helpful to both the new Christian as well as the one who has been involved in Bible study and teaching for decades.

What others have said about this book:

  • Homer Hailey doesn’t have much on this passage in lieu of what you have. –A preacher.
  • I find this intriguing.  You apparently did your research on this. –A preacher and writer from Alabama.
  • I loved it.  So much detail and so much meat! –A Bible teacher in Oklahoma.

If you’re interested in ordering the book (in print or as an eBook), click here.  It’s also available via Amazon.com in print or as a Kindle file.

Now, without further talking, here is the…

Introduction

Habakkuk is among the most overlooked and ignored books of the Bible. Perhaps this is because it’s so short. Perhaps it’s because there really isn’t a clear prophecy of Jesus Christ in the book. Perhaps it’s because it doesn’t have any action or stories in it (like Jonah). Whatever the reasons may be, this book hasn’t gotten the attention it deserves. After all, it is Scripture, and all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable (II Timothy 3:16).

Who Wrote It?

The writer is the prophet Habakkuk. The book is described as the “burden” (or prophecy) which Habakkuk saw (1:1). Someone might rightfully ask, “Couldn’t someone else have written it, just describing what Habakkuk saw?” That might be a possibility, except that the writer claims to be the one who received the prophecy. The writer says, “And the LORD answered me…” (2:2). Also, at the end of the book, the writer says “When I heard, my belly trembled; my lips quivered at the voice; rottenness entered into my bones, and I trembled in myself…” (3:16). This shows that the author is the one who received the prophecy. He identifies himself as the prophet Habakkuk (1:1).

Who is Habakkuk?

Outside of this book, there is no biblical information about Habakkuk.

Habakkuk’s name comes from a word that means “to embrace.” So, it appears that his name carries the idea of “one who embraces” or “one who clings.” In the end of the book, Habakkuk is still clinging to God even in the face of the impending destruction.

Some have suggested that he was a professional prophet, because he identifies himself as “Habakkuk the prophet” (1:1). There were those who, like Elijah or Samuel, were known to be prophets and who made their living by the offerings of the people (see I Samuel 9:6-9).

Others have also suggested that Habakkuk was a priest of God, a Levite who served in the temple worship. This suggestion is based on the final verse of the book, which says “to the chief singer on my stringed instruments” (3:19). Both of these suggestions are possible, though they cannot be definitively proven.

Because of the content of Habakkuk’s prophecy, we can know for certain that he was a resident of Judea (see 1:2-4). We can know that it was written prior to Babylon’s invasion of Jerusalem in 606 BC (which was prophesied in 1:6-11). Beyond that, there is little we can discern.

There is one noteworthy mention of Habakkuk outside of the Scriptures. In the Apocrypha[1], there are two additional chapters to the book of Daniel. One of these chapters is referred to as Bel and the Dragon. In this story, Daniel (who is in Babylon) is thrown into the lion’s den (chronologically, this would have been immediately after the famous lion’s den episode of Daniel 6). In the lion’s den, Daniel is starving. So, in order to make sure Daniel doesn’t starve to death, the Angel of the LORD goes to Judea and tells Habakkuk to go feed Daniel. Habakkuk had just made some soup, and is told, “Carry the soup to Daniel who is in a lion’s den in Babylon.” Habakkuk replies, “I’ve never been to Babylon, and I don’t know where this den would be.” So, the Angel of the LORD grabs Habakkuk by the hair, and flies him to Babylon so he could feed Daniel. Then he grabs him again by the hair and flies him back to Judea.[2]

As you can hopefully see, that information is ridiculous, and gives us no reliable information about Habakkuk.

When Was it Written?

The only thing we can say about the date with absolute certainty is that it was written prior to the invasion of Judea by the Babylonians in 606 BC. The invasion is prophesied as a future event by God in 1:5-11. In 1:5, God says that it will happen in “your days,” meaning during the days of the people then living.

We can be a bit clearer with the date based on Habakkuk’s reaction to God’s announcement. God announces that the Chaldeans (the Babylonians) were going to attack. Habakkuk was extremely familiar with them (1:12-17). Babylon wasn’t really a world-power until around 615. They took and destroyed Nineveh, the capitol of the Assyrian Empire, in 612 BC. This seems to point to a date of 615-612 BC at the earliest.

We can narrow it down a bit more when we see the spiritual condition of the land. According to 1:2-4, the entire nation was wicked to the point where God’s prophet is calling for divine intervention. Josiah had reformed the nation, bringing them back into compliance with God’s word. However, after Josiah died in 609 BC, the nation went downhill fast. The king, Jechoniah, was ready to kill Jeremiah for prophesying.

Based on this information, it appears that we can date Habakkuk’s writing to be between 609 and 607 BC. This would place Habakkuk as a contemporary with Jeremiah.

Who Was it Written To?

It was written to the Jews as a whole. It was written to let them know what was coming and why it was coming. It was written to the wicked Jews so they would understand exactly what God thinks about their wickedness. It was written to the faithful Jews to let them know that God was not going to stand by and let wickedness reign in His nation.

Why Was it Written?

This prophecy was recorded to prepare the faithful for what was about to happen. It was written to encourage the faithful to remain that way. It was written to condemn the wicked, and show that the upcoming destruction was justified because of their wickedness.

Ted Clarke stated it this way:

The ultimate purpose of Habakkuk’s prophecy was to show the grand truths that the just shall live by faith, and that the wicked will not go unpunished.[3]

Interesting Notes:

Most of chapter two deals with the reasons for Babylon’s eventual destruction, but these reasons also apply to Jerusalem, and show that it deserved destruction as well. Babylon and Jerusalem are equated in that section. They are also equated in the book of Revelation (Jerusalem being the “Babylon” mentioned there).

Outline of Habakkuk:

  1. Habakkuk’s complaint (1:1-4)
  2. God’s reply (1:5-11)
  3. Habakkuk’s response (1:12-2:1)
  4. God’s second reply (2:2-20)
  5. Habakkuk’s prayer (3:1-2)
  6. Habakkuk’s psalm (3:3-19)

Final Note:

This commentary uses the King James Version as its basis, though we have taken the liberty to update the spelling and language slightly (for example: didst is now did) to make it more reader-friendly.

—

[1] These are additional books and chapters accepted as part of the Old Testament by the Catholic Church. They never appear in Hebrew Old Testament manuscripts, but only in Greek copies. The Jews never accepted these books and extra chapters as inspired, and none of these writings were ever referenced by the New Testament writers.

[2] These events can be found in what is referred to as Bel and the Dragon, or Daniel 14:28-38. See Appendix A.

[3] Clarke, Ted, “Habakkuk Notes” The Preaching School Collection, e-Sword edition, available from www.TheCobbSix.com.

Articles, Bible Questions

Bible Q&A – Did the Apostles Expect Christ to Return During Their Lifetime?

9 Comments

Question: A man I was talking with told me that the Bible isn’t true because it shows the Apostles thought Jesus’ return would be during their lifetime. And that, since Jesus didn’t come back when they expected it (and still hasn’t), they obviously didn’t have any idea what they were talking about. Can you help me?–C.F. from Indiana.

Thank you for asking such a great question. Believe it or not, this is actually a common attack against the Bible. Unfortunately, though, many people who try to defend the Bible answer this attack in ways that are actually self-defeating. By that, I mean many of the answers that Christians give to this attack are actually in favor of the attacker!

Let me give you some examples. These are not quotes, but paraphrases of what some Christians have said in the past to answer this attack.

  • When they said that the coming of Jesus was “at hand” (that is, very close), the Apostles were just saying that we should live like Christ could come in our lifetimes.

Do you see that on one hand, these Christians acknowledge that the Bible says the coming of Christ was indeed “very close,” but then on the other hand, they deny what they just admitted.

  • The Apostles expected the coming of Jesus to be during their lifetime, but they were just humans and didn’t know everything. But that doesn’t affect the reliability of the Scriptures.

The problem with this argument is that by saying the apostles were mistaken, or just expressing their opinion on when Jesus would return, it calls the rest of the New Testament letters into question. After all, if a plain, direct statement such as “the coming of the Lord is at hand” (James 5:8) was just an opinion, how many other things are actually just opinion? It undermines the credibility of the entire New Testament.

What is just as unfortunate is that these arguments are used in Bible classes to “explain” (or better stated, “explain away”) these statements about the coming of Christ.

Let’s look at two things which will answer the question.

The First Thing.

the New Testament writers absolutely stated (by inspiration) that Jesus would return during the first century. There is no sense in denying these clear Bible statements:

  • “Therefore, YOU [first century Christians] be patient unto the coming of the Lord” (James 5:7).
  • “The coming of the Lord is at hand” (James 5:9).
  • “The end of all things is at hand” (I Peter 4:7).
  • “Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of THESE [first century false teachers], saying ‘Behold the Lord is coming with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.’ These [first century false teachers] are [present tense] murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaks great swelling words, having men’s persons in admiration because of advantage” (Jude 14-16).
  • “…Things which must shortly come to pass. …the time is at hand. …Behold He [Jesus] is coming [present tense] with clouds” (Revelation 1:1, 3, 7).

The New Testament writers believed Jesus would return very soon after they wrote. But this wasn’t just their guess or their opinion. This was an inspired message from the Holy Spirit! It was God Himself giving this message to the first-century Christians.

The Second Thing:

These statements of the imminent coming of Jesus Christ–the coming that the New Testament writers expected to come in the first century–weren’t about Jesus Christ coming at the end of time to destroy the universe. They were in regards to a different “coming” of Jesus Christ.

In Matthew 24, Jesus Christ talks about the destruction of the city of Jerusalem. He says that it will be the worst destruction to ever befall a nation in history. In fact He says there’s never going to be any national destruction worse than what would happen to Judah and Jerusalem (Matthew 24:21). Jesus also gives them a time-frame so they would know when to expect it: “this generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled” (Matthew 24:34). This destruction, prophesied by Jesus, would come during the lifetime of some of those who were listening to Him.

You might ask Why is that important? It’s because of this: Jesus describes this destruction, this judgment on the Jewish nation, as “the coming of the Son of man” (Matthew 24:27, 30).

This destruction, this coming of Jesus Christ in judgment on Jerusalem, happened in AD 70–and it is this coming of Jesus that the apostles spoke about as being imminent. This took place during the lifetime of some of Jesus’ original disciples.

The apostles knew what they were talking about, and they were right when they said that Jesus’ coming [in judgment on Jerusalem] was “at hand.”

When we understand that there’s more than one “coming” of Jesus Christ mentioned in the Bible (one of them imminent, the other one not imminent), this once-confusing “problem” disappears.

-Bradley Cobb

Sermons

Sermon Wednesday – The Divisions of the Bible

Leave a comment

Back after a few weeks’ hiatus, we are proud to continue our series on “Fundamentals of the Faith.”  And you might have noticed that we’ve moved this feature up a day.  Instead of “Sermon Thursday,” we’ll be having “Sermon Wednesday.”

Enjoy!  And, as always, if you have any questions or comments, please feel free to let us know!

Introduction:

Everyone understands the difference between the Old Testament and the New Testament…right?

  • The Old Testament is still binding today for all people.
  • The Old Testament is still binding today, but only for the Jews.
  • The Old Testament is still binding today, but only for Christians.
  • The Old Testament is still binding today except for the animal sacrifices.
  • The Old Testament is not binding on anyone today in any way.

OK, so there’s some confusion about the Old Testament; but everyone understands the New Testament, right?

  • The New Testament only applies to those who have become Christians.
  • The New Testament applies to all people.
  • The New Testament applies to everyone except Jews.
  • The New Testament begins in Matthew.
  • The New Testament doesn’t begin until Acts 2.
  • The New Testament didn’t really officially become effective until Jerusalem was destroyed.

Every one of these things are said by people about the two testaments in the Bible.  To say there is confusion about the Old Testament and New Testament is an understatement.

Today, we’ll look at the two divisions of the Bible, who they apply to, and why.

The two divisions explained.

We get the names “Old Testament” and “New Testament” from the Bible.

  • II Corinthians 3:14 – “…the reading of the Old Testament.”
  • This is also called the “first testament” (Hebrews 9:15, 18).
  • I Corinthians 11:25 – “this is the New Testament in my blood…”
  • See also II Corinthians 3:6, Hebrews 9:15.

What is a “testament”?

This is the same as a covenant, an agreement between two or more parties.  There are two types of covenants: suzerainty and parity (don’t worry, you don’t need to remember the names).

A parity covenant is an agreement between two or more parties of equal standing.  It’s like a business merger.  God is never involved in these kind of covenants, because no one is equal to Him.

A suzerainty covenant is where the more powerful party sets the rules.  This is like the covenants the Roman Empire had with the nations it conquered.  Every covenant involving God is this kind; He is the powerful party, and He sets the rules.

So, when you see the word “testament,” think of the word “covenant.”

The two covenants (or testaments) were both given by God at different times.

The first covenant (the Old Testament), which is also called “the Law of Moses” (Malachi 4:4), was established by God in the book of Exodus (see Exodus 20) and includes all the commands and restrictions given in Exodus through Deuteronomy.

Exodus through Deuteronomy? What about the other 35 books of the Old Testament?

Genesis is the story leading up to the giving of the Law of Moses, beginning with creation, and going through the life of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (whose family is the focus of the rest of the Old Testament).

Genesis contained teachings and commands that would be the foundation of the covenant that was given (such as circumcision, tithing, animal sacrifices, etc…).  But they were not the Covenant itself.

The books after Deuteronomy give the history of Jacob’s family (the Israelites) after the Law of Moses (the first covenant) was given.  Joshua through Esther give, basically, a chronological history of the Israelites until the 400’s BC.  Psalms though Song of Solomon are writings of some of the famous Israelites mentioned in the historical books (primarily David and Solomon).

Isaiah through Malachi (the “prophets”) contain some historical narratives, but their primary focuses are (1) attempts to bring the Israelites back to faithfulness, and (2) prophecies of things that had not yet taken place including many prophecies about Christ and the church.

The new covenant (New Testament), which is also called “the Law of Christ” (Galatians 6:2), was established by God in the book of Acts (see Acts 2), and includes all the commands and restrictions given in Acts through Revelation.

But what about the gospels? Where do they fit in?

Like Genesis, the gospel accounts tell the story leading up to a covenant.  They contain teachings and commands that would be foundational to the new covenant (such as “love one another,” faith, repentance, confession, baptism, and others).

The book of Acts is a brief history of the New Covenant people (the church) from its establishment on Pentecost until around AD 62.

The books of Romans through Jude (the “epistles” or “letters”) are like the books of prophecy in the Old Testament—written with two main focuses (1) to bring Christians to a higher level of faithfulness, and to a lesser extent (2) prophecies about events which had not yet taken place (some of the epistles—like Philemon—don’t include any prophecies).

Revelation is like the epistles, except that it focuses heavily on prophecy about things which had not yet taken place when it was written, but it still encourages Christians to a higher level of faithfulness.

There are two covenants in the Bible, both given by God.

The question before us now is…

Who do the covenants apply to?

Covenants made with specific people do not apply to those outside of that group.

The covenants made between the Roman Empire and the nations it conquered do not apply AT ALL to other nations.  China, which was never conquered by Rome, was never in one of those covenants.  You may say “that’s a big bag of duh right there,” but it is important we point this out.

Covenants only apply to the people who are involved in it.

But just as clear, we must point out that covenants apply to everyone involved in it.

If Rome conquered a nation, then every single person in that nation was now involved—no exceptions.

Covenants made for or at a specific time do not apply outside of that timeframe.

A covenant is an agreement that says “from now on, this is how things are going to be.”  It only becomes enforceable when it begins—not before.  And if the covenant has a cut-off date, it is no longer effective or enforceable after that date.

It’s like a football contract: the player cannot demand that the team pay him for the years he wasn’t under contract, nor can he demand that they keep paying him after the contract has expired.

You may think that this is so obvious that I shouldn’t even bring it up, but it needs to be said because of some of the confusion about the Old Testament and New Testament.

With these things in mind, let’s look at who the old and new covenants applied to.

The Old Testament was given to a specific people.  God had established a covenant with Abraham, then Isaac, and then Jacob to give their descendants the land of Canaan (Exodus 6:4-5).  In Exodus 20:2, God announces that He is speaking directly to the group of people that He had just led out of the bondage of Egypt.

  • What group had He led out of Egypt? The Israelites.
  • Who was God speaking to? The Israelites.
  • Was He speaking to anyone else? No.

Immediately after stating who He was addressing, God gave the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:3-17).

God gave the Ten Commandments to the Israelites, all the Israelites, and no one but the Israelites.

God never commanded that Gentiles (non-Jews) follow the Ten Commandments or the rest of the Law of Moses—it was only ever for the Jews.

This Law of Moses was not intended to last forever—it was given for a specific period of time.

God, through Jeremiah, foretold that God would establish a “new covenant” with His people (Jeremiah 31:31-34).  God specifically states in that passage that it is not the same covenant as the one He made with them when He brought them out of Egypt.

When a new covenant is made, then any old ones are no longer valid.

A football player cannot play under two separate contracts with the same team at the same time.  Only one contract is valid.  So, when this “new covenant” was made, the old one was no longer valid.

Jesus said that the “new testament” (covenant) was in His blood—which was shed for many for the remission of sins (Matthew 26:28).  Christ’s blood was shed on the cross (John 19:33-34).

Jesus connected His death and remission of sins, saying it must first be preached in Jerusalem (Luke 24:46-47).  Remission of sins was first offered in Jerusalem on Pentecost (Acts 2:38).

The New Testament (covenant) began on Pentecost—making the Old Testament no longer valid beginning at that point.

The only group that the Old Testament was ever binding on was the Jews, and that Testament was no longer in effect, starting on the Day of Pentecost after the death of Jesus Christ.  The Law of Christ—the New Testament—became effective beginning in Jerusalem on the same day.

It was first a covenant with the Jews only, but beginning in Acts 10 it was expanded to include the Gentiles as well.  See Romans 1:16 – I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation to all who believe: to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile.

There are only two groups of people in the world, so far as Jews were concerned—Jews and non-Jews (Gentiles).  The New Testament applies to both groups, therefore it is a universal covenant.  It applies to every person—none are excluded.

Those who reject it are still subject to the punishments contained in it for disobedience, for breaking the laws.

Because there is only one Covenant in force today—and it is a universal covenant –THAT is the covenant we need to be most concerned about studying.

We still read and study the Old Testament, because it helps us understand God, how He works, His actions towards His people in the past, and for great encouragement from examples of faithful followers then.  But we need to remember that the entire purpose of the Old Testament was to bring us to Christ (Galatians 3:24-27).

The New Testament is what we live under today, which is why we should focus most of all on its pages.

Conclusion:

The New Testament says that all have sinned, and thus all deserve death (Romans 6:23, 3:23).

The New Testament says that in order to become part of God’s family and receive the blessings of the New Covenant, you have to believe in Christ, repent of your sins, and be baptized to have those sins washed away.

After doing that, the New Testament commands that we continually strive for a life of greater faithfulness to Him, repenting when we’ve messed up (Acts 8:22), and keeping our focus on heaven so that we don’t lose what we’ve worked for (II John 8).

Make the decision to obey the New Testament of Jesus Christ today!

-Bradley Cobb

Announcements

Announcements, Changes, and Explanations

Leave a comment

First of all, thanks to all of you who have taken the time to read our posts over the past few months.  We really appreciate that you have considered our writings to be worthwhile.  And we also hope that you’ll continue to read them for a long time to come!

The past couple months have been hectic–to say the least!  I won’t go into all the details, but suffice it to say that one of our extended family members had to have an emergency surgery otherwise she wouldn’t be alive the next day.  And she’d just had a baby, so Jesse spent almost a full month in Arkansas playing mommy to a new little girl.

And as you’ve probably noticed, our website went from five articles a week down to three.  But hopefully the quality is still worthwhile!

Now, for some news.  Starting this week, we’ll be bringing back Sermon Thursday–except we’ll be moving it up to Wednesday (and changing the name, because it’d look strange to call it Sermon Thursday when it’s on a Wednesday).  We didn’t mean to discontinue it, but with all the things that were going on, it kind of fell through the cracks.

Also, because of the hectic past couple months, we’ve gotten behind on our planned publishing schedule.  The second Alexander Campbell collection was supposed to be available last month, but there’s still work to be done on it.

The Habakkuk commentary is done except for some really annoying typos that need to be fixed.  Hopefully we’ll have an official announcement next week (Lord willing).

The Holy Spirit in the Book of Acts is coming along nicely, but we don’t have a specific date for its publication.

I’m sure you all understand, but we wanted to make sure you all were being kept “in the loop” so to speak.

In other news, Brad’s also taken on a new project.  He’s now one of the head writers of www.ColtsCamp.com, a website all about the Indianapolis Colts.  It’s not a high-paying gig (in fact there’s not been any money yet), but he seems to enjoy it.  You might check out some of his articles at the links below:

Lord willing, we’ll also be adding some more of the James Bales eBook collection, and some more freebies too.

Thanks again for reading, and stay true to Christ, because that is what truly matters!

Articles, Bible Questions

Bible Q&A – The Thief on the Cross–Does it Matter?

1 Comment

Question: Last week, you posted a question and showed that the thief on the cross lived and died under the Old Testament. My question is why does that even matter? Why post an entire article on something so trivial?–Anonymous.

First, thank you for taking the time to read our article. Second, thank you for taking the time to drop us a note asking this question. There’s two answers to your question: the short answer and the slightly longer answer.

The short answer:

Someone asked us the question, so we took the time to answer it.

The slightly longer answer:

The Bible states that we are to “rightly divide” or “handle properly” the word of truth (II Timothy 2:15). There are many good, sincere people who have mishandled the story of the thief on the cross–and some people will lose their souls over it!  This is not a trivial thing.

Let me explain.

There are several religious groups–prominent, well-known religious groups–that try to tell people that they can be saved just like the thief on the cross was: By simply acknowledging Jesus as the Christ.

When it’s pointed out that Jesus said “he that believes and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16), they frequently run to the thief on the cross, and say “He wasn’t baptized, therefore baptism isn’t required for salvation.” It doesn’t matter how many times baptism is shown in Scriptures to be connected with salvation and sin-removal (see I Peter 3:21, Acts 2:38, 22:16, and several others), they still point to the thief on the cross as their proof.

The problem with their stance–with their sincerely-held belief–is that the thief on the cross isn’t an example of someone being saved during the New Testament. The thief lived and died under the Old Testament. It’d be just as logical to appeal to the examples of Noah, Abraham, Moses, Job, and David for the answer to “what must I do to be saved” as it is to appeal to the example of the thief on the cross. All of them lived and died before the New Testament ever came into existence.

The thief on the cross lived and died during a time when forgiveness was based on obedience to the Law of Moses and the system of animal sacrifices. If we appeal to his being saved on the cross, then logically–to be consistent–we also have to argue that we can be forgiven today by means of animal sacrifices.

One other thing to consider regarding the thief on the cross is that his salvation, as promised by Jesus, was not the same as becoming a child of God. In other words, the thief was already a child of God. He was an Israelite, born into the family of God by means of his ethnic heritage–by means of being a Jew. He was like the Prodigal Son–someone who was already part of the family of the Father, but who had gone astray and needed to be brought back.

Yet whenever the thief on the cross is brought up as an example of how to be saved, people use it as an example of how to become part of the family of God. The thief didn’t become a child of God while on the cross. He simply came back home to God.

God Himself (speaking through Peter) answered the question “What must we do?” with the following words: “Repent and be baptized, every one of you for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:37-38).

When someone–regardless of how well-meaning and sincere they may be–teaches that all you have to do to become a child of God is to do what the thief on the cross did, they’re teaching a false salvation.

The thief on the cross is an example of how an erring child of God can come back in repentance. He is not an example of how someone becomes a child of God.

Articles

Are You Sowing the Seed of the King, Dumb Brother?

Leave a comment

Years ago, a kind man named Dooley, after teaching the Wednesday evening Jr. High class at church, decided to share with the class some of the misheard hymn lyrics that he remembered.  I know he mentioned more than one, but I can’t remember the others.  The one I do remember is the title for this post: Are you sowing the seed of the king, dumb brother? (original words are: Are you sowing the seed of the kingdom brother?).

After discussing misheard hymn lyrics in one of last week’s posts, this one sprang to mind.  And when it did, it got me to thinking, and I began to ask myself:

Are you sowing the seed of the king, dumb brother?

And that is the exact question I want to pose to you today.

Before anyone gets offended, let me explain.  The word dumb still has the meaning of “silent” or “mute,” though it isn’t used that way much anymore.  For example, look at Isaiah 53:7 (KJV): as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opens not his mouth.  This is the meaning I want you to think about.

Are you sowing the seed of the king, silent brother?

Evangelism is stressed in almost every congregation I know.  Bulletin articles are written about it.  Sermons are preached about it.  And every member agrees it needs to be done.  And the congregation doesn’t grow.  So more sermons are preached, more articles are written, and every member is even more convinced that it needs to be done.  But what happens?  Do we go out sowing the seed?  Or are we silent?

Preachers are oftentimes just as guilty as anyone else of being silent.  For some reason, we get it through our heads that we’ve spent hours upon hours studying for teaching class, writing sermons, preparing articles, and visiting the members, so we’ve “put in our time.”  Somehow we give ourselves a pass for not doing any evangelism outside of the invitation we put at the end of our sermons.

Are you sowing the seed of the king, dumb brother?

It’s easy to point at others and say, “they’re not evangelizing.”  And that is probably a legitimate accusation against many Christians.  But the question isn’t “are they evangelizing?”

The question is “are you evangelizing?”

I’m not comfortable evangelizing.  God never promised a comfortable life.  Those wonderful folks in the Bible who went out evangelizing did it because they wanted to do it.  Their mindset was that it was a glorious thing to bring others to Jesus Christ.  They were willing to do things that may have been uncomfortable—even risking being murdered—because they thought Jesus and His church were worth it.  Do you?

I’m no good at evangelizing.  Have you ever actually tried it?  There are many different methods, and you’d be surprised at how easy some of them are.  Some are as simple as handing a DVD to someone, and telling them, “I really think you’ll find this interesting.  When you get done watching it, let me know what you think.”

I’m afraid.  The one person who knows me best can attest to the fact that I am a massive fraidy-cat when it comes to needles.  I spent a month avoiding a shot, and then when it came time for me to give it to myself, I couldn’t do it.  I was afraid.  But I finally forced myself to do it.  And you know what?  It’s really not that bad.  If you will finally just start doing it, you won’t be afraid anymore.

This article was written for you.  It was also written for me.  Let us both challenge ourselves every day to speak out for Christ and not be dumb—silent—any longer.

Are you sowing the seed of the king, dumb brother?

–Bradley Cobb

Articles

Be United, not Divided!

Leave a comment

The brethren in Corinth had problems. In that congregation, there was a spirit of selfishness that seemed to prevail. Some members wanted to show themselves superior to other members in the local church. Because of this, some would seek to vaunt themselves up by saying “I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas [Peter], and I of Christ” (I Corinthians 1:12). They were basically saying “I was baptized by Paul; therefore, I am more of a Christian than you are.”

Paul condemns the practice of dividing the church. He instead calls for unity in Corinth. After all, he states clearly “Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?” (I Corinthians 1:13). Neither Paul nor Apollos nor Peter died for the sins of the people, only Christ did. People are not baptized in the name of Paul, Peter, or Apollos, but of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19). Therefore, Christians should not seek to follow after the teachings of any man, but instead those of Christ. Christ is not divided, nor should His church be. This is a strict condemnation of the idea of denominationalism.

Instead, Paul calls the Corinthian Christians (and all Christians) to unity. By inspiration, Paul implores, “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (I Corinthians 1:10). Is such a thing really possible? Yes, it is. Not only is it possible, it is commanded. If God’s people would simply take the Bible, God’s word, as their standard instead of following traditions and their own opinions, unity would be achieved. Not everyone is willing to do this, and they will be judged by God for their rebellion. What are you doing to promote the unity commanded by God?

-Bradley Cobb

Announcements, Bible Questions

Bible Q&A – Did the Thief on the Cross Live Under Two Covenants?

Leave a comment

Question: Since both thieves on the crosses were still alive after Jesus died (their legs had to be broken to quicken their death while Jesus was already dead–John 19:31-33) did they live under both the Old and New Covenant? –An Inmate in Oklahoma

Just so the readers can have a bit more background to the question, the one asking has been taking a Bible correspondence course, and one of the questions was “Did the thief on the cross live under the Old Testament, the New Testament, or neither?” The student searched, and wasn’t sure because both of the thieves were still alive after the death of Christ—albeit a very short time.

First, let me thank you for asking such a great question. It shows that you’re putting a lot of effort, thought, and consideration into your Bible study, which is great!

The thieves both lived and died under the Old Testament, and we’ll look at a few ways to show that this is the case.

First, the gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The New Testament is based completely on this gospel. Peter preached it that way (Acts 2:22-24). Paul proclaimed it that way (I Corinthians 15:1-3). When the thieves were on the cross, Jesus had indeed died, but He had not yet been buried or resurrected. The gospel (the “good news”) had not yet happened when the thieves died. So, they did not live under the New Testament, because the gospel hadn’t happened yet.

Second, entrance into the New Testament was based on baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19-20). There was no baptism into the name of Christ until the Day of Pentecost, 50 days after the resurrection of Christ (Acts 2:1, 38). Jesus had told the apostles not to preach until they received “power” (the miraculous working of the Holy Spirit) in Jerusalem (Luke 24:49, Acts 1:4-5, 8). Therefore, it was impossible for anyone to be a part of the New Testament until Pentecost.

Third, the New Testament is the Will (as in “last will and testament”) of Jesus Christ. A will is not in force until after the person is dead (Hebrews 9:16-17). But just as obvious is this: the official reading of the will takes place days after actual death—sometimes weeks or months afterwards. Until the official reading of the will, there’s no way for people to follow it. The will of Christ was not officially read, and its contents made clear and binding, until the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2). Until that time, all people were still living and answerable to the Old Testament.

Fourth, When Jesus told the repentant thief on the cross, “today you will be with me in Paradise,” Jesus was still alive (Luke 23:43). Thus, there is no doubt whatsoever that the thief’s salvation was acquired prior to the death of Christ—therefore we can say with 100% sureness and accuracy that his salvation was guaranteed based on his actions under the Old Testament.

Fifth, God is no respecter of persons. The thieves had lived their entire lives under the Old Testament, and now they find themselves nailed to crosses—unable to do much more than struggle to breathe and talk. It is obvious that one of the thieves was repentant, and Christ promised him he would be saved. But if the New Testament instantly started and was therefore binding on all Jews the moment Christ gave up the ghost, then the thieves (including the repentant one) were both lost with no possible way of being saved. As we saw above, baptism into the name of Jesus Christ is a requirement for salvation under the New Testament (see also Mark 16:16, I Peter 3:21). Neither one of the thieves could be baptized into the name of Christ, because they were nailed to crosses when Jesus died. God will not make it impossible for someone to be saved. That would make Him a respecter of persons (Acts 10:34).

For this same reason, we can know that the New Testament was not binding on anyone else until Pentecost. Because if it was, then God made it impossible for anyone to be saved from the death of Christ (or the resurrection, if you want to use that as the starting point) until Pentecost, fifty days later. That would make God a respecter of persons, which He is not. There has always, for all people, at all times, been the possibility of salvation through obedience to whatever law of God they lived under. The thieves on the crosses are no exception to this rule.

Thank you for your dedication to studying and understanding God’s word.

—Bradley Cobb

 

Articles

Reading the Bible

Leave a comment

Many times, preachers get into the habit of not reading their Bibles.

What?  What do you mean?  I prepare sermons every week from the Bible!

Yes, I understand that.  I do the same thing.  However, this morning a realization hit me.  I’ve been studying specific passages of the Bible in preparation for a certain lesson; but I hadn’t just been reading the Bible.

Many times, preachers kinda know what they want to preach on, or what text they want to bring to light, and then they dig into that text.  They spend so much time doing that, that they trick themselves into thinking that they’ve done enough Bible reading for the week.  I know I’m not alone in this.  I’ve heard other preachers say the same thing.

This morning, I woke up around 2 in the morning (after going to sleep around 11:30), and was wide awake.  After a couple hours in vain of trying to go back to sleep, I got up with a flashlight and began reading Matthew.  So many things were there that I’d just plain forgotten about.  And literally dozens of sermon ideas and articles ideas hit me—and I was tempted to stop and write them down, but I wanted to keep reading.

Reading God’s word was freeing.  It was a great pleasure.  It was instructive.  It was corrective.  It was enlightening.

And I only got through Matthew 12.

It’s no wonder that one of my heroes, Harold Turner, made it a point to read through the New Testament once every month.

I can’t wait to do this again.

–Bradley Cobb