What is the meaning of "asleep in Jesus"?

What is the meaning of "asleep in Jesus" (1 Thessalonians 4:14)" TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 4:14)?

When Paul says that David (Acts 13:36)" TARGET="_blank">Acts 13:36) "fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption," he is not speaking about David’s "immaterial being" (his soul and spirit), but of his body. The wonderful truth of believers sleeping when their souls depart (Genesis 35:18)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 35:18) refers to their bodies By speaking of believers sleeping, the Spirit reminds us that a change is certain. When the Lord said, "Our friend Lazarus sleepeth" (John 11:11)," TARGET="_blank">John 11:11), the disciples did not grasp that He was about to display the glory of God (v. 40) in His power over death. The Lord’s describing Lazarus’ condition as sleep reminds us that our sleeping loved ones will soon awake, not as Lazarus to die again, but "out from death," to put on immortality (1 Cor 15:53)." TARGET="_blank">1 Cor 15:53). At the moment of departure, the soul of those loved ones enters a fully conscious realm in the presence of the Lord. Their body begins to "go to corruption," but this is only temporary. Those "who are fallen asleep in Christ" (v. 18) shall rise (1 Th 4:16)." TARGET="_blank">1 Th 4:16).

"Fallen asleep in Christ" describes their position before God at the time of their death, but the expression, "asleep in (through, YLT) Jesus," is different. Translators offer a number of different locations for the expression "in Jesus" in verse 14. Commentators give several possible meanings. One very comforting possibility is that "through Jesus" expresses instrumentality. This may then imply that the personal touch of the tender Jesus has put His own to sleep. Just as a mother calms her troubled child until he falls into a restful sleep, so the Lord gently closes a believer’s eyes and takes him home.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

What translations of Scripture help in understanding its message?

Do other translations of Scripture help in understanding its message?

Yes, but be careful! You must know what you are reading. Is it a literal translation or a paraphrase? Does it employ "dynamic equivalence?" Were the texts in the original language reliable? God's Word was given by verbal inspiration to men who wrote down the message. Those original writings do not exist, but copies do. Our responsibility is to ensure we are reading the most accurate translation of the most accurate copies.

With God's Word, every word matters; therefore, using a literal translation is imperative (KJV, NKJV, RV, DARBY, SPURRELL, NASB). Sometimes the literal may be hard to understand because of idioms in the original language, so a paraphrase can help. Also, some versions employ a "dynamic equivalence," where the translator uses words that convey to the modem mind what was understood by readers of the original text (NIV). Be aware, however, that a paraphrase or "dynamic equivalence" includes the editing committee's own interpretation. That could introduce a bias which limits or changes what the Spirit intended in the original text.

Stan Wells

Other pages in this section

About this site

Is the "prophetic view" of Revelation two and three an interpretation or an application?

Is the "prophetic view" of Revelation two and three an interpretation or an application?

The conditions described in the seven letters John distributed were actual literal conditions existing in seven specific churches. This is primary in interpreting these letters. On that basis, the letters teach assembly truths either by statement or principles. Unless we have divine authority for doing differently, we look for only one interpretation of a passage. When a New Testament writer cites an Old Testament passage, he invariably treats that passage consistent with its accepted interpretation.

These letters to the seven churches, however, come with divine authority for a second interpretation. First, the command to write the book came from the First and the Last (1:17). That title comes from the Lord’s statements in Isaiah (41:4; 44:6; 48:12) in which He asserts He is the First, who determined His counsels before any creation existed. Only He can communicate His counsels (44:6, 7). He is the Last, who will have the "last word," completing the counsels He has communicated. When He commands John (Revelation 1:19)" TARGET="_blank">Revelation 1:19) to record what he has seen (chapter 1), what is (chapters 2 and 3), and what "shall be hereafter" (chapters 4-22), all three sections communicate His counsels which He will complete. "What is," therefore, communicates truth about the future.

Second, "these things" in the expression "the things that are about to come after these things" (1:19, YLT) refers back to its nearest antecedent, "the things that are." When John records "after these things" (4:1 YLT), he indicates that "the things that are" continue right up until the events of chapter 4 which correspond to the Rapture.

Third, the Lord refers to "the mystery of the seven stars" (1:20). A mystery is truth that can only be known by divine revelation (Ephesians 3:3, 5)." TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 3:3, 5). Grammatically, the mystery is related to what went before it (v. 20). What follows, namely the identification of the stars as angels and the lampstands as churches, is hardly the full unfolding of the mystery.

This leads to the conclusion that a second and equally valid interpretation of the seven letters is the "prophetic view."

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

How do we "make disciples" and fulfill the Great Commission?

What is the most important help in "making disciples"?

The responsibility to "make disciples" extends "to the end of the age" (Matthew 28:19, 20)." TARGET="_blank">Matthew 28:19, 20). We need every available spiritual means to encourage all believers to "obey all things."

New believers retain their former personality traits. Some love to learn something new (Acts 17:21);" TARGET="_blank">Acts 17:21); others like the challenge of advancing beyond others (Galatians 1:14);" TARGET="_blank">Galatians 1:14); still others love to fit into their new-found society and they eagerly conform (Acts 8:13)," TARGET="_blank">Acts 8:13), while the timid can be intimidated (Diotrephes did this, 3 John 1:9, 10)." TARGET="_blank">3 John 1:9, 10). Playing on these natural traits cannot produce spiritual results. The Lord predicates discipleship on this condition: "if any man will come after me" (Luke 9:23)." TARGET="_blank">Luke 9:23). Hearts drawn to Christ by an all-consuming devotion gladly embrace all He commands (John 14:15, 23)." TARGET="_blank">John 14:15, 23). Fostering devotion to Christ, coupled with patient, practical teaching, is essential to making disciples.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

How does an assembly recognize its elders?

How does an assembly recognize its elders?

Paul gives the qualifications for men who will join an existing oversight in Ephesus (1 Timothy 3:1-7;" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 3:1-7; Acts 20:17)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:17). These still guide an assembly in recognizing its elders. In God’s design, an assembly operates on theocratic, not democratic, principles; it is subject to God’s will, not the people’s. The Lord, the Chief Shepherd, is supreme in each assembly. To produce this subjection to God, He supplies the assembly with a plurality of shepherds. By their own example and by divine enablement, these shepherds lead (1 Timothy 5:17," TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:17, "rule," lead, attend to, WEV) the flock in recognizing elders the Lord provides for them. Elders affirm the Spirit’s work in making men overseers (Acts 20:28);" TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:28); they do not authoritatively make overseers. Unitedly dependent on the Spirit of wisdom (Isaiah 11:2)," TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 11:2), they communicate to the assembly their perception of God’s choice. In this way, the assembly recognizes its elders.

Overseers encourage the spiritual development of every young believer, perceive when a shepherd’s heart develops in some, and discern when that work has reached appropriate maturity in individuals. The Lord doesn’t "graduate" a class of new overseers. God’s work in each soul reaches maturity in its own time.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Is it wrong to conjure dead spirits?

Please explain 1 Samuel 28:15-19" TARGET="_blank">1 Samuel 28:15-19 in the light of Ecclesiastes 9:5." TARGET="_blank">Ecclesiastes 9:5.

Does this give ground for to-day’s teaching of Spiritism?

The story of 1 Samuel 28" TARGET="_blank">1 Samuel 28 in no way justifies the practice of Spiritism in this or in any other age.

As for Ecciesiastes 9:5, it expresses the general rule, “The dead know not anything”; the above story of the witch of Endor is the exception, by God’s special permission, as I shall seek to show. “The dead know not anything,” i.e., of what is going on on the earth, but they know what is going on where they are, as the story of the ex-rich man and Lazarus shows (Luke 16)." TARGET="_blank">Luke 16). The former and Abraham knew each other, and the former recognised Lazarus and remembered his own five brethren.

I have not the slightest doubt Samuel was really permitted by God to respond to the call. This was less, I doubt not, of a surprise to Saul the dupe, than to the witch, the deceiver. To her the attendant spirit was familiar, but she seems to have been completely taken aback by the appearance of the strange visitant that Samuel was, for “she cried with a loud voice,” and did not know him, though by some peculiar intuition she at once became aware of the identity of Saul. Samuel was a true prophet, and could foretell the morrow’s happenings, but we have no justification for supposing that wicked spirits can foretell the future.
That this response to Saul’s evil action does not justify modern Spiritism is clear, from the fact that it did not justify his own recourse to this medium, for it is specifically mentioned in 1 Chronicles 10:13" TARGET="_blank">1 Chronicles 10:13 as one of the two causes of his final downfall: (i) “his transgression” i.e., in sparing Amalek, and also (z) his “asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it. And he enquired not of the Lord, therefore He slew him.” He did ask of the Lord (sha’al), as indeed of the witch, but he did so in a merely formal way in the former case and he did not enquire (dãrash) of Him, as he did of the witch; for in her case he put himself to all pains to get information. Saul knew perfectly well the distinct prohibition of Jehovah to any kind of occult practices—consulting spirits, etc. (see Leviticus 19:31;" TARGET="_blank">Leviticus 19:31; Leviticus 20:6, 27;" TARGET="_blank">Leviticus 20:6, 27; Deuteronomy 18:9-12)," TARGET="_blank">Deuteronomy 18:9-12), and had as we know, acted thereon, till he found it convenient to transgress!

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Prophet accepted everywhere but in his hometown

Todd Babineaux wrote:

Where is the verse that says something about a prophet being accepted everywhere but in his hometown?

Answer:

The Lord Jesus went to his hometown of Nazareth and went into the synagogue. His message was soundly rejected and they tried to kill him. His commentary on their attitude was:

Luke 4:24" TARGET="_blank">Luke 4:24 And he said, Verily, I say unto you, No prophet is accepted in his own country.

Shad

Other pages in this section

About this site

Why do some object to the expression the old nature?

Why do some object to the expression the old nature?

For most of us, our earliest Christian teaching included "the Christian’s two natures: the old nature and the new nature." This was the accepted and handy way of explaining the struggle within a believer that drew him to sin when he genuinely wanted to please the Lord. Some of us may have found this confusing when we learned that orthodox Christians have historically upheld that our Lord possessed two natures. In this case, the expression means that He was truly human - although without the possibility of sin - and truly God in one unique Person.

Actually, the vocabulary of the New Testament does not use two natures to describe either teaching. That Christ is both God and man is foundational, essential truth. Godly men, who labored to defend and clarify this profound truth, distilled the Bible’s teaching into the expression two natures.

The New Testament, however, does provide the terms that describe the struggle within the believer. "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would" (Gal 5:17)." TARGET="_blank">Gal 5:17). Paul also deals with this at the end of Romans 7." TARGET="_blank">Romans 7. The problem is the flesh with its unchanged and unchangeable disposition toward sin (v 18). He perceives a law in my members, a governing principle linked with fallen humanity. This principle wars against the law of my mind, which is the result of the Spirit’s regenerating work.

Using the New Testament’s vocabulary may help us in at least two ways. Speaking about our old nature may isolate us from the problem, as though the responsibility lies with my nature, but not with me directly. Paul says, "In me (that is, in my flesh) . . ." (v 18). I am directly responsible for the problem. Second, the teaching about the flesh embraces our hope of deliverance. The flesh refers at times to our physical body of flesh (Rom 1:3; 2:28; 3:20)" TARGET="_blank">Rom 1:3; 2:28; 3:20) and at other times to our moral disposition toward sin (Rom 7:5, 18; 8:4, 5)" TARGET="_blank">Rom 7:5, 18; 8:4, 5) , a principle presently inseparable from our physical body. The death of Christ has legally severed us from Adam and the consequences of his disobedience. The results of that death will eventually deliver us completely from both the physical consequence (the condemnation of death) and moral consequence (sin dwelling in me - the flesh) of the Fall. This physical and moral problem elicits Paul’s question at the end of Romans 7" TARGET="_blank">Romans 7 (v 24). Deliverance from this body of death (JND) is what God had in mind when "the old man was crucified with Him, [in order] that the body of sin might be destroyed (brought to nothing, WEV)" (6:6). In chapter 8, Paul expands his answer, "I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord" (7:25).

The objections to using the term the old nature are likely intended to bring us to a clearer understanding of New Testament truth.

D. Oliver

Other pages in this section

About this site

Does the bread and the cup of the Lord

Does the bread and the cup of the Lord’s Supper have spiritual value?

The hymn expresses it well: "Only bread and only wine, yet to faith the solemn sign . . ." They are not the body and blood of the Lord, but are emblems or reminders of them. These emblems are not types; neither the shape (round, rectangular), substance (flour or yeast), preparation (from a seed, harvested and ground wheat, baked in an oven), nor disposal (whatever happens to them after they are used) has any significance. Partaking of these emblems does not impart divine life or any inherent spiritual benefit more than any other act of obedience to God’s Word.

Remembering the Lord is a sacred privilege, so there is an elevated responsibility in handling these emblems. Separate emblems of the body and blood of the Lord (1 Corinthians 11:24, 25)" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 11:24, 25) remind us of His death. Behavior inconsistent with this sacred privilege causes particular condemnation (verses 27-30).

The bread and cup involve a dual symbolism relating to commemoration and communion. In themselves, they remind us of the death of our Lord, commemorated when we remember Him. When we partake of them, we express fellowship. "The communion of the blood of Christ" (1 Corinthians 10:16)" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 10:16) expresses our fellowship with God, His claims having been satisfied (Leviticus 17:11, 1 4;3: 17)." TARGET="_blank">Leviticus 17:11, 1 4;3: 17). "The communion of the body of Christ" expresses our fellowship with one another in the assembly (1 Corinthians 10:16,17)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 10:16,17). Paul shows that such expressions of fellowship make it morally impossible to participate in any other fellowship inconsistent with His lordship.

Religion has ascribed to the emblems sacramental value such as the power to take away sins. The emblems do not have spiritual value but they do express spiritual truths.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Under what conditions would laboring men who planted an assembly step in to guide that flock?

Under what conditions would laboring men who planted an assembly step in to guide that flock?

Two possibilities exist: intervention may be necessary to prevent the destruction of the testimony; intervention may weaken the assembly’s ability to trust God, learning from and of Him through its needs. If intervention increases the assembly’s dependence on the laboring man, this contravenes his God-given role, because he has hindered the development of maturity in the assembly. The rare cases when he judges that he must intervene will be emergencies. He will need spiritual wisdom to determine this, and the principle James states (James 1:5)" TARGET="_blank">James 1:5) indicates his recourse.

David Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu