Conference yukon::christian_v7

    
    Hi Tony,
    
    You do mean Jesus's body resting in the tomb don't you, not Jesus's
    spirit.
    
    jeff

Thanks, Tony.  A good thought to remember.

    
    While on the cross, Jesus told the thief, "today you will be with me
    in Paradise".
    
    Does the Paradise mean "heaven" in the biblical context or soem sort
    of 'halfway house' for souls prior to judgement. What did our Lord do
    in Paradise before being resurrected on Easter Sunday. Is it mentioned
    somewhere in the Bible?
    
    Thanks, Mike

    I believe it is along the lines of the "halfway house."  That is, a
    place of rest before judgement.  I know that some have interpreted it
    as "heaven" and have used this scripture and interpretation to support
    "deathbed repentance."  That is, they figure that if a thief can be
    forgiven at the last minute, they can sin as much as they want so long
    as they "sincerly" repent just before they die.  Controverial topic.
    
    I think that such repentance is possible, but highly unlikely to be
    accepted by the Lord.  I note that it takes a long time to break sinful 
    habits.  Kind of hard to prove to the Lord that you've "sincerly" 
    repented if you repent only after it is no longer physically possible 
    for you to sin and you've spent your life knowingly sinning to fulfill 
    lust.  
    
    Steve

    
    
    Please support your beliefs with Scriptures, since this is a
    Bible-based conference:
    
    
    >>>   I believe it is along the lines of the "halfway house."  
    
    
    >>>   I think that such repentance is possible, but highly unlikely to
    be accepted by the Lord. 
    
    
    It is outright statements like these, unbacked by Scriptures, that can
    confuse believers who are desiring to know more fully God's Word.
    Think of the effect of a casual noter just reading at this point.  
    Please back up feelings and beliefs with Scripture.
    
    Thanks
    
    Bob
    

    >I think that such repentance is possible, but highly unlikely to be
    >accepted by the Lord.  I note that it takes a long time to break sinful 
    >habits.  Kind of hard to prove to the Lord that you've "sincerly" 
    >repented if you repent only after it is no longer physically possible 
    >for you to sin and you've spent your life knowingly sinning to fulfill 
    >lust.  
    
    Repentence is repentence. "God looks on the heart, not on the outward
    appearance."  "A broken and contrite heart He will not turn away."
    I'm not sure of the references or if the quotes are exact but I think
    you can see my point.  We don't stop sinning to `prove' to God that we
    are His.  He already knows.  How many good works are enough before God
    finally decides that we have proven ourselves? We stop sinning out of a
    heart that loves the Lord and desires to serve Him. There's also the
    parable that Jesus told about the workers in the field, some of whom
    came at the first part of the day, some of whom came at noon, and some
    of whom came just before quitting time.  All received the same wage.
    Eternal life is for all who will *truly* repent no matter when that is, 
    but God knows our hearts and whether it's real or not.
    
    Dave
    

re.6 

	Bob, lighten up. In case you haven't noticed there are many entries
in this conference that don't quote scripture.

	It's a fair request on your part to ask for scriptural back-up but I
wouldn't get all bothered about it.

	Let me ask you to provide support for your view on Paradise (whatever
that is). In my study of the Bible, I recall very little that supports the
idea of believers going directly to the presence of God's throne upon death.
What do you think?

regards,
ace

>	It's a fair request on your part to ask for scriptural back-up but I
>wouldn't get all bothered about it.

Alleluia, ace!

    
    This interpretation is from a fellow brother/colleague of mine:
    
    When our Lord died on the cross for us sinners, He took it upon Himself 
    all the sins of the world. As a result, He uttered 'Father, why have
    you forsaken me?' Sin separates God from man and that was the first
    time when our Lord experienced God's Absence.
    
    After He died, His spirit went down to Hell and suffered for 3 days
    for our sins before God resurrected Him.
    
    It's a fallacy that Jesus 'went down to Hell and snatch the keys of
    Hell and Hades from Satan', not in the actual sense but He has earned
    for us the fellowship of God and man again. Sin has no longer any hold
    on us. The price has been fully paid for.
    
    Mike 

re.9  8*)

Hi Mike, 

Re: 105.10

First - Amen to the fact that Jesus took the sins of the world upon Himself
on the cross, bearing the full depth of the enormity of separation from God
which is the inevitable result of sin (Habakkuk 1:13). 

I think you quoted the second paragraph to refute it - ?
�    After He died, His spirit went down to Hell and suffered for 3 days
�    for our sins before God resurrected Him.
 - with:
�    It's a fallacy that Jesus 'went down to Hell and snatch the keys of
�    Hell and Hades from Satan', not in the actual sense but He has earned
�    for us the fellowship of God and man again. Sin has no longer any hold
�    on us. The price has been fully paid for.

The fallacy of Jesus 'suffering 3 days in hell' arises from a misunderstanding 
of 1 Peter 3:19 : 
 "...being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which 
  also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison; which sometimes were 
  disobedient..."

- the 'preached' here is to proclaim victory; not to evangelise.  The work 
was complete when He said "It is finished".

We usually think of the crucifixion as the cause of Jesus death.  When
people were crucified, part of the agony was that they couldn't voluntarily
end it.  The had to remain there suffering.  This was not the case with 
Jesus.  When His work was complete, our LORD Jesus left His body, having
fulfilled all His Father's purpose.  John 19:30 shows us this:

 "When He had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, 
  He bowed His head, and gave up His spirit."

Meanwhile, the two thieves crucified with Him had to suffer on, until they 
were put out of their agony byu the soldiers (v32).

Luke records how the centurion was astonished at Jesus' death (24:46-47),
and Matthew (27:54) and Mark (15:39) also record how he was impressed that
his passing was divine control, with the accompanying signs.

Mark also recordss how surprised Pilate was to hear that Jesus was already
dead (Mark 15:44-45).  Because crucifixion itself would have taken longer. 
Jesus had completed His work, and gone, in perfect control to the end! 

Sorry - I didn't really cover the day in between, but this has taken us up 
to that point...

								Andrew

    
    Hi Andrew,
    
    Thanks for your reply. 
    
    The point that our Lord Jesus "went down to Hell to snatch the keys of
    Hell and Hades from Satan" was made by the pastor during  Sunday
    Service at our local Church. Did he get it right? I couldn't find it
    being mentioned in the Bible.
    
    
    Mike

Hello Mike,

I would not understand it in the way your pastor expressed the keys being
siezed, because Jesus had already completed the work. I think the idea of
Jesus getting them from hell may be derived from a different interpretation
of the 1 Peter 3:19 verse I mentioned in .12, possibly with the reference
to the keys in Matthew 16:19, where the LORD Jesus promises the His power
to the church through faith: 

 "...on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not 
  overcome it.  I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever 
  you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth 
  will be loosed in heaven..."

Note that the keys referred to here are the keys of heaven. not of hell.

Binding and loosing in 'heaven' in this passage is better translated as
referring to 'the heavenlies'.  The spiritual realm is to be subject to our
faith, as per Ephesians 6:12 - the armour of God passage, where we are 
reminded that we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against the 
principalities and powers of the air - the enemy satan and his minions.

In Revelation 1:18, the LORD Jesus is identified as holding the keys to 
death and Hades.  As far back as Matthew 10:28, Jesus says :
 "Do not be afraid of those who kill the body, but cannot kill the soul.
  Rather, be afraid of the One Who can destroy both body and soul in hell."
- sounding very much as if He retained control in that area throughout!

The only other reference I am aware of which might be taken as a key to
hell is in Revelation 20:1, where an angel from heaven uses it to lock
satan in the Abyss for a thousand years. 

					God bless
						Andrew

The principal place where the doctrine of descent into hell
comes from is Ephesians 4:9, "What does "he ascended" mean
except that he also descended to the lower, earthly regions".
There is a secondary reference somewhere, but I don't remember
where.

Personally, I believe that the "lower, earthly regions" in
Eph 4:9 is earth, not hell and thus find little or no support
for the belief that Jesus descended into hell (and do not say 
that part of the Apostles Creed which, by the way, has already 
been omitted from the Nazarene version so I'm not the only 
one :-) ).

It's an interesting question more for scholars than for any
true impact on your life.

Collis

I've been following a thread in an external conference which is discussing
this topic.  Someone offered an opinion that the "hell" referred to could
have been "sheol," the place where all the good Jews went to wait for Christ's
redemption.  (I think?)  "Gehenna" was the place where everybody else went.
Both of these words may have been translated into "hell" at some point.

Sheol was neither heaven nor hell.  The lord supposedly went there to preach
to the resting dead and grant them entrance into heaven.  This would resolve
another seeming contradiction:  Jesus said to one of the criminals as they
were hanging on the crosses, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me
in paradise."  (Luke 23:43)  But then after Jesus rose again he instructed
Mary Magdelene, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the
Father." (John 20:17)

The article I read had much more detail than this.  I could go back and look
it up if anyone want's to see it.  I didn't find anything unbiblical about it.

Personally, I agree with Collis in that I don't see how this has any bearing
on my salvation or why it should be expressed in the Apostle's Creed.  Please
correct me on this if I'm way off.  Jesus said "IT IS FINISHED"  (price paid!
don't worry about your bill, it's on the House!)  He died.  He rose.
And what He did on His vacation is not my concern.
(OK let me supress my elation and get back to the topic. 8^)

One other thing I read that does bother me now and then is the prophesy that
the Son of Man would spend three days and three nights in the belly of the
earth.  (the sign of Jonah)  Friday, Saturday, Sunday, uh... wait a minute.
I only counted two nights there.  Actually, this wouldn't bother me so much
except that a non-christian asked me about this once in a rather challenging
way.  And I didn't have much of an explanation.

Possible explanations:

	- Solar eclipse at the ninth hour.  (But He wasn't in the grave yet)
	- Accounting for the nights and days a little bit differently.

Rick

>Sheol was neither heaven nor hell.  The lord supposedly went there to
>preach to the resting dead and grant them entrance into heaven.

Correct.  This is the Apostolic teaching, which is why this is in both
scripture and the Apostles' Creed.  Some translations of the Apostles'
creed say "the place of departed spirits" or "the dead" instead of "hell."

>I agree with Collis in that I don't see how this has any bearing
>on my salvation or why it should be expressed in the Apostle's Creed.

What he did there may not have any bearing on your salvation, since the Gospel
was preached to you while you were alive.  But remember, the salvation of
Christ is offered to all mankind: the universal Truth of the Gospel is to be
preached to all people in all of creation and for all time.  This includes
the Old Testament saints.  During His descent to the place of the departed
spirits, Jesus proclaimed the Gospel to those who are dead (1 Peter 4:6).
So it does have a bearing on the salvation of people who did not get to hear
of Jesus during his life.  This was important to the Apostles, since they had
friends and relatives of recent memory who had died before Jesus' ministry;
the Apostles were concerned about them, and we can logicall infer from various
scriptural passages that Jesus explained to them where he had been, which is
one reason they taught and wrote about His activities while among the dead.

It was also VERY important to affirm that He went where all the dead went
in order to counter heresies that were arising during the early Apostolic
period which claimed that Jesus didn't really fully and completely die.  It
is doctrinally very important for Jesus to have actually died and descended
to the dead, for it is by his death and his subsequent victory over death and
resurrection from the dead "the firstfruits of them that slept" (1 Cor 15:20)
that he conquered death for us.

>Personally, I believe that the "lower, earthly regions" in
>Eph 4:9 is earth, not hell and thus find little or no support
>for the belief that Jesus descended into hell

Well, now, "... at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in
heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;"  (Ph 2:10)

This place under the earth or in the "lower, earthly regions" was Sheol,
not the everlasting hell of the Apocalypse.  "Or, Who shall descend into
the deep? (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.)" Rom 10:7.

In 1 Peter 4:6 we learn: "For for this cause was the gospel preached also
to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the
flesh, but live according to God in the spirit."

Also 1 Peter 3:18-20 "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the
just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in
the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which he also went and preached
unto the spirits in prison; which sometime were disobedient..."

And John 5:25 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now
is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that
hear shall live."

It's important to remember that the old Hebrew concept of Sheol was one
of completely inanimate spirits, but that this had begun to change in the
intertestamental period, especially among the Apostles who believed that
Jesus had spoken to the dead and that they had heard him, and were now
waiting for the resurrection on the last day (the Parousia).

/john

Thanks John.  That makes sense.  I can remember being a little confused
before about those last three verses.  I assumed they were referring to the
"dead in Christ" but obviously that didn't always seem logical.

Rick

Re:  .17

I Peter 4:6 is translated in the NIV as "For this is the reason
the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so
that they might be judged according to men in regard to the
body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit."

I agree with the interpretation in this translation.  The other
interpretation presented in .17 is a possible one as well.

Re: 3 days and 3 nights

Culture difference.  Any part of a day and night was considered
a full day.  The chief priest and Sanhedrin recognized that they had 
to watch the tomb until the third day was up.  This same claim was
repeated a number of times in a number of different ways by Jesus.
His listeners at that time were (apparently) not confused.

Collis

This is not directed at the person who brought this up, but a warning for all.

>Re: 3 days and 3 nights

>Matthew 12:40  For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's
>belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of
>the earth.

Well this really tears it for me.  I'm pitching the whole Bible out because
I don't understand this.  Wait a asecond, what's this?

----------------------------------
Matthew 26:61  And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of
God, and to build it in three days.

Matthew 27:63  Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was
yet alive, After three days I will rise again.

Mark 8:31  And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many
things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes,
and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Mark 14:58  We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with
hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.

Mark 15:29  And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and
saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days,

John 2:19  Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in
three days I will raise it up.
 20  Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and
wilt thou rear it up in three days?
-----------------------------------

I'm not going into any possible explanations, and my introduction to 
this note was pretty dramatic "this tears it for me."  People come
at this from two sides:

(1) I believe the Bible, but I don't understand why this is said this way.

(2) I don't believe the Bible, because I won't believe what I don't understand,
       or will understand what I want despite presented evidences to the
       contrary.

The second side is the anti-Christian, who seeks only to destroy faith to
validate their own, rather than seeking the Truth.  Hebrews 11:6 say that
God rewards those who dilligently seek Him, not ways to validate life 
outside of His stated morals.

So take care to "study to show thyself approved."  It's okay to have
questions.  But the pharisees desmonstrated that one can have questions
that are designed to trap (Matt 22, Mark 8, Mark 11, etc) for destruction.
In each case, Jesus answered with the truth because He is the Truth and
put these "tempters" to shame.  Beware of those who question with intent
to subvert your faith.

Thanks, Collis ... I'd never associated Ephesians 4:9 with anything other 
than descent to earth, dso hadn't realised the link.

Rick, 'Hell' is the general greek name for the area which is referred to as 
being finally disposed of in Revelation 20:14.  'Sheol' is the Hebrew name 
for the same place.

There were three divisions of hell / sheol; (1) the place for the lost
dead, awaiting judgement, (2) the place for the saved dead (also known as
Abraham's bosom, and paradise), which awaited Jesus' resurrection, when it
was opened into heaven; and (3) the place for fallen spirits 

1 and 2 can most clearly be seen from Luke 16:19-31.  3 is identified as 
Tartarus in 2 Peter 2:4.

Gehenna is the place of everlasting burning, the lake of fire, as recorded
in Revelation 20:15, which will receive death and hell, as well as those
whose names are not written in the Lamb's Book of Life. 

Agreed - not a foundational doctrine to salvation, but something which is 
included in the Word for our edification and understanding.

John, re .17

I've heard this interpreted before as a 'second chance' condition (or
rather, 'first chance for those who never heard on earth' - the OT
saints category).  However, it conflicts with Hebrews 9:27..
"...man is destined to die once, and after that the judgement...

The idea that those who died before Jesus lived, implies that salvation is
limited to those who receive the specific word.  Salvation certainly
requires the Word to be received where it is heard, but it does not
preclude salvation from those who have a lesser degree of revelation.  This
can be seen from Psalm 19, and Romans 1:19-20, which also answers the
problem of those who die even now without hearing the gospel - remote
tribes, the newborn and stillborn - even those who are killed before birth.

In terms of the patriarchs, the first covenant was completed by the second, 
but their faith was living in accordance with Psalm 19, Romans 1 as above, 
according to Hebrews 11:14-16, where they live for a better country.  In 
fact, verse 26 even records of Moses that he "regarded disgrace for the 
sake of Christ as of greater value..." !  Note also that in Luke 16, 
Abraham (and Lazarus) are already in a better place, as opposed to the 
faithless rich man.  They were not there to have a further option, but to 
receive the fullness - as per Hebrews 11:40.

The OT sacrifices realised their fullness through Jesus' sacrifice.
Hebrews 9:15 fulfills the law for them as well as us. :
 "...Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called 
  may receive the promised eternal inheritance - now that He has died to set 
  them free from the sins committed under the first covenant..."

 Their salvation is by faith in the LORD Jesus, as well as ours.

While Hebrews addresses the issue of the Old Testament saints, it nowhere
mentions any after-life salvation decision.  They had completed their life
of choice, according to what God had given them.

re some of your other interpretations, I don't think you read some of the 
preceding in htis string - or you're presenting one view alone, rather than
answering objections to it? - eg:

� 1 Peter 4:6 we learn: "For for this cause was the gospel preached also
� to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the
� flesh, but live according to God in the spirit."

Note the change of tense.  WAS preached ... ARE dead.  Those who are dead 
have received their preaching.  This is in context with the previous verses, 
which are stressing the accountability of those who are still living 
dissolute lives.

� Also 1 Peter 3:18-20 "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the
� just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in
� the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which he also went and preached
� unto the spirits in prison; which sometime were disobedient..."

The word translated 'preached' is not 'evangeliso', but 'katangello', to 
proclaim or tell.  Looking closer at this verse, you find it referes 
explicitly to spirits who disobeyed before the flood.  If this is meant to 
fill in a pre-resurrection need, it leaves a big gap unexplained.  In fact, 
this records the reporting of defeat to the spirits in Tartarus, as 
referred to in 2 Peter 2:4.  They were there in connection with a particular 
sin era.  I went into that earlier...

� And John 5:25 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now
� is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that
� hear shall live."
Now that is referring to the resurrection, as from Matthew 27:52-53 to 
Thessalonians 4:16.  The day of salvation was dawning with Jesus, the 
Creator, on earth.

Now I know we're into the area of difference in doctrine between Church of
England + Catholicism, and the evangelical doctrines, but I wanted to
clarify the stance without necessarily making it a point on which to focus.


					God bless..
							Andrew