VARIOUS SHORT ARTICLES
All these articles were first published in Grace & Truth magazine, except those marked "*".
TABLE OF CONTENTS
THREE LITTLE WORDS
KING JAMES VERSION
ENGLISH KINGS AND ENGLISH BIBLES *
THE LAST ENEMY
IS THERE A FUTURE FOR ANIMAL SACRIFICES? *
THREE LITTLE WORDS
"The soul that sins will suffer unspeakable agony in a burning hell for all eternity." Is this true?
Many people think so, even though it seems totally foreign to their idea of a loving God. Some would support this statement, though, because they reason that if there were no penalty, there would be no justice.
Over the centuries, many human philosophies have been conceived to try to solve this puzzle. But the only sure answer is in the revealed Word of God.
The Apostle Paul tells us to have a pattern of sound words (2 Timothy 1:13). This is even more important today, as everything he wrote 2000 years ago was written in Greek. If something has been lost in translation, then our understanding will be faulty.
The key words in the opening sentence are three little words - SOUL, HELL, and ETERNITY. But do these English words accurately tell us what the Scriptures meant originally? If they do not, then we need to revise our understanding of the truth.
The SOUL (psuche, in Greek) is the seat of sensation in animals and humans. HELL (Hades, in Greek) is a hole in the ground. Another Greek word, (Gehenna) is also often translated as hell, and is a place near Jerusalem where rubbish was burnt. ETERNITY or forever (aioon, in Greek) is a period of time with a definite beginning and end.
Death is not life. The second death is still death, not life. There is no understanding, no feeling, no pain, no sensation, in death. The lake of fire is the second death and is judgement for all sinners. The ration (not 'wages') of sin is death. Those sinners who are cast into the lake of fire will experience death, not life. They will be dead for the eon, an age predetermined by God.
God as a righteous Judge, could not pass over anyone's sin. Judgement is necessary before God can bring salvation and reconciliation to anyone. But death and Hades will also be cast into the lake of fire, to exist no more (Revelation 20:14). Is that the end? No. (1 Corinthians 15:22):
A proper understanding of these three little words lifts the burden of error and brings peace (Philippians 4:7):
The saint does not need to worry about anything, including the fate of his friends and family who died in unbelief.
Thank God that despite man's reasoning, He is a righteous, loving God.
KING JAMES VERSION, THE ONLY INSPIRED BIBLE?
"The whole history of Bible translation in any language is a history of repeated revision and correction." In a nutshell, that is the argument set forth in the preface of the King James Bible, entitled, "The Translators to the Reader". (This preface is seldom included in the KJB today.)
It was written to defend their version against criticisms they expected be brought against it.
Many assume that the Authorized Version they have is the same one that was published in 1611. Within the next three years there were 14 minor revisions. More important changes were made in 1629, 1638, 1762 and 1769.
The translators expected that changes would be needed and expressed surprise that revisions should be imputed as faults. They explicitly deny the perfection of their work. There is "no cause why the Word translated should be denied to be the Word, or forbidden to be current, notwithstanding that some imperfections and blemishes may be noted in the setting forth of it."
Those who believe the Authorized Version is perfect and the only inspired, infallible Word of God are in conflict with the very scholars who produced it.
So with so imperfect a work, why is the KJB so highly regarded? It is certainly the single greatest monument in the English language. But the supremacy of the version is one of style, not of scholarship. It is elegant, if not accurate. Nevertheless, if we do not own and read a KJB we deprive ourselves of our rich literary and religious heritage.
It is indisputable that for hundreds of years, it has been used by God in calling His people. But God was also calling people before 1611, so we cannot claim that the King James Version is essential in missionary work. As the Bible was translated into English for the first time in 1382, we may well ask if God is limited to drawing the elect to Himself by human inadequacies.
If no version is absolutely infallible, what should a follower of the Lord Jesus Christ in the 21st Century do? Give up, because all versions contain error? The original texts in Greek and Hebrew were inspired, so do we have to learn these ancient languages?
The answer to both questions is NO.
We should not base our salvation on any version. Nor believe that those who don't read that particular one are unsaved.
We recommend the Concordant Version because it used a consistent system of translation. Whenever possible, one English word was used for only one Greek or Hebrew word. This system minimizes the risk of interpreting the text by human tradition or bias, but it was explicitly rejected by the KJB translators: "Another thing we think good to admonish thee of (gentle reader) that we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done." "For is the Kingdom of God become words or syllables? Why should we be in bondage to them if we may be free, use one precisely when we may use another no less fit, as commodiously?"
One good reason is that the Concordant method has enabled believers to uncover truth which has been lost due to faulty translation.
The KJB translators should have heeded Paul's advice in 2 Timothy 1:13 to have a pattern of sound words.
More important than which version to study is the vital need of every believer to read God's Word in whatever version is available to them. Why? Because it
Remember Paul's words in 2 Timothy 2:15 -
ENGLISH KINGS AND ENGLISH BIBLES
An Act of Parliament was passed in 1543, during the reign of King Henry VIII, entitled the Act for the Advancement of True Religion. It restricted the reading of the Bible to clerics, noblemen, the gentry and rich merchants. Even women of the gentry and nobility were only allowed to read the Bible in private. Everyone else was forbidden to read it.
The reason for the Act was because "malicious minds have intended to subvert the true exposition of Scripture." The advancement of true religion was to be accomplished by abolishing the reading of God's Word!
But all that changed 68 years later, in 1611, with the publication of the Authorized or King James Version. Or did it?
The title page of the King James Bible shows that it was appointed to be read in churches by His Majesty's special command. No other version was allowed. The title page also tells us it was, "with the former translations diligently compared and revised." So it is clear that it is not a completely new translation. It followed closely the 'Bishop's Bible', which revised the completed 'Geneva Bible' of 1560.
Some early versions were made from unreliable texts or from Latin translations. Any faults in previous versions may well be perpetuated in the new one. Evidently this was the case because 14 minor revisions were made in the first three years. Important changes were made in the KJV in 1616, 1629, 1636, 1638, 1639, 1669, 1701, 1762 and 1769.
Nevertheless, the King James Version has greatly influenced the English speaking world and has acquired an aura of endearment and respect.
We give thanks to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ that 400 years ago, the Authorized Version brought God's Word to English speaking peoples.
From its inception, however, it was a controversial version as is made clear in the original preface entitled, 'The Translators to the Reader'. It was intended to be used by both Anglicans and Puritans and compromises had to be made to avoid theological bias.
The motive of the KJV translators was nevertheless,
The version made beautiful reading but the real test should be, "Is it what God intends to convey to His creation?" The truth should not be slanted to satisfy political motives or the doctrines or traditions of men. Sincere people will uphold God's pure Word - it sets us free from superstition and error.
The Reformation was a milestone in the understanding of God's revelation, but the real breakthrough came when Bible students obeyed two Scriptural imperatives:
- Correctly cutting the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15) and
- Have a pattern of sound words (2 Timothy 1:13).
The weakness of some versions is that the same original word is translated in many different ways. One example in the KJV is the Greek word aioon - an age or better, eon. The KJV translates this as: ages, course, world, eternal, forever, never, ever, forevermore, and while the world stands. For more details of this clear inconsistency, and its effect on understanding God's purpose, please ask for our free literature on the eons.
No one could accuse the KJV translators of "intending to subvert the true exposition of Scripture." But that is the effect it had by not being consistent in translation. They deliberately,
This is a far greater weakness of the version than the now antiquated words used in 1611.
Since 1611, many thousands of Greek texts have been discovered, which have led to a better understanding of the meaning of words. The KJV translators only had six Greek manuscripts available. The Hebrew Scriptures had been much more carefully copied and monitored by Jewish scholars.
The original Scriptures were concordant; the problem only arises in translations. Literal translations may not be so easy to read, but they do lead to uncovering revealed truth.
The Concordant Version is a completely new translation, not a revision. We recommend the Concordant Version because the method used avoids to a large extent colouring God's Word with the opinions and traditions of the translators. Ask for free literature on the Concordant method. God's message to us today is made clear in Paul's 'Prison Letters'. If you are unfamiliar with the Concordant Version, a good place to start is to read Paul's prison epistles. Why not ask for your free copy today? It could be your act for the advancement of Truth!
THE LAST ENEMY
Hamlet, according to William Shakespeare, posed an age-old conundrum, "To die, to sleep. To sleep; perchance to dream, ay there's the rub, for in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil" (Act 3, Scene 1).
Many and varied have been the ideas of religionists and philosophers over the centuries about the death state. Do the dead dream? Do they live to continue a life in another world, so that they can watch over their loved ones?
Perhaps Shakespeare has an excuse. The Authorized or King James Version was published a decade after "Hamlet" was first performed. In Ecclesiastes 9:10 he would have read,
Ecclesiastes 12:7 tells us what happens at death,
That is crystal clear - the dead are not alive. But did Lazarus dream during his four days in the tomb? After all, Christ told His disciples, "Our friend Lazarus sleepeth, but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep" (John 11:11). The disciples were confused; they knew he was dead. Verse 13 explains, "Howbeit Jesus spake of his death."
Sleep in the Scriptures is used four times literally, but fourteen times figuratively. "All flesh is as grass" is a figure of speech. Grass is green but not all flesh is green. Flesh is only like grass in that it is transient. Death is like sleep in one respect - it is normally unbroken oblivion until awakening. But death is not life, either literally or figuratively.
When the believer dies does he immediately receive everlasting life? Is "Absent from the body, Present with the Lord" true? That is not what Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 5:8. What he did write was:
The context is about resurrection. Paul did not long to die (verse 4 - "unclothed") but to be "clothed" with a resurrection body.
Paul told the Philippians in Philippians 1:21 that "to die is gain". Did he write that because he was suffering in prison? No, he was deeply concerned about the furtherance of the Gospel. While he was alive and imprisoned, the brethren were "much more bold to speak the Word without fear". If his bonds resulted in the spread of the evangel, his death might have the same effect. In either case, Christ will be magnified.
There is no difference in the death of the believer or the unbeliever. The great difference is in resurrection.
The believer in this administration waits for a change (1 Corinthians 15:51-53):
The believers' resurrection is to life. The unbelievers' resurrection is to judgement.
They will be cast into the lake of fire - the second death.(Revelation 20:5):
It could not be clearer; they do not live again until a thousand years are past. They are dead, then live again. They can only be raised to life if they were really dead before.
God's just demands will have been met. But if these billions who die instantly in a literal lake of fire are not then raised to life, Satan has won. He has succeeded in separating God from His creatures.
The Book of Revelation does not tell the full story. We need to turn to Paul's letters. He explains in 1 Corinthians 15:22 that just as in Adam ALL die, so in Christ ALL will be made alive. No one denies that it is given for ALL men once to die. Why should it be considered so strange that those same ALL should live again?
They too will need a "new tabernacle", a new body to live for ever.
The nightmare scenario of billions of unbelievers (including babies and those who had no opportunity to even hear the evangel) being tortured for all eternity is alien to the concept of a loving God.
Those who are roused from the second death will know they deserved death but will rejoice that God is a merciful loving God.
Eventually, after everyone has "shuffled off this mortal coil", the last enemy, death, will have been destroyed. That will not be a dream, it will be reality. God will be ALL in ALL and will receive all the glory.
IS THERE A FUTURE FOR ANIMAL SACRIFICES?
Animal sacrifices are described throughout God's Word. To the modern Western mind it is an alien subject - sacrificing an innocent animal seems so barbaric and cruel.
This subject may seem to be just an academic exercise, because since AD 70 (except for brief periods), no animals have been sacrificed at the temple in Jerusalem.
Many sincere believers are thankful that since Christ's sacrifice at Golgotha, they are not necessary now and will not be necessary in the future.
But is that assumption that there will be no sacrifices in the future correct?
To answer that, we need to understand the purpose of animal sacrifices.
These sacrifices could do nothing to take away sin. They were symbolic, and a shadow of the good things which are impending as is made clear in Hebrews chapter 10.
Verses 1-2
Even in previous dispensations, the ineffectiveness of sacrifices was known:
Psalm 51:16-17:
Mark 12: 33 :
So what was the purpose of animal sacrifices?
Continue in Hebrews 10. Verses 3-4:
(This passage is not saying that sacrifices have no future, just that they do not take away sin.)
Did the sacrifices appease God and take away the punishment of sins? No, on both counts, because the problem of sin is not resolved by taking away the punishment. The sin remains. We are not sinners because we sin. We sin because we are sinners. We sin because we are dying. Acts of sin are caused by our dying sinful flesh. Taking away the punishment does not prevent us dying.
I repeat, sacrifices were a reminder to humanity of sin, of our condition in Adam. They point to Christ, a Lamb without blemish who would take away the sin of the world. So does that mean that in the Millennium when Christ Himself is King reigning from Jerusalem, that animal sacrifices will be unnecessary?
The prophet Ezekiel in chapters 40-48 records in great detail a temple which will exist in the future. Chapter 40:38-43 includes sacrificial offerings. Some have attempted to "spiritualize" it away by applying it to the Church.
Most commentators agree that this temple is yet future. The only disagreement is whether it is to be taken literally or not. Ezekiel's detailed vision of the first temple (as described in chapters 7-12) literally came true. At that time he was in Babylon and saw in vision the temple in Jerusalem.
Ezekiel records in great detail (in chapters 40-48) the Millennial temple, also in vision. There is no indication that one should be taken literally and the other figuratively.
If it is literal, then this poses a problem for those who believe that animal sacrifices have no place in the future of Israel. But when we rightly divide God's Word, the answer is clear.
Today is the dispensation of grace. Believers, those who form part of the Body of Christ, are God's temple. We are to be living sacrifices. Our future lies in the heavenlies. Not so those saints who will reign with Christ on earth during the Thousand Years. At that time, gentiles will be born who will have sinful flesh. They will not all become believers.
Just because Christ will be reigning over the earth, does not mean that sin will be eradicated. The inhabitants, too, will need to be reminded of the seriousness of sin, just as those in Ancient Israel.
Today, many believers "take the bread and the wine" as a memorial of Christ's sacrifice. But this is only "until He comes" (1 Corinthians 11:26).
In that future period, it will still be necessary to have a memorial of Christ's sacrifice, once again in the temple in Jerusalem. The Millennium is often pictured as a time of unprecedented prosperity and well being. Which it will be, especially as Satan will be bound for the Thousand Years. But sin will not have been completely eradicated. This is shown by the fact that Satan will be able to deceive millions of people and lead them in a great rebellion at the end of the Thousand Years. (Revelation 20:7-9). The Lord will "be shepherding them [the unbelievers] with an iron club". During the Millennium, people will be forced to attend the Festival of Booths, or else rain will be withheld. (Zechariah 14:17-19).
Thankfully, sin and sacrifices are temporary. Eventually a temple and animal sacrifices will not be necessary. When the former heaven and the former earth are replaced by a new heaven and a new earth, there will be no temple, because God Himself will be there. There will be no priests - mediators between man and God - because Christ will be there.
Revelation 21:22:
All creation will rejoice and praise God's holy name when God is ALL IN ALL!