Should consideration always make room for the ministry of visiting brothers?

Should consideration always make room for the ministry of visiting brothers?

No. If a man doesn’t occasionally give profitable ministry in his home assembly, his distance from home will not transform him or his ministry. Being a visitor doesn’t give a man the right to minister. On the other hand, Christian courtesy would rarely fail to consider a visitor. The principle in 1 Corinthians 14:32" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 14:32 seems to indicate this. The Spirit of God would not cause a man to act without considering others.

Visiting another assembly, especially a smaller company, is more than a convenience for breaking bread, however. It is an opportunity to give the believers some spiritual help with warm and uplifting ministry. They are likely tired of hearing themselves and will greatly appreciate the lift.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

How do various Bible versions translate the words Sheol and Hades?

The meaning of SHEOL and HADES

In the King James Version, the Hebrew word SHEOL is usually translated as hell. The corresponding Greek word HADES is also translated as hell. Sheol means “the place of departed spirits” and hades means the “place of the dead”. The word “hell” conjures images of darkness, flames, torment and agony. However, the departed spirits of the Old Testament believers also went to sheol/hades, but not to suffer torments.

According to Vines Dictionary…

Hades is the region of departed spirits of the lost". This includes the blessed dead in periods preceding the ascension of Christ. It corresponds to "Sheol" in the Old Testament. In the Authorized King James Version it has been unhappily rendered "hell" (Psalms 16:10)" TARGET="_blank">Psalms 16:10) or "the grave," (Genesis 37:35)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 37:35) or "the pit" (Numbers 16:30-33)." TARGET="_blank">Numbers 16:30-33). In the New Testament the Revised Version always used the rendering "hades". In the Old Testament, they have not been uniform in the translation. For example in Isaiah 14:15" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 14:15 it is translated "hell" with a note in the margin that says "Sheol". Usually they have "Sheol" in the text and "the grave" in the margin. Sheol never denotes the grave, nor is the permanent region of the lost.

Translation Challenge

Most Bible translators avoid using “hell” to translate the words sheol and hades. Instead they simply transcribe the words from the original Hebrew (sheol) or Greek (hades) such as the English Standard Version (ESV). Other translations that use “sheol” instead of hell include the New American Standard Bible (NASB), The New King James Version (NKJV), Darby, and Young’s Literal Translation. The NIV and other loose translations and paraphrases use a phrase such as “the realm of the dead”.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Was Jesus in Hell between his death and resurrection?

Did Christ go to hell after dying on the cross? Did Christ suffer for sins in hell? Was he there to open the gates of hell to liberate those lost in their sins? Is hell the same as the Lake of Fire?

The short answer:

No. Jesus did not go to suffer in the flames of Hell. After dying on the cross, Christ went to the place of departed spirits. That is, he went to SHEOL (the Hebrew word) or HADES (the Greek word). He did not go to suffer in the flames of hell or go to Lake of Fire as some mistakenly believe.

The full answer:

To give a full answer to these questions one must study several scriptures and the meaning of the word SHEOL translated HELL in some versions of the Bible.

What scirptures say that Christ was in sheol/hades?

Starting with Psalm 16:10," TARGET="_blank">Psalm 16:10, which is quoted in the New Testament in Acts 2" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2 in reference to Christ and his resurrection, we see the two words used in reference to Christ and his resurrection.

Psalms 16:10-11" TARGET="_blank">Psalms 16:10-11 For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption. (11) You make known to me the path of life; in your presence there is fullness of joy; at your right hand are pleasures forevermore. (ESV)

Here is the same verse from Psalm 16" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 16 in the King James Version. Notice that hell is used in place of sheol.

Psalms 16:10-11" TARGET="_blank">Psalms 16:10-11 For thou wilt not leave my soul in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. (11) Thou wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore. (KJV)

Peter is giving his great Day of Pentecost speech in Acts 2" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2 when he quotes from Psalm 16." TARGET="_blank">Psalm 16. The prophecy of Christ’s resurrection was written many years before by King David.

Acts 2:22-33" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2:22-33 "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know-- (23) this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. (24) God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it. (25) For David says concerning him, "'I saw the Lord always before me, for he is at my right hand that I may not be shaken; (26) therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced; my flesh also will dwell in hope. (27) For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption. (28) You have made known to me the paths of life; you will make me full of gladness with your presence.' (29) "Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. (30) Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne, (31) he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. (32) This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses. (33) Being therefore exalted at the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he has poured out this that you yourselves are seeing and hearing. (ESV)

In the KJV the verse is written with the word hell in place of hades.

Acts 2:27" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2:27 Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. (KJV)
Act 2:31" TARGET="_blank">Act 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. (KJV)

The meaning of SHEOL and HADES

In the King James Version, the Hebrew word SHEOL is usually translated as hell. The corresponding Greek word HADES is also translated as hell. Sheol means “the place of departed spirits” and hades means the “place of the dead”. The word “hell” conjures images of darkness, flames, torment and agony. However, the departed spirits of the Old Testament believers also went to sheol/hades, but not to suffer torments.

According to Vines Dictionary…

Hades is the region of departed spirits of the lost". This includes the blessed dead in periods preceding the ascension of Christ. It corresponds to "Sheol" in the Old Testament. In the Authorized King James Version it has been unhappily rendered "hell" (Psalms 16:10)" TARGET="_blank">Psalms 16:10) or "the grave," (Genesis 37:35)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 37:35) or "the pit" (Numbers 16:30-33)." TARGET="_blank">Numbers 16:30-33). In the New Testament the Revised Version always used the rendering "hades". In the Old Testament, they have not been uniform in the translation. For example in Isaiah 14:15" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 14:15 it is translated "hell" with a note in the margin that says "Sheol". Usually they have "Sheol" in the text and "the grave" in the margin. Sheol never denotes the grave, nor is the permanent region of the lost.

Translation Challenge

Most Bible translators avoid using “hell” to translate the words sheol and hades. Instead they simply transcribe the words from the original Hebrew (sheol) or Greek (hades) as seen above in the examples from the English Standard Version (ESV). Other translations that use “sheol” instead of hell include the New American Standard Bible (NASB), The New King James Version (NKJV), Darby, and Young’s Literal Translation. The NIV and other loose translations and paraphrases use a phrase such as “the realm of the dead”. So to say that Christ went to hell means that he went to a place where spirits have no bodies.

Hades – one place with two conditions

There is a wider meaning to sheol and hades than what the word hell – eternal torments - brings to mind. Sheol/hades is a place, or perhaps better stated a condition, with two very distinct environments. The lost suffer in Hades while the saved enjoy rest there. For example, in Luke 16:19-31," TARGET="_blank">Luke 16:19-31, the rich man opened his eyes in Hades being in flames of torments. Lazarus died as well and was in Hades as well, but in a completely different condition. Lazarus was “far off” at Abraham’s side. There was “a great chasm” separating Lazarus from the Rich Man which was impossible to cross which indicates that there are two separate places to which people went. However both are in “the place of departed spirits” – that is SHEOL or HADES. When the Lord was on the cross, he promised the repentant thief that “today you will be with me in paradise”. This refers to the place of departed spirits of the saved. The thief went to the same place as Lazarus – “to Abraham’s side.” It is presumed that the other non-repentant thief went to hades the same day, but to the place of torments.

Where did Jesus suffer for sins – while on the cross or did he suffer in hell?

The fact that the KJV bible states that Jesus went to “hell” leads some to the conclusion that Christ he went to hell to suffer for our sins. As seen in the preceding paragraphs, the word hell (sheol/hades) does not necessarily indicate a place of suffering, only the place of departed spirits.

The idea of Christ suffering while his body lay in the tomb is contrary to other scriptures that teach he suffered for our sins on the cross. “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree” (1 Peter 2:24)" TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 2:24) “once for all” (Hebrews 10:10)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 10:10). He canceled “the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.” (Colossians 2:14)." TARGET="_blank">Colossians 2:14). The cross is “the power of God” (1 Corinthians 1:18)" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 1:18) to those of us who are saved.

The cross is the lowest point that Christ’s sufferings took him.

Philippians 2:8-9" TARGET="_blank">Philippians 2:8-9 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. (9) Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name,

Hebrews 12:2" TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 12:2 looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.

The work of salvation was completely finished when Christ died. “When Jesus had received the sour wine, he said, "It is finished," and he bowed his head and gave up his spirit.” (John 19:30)." TARGET="_blank">John 19:30). His suffering in our place was completed. His soul/spirit went to the paradise side of hades. Jesus did not go to the torments of hell. Jesus’ suffering ended the moment He died. The payment for sin was paid. He then awaited the resurrection of His body and His return to glory in His ascension.

Did Jesus go to hell? No. He did not suffer in the flames of torments.
Did Jesus go to sheol/hades? Yes. He went to the place of departed spirits.

Other questions that are related to this are:

“Did Christ take people from Hades to Heaven when he rose from the dead?” Ephesians 4:8-10" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 4:8-10 talks about Christ “leading a host of captives” when he ascended.

“Did Christ go talk to spirits in Hades to declare his victory over Satan and death?” 1 Peter 3:18-20" TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 3:18-20 has many interesting interpretations to consider on this question.

Some of the questions below will help you see the meaning in these statements.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Can social discipline be lifted for a person who has been put away from the assembly?

Can social discipline be lifted for a person who has been put away from the assembly?

Social discipline is intended to preserve other believers from doing what the offender has done. When the excommunicated person changes his behavior., social contact with the other assembly believers no longer poses any threat to their behavior. For example, when a couple put away for fornication marries, they no longer endanger the behavior of others. On occasion the excommunicated individual chooses to remove himself from contact with believers, perhaps going back into the world. In that case, 1 Corinthians 5:9," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5:9, 10 applies. He is no longer in the class of those from whom believers must withdraw.

In Matthew 18:18," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 18:18, the Lord teaches that, because the Lord is in the midst (verse 20), the assembly must carry out Gods mind on earth. Through Gods Word, the decision of God in heaven and the assembly on earth are the to the same. The assembly imposes discipline ("whatsoever ye shall bind") and exempts from or lift discipline ("/whatsoever ye shall loose") in concert with heaven. The social discipline in 2 Thessalonians 3" TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 3 was temporary until the behavior changed. Therefore, the Lord intends the social discipline in both 2 Thessalonians 3" TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 3 and 1 Corinthians 5" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5 to be lifted at the appropriate time.

The assembly applied the Word of God, binding the discipline. The assembly is now to apply the Word of God in lifting or loosing the discipline, thus carrying out the Lords mind on earth. Just as the discipline is not an act of the overseers, but of the assembly, and has been handled in the presence of all the assembly, so lifting the discipline should be handled in the same way.

How will the assembly know when social discipline should be lifted?

This involves a subjective judgment by the overseers in guiding the assembly. As shepherds they know the spiritual state of the disciplined person and have an ongoing interest in bringing that individual back to the Lord and eventually to the assembly. Even if there is no spiritual recovery, shepherds, who see the wanderers, will know that the time comes that he wondering offender no longer endangers other believers with this behavior.

Social discipline is not intended to heap shame on a person for all the years of his life, but to cause him to be ashamed that his sin has had such serious results and has endangered others. When his behavior no longer endangers others, it is time to end the shame and lift the social discipline.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Are the ten virgins a picture of backsliders?

Are the ten virgins a picture of backsliders and of Christians who are waiting for the wedding? (Matthew 25:1-13)" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 25:1-13)

To draw teaching about a partial Rapture from this parable is ill-considered, because first the context shows the parable doesn’t deal with the Rapture. Second, the descriptions of "wise" and "foolish" in this last discourse in Matthew remind us of the same contrast at the end of the Lord’s first discourse (chapters 5-7). There the foolish do not build on His sayings and their building suffers a great fall. They are not believers. Third, should anyone relate the waking (wise) and sleeping (foolish) virgins to the two states, "whether we wake or sleep" (1 Thessalonians 5:10)," TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 5:10), the context in that passage will dispel the idea of a partial Rapture. Paul does describe Christians who are watching for the Lord’s coming and Christians whose behavior is like the unbelievers of the world (sleeping in the night, v 7), but he states the reason both will be saved by the Rapture from the coming wrath (during the 7-year period) is the result of the death of Christ and not of our spiritual condition.

Teaching of a partial Rapture is not in the Parable of the Ten Virgins or anywhere else in Scripture.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

How is the human soul different from his spirit?

IS MAN A TRIPARTITE BEING?
Is man dual or tripartite in nature? If the latter, how are spirit and soul distinguished?

Certainly tripartite, as 1 Thessalonians 5:23" TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 5:23 proves—”I pray God your whole Spirit and Soul and Body be preserved’ blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” An attempt was made by the late Dr. Bullinger to shew that man is dual:—the combination of Spirit and Body forming the Soul—but it was clearly untenable, for if that were the case, the order of the words would be Spirit and Body, even the Soul; and at death the personality would be dissolved, a doctrine even worse than the so-called “sleep of the soul.” The Spirit and the Soul represent the spiritual side of man, which is sometimes called by one name, sometimes by the other.

They are distinct, but only divisible in a metaphorical sense by the Word of God “piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit” (Hebrews 4:12)," TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 4:12), that is, they are never viewed as separated one from the other. The Spirit is the higher part; with it, man understands (1 Corinthians 2:11), and is in touch with the unseen :—“God is Spirit: and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth” (John 4:24)." TARGET="_blank">John 4:24). The Soul is the other side of man’s spiritual being, and links it with the body—it desires, loves, sorrows, etc. “My soul is cast down within me” (Psalm 42:6;" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 42:6; see also 1 Samuel 18:1;" TARGET="_blank">1 Samuel 18:1; Numbers 21: 4;" TARGET="_blank">Numbers 21: 4; 2 Samuel 5:8)." TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 5:8).

The personality is sometimes connected with the soul (e.g., “few, that is, eight souls* were saved by water”), or with the body. When Stephen fell asleep, we read that “devout men carried him (i.e., his body) to the burial” (Acts 8:2)," TARGET="_blank">Acts 8:2), but Stephen in a higher sense was not in the graveyard, but with Him to Whom he had just committed his spirit.”

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

What events tell us that the Lord's coming is imminent?

What events tell us that the Lord's coming is imminent?

The proof that the Lord is coming soon is that "Jesus died and rose again" (1 Thes 4:14)." TARGET="_blank">1 Thes 4:14). Although future events cast their shadows before them, we should never look for events or dates, but for the Lord Himself. Paul twice included himself among the living at the rapture (1 Corinthains 15:; 1 Thessalonians 4" TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 4:). He taught that it is an any moment event. This truth has had sanctifying and satisfying power in the lives of first century and present century saints. Paul and all these believers were wrong if it was necessary to wait for 2000 AD to begin the millennium. Peter taught that God is beyond time, not that there is a 2000 year period between the advents (2 Pet 3:8)." TARGET="_blank">2 Pet 3:8). The best of chronologies makes 1996 the 2000th year since the birth of Christ.

Hosea 6:2" TARGET="_blank">Hosea 6:2 is a false profession of repentance by Ephraim (v 4), not two days (2000 years) before the millennial age which is the third day (1000 yrs).

In spite of Scripture's strong warnings, men still set dates. The Lord could come at any moment and this has been true ever since He went back into Heaven. "Yet a little while, how short, The Coming One will come"

N. Crawford

Other pages in this section

About this site

Were there other people born to Adam and Eve who never sinned?

Were there other people born to Adam and Eve who never sinned?

No.

Adam and Eve had their first child, Cain, after being expelled from the Garden of Eden. The promise to Eve in Genesis 3:15" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 3:15 indicates that the Seed (offspring) of the woman was yet to come and give a mortal wound Satan, the serpent.

Genesis 3:15" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 3:15 I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and her offspring; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel."

Eve named her firstborn son Cain whose name means "acquisition" saying "I have gotten a man with the help of the LORD." Eve may have thought that she had just given birth to the Promised Seed that would lead to the downfall of Satan the redemption of mankind. Cain was obviously not the chosen line of descent that would lead to the Messiah. That honor would go to Seth, the third-born child.
Genesis 4:1-10" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 4:1-10 gives us the story of the birth of both Cain and Abel and the following argument between God and Cain about the nature of their sacrifices. Cain brought a bloodless sacrifice from the fruit of the ground and was rejected. Abel brought the lamb which was received, establishing for us the model of the shedding of blood for forgiveness (see Hebrews 11:4)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 11:4).

Although the details are not give for how long Adam and Eve were in the garden, Genesis 4:3" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 4:3 is the first time that the Bible mentions a significant passing of time.

Genesis 4:3" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 4:3 In the course of time Cain brought to the LORD an offering of the fruit of the ground.

There must have been other children born to Eve, notably girls, but their names are not mentioned in the Scriptures. Cain and Seth both took wives in marriage, presumably their sisters.

Shad Sluiter

Other pages in this section

About this site

Is allowing 5 to 15 minutes For ministry after the Breaking of Bread merely tradition?

Is allowing 5 to 15 minutes For ministry after the Breaking of Bread merely tradition?

No, expecting ministry at the Breaking of Bread is scriptural. In Acts 20:7," TARGET="_blank">Acts 20:7, Paul ministered the Word in conjunction with the Breaking of Bread. The gathering described in 1 Corinthians 14" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 14 included both the Breaking of Bread (compare verse 16 with 10:16) and ministry "to edification, and exhortation, and comfort" (vv. 3, 24, 26). Timothy was to give attention to the public reading of Scripture (1 Timothy 4:13)." TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 4:13). In the Thessalonians’ gatherings (1 Thessalonians 5:19" TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 5:19 - 21), the Spirit prompted men to speak from God. The believers were to value this, evaluate what was said (see 1 Corinthians 14:29)," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 14:29), and treasure what was profitable. We do not have prophets (1 Corinthians 13:9, 10)," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 13:9, 10), but we do have the Scriptures for our profit (2 Timothy 3:16;" TARGET="_blank">2 Timothy 3:16; 1 Corinthians 12:7)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 12:7). Believers should therefore expect to receive profit from the opening of the Word at every assembly meeting, including the Breaking of Bread.

Prior to partaking of the bread and cup, if the Scriptures are opened, they should contribute to remembering the Lord. An exposition of a passage would be as out of place here as various men reading miscellaneous passages such as psalms exhorting us to praise despite our troubles. Heart response to Christ should characterize this gathering; Spirit-guided ministry will promote this.

When the assembly has remembered the Lord, the fragrance of their worship will set the tone for any ministry to follow. The only weekly ministry some believers hear is at the Breaking of Bread. For that reason, special concern should be given to provide profitable ministry then. If just "5 to 15 minutes for ministry" has become the norm in places, this ought to be changed for the profit of all.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Shouls someone "break" the loaf before distributing it during the Lord's Supper?

BREAKING THE BREAD

Is it right to take the loaf, that which answers to the Body of our Lord and break it in two, and then hand it round the Assembly?

In Matthew 26:26;" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 26:26; Mark 14:22;" TARGET="_blank">Mark 14:22; Luke 22:19," TARGET="_blank">Luke 22:19, we read that the Lord took bread and gave thanks (or blessed) and brake and gave unto His disciples saying, “This is my body,” and Luke adds, “which is given (not broken) for you.” In 1 Corinthians 11:23, 24, the Lord Jesus is said to have followed the same order, with the words, “which is broken for you,” but this, R.V. changes simply (and with sufficient MS. authority) to, “which is for you.” Now, compare this with Luke 24: 30," TARGET="_blank">Luke 24: 30, where a simple meal was about to begin (for it can hardly be maintained that the two disciples had spread the table of remembrance that evening at Emmaus, in the condition in which they were of unbelief and ignorance of the true meaning of all that had taken place), and where we read that the Lord took bread and gave thanks, as he sat down to the meal, and then brake it. I do not, therefore, think we must put undue emphasis on the breaking of the bread even by the Lord, though far be it from us to affirm that any act of His was not significant. However, the brother who gives thanks in the Assembly for the bread or the cup, would shrink from any pretention to be taking the place that the Lord rightly took. His giving thanks is no official act, but only as representing the Assembly, and his breaking the bread is only for the convenience of distribution. The true breaking of bread is done by all, each one for him or herself, as we read in 1 Corinthians 10:26" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 10:26: “The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ”? What is important is that the giving of thanks should take place before the loaf is broken for distribution, for the loaf is one, and this must be maintained, for it not only represents the one holy Body of the Lord given for us, but His mystical Body, the oneness of which is thus witnessed to. “The bread which we break is it not the communion of the Body of Christ? seeing that there is one bread, we who are many are one body” (1 Corinthians 10:16-17," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 10:16-17, R.V., margin).

To pass a whole loaf around would be very inconvenient, and would necessitate its being divided in some way by the one who received it first, which would come to the same thing as that to which the questioner objects. The breaking of the bread by the saints is not a dividing of the Body of Christ, but a communion in it (“Him we all in common share”), a remembrance of Him in the act, and a proclamation of His death.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu