|
Post by jaybee on Jun 26, 2015 13:57:06 GMT -8
Relating back to 1Th 5:6-8, does 1Th 5:10 tell us that even the spiritually unresponsive (asleep) will be saved?
1 Thessalonians 5:6-10New International Version (NIV)
6 So then, let us not be like others, who are asleep, but let us be awake and sober. 7 For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk, get drunk at night. 8 But since we belong to the day, let us be sober, putting on faith and love as a breastplate, and the hope of salvation as a helmet. 9 For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ. 10 He died for us so that, whether we are awake or asleep, we may live together with him.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jun 26, 2015 23:09:38 GMT -8
Can't believe I never noticed that- and we just taught through 1 thess! It does seem strange that Paul would mix his metaphors so badly if he wasn't intending to make a universalist kind of statement
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jun 26, 2015 23:11:05 GMT -8
I just caught it today as I am writing a paper on the letter. I had never caught it before either, so don't feel too bad.
|
|
|
Post by asaph on Jun 27, 2015 4:02:42 GMT -8
I would say chapter 4 answers your question:
1Th 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 1Th 4:14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 1Th 4:15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 1Th 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 1Th 4:18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.
The sleep in 5:10 is reference to the sleep in chapter 4, which is physical death.
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jun 27, 2015 11:27:21 GMT -8
asaph
That's what I had always thought.
But Paul shifts his thoughts and changes his use for sleep in the first verses of chapter 5, and equates it to spiritual alertness vs inattentiveness.
So by the time you get to 1Th 5:10, the context for the word sleep relates back to 5:6-8, not further back to chapter 4.
|
|
|
Post by asaph on Jun 27, 2015 12:26:11 GMT -8
I disagree, based on the context of the letter itself, within itself, which was not broken down into chapters and verses in the original, as you know.
The context from 4:13 onward is the second coming and end of the world and preparation for that event. We have absolutely no references to any kind of universalism in any of Paul's other writings. Quite the contrary. Claiming it is stated in 1 Thes 5 because of a chapter division added later would be doing injustice to Paul's theology, in general, and, I believe, the context of the entire letter itself, especially joined with his second letter.
5:10 is just an echo of 4:17. Whether alive or dead at Christ's return we shall all be together with Him forever, so maintain hope and be comforted.
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jun 27, 2015 12:57:41 GMT -8
Even without chapters, wouldn't the flow of Paul in 1 Thessalonians be:
sleeping dead, sleeping spiritually, sleeping in 5:10?
So, contextually, the last reference of sleeping before 5:10 relates to spiritual sleep?
I don't need chapter breaks to make the letter flow that way. Paul makes the moves himself.
How do you relate sleeping in 5:10 back to chapter 4 and jump over Paul's use of sleeping in 5:6-8?
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jun 27, 2015 13:03:59 GMT -8
Additionally, if a full preterist as myself sees 1Th as speaking about the 70 AD parousia rather than the literal end of the world, then the sleeping in 5:10 could be spiritual and still not be universalist relating to the final judgment.
Christ comes in 70 AD to bring life to both the spiritually alert and asleep.
In that sense, sleep in 5:10 can fit contextually and still not be about universalism related to the final judgment.
|
|
|
Post by asaph on Jun 27, 2015 15:49:54 GMT -8
I do not deny Paul's use of sleep to state spiritual lethargy in 5:6,7. I am not a Preterist, and do not see the destruction of Jerusalem being the subject matter. Where would you make that distinction between 4 and 5 when the resurrection obviously points to the second coming in 4, and then Paul moves into the spiritual conditions which bring about people's destruction in 5, then returns to being with Christ forever, whether alive or dead at Christ's return, 10,11, equating with 17 and 18 in chapter 4. He returns to that to stay focused on the original problems facing those who had lost hope in a resurrection.
The spiritual fact is, whether you were spiritually awake or asleep at the destruction of Jerusalem was no guarantee you would be with Christ from then on. If you were spiritually awake you already were spiritually with Christ. If you were asleep what would the destruction of Jerusalem do to wake anyone up, especially seeing the 66 siege served as the warning they saw from Christ and fled to Pella when Gallus was called away to another conflict and the siege ended. So, 70 ad had nothing to do with Christians, in reality. It just served as a warning to show believers what would transpire before the end of the world; questions asked of Christ in Matt 24, etc. What will be the sign of Christ's coming and the end of the world? He used the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple as a pattern of what would happen before He returned and the end of the world. Did He return at the destruction of the city? Did the world end? Are we with Christ in heaven?
I just do not get the attraction of Preterism.
Alcazar sure knew what he was doing.
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jun 27, 2015 21:43:33 GMT -8
Maybe one day I will take the time to write out the entirety of my belief as it relates to full preterism.
In the meantime, I do not suppose to persuade you differently than you have your mind made up.
Food for thought perhaps: Was Paul mistaken when he talked of himself and his direct readers as the ones who would experience the return of Christ?
It seems a grave error for one who claims in Galatians to have personally been taught by Christ.
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jun 27, 2015 21:49:24 GMT -8
Oh, and the appeal of preterism just might be the understanding that the new creation is now, the new Jerusalem is here, and its gates are open to all who wish to come in.
Much more exciting in my opinion than believing we are still waiting 2000 years later for events claimed to be imminent by the NT authors.
To live in a belief that we are in the new age now is a great feeling and understanding.
|
|
|
Post by asaph on Jun 28, 2015 12:04:43 GMT -8
The passing of 2 millennia is the fault of the church, not Christ. Christ could have come ere this if His people could maintain the program and keep their act together. Has not happened. Losing of the first love. Apostasy. Laodicean condition now. I am quite certain Paul will be shocked to find out 2000 years passed by before Christ raised the dead.
If you believe ... well, where is the city? The saints enter in. You have entered in? Which gate, pray tell? You have seen the Father? The sea of glass? Met the 24 elders? Met your guardian angel? Asked all your questions and received answers whereby you can judge angels?
The church militant is yet the church triumphant, simply because Christ is coming for a clean church, without spot or wrinkle, and the body is yet dirty, full of wrinkles, corrupted by the world. The final shaking and sifting will take care of that. But, it will not come until the former rain has done its work to prepare for the latter rain.
Indeed, no, based on what I know of Preterism's origins I see no useful light in it.
Was Paul mistaken? No, and Yes. Conditions and circumstances changed things, as happened all throughout biblical history, and still today.
|
|
|
Post by Josh on Jun 28, 2015 17:29:14 GMT -8
Relating back to 1 Thess 5:10, asaph, I thought you were a Christian universalist? No? Or are you an annihilationist, I forget?
You say Paul nowhere else teaches universalism, but there are several passages in Paul that could be reasonably interpreted that way. Here are two for consideration. 1 Timothy 4:10
That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.
1 Cor. 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
|
|
|
Post by asaph on Jun 29, 2015 6:47:54 GMT -8
Relating back to 1 Thess 5:10, asaph, I thought you were a Christian universalist? No? Or are you an annihilationist, I forget?
You say Paul nowhere else teaches universalism, but there are several passages in Paul that could be reasonably interpreted that way. Here are two for consideration. 1 Timothy 4:10
That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.
1 Cor. 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
I am neither, either by doctrinal position (universalist), or term for positions (annihilationist). 1 Tim. 4:10 - God obviously IS the Savior of all people, all humanity. Christ died for everybody. It is especially for those that believe because they act on the invitation and gift. Those who do not cannot claim its blessings of eternal life. "Lord, Lord, didn't we do all these things in your name?" "Depart from me, you did not do the will of my Father." If all professed believers are not going through the gates, certainly the non-believing open sinner isn't. 1 Cor. 15:22 - Indeed, all WILL be made alive, physically, first or second resurrection. But, Paul's subject there is the resurrection unto eternal life, which you know. So, I do not believe those passages can "reasonably" be interpreted to prop up universalism. Are you just playing devil's advocate here?
|
|
|
Post by jaybee on Jun 29, 2015 8:51:04 GMT -8
The passing of 2 millennia is the fault of the church, not Christ. Christ could have come ere this if His people could maintain the program and keep their act together. Has not happened. Losing of the first love. Apostasy. Laodicean condition now. I am quite certain Paul will be shocked to find out 2000 years passed by before Christ raised the dead. I can give a better treatment to your post later, but initially I would wonder two things: 1. If we (the church) are "behind schedule" then what does that mean for your existence? Perhaps if the church did things on time, everything would have been wrapped up early, and you would not exist. So is your existence an unplanned event by God because the church failed? 2. What is your view of inspired scripture? Did Paul write mistaken words in the mistaken belief of an imminent return of Christ? Or did the Holy Spirit inspire Paul to write correctly of an imminent return of Christ?
|
|
|
Post by asaph on Jul 1, 2015 4:32:07 GMT -8
I can give a better treatment to your post later, but initially I would wonder two things:
1. If we (the church) are "behind schedule" then what does that mean for your existence? Perhaps if the church did things on time, everything would have been wrapped up early, and you would not exist. So is your existence an unplanned event by God because the church failed? *******I would not have any comfort at all attempting to explain or identify God's plans, one way or the other. Nothing catches Him by surprise. His actions know no hastening or delay. Was it God's plan for Lucifer to fall? For a third of the angels to follow the rebellion? For Adam and Eve to fall? For anyone in the last 6000 years of human existence to sin? The difference between Plan A and Plan B exists in the mind of God and humans should beware to encroach upon it. God's foreknowledge keeps us from being destroyed by Satan. I am thankful for that, and can live in that existence. The fact is Jesus said He was coming quickly. THAT is what the church had as a promise 2000 years ago. Who would call 2000 years quick? What happened? Choice. 2000 years of choices not in harmony with God's perfect will but, within the scope of His foreknowledge to work around, which God portrayed in symbolic language in prophecy.
Jer 18:7 At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; Jer 18:8 If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. Jer 18:9 And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; Jer 18:10 If it do evil in my sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.
The judgments and promises of God are conditional.
2. What is your view of inspired scripture? Did Paul write mistaken words in the mistaken belief of an imminent return of Christ? Or did the Holy Spirit inspire Paul to write correctly of an imminent return of Christ? *******The latter is the truth. The truth has been subject to men's choices since the beginning of time and Plan B goes into effect. One might look at the history of this world and realize an entire alphabet of plans has been unleashed because of man's constant poor choices. God offers two ways - His or ours, with blessings or curses attached to each. Paul wrote the truth. Man has not followed it with enough consistent passion to finish the work he's been given to do. Man's choice. One day, hopefully very soon, a revival of apostolic purity will kindle and not go dim and the witness of the kingdom will go to all the world and the end will finally come and Christ will return. I hope I am alive to see it. If not, the resurrection works just fine for me.
|
|