Apostolic Preaching on Judgment

[RICHinCHRIST]

I have a question (primarily for Steve Gregg, but please chime in even if you aren't Steve), since this is in reference to something which I have heard him teach.

Steve, I've heard you mention in the past that the apostles in the book of Acts did not preach about heaven and hell but rather about the kingdom of God and Jesus' Lordship and the need for repentance. I am wrestling, however, with a statement of Paul's in Acts 17.


Paul may have not preached on the specific nature of the afterlife, but he did mention Judgment Day at least. I tend to think that Luke is paraphrasing the topical nature of what Paul spoke about that day. I think it is probably likely that he spoke more information on this occasion than what is presented in the 10 verses that are recorded (which could take 30-40 seconds to read... surely he preached for longer than 30 seconds if there were many who ended up believing his words and becoming disciples.. perhaps he reasoned with them for an hour, or even longer?). If Paul mentioned the Judgment Day, would we be able to conclude that he did not mention the nature of that judgment like he did on other occasions (Romans 2:5-11, 16)? Would Paul have shied away from mentioning the punishment God would inflict on those who did not obey the gospel of God? After all, it would seem to me that many might respond to Paul's declaration for repentance by saying: "Why should we repent?" I'm sure Paul's answer would have been, "Because Jesus is in charge, He's the Lord"... but would he not also mention their impending doom because he was concerned for them?

[steve]

It is hard to extrapolate from what is recorded of Paul's message to the content which might have been omitted in the report. It is possible that his sermon was much longer, but we should hope that Luke's version is at least a faithful digest of what was included. The reference to "judgment" may only sound ominous to us because we have long associated it with hell in our minds. To say that God "will judge the world in righteousness" may be ominous for criminals, but is good news to those who do not see themselves as guilty of actionable crimes. Of course, we know that all have sinned, and that there is none righteous in the sight of God—but this fact might not have been a part of the Athenians' worldview, and Paul did not make mention of it.

Would to God that every injustice would be redressed by a magistrate who would always "judge in righteousness." In fact, this very feature of the judgment is seen as very desirable in scripture (Lev.19:15/ 1 Kings 8:32/ Psalm 7:8; 9:8/ Rev.19:11). Unless these Athenians were imbued with an Augustinian view of total depravity, they would not necessarily find this mention of the judgment as threatening. Nor do we have reason to think Paul meant for them to. Paul may have been intending to inspire admiration for a God who will right all wrongs—something that almost everybody desires to see happen. This might have been viewed as much as a promise as a threat. It is essentially a declaration of the kingdom of God—namely, that the world will someday be ruled and judged by the best of all possible ruler/judges—Jesus Christ.

Paul's mention of judgment, in Romans 2, does not make mention of eternal suffering, and essentially only reports such things as most philosophically-oriented people would consider intuitive: That bad people will be punished appropriately, and good people will be rewarded as we would all hope.

In other words, unless most of the Athenians had considered that they were in great danger from God's wrath (and Paul had not indicated that this was the case in his sermon), they might not think of God's "judging in righteousness" as a bad thing. If Paul went beyond this to explain more of the consequences that will come upon all who are lost, we do not know. However, nothing in Luke's digest of the sermon would give the impression that Paul's preaching went that direction.

[RICHinCHRIST]

Thanks, Steve. I agree that Paul may not have been speaking on the "nature" of the judgment (at least we have no reason to think he did), but perhaps his words are ambiguous enough to take either way. I understand what you're saying about the idea of "righting all wrongs" as being an expression of judgment; that's an interesting perspective considering the Athenian's own worldview (which I doubt was 'Reformed'!).

I was thinking we would have to interpret Paul's words in light of other passages in which he speaks on repentance and the judgment. That's why I mentioned Romans 2, because it seems from 2:4-16, Paul sheds light on both ideas of repentance and the day of judgment (both of which, he said, were part of "his gospel" Rom 2:16). When Paul mentions the "day which God has appointed to judge the world in righteousness" (Acts 17:31), he says it in reference to God's command "for all men everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30). I realize, however, that it's ambiguous enough to see that possibility you mention. Perhaps Paul is not referring to post-mortem judgment (which could reference any of the 3 views of hell), but rather a present-day "change of mind" because God is ultimately transforming our present world into the kingdom of God, which He will finalize on that Day. This would be a much more positive appeal to the Athenians to basically "join God in what He is inevitably going to do", rather than a fire-and-brimstone "repent or you're hopeless". I suppose the passage is ambiguous enough for us to see it either way, but the former may better fit the entire context of what Paul is saying in that Mars Hill sermon. I'll have to chew on that!

[Homer]

Acts 13:38-41
New King James Version (NKJV)

38. Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through this Man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins; 39. and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses. 40. Beware therefore, lest what has been spoken in the prophets come upon you:
41. ‘ Behold, you despisers,
Marvel and perish!
For I work a work in your days,
A work which you will by no means believe,
Though one were to declare it to you.’

Paul is here speaking to Jews and God-fearing gentiles and gives a clear warning of the consequences of a failure to repent. Verse 41 is a quotation of Habakkuk 1:5, a passage about being destroyed by the Babylonians.Your point about Luke only giving a brief summary of sermons in Luke is a good observation. We can be sure Jesus and the Apostles said many things that are not included in the scriptures. One of Jesus' sayings we quote is not found in the gospel accounts but Paul happened to mention it in Acts 20:35.

[steve]

Homer,

I apologize. Somehow, when I was copying your material to paste below, I accidentally deleted your opening greeting to Rich (above)! I think I deleted your opening sentence too! It was an accident, and I have no idea how it happened. At least, I believe, the substance of your post remains.

You wrote:

Acts 13:38-41
New King James Version (NKJV)

38. Therefore let it be known to you, brethren, that through this Man is preached to you the forgiveness of sins; 39. and by Him everyone who believes is justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses. 40. Beware therefore, lest what has been spoken in the prophets come upon you:
41. ‘ Behold, you despisers,
Marvel and perish!
For I work a work in your days,
A work which you will by no means believe,
Though one were to declare it to you.’

Paul is here speaking to Jews and God-fearing gentiles and gives a clear warning of the consequences of a failure to repent. Verse 41 is a quotation of Habakkuk 1:5, a passage about being destroyed by the Babylonians.

Yes, it was a warning about what was about to happen "in your days" (not after death). Paul probably meant it the same way Habakkuk did. He knew judgment was coming on Israel, because Jesus had said that this would happen in that generation. According to Jesus, this would include widespread slaughter, exile and physical destruction of buildings. There is no evidence that Paul had anything to say about postmortem judgment here.

Your point about Luke only giving a brief summary of sermons in Luke is a good observation. We can be sure Jesus and the Apostles said many things that are not included in the scriptures. One of Jesus' sayings we quote is not found in the gospel accounts but Paul happened to mention it in Acts 20:35.

I agree that the sermons are abbreviated in the record. However, when we find no record of Paul ever speaking of something, we cannot simply add whatever doctrines we believe and assume that Paul also taught them "off the record."

[Suzana]

Homer,

I apologize. Somehow, when I was copying your material to paste below, I accidentally deleted your opening greeting to Rich (above)! I think I deleted your opening sentence too! It was an accident, and I have no idea how it happened.

Steve, I wonder if you used cut and paste instead of copy and paste? I remember at a computer course we were instructed never to cut, even if we wanted to delete, until it was successfully copied - till we got the hang of things.
(Of course we were novices, and I am in no way insinuating anything about you and computers...could be just a forum glitch...)

[Homer]

Hi Steve,

You wrote:

I apologize. Somehow, when I was copying your material to paste below, I accidentally deleted your opening greeting to Rich (above)! I think I deleted your opening sentence too! It was an accident, and I have no idea how it happened. At least, I believe, the substance of your post remains.

No need to apologize. I have spent an hour or so writing something and then accidentally erased it all, so I completely understand.

Yes, it was a warning about what was about to happen "in your days" (not after death). Paul probably meant it the same way Habakkuk did. He knew judgment was coming on Israel, because Jesus had said that this would happen in that generation. According to Jesus, this would include widespread slaughter, exile and physical destruction of buildings. There is no evidence that Paul had anything to say about postmortem judgment here.

I'm not sure what the point of your reply is if Paul is not warning of the judgement Jesus pronounced on all who do not believe. The warning in Habakkuk is directed to scoffers. I'm sure you are not taking Todd's ultra-universalist position that all God's punishments occur in this lifetime. And it is unclear that Paul's audience would have understood it as an allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70; Paul made no mention of that. And if it was about AD 70 why would that be a threat to a mixed group of Jews and gentiles residing in Pisidian Antioch, some 600 miles away by land?

It seems best to consider it a simple threat concerning the consequences of unbelief - destruction, that is. Just as Paul warned the Corinthians in 1 Cor. 10 by recalling the history of Israel's failure to enter the promised land. We can't over-literalize an allegory.

[RICHinCHRIST]

...I accidentally deleted your opening greeting to Rich (above)! I think I deleted your opening sentence too! It was an accident, and I have no idea how it happened.

steve, don't know if you know this... but you can actually hit the button "quote" in the upper right hand corner of a post. It automatically copies and pastes the person's entire post. Then you kind of have to go in and edit which sections you want to remain in the quote. As long as what you want quoted fits in between the clauses, [ quote=" namegoes here"] and [/ quote ] (with no spaces), it should work.

I'm not sure what the point of your reply is if Paul is not warning of the judgement Jesus pronounced on all who do not believe. The warning in Habakkuk is directed to scoffers. I'm sure you are not taking Todd's ultra-universalist position that all God's punishments occur in this lifetime. And it is unclear that Paul's audience would have understood it as an allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70; Paul made no mention of that. And if it was about AD 70 why would that be a threat to a mixed group of Jews and gentiles residing in Pisidian Antioch, some 600 miles away by land?

Homer, It doesn't have to refer solely to the judgment the Jews in Jerusalem would receive. All the Jews would be affected by the AD 70 judgment because the Old Order was being eradicated.