The Narrow Path Ministries

So I have been suffering with a toothache for the last few weeks, and my dentist appointment isn't until April 9th.(Pray for me) I have had a lot of time to sit around and think up interesting scenarios.

What if the church that was alive during the Apostles day had a vision of what the church was like today, and some of its theological wars. I call them "wars", because theology is more than just a discussion these days, it divides churches and sometimes destroys relationships.

So here is a list of questions I came up with to give to Peter and Paul. Feel free to add yours.

Dear Peter and Paul,
Salvation issues:
1.) At what point is a man justified and forgiven of his sins? Does this take place at belief in the gospel? After baptism? Before Baptism? What would you consider essential to the faith and a definite for the Christian to believe in order to be Christian? Expound more upon the subject of predestination.

End times:
2.) What can the church expect just before the return of the Lord? Please explain the catching up of the saints at the end of this current age.

Doctrinal issues:
3.) Explain the Deity of Christ in relation to the Godhead. How should we understand the Godhead? What writings should the Christian church except other than the completed canon? Explain when the gifts will cease, and will this happen before the return of Jesus? What did you mean when you in wrote 1 Tim 2 "Never the less, she shall be saved in childbearing"...

Peter, what did you mean when you wrote "Christ preached to the spirits in prison"?

Now add yours.

Finally, who wrote the book of Hebrews?

Paul, what is meant by "they who baptize for the sake of the dead."

Actually, Paul did deal with some theological "problems". He said those who taught that the resurrection is past already had "swerved from the truth" and were "upsetting the faith of some."

Yet, today the teachings of Hymenaeus and Philetus are widely accepted. The idea is that when Jesus rose he loosed the righteous who were in the chains of Hades and took them straight to heaven (the interpretation of "led captivity captive". So from then on people go straight to heaven at death, and that is the personal resurrection of each "saved" human being when he dies.

I've often heard preachers at funerals quote the resurrrection chapter (I Corninthians 15) and then apply Paul's words concerning the resurrection to the dead "passing through a door" into the presence of God.

Justin Martyr (2nd century) in his dialogue with Trypho said, "If you have heard that there are some among us who say that there is no resurrection and that their souls, when they die, are taken to heaven, do not imagine that they are Christians.

So from then on people go straight to heaven at death, and that is the personal resurrection of each "saved" human being when he dies.

Hello Pai,

If I understand you correctly, you are saying that you do not believe that a believer goes to heaven immediately when he dies, rather he merely "sleeps" until the resurrection, am I right? I also noticed that you put the word "saved" in parenthesis, I am assuming form this that you have a problem with this terminology...?

First, I believe that a Christian goes to be with Jesus at the time of his death. There are several scriptures that seem to teach this. Also, how could Moses and Elijah appear and talk with Jesus, if they were in an un-conscience state?? Would you consider me lost because I believe such? It seems Justin would...

On the last point, why would you have a problem with a Christian saying "I am saved", assuming you do..? Scripture uses this language in several places.

The consciousness of spirit/soul (I use the "/" b/c of the popular usage of the word soul) after death, true or not, is a completely and totally different issue than 'resurrection.' Most people from all worldviews believe in some type of life after death (for the spirit), but Christianity posits that there will be life AFTER 'life after death.' The resurrection is not an alternative, it's 'in addition to.' A Christian may believe in 'soul sleep' or 'consciousness' upon bodily death. We disagree about such things. But Christianity is marked by it's belief in a future resurrection.

mattrose wrote:The consciousness of spirit/soul (I use the "/" b/c of the popular usage of the word soul) after death, true or not, is a completely and totally different issue than 'resurrection.' Most people from all worldviews believe in some type of life after death (for the spirit), but Christianity posits that there will be life AFTER 'life after death.' The resurrection is not an alternative, it's 'in addition to.' A Christian may believe in 'soul sleep' or 'consciousness' upon bodily death. We disagree about such things. But Christianity is marked by it's belief in a future resurrection.

I agree Matt. I personally believe that all Christians go to be with Jesus just after death, and receive glorified bodies at the resurrection. I don't have all the answers on this subject, or any other for that matter, but it seems to be the most consistent view to me.

Brody wrote:If I understand you correctly, you are saying that you do not believe that a believer goes to heaven immediately when he dies, rather he merely "sleeps" until the resurrection, am I right?

Not quite. I don't believe he "sleeps". I believe he's dead.

But you are right in saying that I don't believe he goes to heaven immediately at death. Nor do I believe he is conscious in any way before or that he even "exists" (:lol: Don't make too much of those quotation marks) before he is raised to life again..

I also noticed that you put the word "saved" in parenthesis, I am assuming form this that you have a problem with this terminology...?

I have no problem with the terminology. What I have a problem with is the way it is used. Many evangelicals and fundamentalists use the word to mean that they have been saved from hell. But the apostles used in the sense of being saved from sin. So if I use "saved" in the way the apostles used it, many do not understand. So when I used the word with quotation marks in my previous post, I was using it the way most modern evangelicals and fundamentalists us it. If I had meant it in the apostolic sense, I would not have used quotation marks.

In the apostolic sense , we are being saved from sin. The process is not yet complete. Here is one example of salvation as a process:

1 Corinthians 1:18 For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.

I am aware, of course, that Paul states "by grace you have been saved through faith" which appears to be a completed fact.

That does not necessarily mean that Paul thought of salvation of an individual as a completed fact rather than a process. The writer of Hebrews (who might have been Paul) also said "all things have been put under his feet", and a couple of lines later "But we do not yet see all things under his feet". When God decides to do a thing, nothing can stop him, and so it's as good as done now. So we might as well say "All things have been put under his feet" even though it is not a present reality. The same with being saved. I see Paul's "you have been saved" (Ephesians) in the same way. "He who began a good work in you will continue to perfect it until the day of Christ." So even though we will not be completely saved from sin until Christ puts the finishing touches on our salvation at his return, if we are moving in that direction by the enabling grace of God, we can confidently say "I have been saved (from sin)" --- in the expectation that the process will be completed.

First, I believe that a Christian goes to be with Jesus at the time of his death. There are several scriptures that seem to teach this.

I don't think there are any. There are several which have been interpreted that way by those who already have that bias when they read them.

Also, how could Moses and Elijah appear and talk with Jesus, if they were in an un-conscience state??

They didn't. That was a vision which the apostles had. Jesus himself called it a "vision":

And as they were coming down the mountain, Jesus commanded them, "Tell no one the vision, until the Son of man is raised from the dead." Matthew 17:9

Would you consider me lost because I believe such? It seems Justin would...

No, I wouldn't consider you lost or a non-Christian because you believe that you will go to heaven at death. I think Justin Martyr was referring to the gnostics in his day who denied the resurrection and believed that their souls were taken to heaven when they died. I think Justin was right about the gnostics. They were not true Christians. Though the gnostics have had a strong influence on Christendom throughout the ages, the fact that Christians have accepted some of their teachings as true, does not make them non-Christians.

On the last point, why would you have a problem with a Christian saying "I am saved", assuming you do..? Scripture uses this language in several places.

Hopefully, I have already answered this question. If not, please say so, and I will try to be even more specific.

Those who believe in the redeemed soul's consciousness after death often use Paul's dichotomy "absent from the body/ present with the Lord" (2 Cor.5:6, 8/ Phil.1:22-24) as a referent. I am among those who do so. I know that "present with the Lord" does not, in itself, clearly specify a conscious state. It does, however, suggest that whoever or whatever is referred to as "we" is an identifiable entity that can be present or absent in various places. If "I" am absent from my body, then "I" must be something distinct from my body, which currently lives in the body. At death, "I" no longer dwell in this earthen vessel, but "I" am then present with the Lord. What is this "I" that is transported at death to heaven, where the Lord is?

I think that Jesus' promise that "whosoever lives and believes in me shall never die" (John 11:26) supplies a strong basis for me to believe that "I" will never die—I will simply relocate (I am aware of an alternative interpretation of John 11:26, but I consider it to be less likely).

In a more tenuous case, I consider that when John saw "the [apparently disembodied] souls of them who had been beheaded" in heaven with Christ, prior to the resurrection (Rev.6:9ff/ 20:4-6)—if the vision even slightly corresponded with literal reality—he saw that those who had died in Christ were still alive and vindicated in heaven. If the vision does not correspond with the actual case of Christians who have died, then at least the Holy Spirit did not mind using images that could easily convey that impression.

Having said that, I have no preference for either doctrine. Whether we are unconscious until the resurrection or we are immediately conscious in the presence of Christ does not, to me, seem consequential—except to the question of how the relevant scriptures should be interpreted.

Steve wrote:Those who believe in the redeemed soul's consciousness after death often use Paul's dichotomy "absent from the body/ present with the Lord" (2 Cor.5:6, 8/ Phil.1:22-24) as a referent. I am among those who do so. I know that "present with the Lord" does not, in itself, clearly specify a conscious state. It does, however, suggest that whoever or whatever is referred to as "we" is an identifiable entity that can be present or absent in various places. If "I" am absent from my body, then "I" must be something distinct from my body, which currently lives in the body. At death, "I" no longer dwell in this earthen vessel, but "I" am then present with the Lord. What is this "I" that is transported at death to heaven, where the Lord is?

As I see it, neither in 2 Cor.5:6, 8 nor in Phil.1:22-24 is Paul referring to the intermediate state; rather Paul is speaking of the resurrection. This fact seems obvious when we consider the context of 2 Cor.5:6, 8. Let's examine the first three verses:

1 For we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens.
2 Here indeed we groan, and long to put on our heavenly dwelling,
3 so that by putting it on we may not be found naked.

If Paul had been speaking of our disembodied spirit being present with the Lord at death, then surely he would not have called this "a building from God" and "a house not made with hands". Also he says that by putting on this dwelling we may not be found naked. (disembodied?)

Rather Paul thinks of our physical body as "an earthly tent we live in". If that physical body is destroyed, God has a permanent house in the heavens for us to live in --- namely, the resurrection body. This idea seems to be the same as that which Paul expressed in "the resurrection chapter":

What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable.
I Cor 15:42

4 For while we are still in this tent, we sigh with anxiety; not that we would be unclothed, but that we would be further clothed, so that what is mortal may be swallowed up by life.

Here Paul seems to say that we will not be "unclothed" and come into the presence of God as a disembodied spirit. Rather, we will be "clothed" with the resurrection body.

5 He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee.
6 So we are always of good courage; we know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord

While we are at home (in this present body), we are away from the Lord.

7 for we walk by faith, not by sight.
8 We are of good courage, and we would rather be away from the body and at home with the Lord

We would rather be absent from this present mortal body, and be present with the Lord (in that future immortal body). I think that is what Paul is trying to tell his readers.

I think that Jesus' promise that "whosoever lives and believes in me shall never die" (John 11:26) supplies a strong basis for me to believe that "I" will never die—I will simply relocate (I am aware of an alternative interpretation of John 11:26, but I consider it to be less likely).

I know it's often translated as "shall never die", but if that is a correct translation, then it contradicts the first part of Jesus' sentence in which he says:

"I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in me, though he die, yet shall he live."

Here Jesus clearly speaks of those who believe in him and who also die.
Or is he using the word "die" in a different sense in the second clause? That seem unlikely.. The Greek literally reads as follows:

And everyone who lives and believes in me may no way be dying into the age.

The second verb is an aorist subjunctive and not a future.

I see two possiblities. If we take it really literally, he may mean that those living who believe in him will not continue in death right into the next age after he returns, but will be raised to life at his return.
Or, if we consider "into the age" as meaning "permanently", then he may mean that the living ones who believe in him shall not remain dead permanently, but will be raised to life.

In a more tenuous case, I consider that when John saw "the [apparently disembodied] souls of them who had been beheaded" in heaven with Christ, prior to the resurrection (Rev.6:9ff/ 20:4-6)—if the vision even slightly corresponded with literal reality—he saw that those who had died in Christ were still alive and vindicated in heaven. If the vision does not correspond with the actual case of Christians who have died, then at least the Holy Spirit did not mind using images that could easily convey that impression.

It seems pretty figurative --- a bit like the voice of Abel's blood crying out to God from the ground.

Having said that, I have no preference for either doctrine. Whether we are unconscious until the resurrection or we are immediately conscious in the presence of Christ does not, to me, seem consequential—except to the question of how the relevant scriptures should be interpreted.

It is certainly of no consequence for the individual believer. For the next thing of which he will be aware after death is being in the presence of the Lord regardless of which of the two is true.

That being the case, one can see how Paul's statement in Philippians 1:2 can fit either understanding:

My desire is to depart and be with Christ, for that is far better.

Notwithstanding, whichever of the two is true seems to have considerable import to living people who have lost loves ones and who would like to think of them living in peace and joy with the Lord.

Hello Brody in Georgia, Some of your questions sparked me to respond, as well as Steve and Paidion's posts.

1. Concerning when a Christian becomes a Christian and what is essential to the faith:
Flesh and blood did not reveal to Peter that Jesus was the Son of the Living God. During the course of the prayers and the worship in the first really Christian meeting I ever attended, I realized that Jesus Christ had been raised from the dead and that beyond anything anyone could say, I was a Christian. It was revelation. No one had told me anything. I felt incredibly light – so it was probably then that my sins were forgiven. I did not even know what a sin was at the time.

Before that, at other times, I had been asked if I knew where I was spending eternity - but the question seemed irrelevant. I was provoked to go to that meeting when I saw that my present life needed to change.

3. What writings should the Christian church accept other than the completed canon?

Perhaps you are thinking of the Church at large, but each of us has to discern what is of God and what is not. There are books that are very popular and considered to be very spiritual but hold no appeal to me. I could be deceived, and my best buddy could be deceived. We are not to be ‘lone rangers’ – but we must respect others and be prepared to stand alone at times. And, as we have learned here, not everyone is going to agree on every point.

HEAVEN AT DEATH: Concerning going to heaven at death.

Before I met the Lord, I studied every religion except Christianity. After becoming a Christian, I was disturbed at the way people talked about going to heaven at death. It sounded so glib – too easy – and it did not stir my spirit. It struck me as too similar to what I had been reading in the World, and I began to reason if we go to heaven at death, why on earth should we have to get resurrected, after being in heaven as a spirit and having found all our long-lost relatives and friends again. What use was the resurrection?

And yet, it is central to our faith – our belief in the resurrection. NO ONE was talking about looking forward to the coming of the Lord and the resurrection. For years it disturbed me, and then I met a new friend and as we talked about our lives, I told him that I had a dog that ‘went home’ recently. He took exception to my statement and asked what I meant. When he said that my dog did not go home, but was dead, I was shocked. It couldn’t be – I didn’t like it - I could not accept it.

It was then that I realized that believing someone is dead-dead-dead, and that we will not see them until the Resurrection, requires faith – real faith – more real than what sounded like daydreams about heaven - and that relying on euphemisms – ‘went to be with the Lord’ – ‘crossed over the river’ – help us to deny the reality of it – that is why we have funeral parlors make up the person so they don’t look dead. We are not walking in faith. We are not looking for the main event in all our lives – the Resurrection of the dead.

So, anymore, at funerals, I say to people how I am looking forward to the resurrection and the coming of the Lord but I can tell it means nothing to them.

Be blessed, y’all. Jepne


We have just as much truth and light as we are willing to bear the suffering necessary to obtain it. A Katz

Per Paidion's and Steve's remarks:

What Steve said makes the most sense to me. If our souls do not go immediately to heaven when our bodies die, what did Jesus mean when He said to the thief on the cross, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise." (Luke 23:43) I would like to hear your take on this verse Paidion. Also, I would like to make clear that I don't believe unbelievers go straight to hell (not that I believe in the traditional view of hell, but for lack of a better word) when they die, but are unconscious (again, for lack of a better word) until God raises them to be judged. (Rev. 20)

Per Brody:

Getting back to the point -

I would sure like to have clarity on 1 Tim. 2:15 also. The only way I can make sense of it is to relate it to what I've experienced - that there is a lot to learned, and many tests to perfect us, when aspiring to be a godly mother.

Zoe