Month: July 2022

Hebrews 9:27-28 says, “And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after that the judgment, so Christ was offered once to bear the sins of many. To those who eagerly wait for Him, He will appear a second time, apart from sin, for salvation.”

Because of the fall in the Garden, every person with two exceptions – Enoch & Elijah, has died! All the Old Testament and New Testament prophets, apostles, pastors, etc. have died. As great as these people were, they were still subject to being mortal. And 1 Corinthians 15:26 says, “the last enemy that will be defeated is death.” All humans will die and that includes you and me! The important thing is to be prepared for it by submitting to the Lordship of Jesus Christ! Those who believe in and know Jesus will only die physically. Those who reject Him will die twice – physically and eternally. Jesus defeated death at His resurrection, and that same spirit will resurrect us  (Romans 8:11, Romans 6:5, John 5:28, Revelation 20:5, 1 Thessalonians 4:16) when He comes again!

‘Jews would be acquainted with a repetition of sacrifices. They would need to understand why the death of Christ was final and unrepeatable. This verse implies that a repeated offering would have involved Christ in continual suffering. If Christ’s death were repeatable, it would need to begin with the dawn of history when sin entered the world and to last throughout the ages.

‘However, the death of Christ could happen only once in history. There was only one incarnation and death. The timing of this event occurred in God’s perfect wisdom.

‘Several facts about Christ’s death are presented. First, it happened in history when he appeared on earth. Second, it was once for all and never needed repetition. Third, the effect of the sacrifice was to do away with sin. Fourth, the death was voluntary. Christ offered himself. 9:27–28. These verses contrast the death of human beings and the death of Christ. The death of human beings was destined, and judgment followed after it. We cannot avoid death. God has appointed that death should visit every human being.

‘The fact that judgment follows death does not mean that it occurs immediately after death. An interval separates death and judgment. The mention of judgment after death does not suggest that no judgment occurs prior to death. These verses speak of the final judgment which clearly occurred after physical death.

‘The death of Christ was voluntary. We saw this expressed clearly in 9:14, but verse 28 also implies it. The death of Christ was not only voluntary, but the malice of the Jews and the plan of God demanded it.

‘Christ died to take away the sins of many people (see 9:26). At a time after his death, he will come again not to deal with sin but to bring salvation to his people. Jesus dealt completely with sin in his death. At His return, he will usher his people into the experience of eternal life. The idea of Christ’s appearance a second time reminds us of the reappearance of the high priest after he had completed his task in the Most Holy Place on the Day of Atonement (see Luke 1:21–22).1’

Some ask, ‘if Jesus defeated death on the Cross & Resurrection, why must we die physically?’ Paul answers that, to some degree, in 1 Corinthians 15:50-54, “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption.  Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed—  in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.  For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.  So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: “Death is swallowed up in victory.” Short answer: corruptible cannot inherit the coming manifestation of the Kingdom.

Another question that often arises is, ‘If we pray with faith, claiming the healing promises, why do some people still die?’ Answer: It is appointed for the mortal body to die to get an incorruptible body for eternity. Even those who were restored to life in the Bible had to die again to get theirs. In this age, there is no way around death. But when Jesus fully manifests His Kingdom after His return, death will totally be done away with! (Revelation 21:4).

‘It is somewhat unexpected for the writer to introduce at this stage the idea of judgment. But he has been dwelling on the necessity for Christ’s death and this leads him to make a general statement about man’s destiny. Death in itself is unavoidable: it is appointed for men to die once. No one is exempt from this experience. The difference between Christ’s death and all others is that His was voluntary whereas for all others it is appointed (apokeitai), i.e. stored up for them. The expectation that some will escape death (cf. 1 Thess. 4:15ff.) is an exception to the general rule stated, occasioned by the special event of the coming of Christ. It is not therefore in conflict with this statement in Hebrews.

‘The words and after that comes judgment are not intended to imply that judgment follows immediately after death, but rather that judgment is to be expected subsequent to death. Furthermore, this does not mean that no act of judgment ever happens before death. The judgment (krisis) alluded to is the final assessment.

‘In making the comparison between everyman and Christ, the writer begins with a common factor: he died once, a point repeated yet again. What is most significant about this statement is that the death is now stated in the passive, having been offered, instead of the active as in verse 14. No hint is here given about who made the offering. Taken in conjunction with verse 14, it may be said that both active and passive aspects are necessary for a complete understanding of the offering. While it was voluntary, it was also imposed by external circumstances: historically by the malice of the Jewish murderers and theologically by the definite plan of God (cf. Acts 2:23).

‘The purpose of the offering is again stated in similar though slightly different terms from verse 26. Here the phrase to bear the sins of many (pollōn anenenkein hamartias) is precisely paralleled in the Septuagint of Isaiah 53:12. The same idea occurs in 1 Peter 2:24 where the bearing of sins is said to have been ‘in his body on the tree’. Similarly, John the Baptist’s announcement that the Lamb of God would bear away the sin of the world echoes the same thought. The ‘many’ contrasts with the one offering.

‘The Christ who has dealt with sin at his first coming will appear a second time for a different purpose. Had the parallel with judgment been pressed, some aspect of Christ’s coming to judge might have been introduced. But the second coming is said to be for salvation. The second coming is in fact the divine seal on the complete acceptance of the sacrifice offered previously. The emphasis falls on the effect that the second coming of Christ will have on those who are eagerly waiting for him (i.e. Christians). Nothing is said about unbelievers as would have been natural after the mention of judgment. But it is Christ’s work of salvation that engages the writer’s attention. There might here be some analogy to the expectations of the worshippers as they wait to greet the high priest on his return from the holy of holies on the Day of Atonement. But the words not to deal with sin (chōris hamartias) quickly put a different complexion on the analogy. Sin needs no further atonement. All that is necessary is the appropriation of the salvation which Christ’s self-offering has secured. The verb translated eagerly waiting (apekdechomenois) occurs in 1 Corinthians 1:7, Philippians 3:20, and Romans 8:19, 23, 25, in each case of the great expectancy of believers waiting for the glories to come.’2

1. Thomas D. Lea, Hebrews, James, vol. 10, Holman New Testament Commentary (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 171–172.

2. Donald Guthrie, Hebrews: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 15, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1983), 201–203.

We humans are tri-partite (3 part) beings (1 Thess.5:23-24). We are a spirit, that has a soul, and lives in a body. The body is the house and contains the five senses. The soul is basically the mind, will, and emotions. And the spirit is where the Spirit of God resides in the born-again person’s life, it also serves as the place where the conscience resides, which is the voice of the human spirit. 

The person who is not a child of God has a dead spirit (Eph. 2:1,12) and is in darkness without the life of God, having no hope in this world. But when they make Jesus their personal Lord, they are born again in their spirit (John 3:3,6). The Spirit of God comes to live in their human spirit and assures them that they are a child of God (Romans 8:9, Romans 8:16). 

Every person has a conscience, whether or not they are a child of God. But it can only operate correctly when the mind is renewed to the Word and Spirit of God (Romans 12:2, Ephesians 4:23).

The scribes and Pharisees brought a woman, who had committed adultery, to Jesus to see what He would do. He wrote on the ground and John 8:9 says, “…being convicted by their conscience went out one by one.” 

The Apostle Paul when giving testimony to Felix said that he always “…strived to have a conscience without offense toward God and man” (Acts 24:16). Paul also said that the Gentiles who do not have the law are a law unto themselves, “their conscience also bearing witness and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them…” (Romans 2:15) Paul further said in Romans 9:1 “I tell the truth in Christ, I am not lying my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit.” In Paul’s teaching to the Romans, he admonished them to be subject to earthly authorities, …” not only because of wrath but also for conscience sake”(Romans 13:5).

Scripture also reveals that one can have a:

 Good Conscience (1 Tim.1:5, 1:19).

A pure conscience (1 Timothy 3:9).

Seared Conscience (1 Timothy 4:2).

Conscience cleansed by the blood (Hebrews 9:14). 

And Hebrews 9:22 “Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water.” I submit that when one is born again the blood of Jesus cleanses his conscience from all the impurities of the past that may have been part of it. That is one reason why the new convert needs to immerse himself in the Word of God to allow his mind to be renewed along with what has happened in his spirit.

The Bible further says in Ephesians 1:7, “In Him, we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins according to the riches of His grace.”

Colossians 2:13-14 “And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, He has made alive together with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses, having wiped out the handwriting of requirements that was against us, which was contrary to us, and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the Cross.”

Hebrews 9:26 says, “He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world, but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.”

1 John 3:5, “And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him, there is no sin.”

WHY IS THERE STILL SIN CONSCIENCENESS?

Hebrews 10:1-4 says, “For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more consciousness of sins. But in those sacrifices, there is a reminder of sins every year.  For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.”

The animals sacrificed under the Law could never cleanse from sin, it merely covered them for a year. But in Jesus’ sacrifice, they are not only covered, but we are cleansed, and the sins are forgiven, as the conscience is cleansed!

I suggest that the reason many Christians still have a conscienceness of sins is that they have not renewed their mind with the Scriptures given above and others like them in the New Testament. 

When our sins are forgiven, they cease to exist. God does not remember them anymore (Isaiah 43:25). They are cast into the depths of the sea (Micah 7:9). and He put them behind His back (Isaiah 38:17).

The only time we should be aware of our sins is when our conscious speaks to us about having done something wrong. Then, we should immediately thank God for His forgiveness and cleansing and begin declaring the promises of the Word of God. Since we are now the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5:21) begin to speak this as it renews your mind.

The Scripture says in John 16:7, “And when He has come, He will convict the WORLD of sin, and of righteousness and of judgment.” I submit for your consideration, that the Holy Spirit convicts the sinners of their sin, but for the disciple of Jesus, it is his conscience that makes him aware of wrongdoing, as long as it is not seared by disobedience to the Word of God.

1 Peter 5:1-4

So I exhort the elders among you seems at first unrelated to the previous section, but the word so or ‘therefore’ (oun) suggests that this section follows logically on from the previous one. It is likely that the thought of judgment beginning from the house of God (4:17) prompted Peter to focus on the need for purity of heart before God in relationships among those in the church, beginning with the leaders of the church. This pattern may even have been suggested by Ezekiel 9:6, from which Peter borrowed the language about judgment beginning ‘from the house of God’, for there it says, ‘So they began with the elders who were before (lxx: in) the house.’ The connection is: since purifying judgment is beginning with God’s house, and especially with the leaders of God’s house, therefore I exhort the elders among you. Lest he seems to be too haughty in this prediction of judgment, Peter immediately classes himself with the elders: as a fellow elder. This lets the elders know that he thinks of himself as one of those with whom judgment will begin—even he, an apostle, is not exempt, nor should any among his readers think themselves too important or too sanctified to be exempt. Moreover, as he is about to encourage them to be ‘examples’ to the flock (v. 3), so he demonstrates in the next phrase how he himself is willing to be an example for those leaders to whom he writes. While it is remarkable that Peter the apostle would take the less exalted title ‘fellow elder’ to speak to elders, it is even more remarkable that he should describe himself as a witness of the sufferings of Christ. Had he said ‘witness of the resurrection’ it would have been a claim for the truthfulness of his message (as in Acts 2:32; 3:15; cf. 1:22). Even ‘witness of his transfiguration’ would have been a claim to authenticity (cf. 2 Pet. 1:16–18). But ‘witness of the sufferings of Christ’ bluntly recalls, for Peter and for anyone familiar with the details surrounding Christ’s crucifixion, the most painful episode in Peter’s life—for we remember just what kind of ‘witness’ Peter was: one whose courage failed and who three times denied that he even knew Christ (Matt. 26:69–75). Why does Peter recall this? Probably to demonstrate that restoration even from grievous sin is possible with Christ (cf. Paul’s similar use of his life as an example of restoration totally by grace, 1 Tim. 1:16), and thus to encourage in the elders a humble willingness to be penitent for sin rather than a hypocritical pride and an unwillingness ever to admit to doing wrong. The fact that Peter is also a partaker in the glory that is to be revealed shows that full restoration from sin is certainly available through Christ. This phrase could refer to Peter’s presence on the Mount of Transfiguration, when the cloud of God’s glory overshadowed those with Jesus (Matt. 17:1–8; cf. 2 Pet. 1:16–18), but had he meant this he would probably have said something like, ‘as well as a witness of the glory that was revealed’. The fact that he mentions this partaking in glory after he mentions his witnessing of the sufferings of Christ, and the fact that he says the glory is still to be revealed, suggests that he is thinking of the future glory that will come to believers when Christ returns (note this theme in 1:7; 4:13; 5:4, 10). Peter is an ‘elder’ who has sinned, repented, been restored, and will share with Christ in glory. He can rightly ‘exhort’ any elder in whose life there is sin likewise to repent and be restored before God’s disciplinary refining fire reaches him. On another level, the reference to Christ’s sufferings may also function as a reminder to the elders that just as Christ was willing to suffer for them, so they should be willing to endure hardship and suffering for the sake of those in their churches (cf. the note on the function of 3:18 in its context). Yet in the context of Peter’s speaking about himself as a fellow elder/witness/partaker in glory, the primary emphasis of this phrase does not seem to be on Christ’s example but on Peter’s own experience. 2. Peter exhorts the elders, Tend the flock of God that is your charge. There is a play on words since the verb tend (poimainō, ‘serve as shepherd, serve as pastor’) and the noun flock (poimnion) come from the same root. We could translate, ‘Shepherd the sheep of God’. The verb Peter uses is the same one Jesus used when he said to Peter, Tend (poimainō) my sheep’ (John 21:16). The phrase that is your charge is more literally ‘that is among you’. At this point the rsv mg. adds exercising the oversight, a phrase which translates the verb episkopeō, ‘functioning as overseer (or bishop)’. The phrase should be included in the text here (so niv, ‘serving as overseers’; the three main manuscripts omitting it are all from one geographical area, while those including it are diverse in location, and several are also quite early). The combination of the term ‘elder’ with the verbs related to ‘pastor’ and ‘bishop’ (‘overseer’) in such close connection in verses 1 to 2 is good evidence that the terms ‘pastor’, and ‘bishop, overseer’ were interchangeable during the New Testament period. Peter now tells the elders how they are to act, listing three sins to which elders are especially prone and three antidotes to which they should give attention. Calvin introduces this section with a perceptive summary: In exhorting pastors to their duty, he points out three vices, especially which are often to be found, namely sloth, desire for gain, and lust for power. Not by constraint but willingly means not doing the job simply out of obligation or because ‘someone has to do it’, but because the elder has freely and willingly chosen to carry out this valuable work (cf. 1 Tim. 3:1). The phrase in the rsv mg. as God would have you (literally, ‘according to God’, meaning ‘according to God’s will’) is also well attested in ancient manuscripts and should be included in the text (so niv, nasb). No one should be pressured into accepting a church office which he does not really want to have—God wants our ungrudging service, and he will provide another solution. An elder is to serve not for shameful gain but eagerly. The word translated eagerly places somewhat more emphasis on a positive emotional desire to do the work, whereas ‘willingly’ in the previous phrase simply focused on the element of unconstrained or free choice, the decision of the will that one will do the work. It may be questioned whether the prohibition against serving for shameful gain means one should never engage in church-related work in order to earn money, or whether it means one should not do it in order to earn money ‘shamefully’ (i.e. with greedy or selfish motives, or by dishonest or unfair practices). The second view seems preferable, both because Peter says shameful gain, not just gain, and because Scripture elsewhere indicates that it is right at least for some elders (probably those whose source of income or full-time work is their eldership activities) to earn money from this work (1 Tim. 5:17–18)—therefore, the desire for such earnings must be correct also, at least as part of their motivation. Yet the contrast is not: ‘not for shameful gain but for honest gain’, but a much higher one: ‘not for shameful gain but eagerly’. Greed and selfish interest are so near at hand in all human hearts that especially in this work they must be constantly guarded against. 3. Not as domineering over those in your charge but being examples to the flock shifts attention from inward motivation to outward behavior. But even here attitude is determinative, for an elder greedy for power over others will ‘domineer’, delighting in the use of his authority and seeking to increase, preserve or flaunt it. By contrast, the elder who seeks not his own status but the edification of others (cf. Phil. 2:3–4, 5–8, 20–21; Matt. 23:11) will strive continually to make his life an ‘example’ to others, a pattern to imitate. The term translated domineering (katakyrieuō) means ‘forcefully ruling over, subduing’, and can carry the nuance of a harsh or excessive use of authority (note its use in Matt. 20:25; Mark 10:42; Acts 19:16; also lxx Gen. 1:28; 9:1; and, in the context of military conquests, Num. 21:24; 32:22, 29; Ps. 110:2, etc.). The word always seems to involve bringing something into subjection by the use of force, whether physical, military, or political. Here Peter forbids the use of arbitrary, arrogant, selfish, or excessively restrictive rules. He implies that elders should govern not by the use of threats, emotional intimidation, or flaunting of power, nor generally by the use of ‘political’ force within the church, but rather by the power of example whenever possible. Nevertheless, verse 5, in commanding others to ‘be subject’ to the elders, implies that they have genuine governing authority in the church, and that at times they can give directions which the church ought to obey. (Paul’s use of his own authority as an apostle, especially in 2 Corinthians and Philemon, is a profitable example for study.) Although we may already recognize that God himself is our example to imitate (Eph. 5:1) and that Jesus is our perfect example for a human life pleasing to God (1 Pet. 2:21; 1 John 2:6; etc.), we are probably surprised to find how often the early Christians expected all their leaders to live in a way which others could imitate as well: they did not have to be perfect in order to be examples to the flock. Paul frequently urged others to imitate his example (1 Cor. 4:16; 11:1; Phil. 3:17; 4:9; 2 Thess. 3:7–9), and told both Timothy (1 Tim. 4:12) and Titus (Titus 2:7–8) that they were to live as examples of the Christian life to others (cf. Heb. 6:12; 13:7). Thus all in leadership positions in the church should realize that the requirement to live a life worthy of imitation is not optional—it is a major part of the job, challenging though such responsibility may be. Moreover, those who select church leaders should realize that academic excellence and administrative or financial skills do not automatically qualify one for leadership in the church (as they would for leadership in the university or business worlds). Recognizing that one has such responsibility should never engender pride, but rather a continual humility in the awareness that the sin remaining in one’s heart is still hateful, and that any growth in holiness of life has only come about by God’s grace. Indeed, to take pride in one’s own spiritual progress would be to set exactly the wrong example for others. Those who like Paul cry out, ‘Who is sufficient for these things?’ (2 Cor. 2:16b) are most likely to set the best example, for, as Peter himself says in this context, ‘God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble’ (v. 5b). Those in your charge has been thought by some to indicate that each elder had certain individuals assigned to him to care for, but there is not enough evidence to conclude this. The expression could just mean ‘your shares or portions of responsibility’ before God. 4. Peter promises no earthly reward but rather directs the elders to look beyond this present world: And when the chief Shepherd is manifested you will obtain the unfading crown of glory. When elders are viewed as shepherds, as they are here, it is natural to call Christ the chief Shepherd (the term occurs only here, in the NT, but cf. 2:25; also Heb. 13:20; Matt. 26:31; John 10:11–16). When [he] is manifested means ‘when he is made visible, when he appears’, and thus refers to the time of Christ’s visible return to earth. At that time (and not even at death: see note at 1:7), Peter says, you will obtain the unfading crown of glory. Crown (stephanos) is used of a victor’s crown or ‘wreath’ in athletic contests (1 Cor. 9:25), or a golden crown given by a Roman general to soldiers most valiant in battle (Josephus, War 7.14), or a crown worn by a king (2 Sam. (lxx 2 Kgs) 12:30; cf. Rev. 6:2; 14:14). In every case it is a sign of special honor, given not to all but only to those worthy of particular public recognition, commonly as a reward for some kind of unusually meritorious activity. Such an idea would fit this verse, where Peter mentions this unfading crown of glory specifically when speaking to ‘elders’, and when speaking of a reward which is given in the age to come, following after a description of righteous conduct in the exercise of the office of elder during this life. Moreover, the term glory carries the nuance of outwardly visible evidence of honor. Finally, the ‘twenty-four elders’ in Revelation have ‘golden crowns’ (Rev. 4:4) which they cast before God’s throne (Rev. 4:10)—even though these are not identical to the elders in local churches to whom Peter is writing, the ‘crowns’ there are none the less marks of honor said to be possessed by particular individuals, not by all. There are other passages of Scripture which suggest that some kind of ‘crown’ will be given to all believers (2 Tim. 4:8; Jas 1:12; Rev. 2:10; 3:11). Yet in these passages the ‘crown’ seems to be a metaphor for the heavenly life in general. The ‘crown’ of righteousness’ in 2 Tim. 4:8 which the Lord will give not only to Paul but ‘also to all who have loved his appearing’ (i.e. all believers) probably means ‘righteousness, which will be like a crown’. Similarly, the ‘crown of life’ in Jas 1:12; Rev. 2:10; cf. Rev. 3:11) is probably ‘eternal life in heaven, which is a reward like a crown received at the end of a race’, 1 Corinthians 9:25 implies that all believers should strive to obtain an ‘imperishable’ crown, but in the context it may also be viewed as a heavenly reward not for all believers but only for those who have continued through life faithful and obedient to God in a way worthy of special reward (cf. 1 Cor. 9:24, and note degrees of reward in 1 Cor. 3:12–15). 1 Peter 5:4, then, seems to indicate that elders in local churches should fulfil their office in ways pleasing to God, not in order to obtain honor or wealth in this life, but to obtain a special reward, an unfading crown of glory, when Christ returns (cf. note at 1:7). In churches today this should be the reward which elders work for, but it often is not.

Wayne A. Grudem, 1 Peter: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 17, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 192–198.