Liberty U is on a downward slop

Sure, it is true that I am not a fan of Ergun Caner, long before this debacle with his past and the clear lies and fictional past he has created. But I find his exegesis appalling and his apologetic method ineffective and more harming to Christians who work long and hard to reach out to other scholars of other faiths and beliefs.

 

But what is under my skin about the Ergun Caner issue is the ease that other Christians are letting it slide and allowing him to not repent and ask for forgiveness. In a recent article in SBC Today they said Ergun was “exonerated”. Really? So why is he no longer Dean/President? Why was the article titled “ERGUN CANER GUILTY: REMOVED AS DEAN FROM SEMINARY” in a recent write-up in Liberty Student News? It is clear that Liberty found something that was wrong but are not making it clear. The shame.

 

An even bigger issue I believe is found in a recent interview that Glenn Beck had with Jerry Falwell Jr. Glenn Beck, a confused convert to Mormonism was invited to address Liberty's most recent graduation ceremony, leading to a number of public exchanges between Beck and Falwell, Jr. In the above linked article, however, we encounter this statement from Falwell Jr: "And there are bigger issues now, we can argue about theology later after we save the country." What?! Last I checked theology, the study of God, is FAR more important than the country!

 

Last I checked Christians were called to be salt, light and to proclaim the gospel to all people. But it seems Falwell Jr wants to hold off on that and “Save the country”. If God chooses to use the gospel to save any nation, that is His business, so that should be the only thing we are focused on and let God do His thing. But it seems Falwell has bought into the same "America = Christianity" mindset that has infected so many others, leading to rank confusion. But the set of priorities revealed by the above statement, uttered to a Mormon in the context of the conflict between Mormonism and Christianity, sheds a good bit of light on how Liberty has handled the Ergun Caner situation as well. Theology? Eh, we can debate that some other time. It's secondary. Gotta save the country first! Only logical conclusion: theology has nothing to do with how you save a country, hence, saving a country is a political endeavor, not a theological one.

 

Chris White

Peter Hitchens: The Rage Against God

The bother of one of the most well known Atheists in the world writes a book on how atheism led him to faith on God and Jesus Christ. This is a GREAT video and a realization that there is hope for anyone that God moves in.


Peter Hitchens Author Interview--The Rage Against God from Gorilla Poet Productions on Vimeo.

Short chart on the major differences of the Premillennial views

Summary Chart Dispensational vs. Historic Premillennialism
	Dispensational Premillennialism	Historic Premillennialism
1	The church is hardly, if at all, in the Old Testament prophets.	The church was foreseen in Old Testament prophecy.
2	The great burden of Old Testament prophecy is the kingdom of the Jews.	Old Testament prophecies are primarily about the coming of Christ to die (at the first advent) and the kingdom age (at the second advent).
3	The earthly kingdom should have been set up at the first advent, for that was the predicted time of its coming.	The first advent was the specific time for Christ to die for man's sin.
4	The present age was unforeseen in the Old Testament and thus is a ``great parenthesis'' introduced because the Jews rejected the kingdom.	The present age of grace was designed by God and predicted in the Old Testament.
5	Time is usually divided into seven dispensations. The present age is the sixth such dispensation.	One may divide time in any way desirable so long as one allows for a millennium after the second advent.
6	The second advent will be in two sections - ``the rapture'' and ``the revelation.'' Between these two events is the unfulfilled 70th week (seven years) of Daniel 9:23-27, called ``the great tribulation.''	The second advent will be one event.
7	No sign precedes the ``rapture stage'' of the second advent, which may occur ``at any moment.'' However, signs will precede the ``revelation stage'' of the second advent.	Certain signs must precede the second advent.
8	There will be a resurrection of ``tribulation saints'' at the ``revelation stage'' of the second advent.	There are two resurrections - the righteous before the millennium, the unrighteous after the millennium.
9	Usually holds to the ``futurist'' view, which makes most of Revelation a literal description of events to take place during ``the great tribulation'' or Daniel's 70th week.	Usually holds the ``historical symbolic'' view of Revelation - a picture in symbolic form of the main events in the present age.

 

 

Chris White

A GREAT opportunity for Japan.

Michael is president and founder of Christ Bible Seminary in Nagoya, Japan. It seems God has opened the door for this seminary and church to be housed in downtown Nagoya. Watch the short video above in which Michael explains the amazing opportunity and need. Please pray and consider supporting this work.

All Christian music should proclaim Christ like this!

I'm not a big fan of Rap, but what I am a fan of is Christian musicians proclaiming Christ as much as these do! Listen to the message and how much they proclaim God and Christ as the Savior.

Tebow spot was a bust!

I’m very disappointed in the HUGE amount of money that Focus on the Family (FotF) spent on a 30 sec spot during the Superbowl to have NO hint of a Christian message at all! It didn’t even have a strong Pro-Choice message, because if anyone did not know the Tebow full story, that spot would mean nothing to them. SHAME on you FotF!

 

We are called to be good stewards of what God has given us and this (in my opinion) was a HUGE waste of funds that could have be used in a much more glorifying way.

On another note, it’s not like FotF is known to profess the Gospel and its ability to save fully, this is just another instance where FotF failed the church.

 

Chris White

 

I understand that Amillennium view is not the only view out there...

Now to be fair I have to allow some other views into the discussion. Throughout all my studies (which is a small amount of time for such an interesting and argued about topic) I have come to some hermeneutics that I believe has to stand and some points that are still in question. I’ll explain, when reading the Bible I believe that the Bible explains the Bible and more so the New Testament shines light onto the Old Testament. So the New helps the readers to understand what the Old was talking about. They are to be regarded as one book with the full story laid out before the reader. This hermeneutic is used by almost all Amillennium believers, but that is not the only view that needs to be looked at. The Historical Premillennium view also holds this same hermeneutic of reading the Old in light of the New. This view is also not one of the most believed views but to me holds the strongest augments out of all the Premillennium views.

In the following article we see a very basic review of the Historical Premillennium view…

Chris White

Historic Premillennialism by R. Todd Mangum, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Theology Biblical Theological Seminary

200 N. Main Street Hatfield, PA 19440

Three lines of biblical evidence seem to suggest that, when Jesus returns, He is coming to set up an earthly kingdom that is greater and more wondrous in kind than our present existence, but not as great and wondrous as the final, eternal state. That is, when Christ comes back, He will set up with His faithful ones a "reign of a thousand years" that will restore the earth to a paradise-like state, but not the full paradise of the eternal state. This observation forms the basis of the "premillennial view" of eschatology (meaning Jesus comes "before the millennium" to set up "His millennial reign"). A premillennialist eschatology is one that the early church fathers seem also to have affirmed - hence, the label "historic premillennialism."
In terms of biblical evidence, first, several prophecies use graphic language to describe a time of supernaturally inaugurated peace, prosperity and calm, but with aging and death nevertheless still in existence. In other words, the Bible presents the future eradication of sin and death as coming in two stages: a silver "millennial" stage, followed by the final judgments and the eternal state - a premillennial return, followed by the millennial reign, then the eternal state (see 1 Cor. 15:23-24).
Twice in the book of Isaiah, conditions on earth are described as a time when "the wolf will dwell with the lamb, and the leopard will lie down with the kid, and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little boy will lead them. Also the cow and the bear will graze; their young will lie down together; and the lion will eat straw like the ox. And the nursing child will play by the hole of the cobra, and the weaned child will put his hand on the snake's den. They will not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain, for the earth will be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea" (Isa. 11:6-9; cf. Isa. 65:25). Notice the description of incredible peacefulness, even in the animal kingdom - the curse has been suppressed, at least. But notice also that babies apparently are still being born, nursing, and being weaned; is that possible in the eternal state? Isa. 65:20 adds that, during this period, "the youth will die at the age of one hundred and the one who does not reach the age of one hundred shall be thought accursed." Death, apparently, has less of a sting than it has now, but it's still around. Again, it does not sound like the eternal state, but it's certainly a state of existence far better than what we know now.
These descriptions do not lend themselves well to a merely figurative, hyperbolic or typological sort of interpretation, either. Rather, they seem like vivid details selected and presented as poignant excerpts of what will be characteristic of this future era. The overall picture portrayed is one in which paradise on earth has precipitously advanced, but traces of the curse can still be detected.
Secondly, Christ's return is described as a cataclysmic event inaugurating a period in which He "rules with a rod of iron" (Rev. 19:15; Rev. 12:5; Rev. 2:26-27). Why would such a "rod of iron" be necessary in the eternal state, when all the enemies of God are disposed of in the Lake of Fire? Rather, as premillennialists have traditionally suggested, the Bible's description of Christ's post-second coming reign seems to be of a time when Christ is firmly in control, but He also still has enemies that He must persistently and vigilantly suppress in the exercise of His righteous authority. I.e., the biblical picture of the future is one in which a "silver age" of Christ's millennial reign precedes the "golden age" of the eternal state.
Finally, Rev. 20 explicitly reveals that Christ's second coming unfolds in two stages: in stage one, He and His saints reign over the nations "for a thousand years." This "millennium" is a time when Satan is bound and the enemies of Christ are defeated and suppressed . . . but it is not yet the final stage. At the end of stage one, Satan is released and, for a brief time, the nations are once again deceived and rise up in one last rebellion against Christ and His saints. They are defeated, of course, but the fact that such a rebellion is even possible suggests that Christ's second coming does not immediately usher in the eternal state in which sin, rebellion and death are completely eradicated. Rather, the second coming ushers in an intermediary "silver age," with the final "golden age" being established only after a final, consummative battle. Only then, in Rev. 20:14 - after the battles described in Rev. 20:7-10 (cf. Ezek. 38-39) have run their final course - are "the devil, death and Hades" themselves "thrown into the lake of fire."
Premillennialists have differed among themselves as to what other details will be fulfilled during this millennial state. Will God restore the nation of Israel to prominence, complete with a revived temple and "throne of David" from which Christ will rule? Or, are the thousand years merely the amount of time needed for the judgments of all humanity to be accomplished? Some premillennialists may even have been guilty of inappropriate dogmatism about details they have sometimes included in their apocalyptic speculations and eschatological charts.
But none of this should detract from the strong biblical evidence that underpins some basic premillennialist suppositions: (1) that Christ's bodily return is a cataclysmic interruption (rather than a progressive, gradual sort of development); and (2) that the eternal state is preceded by an intermediate, transitional stage. These observations of biblical teaching form the heart of the premillennialist position. That biblical interpreters before Augustine were largely agreed on these points adds credibility to this interpretive approach and eschatology.

Millennium, Part 10 - Final part of this work.

Two More Points of Application
All right. So what? That's a lot of little Greek words. Let me just close by hopefully making this seem real and important by giving you two points of application. Just a couple observations from the text.

Number one, death means reigning with Christ. Not just going to Heaven and you won’t hurt, you won't have pain, death means, right then, you live and you reign with Christ. Now, what does it mean? We could think about this a long time. What does it mean that your grandmother, my grandmother, is on a throne, not as big as Christ's throne, but is on a throne? She's got a crown. She lays it out at Jesus’ feet. But she is still on a throne reigning. Does that mean she is affirming Christ's judgments? Certainly. Does it mean that her being there, your loved ones being there, is a kind of a vindication on all of those who oppress us, or made war with Christians? Does it mean that your loved ones, who believed in Christ, are somehow under the sovereignty of God, participating in decision making for the Earth? Meditate on that for a while—Jesus asking, “Grandma, what do you think? Bill, what do you think we should do here?”

Somehow the saints are now reigning with Christ.

I think at the very least, the presence of believers in heaven as overcomers will be a testimony to their innocence and to the guilt of those who persecuted them. But I think it's more than that. I think it means that we will be restored to our rightful place of God-given dominion over the earth. Genesis 1 says we are image bearers. What do we do as image bearers? We replenish the earth, and we subdue it. We are given to be creation kings over the earth. You do not just die and learn the harp. You do stuff. You make decisions. You think. You reign. In some mysterious way we will be co-laborers just like we are co-laborers with Christ, now. And if we can participate with Christ and his work here on earth, cannot we also, as glorified souls, participate with Christ in his reign in heaven. He uses angels, and he uses our loved ones who have died. Under his sovereignty of course, but making judgments, working with Him as He works out His will on the Earth. You get to be a little king, a little queen, with Christ. You want to be a somebody? You want to have authority? You want to make decisions? You want to have significance on the Earth, you're not going to get much more impact than that. Reigning with the King of Kings!

And here is the last observation or application. Death means reigning with Christ, and therefore death means life. Most often when someone you love dies, it is not pretty. There are times someone dies peacefully in their sleep, and that is wonderful. Much more often, somebody is shot in battle. Somebody is mangled in a car accident. Somebody has cancer, which literally can eat away at the flesh. And they can look shriveled, or they can look diseased. All of us have had the experience of being at the funeral home, going up to a casket, and saying, “That just doesn't look like Dad. It just doesn't look like Grandma.” And it’s sad, the deterioration of our physical bodies. And what we need to have assured in our head is that we will stand at those caskets, and look at those made-up faces and know, right at that very moment, she lives. You look at father lying in his casket, dead. But he lives!

Death for the Christian means life. And when they die, they live and they do not die again. They will be priests of God and Christ and will reign with Him during this entire church age. Now, I hope you know this. And believe it. There are people that are not Christians in the world who never think of death. They do everything else except their own mortality. Our whole culture, sometimes it seems, our economy is built on not dying, getting healthy, getting fit, having all the insurance you need, always being safe, and never dying. I understand that a non-Christian would feel that way. What I don't understand is the way some Christians talk. You would be hard-pressed to think that life after death even matters.

I read one author who explained why eternal life is called eternal. Eternal life is called eternal, he says, not because it has to do with eternity after we die, but because it touches God the Spirit, who is eternal. So we have this life here on earth, which is kind of an eternal life that touches the spirits. That’s not the whole story, not by a long shot. There are other Christians, and I want to say this with all due respect, because I do not want to exchange one imbalance for another, but there are some Christians who are so busy only--that is the important word -- only talking about making the world a better place, or bringing shalom, or renewing creation that they never talk about what happens when you die. But face it, you are going to die. I am going to die. And we can talk all about how we follow Christ and we make the world a better place. And we help the poor. And we want to help the poor, but you also have to think what are the new heavens and the new Earth? It is just not no more cancer, it's not just that people are no longer sad. The new heavens and the new earth is where God reigns and is All in All, and where we are ultimately, abundantly satisfied in Christ. And if that is not part of your mission to the poor, you're not fully bringing the kingdom that is to come.

If your Christian faith does not help you die well, then either your faith isn't worth much, or your Christianity isn't worth much. People live and talk and preach and they make decisions in life as if there were no eternity. And it is an absolute travesty that it happens in the church. I’m fired up because I spent a week at our denomination's General Synod and I wondered, “Does anybody here believe that Hell is real? That Heaven is real?” Or are we just playing games. Do we mourn as those who have no hope, or more likely, do we live as if there were no hope beyond this life? Paul says it very clearly, “There is no hope beyond this life, if there is no resurrection.” If there is no living and reigning with Christ, we are of all men most to be pitied. If you don't get anything with Christ after you die, forget it. Don't put another dollar in the plate, walk out of here, forget it. You are wasting your time as a Christian. If you do not really believe that something happens after you die, do not come here. Well I shouldn't say that. Come and learn, but don't just sit and pretend like you're a Christian.

Death means life. It is always sad when someone is sick. It is always sad when somebody dies. It is always sad when someone is dying. But as Christians we do not mourn as those who have no hope. Pity those who are left behind, no pity for those who go ahead of us and die and reign. You see this Millennium, which Christians argue about, it is not some esoteric thing to write PhD’s on. If I am correct in what I have explained this morning, the Millennium is a great engine of hope. This is what it was meant to do for the first Christians. This is what it is meant to do for us. Love has won. Christ has conquered. The nations belonged to Him. All of you who call upon the name of Jesus belong to Him. And in a moment of your death -- and you'll have loved ones who will mourn and weep and right they should. But in the moment of your death, you go on to live and reign for a thousand years. Blessed and holy is the one who shares in the first resurrection! Over such the second death has no power, but they will be priests of God and of Christ as they will reign with Him a thousand years.

Chris White

Al Mohler on God's Message to Haiti

The following article by Dr. Al Mohler is excellent, a bit hard to swallow at times, but truly excellent. Dr. Mohler's biblical and gospel-centered insight can equip Christians to think about natural disasters like this rightly and also prepare us to turn conversations about Haiti toward gospel-hope.

 

Does God Hate Haiti? by Al Mohler
The images streaming in from Haiti look like scenes from Dante's Inferno. The scale of the calamity is unprecedented. In many ways, Haiti has almost ceased to exist.

The earthquake that will forever change that nation came as subterranean plates shifted about six miles under the surface of the earth, along a fault line that had threatened trouble for centuries. But no one saw a quake of this magnitude coming. The 7.0 quake came like a nightmare, with the city of Port-au-Prince crumbling, entire villages collapsing, bodies flying in the air and crushed under mountains of debris. Orphanages, churches, markets, homes, and government buildings all collapsed. Civil government has virtually ceased to function. Without power, communication has been cut off and rescue efforts are seriously hampered. Bodies are piling up, hope is running out, and help, though on the way, will not arrive in time for many victims.

Even as boots are finally hitting the ground and relief efforts are reaching the island, estimates of the death toll range as high as 500,000. Given the mountainous terrain and densely populated villages that had been hanging along the fault line, entire villages may have disappeared. The Western Hemisphere's most impoverished nation has experienced a catastrophe that appears almost apocalyptic.

In truth, it is hard not to describe the earthquake as a disaster of biblical proportions. It certainly looks as if the wrath of God has fallen upon the Caribbean nation. Add to this the fact that Haiti is well known for its history of religious syncretism -- mixing elements of various faiths, including occult practices. The nation is known for voodoo, sorcery, and a Catholic tradition that has been greatly influenced by the occult.

Haiti's history is a catalog of political disasters, one after the other. In one account of the nation's fight for independence from the French in the late 18th century, representatives of the nation are said to have made a pact with the Devil to throw off the French. According to this account, the Haitians considered the French as Catholics and wanted to side with whomever would oppose the French. Thus, some would use that tradition to explain all that has marked the tragedy of Haitian history -- including now the earthquake of January 12, 2010.

Does God hate Haiti? That is the conclusion reached by many, who point to the earthquake as a sign of God's direct and observable judgment.

God does judge the nations -- all of them -- and God will judge the nations. His judgment is perfect and his justice is sure. He rules over all the nations and his sovereign will is demonstrated in the rising and falling of nations and empires and peoples. Every molecule of matter obeys his command, and the earthquakes reveal his reign -- as do the tides of relief and assistance flowing into Haiti right now.

A faithful Christian cannot accept the claim that God is a bystander in world events. The Bible clearly claims the sovereign rule of God over all his creation, all of the time. We have no right to claim that God was surprised by the earthquake in Haiti, or to allow that God could not have prevented it from happening.

God's rule over creation involves both direct and indirect acts, but his rule is constant. The universe, even after the consequences of the Fall, still demonstrates the character of God in all its dimensions, objects, and occurrences. And yet, we have no right to claim that we know why a disaster like the earthquake in Haiti happened at just that place and at just that moment.

The arrogance of human presumption is a real and present danger. We can trace the effects of a drunk driver to a car accident, but we cannot trace the effects of voodoo to an earthquake -- at least not so directly. Will God judge Haiti for its spiritual darkness? Of course. Is the judgment of God something we can claim to understand in this sense -- in the present? No, we are not given that knowledge. Jesus himself warned his disciples against this kind of presumption.

Why did no earthquake shake Nazi Germany? Why did no tsunami swallow up the killing fields of Cambodia? Why did Hurricane Katrina destroy far more evangelical churches than casinos? Why do so many murderous dictators live to old age while many missionaries die young?

Does God hate Haiti? God hates sin, and will punish both individual sinners and nations. But that means that every individual and every nation will be found guilty when measured by the standard of God's perfect righteousness. God does hate sin, but if God merely hated Haiti, there would be no missionaries there; there would be no aid streaming to the nation; there would be no rescue efforts -- there would be no hope.

The earthquake in Haiti, like every other earthly disaster, reminds us that creation groans under the weight of sin and the judgment of God. This is true for every cell in our bodies, even as it is for the crust of the earth at every point on the globe. The entire cosmos awaits the revelation of the glory of the coming Lord. Creation cries out for the hope of the New Creation.

In other words, the earthquake reminds us that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only real message of hope. The cross of Christ declares that Jesus loves Haiti -- and the Haitian people are the objects of his love. Christ would have us show the Haitian nation his love, and share his Gospel. In the midst of this unspeakable tragedy, Christ would have us rush to aid the suffering people of Haiti, and rush to tell the Haitian people of his love, his cross, and salvation in his name alone.

Everything about the tragedy in Haiti points to our need for redemption. This tragedy may lead to a new openness to the Gospel among the Haitian people. That will be to the glory of God. In the meantime, Christ's people must do everything we can to alleviate the suffering, bind up the wounded, and comfort the grieving. If Christ's people are called to do this, how can we say that God hates Haiti?

If you have any doubts about this, take your Bible and turn to John 3:16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. That is God's message to Haiti. 

 

 

Chris White

Millennium, Part 9

One More Issue
We come now to verse five. There is one more issue to deal with before we can be fully convinced of the interpretation of I am giving you. Verse five, the NIV puts it as parentheses, which I think is the sense of things. “The rest of a dead” -- so we have been talking about the believing dead, now, this is the unbelieving dead. “The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.” So here's the problem. Okay, if what I have been saying is true, and coming to life, this first resurrection, means that you live and reign with Christ, what about verse 5? Verse five seems to be saying, “Well, the rest of the dead, the unbelieving dead, after the thousand years or over, they are going to have the same life.” And we know that that is not true, because it says that “They who do not experience the first resurrection will experience the second death.” Do you see why this book is confusing? So how does that work? Because we do not want to say, “Yes, if you are an unbeliever, you die and you just lay there, but then a thousand years from now, when this church age is over, then you're going to reign with Christ.” That clearly is not what Revelation teaches. So some have argued that, well, we are talking about two different kinds of coming to life. Verse four is talking about a spiritual resurrection, and verse five is talking about a physical resurrection. So when it says, “The rest of the dead do not come to life,” it just means they did not have their bodily resurrection until the end of the Millennium. And that is possible, but it seems unlikely that zao -- it is the same word -- would be used in two totally different ways so close together. And besides, the points of verse five seem to be one of contrast. That while the dead, the deceased saints had the privilege of coming to life, those who do not believe in Christ did not have the privilege. So if this contrast is to hold, the coming to life must be of the same kind. In other words, you say, “Well, they came to life and the rest of them, well, they didn't have this totally other kind of coming to life.” The contrast doesn't fit then.

So how are we to resolve this difficult that the unbelieving dead do not live or reign with Christ during the thousand years? They have no part in the first resurrection. They did not share in the privilege of reigning with Christ in Heaven, nor will they ever have that privilege. What do we do? The key to understanding this verse is the little word “until.” Do you see that and verse five? The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended. Let me give you just one more Greek word. It’s the word achri. Most of us have probably read it to mean something like this. “The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended, and then after the thousand years they did come to life.” We read “until” as indicating a change in their situation after the thousand years. But I want to argue that that is not how we should read “until.” The word “until” can have the force of during, or right up to, or throughout, and does not have to indicate a change in the circumstances after the time. Let me give you an example, because is probably murky in your head.

I sang in the choir in college. Our favorite stuff to sing was usually spirituals. And so we sang the song, “I’m Gonna to Sing ‘Till the Spirit Moves in my Heart.” And I was a tenor. And it was a great song for tenors, because tenors get to start out. “I'm going to sing until the spirit moves in my heart.” You do all this little cool stuff. And the basses come in and do their stuff. And at the end of it, it would just keep repeating, I’m going to sing till the spirit moves” -- and then you say, “I'm going to sing till Jesus comes. I'm going to sing till Jesus comes.” That is what the basses do. “I'm going to sing until Jesus comes.” Now would you understand that song to mean, “And then after Jesus comes, I stop singing”? “I'm going to sing until Jesus comes, and when he comes back I’m done singing.” I think we instinctively understand ‘until’ in that sentence means I'm going to sing right up to when Jesus comes. All the way until Jesus comes. And it doesn't give any indication of, “Well, when he comes, I stop singing.”

Or let me give you another example. Suppose you are out of town for a day, and you get one of these nice young ladies here to babysit. And you return late at night and you ask how the kids did. “Well, the two oldest did really well. They were obedient. The youngest was just squirrely. Was just acting up. I don't understand.” And then the next day, you are talking with your friends who have kids, and they are also thinking about blowing this joint and dropping their kids off somewhere. And that sounds like a good idea to them. And they say, “So how did it go? With the babysitter? How did your kids do? Being away from them for a whole day?” “I don't understand it,” you say. “You know, our youngest was just so rascally and disobedient, and the two oldest kids were obedient right until we came home.”

Now, you would probably understand that to mean our kids, the two older, were obedient and respectful the whole time we were gone. You would not be praising them if you meant, “They were obedient until we came home, and when we set foot in the door, they got out the matches and started lighting things on fire.” You instinctively know until does not always mean that the situation changes after the given time.

Now, let me just give you some verses where this happens in Scripture. And then, we will be wrapping up the answer to this question. Acts 23:1, I'll just read it. Paul looked straight at the Sanhedrin and said, “My brothers, I have fulfilled my duty to God in all good conscience until (achri) this day.” Now, does Paul mean I've been fulfilling my duty until this day, and starting right now, I don't have to do my duty anymore? No. In Acts 26:22 Paul says, “But I have had God’s help to (achri) this very day, and so I stand here and testify to small and great alike.” Until, achri, this very day. Now, does Paul mean that God has helped me until this day, and I'm glad that I made it here. But after today I am not going to get any help? No. He doesn't mean to say that until indicates a change in circumstance. Romans 5:13, “For before the law,” actually, until (achri) the law, “was given sin was in the world, but sin is not taken into account where there is no law.” So until the law was given, sin was in the world. Does Paul mean that after the law was given, then sin was no longer in the world? No. He is clearly making the point right in up until this time, this was true. I will give you one more. Romans 8:22, “We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to (achri) the present time.” Right up to the present time. Nobody understands Paul to be saying, “All of creation has been groaning and suffering until I wrote this down in 60 A.D., and now creation has stopped suffering.” No, the “until” has the force of right up to, or during.

So go back to verse five. We will put this together. “The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.” This does not mean that they then came to life after the thousand years were ended, and suddenly reigned with Christ. All it means is right up to the end of the Millennium, during this whole church age, the unbelieving dead did not have the privilege of living and reigning with Christ. If it was to indicate that something changed after the thousand years, it probably would have said so. Look at verse three for example. “He threw the Devil into the abyss. Locked and sealed it over him to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended,” and now it makes it clear that something changes. “After that, he must be set free for a short time.” So there we have “until,” but it shows us very clearly that a change is indicated--after that time the situation will be different. But it does not say that in verse five. So the point is that the unbelieving dead will not be made to live with Christ during this age, nor ever. Meanwhile, the believers who die, once they die, will live and reign with Christ as disembodied souls awaiting the resurrection during this church age. And those who live with Christ now in heaven will not die later in hell. And those that are not living with Christ, now, will experience the second death later in the lake of fire.