④ Greeks and Gentiles who embraced Christian faith before the ministry of Paul.

Dear in Christ,


[This is the second part of the study on Gentiles. Please ensure that you have read the first part.]

Greek Proselytes meet Jesus.

Joh 12:20 And there were certain Greeks among them that came up to worship at the (Passover) feast:
Joh 12:21 The same came therefore to Philip, which was of Bethsaida of Galilee, and desired him, saying, Sir, we would see Jesus.
Joh 12:22 Philip cometh and telleth Andrew: and again Andrew and Philip tell Jesus.
Joh 12:23 And Jesus answered them, saying, The hour is come, that the Son of man should be glorified.

Please remember that only those who have accepted Jewish faith are allowed to partake in the Passover feast. (Ex 12:48-49). In other words, these were religious / righteous Proselytes.

Greeks and Gentiles who embraced Christian faith before the ministry of Paul.

Religious proselytes from Greek colonies (in bold typeface) were among those who came to Jerusalem for Pentecost.

Act 2:9 Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
Act 2:10 Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes,
Act 2:11 Cretes and Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.

Almost 3,000 people accepted Christ on that day. It may be safe to assume that most of them would have returned to their own countries after the Passover.

Thereafter we read about the Greeks who accepted Christ in:

Act 6:1 And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians (Greeks) against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration.

A very small number of manuscripts use the word Grecians (Hellenists, Ελληνιστων) instead of Greeks. Such manuscripts intend to convey the meaning that they were Greek speaking Jews. Almost from the days of Alexander the Great, Koine Greek had been the most popular language in the region which came to be known as the Eastern Roman Empire. Therefore, it may be hard to determine whether they were Greeks or Greek speaking Jews.

The harvest that Peter made in Caesarea.

We are all familiar with the vision that Peter had while he was in Joppa and about Cornelius, the centurion, who sent emissaries to bring him. There is something that we missed out while reading the narrative:

Act 10:1 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
Act 10:2 A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.

Scholars admit that the expression "one that feared God" implies that the person was a proselyte of the gate. (a resident alien who lives in the Land of Israel and follows some of the customs. They are not required to be circumcised nor to comply with the whole of the Torah. Once they are circumcised, they become religious / righteous proselytes.)

We find them mentioned in passages like:

Exo 20:10 But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates:

Now let's see who protested against Peter's baptizing the proselytes of the gate, mentioned above:

Act 11:1  And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles (proselytes of the gate) had also received the word of God.
Act 11:2  And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him,
Act 11:3  Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them.

Do you see the contrast here? The ones that feared God (uncircumcised gate proselytes) are treated as gentiles by genuine Jews and religious proselytes, both of whom are circumcised.
.
I don't claim that every occurrence of the word gentiles is about religious proselytes or gate proselytes, just as there is no way to prove that every occurrence of the word is about non-Jews. We need to exercise discernment while studying the scriptures.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

③ Who are the “Gentiles” mentioned in the New Testament?

Dear in Christ,

Most of us are taught that the word "gentiles" 

If you are familiar with the caste system of Hinduism, something similar existed among the first century Jews. There were:

1. Jews by descend. ⇒ they may address #2 and #3 as gentiles, either together or separately.
2. Religious Proselytes. (these are circumcised converts to Jewish faith.) ⇒ they may address #3 as gentiles.
3. Proselytes of the gate. (these observe some of the Jewish customs. They remain uncircumcised.)

Most of the New Testament references to gentiles are regarding religious proselytes and proselytes of the gate. (Yes, I want to write myself into the Biblical narrative, but, I need to locate an appropriate place to do so.)

The genuine Greek word for gentiles / nations.

There is a general notion that every instance of the word "gentiles" in the New Testament is about anyone other than Israelites or the followers of the Jewish religion. This article is an attempt at examining the truthfulness of this notion. For instance, while we read:

Luk 21:24 ... Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
Rom 11:25 ... blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles:..
Rev 20:8 And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea.

we tend to believe that the narrative is about every non-Jew, everywhere

Please consider the following passage:

Mat 20:17 And Jesus going up to Jerusalem took the twelve disciples apart in the way, and said unto them,
Mat 20:18 Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,
Mat 20:19 And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.

Is not the narrative about chief priests and scribes handing over Jesus to Roman authorities? What has a Chinese or Indian or Japanese or American to do with the unfortunate incident?

Luk 21:20 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.
...
Luk 21:24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations[G1484]: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles[G1484], until the times of the Gentiles[G1484] be fulfilled.

If you know even a little bit of history, the destruction of Jerusalem that took place in 70 AD had nothing much to do with anyone other than Romans. So, the word "gentiles" has got a very limited meaning in this passage, as well.

Please note that it is the same Greek word, G1484 [ἔθνος, pronounced as "ethnos"] that is translated as gentiles and nations. The New Testament has only this word to convey the meanings of country, nation or gentiles (as in populace). In the Old Testament also, there is only one word (גּוֹי, goyim, H1471) used to convey all these meanings. It's the translators' (or their sponsors') discretion as to how the word is translated in a given context.

If these words are used in a context about some non-Jewish group, like Greeks or Romans, then the reference is about them and not to every non-Jew everywhere.

The word for Greeks mistranslated as “gentiles”.

There is a general perception that whatever is said of Greeks is applicable to every non-Jew, but that is not the case, as we will see later in this article.

We are familiar with words like Hellenistic (related to Greece). This word is the adjective form of the noun Hellene (a place near Thessalonica). It is written as Ἕλλην, read as hel'-lane, Strong's # G1672.


Quite a few times King James Version (KJV) renders this word as gentiles. Thus we read:

Joh 7:35 Then said the Jews among themselves, Whither will he (Jesus) go, that we shall not find him? will he go unto the dispersed among the Gentiles,[G1672] and teach the Gentiles?[G1672]

When it comes to passages where it becomes totally absurd to render the word as Gentiles, KJV reverts to the actual meaning of the word.

Joh 12:20 And there were certain Greeks[G1672] among them that came up to worship at the feast: (We will come back to this verse again.)

In this context, the translators found that it makes no sense to say that gentiles came to worship at a Jewish festival, so they rendered it as Greeks.

Wherever the translators (or their sponsors) felt that it would be a strong warning to the readers, they, again translated the same word as "gentiles".

Rom 2:9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;[G1672]
Rom 2:10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile:[G1672]

The word Greeks is not just about the people of or from Greece. It's about the descendants of Javan (Gen 10:2) which may include various races, including Romans.

“...from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.”

We read about the opposition that Paul had to encounter at Corinth in Acts 18:

Act 18:4 And he (Paul) reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

Let me ask you this: When did Greeks start entering synagogues? We read about a centurion who approached Jesus, requesting that his servant be healed, having built a synagogue for Jews. (Luk 7:5). But, we don't get to read any non-Jew entering a Jewish synagogue. Please do remember that Jesus specifically instructed his disciples not to enter into the towns of gentiles (as in non-Jews, Mat 10:5).

It's pretty obvious that these Greeks who were in the synagogue were proselytes (as in those who accepted Jewish faith). Scriptures call them as religious proselytes (Act 13:43) and Jews call them as righteous proselytes.

While the congregants in the synagogue objected to his affirmation that Jesus was the Christ, he told them "from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles".

Act 18:6 And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.
Act 18:7 And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue.

So, Paul who said "I will go to gentiles" entered the house of Justus, "one that worshipped God". This is an expression to indicate that the person was a proselyte. While Pilate referred to his wife as a "worshiper of God", Annas and Caiaphas referred to her as a proselyte.

Some manuscripts refer to Justus as Titus Justus. There are two more Biblical characters named Justus (Acts 1:23; Col 4:11) and both of them were Jews. It's obvious that the Justus mentioned Acts 18 was either a Jew or a proselyte.

Act 18:8 And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.

Is it even remotely possible that someone who doesn't accept Jewish faith would be the chief ruler of the synagogue?

Paul, who said that he is proceeding to the gentiles, didn't go to anyone who is totally alien to Jewish faith, instead, he went to proselytes.

Aquila and Priscilla, who extended much support to Paul at Corinth were Jews. (Acts 18:1-2) Marcus and Jesus, a.k.a, Justus were some of the Jews who always supported Paul (Col 4:10-11). (It's quite likely that these were religious proselytes and not Jews by descend.)

“...lo, we turn to the Gentiles.”

We read about Paul's testimony at a synagogue in Antioch in the 13^th chapter of Acts. In this incident, which, obviously, happened prior to the one we have seen above, Paul says he is "turning to the gentiles", instead of "going to the gentiles".

Act 13:42 And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath.(Some manuscripts don't have the Jews and Gentiles in them.)

I don't think there mikes and loud speakers during those days, so that the gentiles in the neighborhood of the synagogue could hear those words Paul spoke. Doesn't it make more sense to think that these Gentiles were right inside the synagogue, than to think that Paul delivered his message in the top of his voice (lungs), so that all the neighborhood could hear the word?

The next verse identifies these so-called gentiles:

Act 13:43 Now when the congregation was broken up, many of the Jews and religious proselytes followed Paul and Barnabas: who, speaking to them, persuaded them to continue in the grace of God.

 So, the gentiles mentioned in the passage are religious proselytes!

Act 13:44 And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God.

I am not sure whether the synagogue at Antioch was big enough to accommodate the whole city. I think the talk is about all the Jews and religious proselytes of Antioch.

Act 13:45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.

Isn't it obvious that only the Jews were enraged and not the religious proselytes.

Act 13:46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

There were Gentiles in the synagogue (Act 13:42) and Paul was upset with the Jews. Now, to which of the gentiles he was turning to, the gentiles who were beside him OR the ones elsewhere? Obviously to the gentiles - religious proselytes, who were beside him!

Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Again, it was the religious proselytes, who were beside Paul, who were glad hearing his words.

Next: Greeks and Gentiles who embraced Christian faith before the ministry of Paul.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Carrot cake, Beetroot wine and Matthew 10:28

Dear in Christ,

---

1. This post may sound silly to many. I wish something similar (or even better) were written by someone with a better knowledge of zoology.
2. If you are not familiar with the Hebrew and Greek words translated as Hell, Sheol and Gehenna, respectively, please, this post may not be for you.

---

There was a time we used to stay in an agrarian village near Electronic City, Bangalore, [Electronic City is termed as the software capital of India]. Fields yielding carrots, beets (beetroots), spinach, etc., were all around us. During evenings while the farmers gather these vegetables they would give us some (very often, for free). During those days we lost a lot of weight by turning raw vegans. Also, we tried out a few recipes like beetroot wine and carrot cakes.

Three years passed by, and some of these farmers decided to stop cultivation and to construct apartment complexes in their fields, to be let out to the software professionals from the nearby Electronic City. As they were digging foundations for the apartment complexes, a few human skeletons were uncovered, which caused quite a stir among the superstitious villagers. Cops were called in and the investigations revealed that these skeletons were of a few goons who were killed in a gang war, many years ago.

(For the sake of this post I assume that decomposition of human bodies results in producing simple molecules. I am not a student of science, correct me, if I am wrong.)

All those three years while we were staying there, the molecules from the bodies of those goons nourished our bodies and became part of our bodies while we consumed the vegetables (in the form of beet wine and carrot cakes) that grew in the fields in which they were buried.

Now, let's try to apply Mat 10:28 to these goons.

Mat 10:28 And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

According to a vast majority of Christians, the bodies and souls of sinners and those who don't accept the Christian God would be destroyed in hell. The goons I mentioned above should have been sinners and quite likely to be non-Christians. If the judgment of the world has to happen one of these days and if their bodies are to be cast into hell, at least, parts of their bodies have to come out of our bodies, because we have consumed the molecules from their bodies.

It is estimated that the surface soil of earth contains the decomposed remains of 110 billion human beings who lived and died over thousands of years. The food you eat and the water you drink have the molecules from those human beings, a majority of them could have been sinners. The molecules from thousands of them could be in your body. I am more than convinced that you are a heaven bound Christian saint. The molecules that once belonged to those sinners have to come out of your body, so that they could be thrown into hell. Do you think this to be a plausible scenario?

For the reasons mentioned above, physical, biological resurrection of human beings also becomes implausible.

Yes, yes, Mat 10:28 mentions “soul” as well!

It is generally understood that the word “soul” implies “the immaterial part of a human being”.

The Greek word translated as “soul” in Mat 10:28 is ψυχή (psuchē, psoo-khay', G5590 in Strong's Lexicon). Whereas this word is translated as “soul” for a 54 times in the King James Version, it is also translated as life (40 times), mind (3) and heart(2).

Let us examine some of the passages where this word is translated as “soul”.

Act 7:14 Then sent Joseph, and called his father Jacob to him, and all his kindred, threescore and fifteen (75) souls.[G5590]

Do we have to believe that Jacob went down to Egypt with 75 “immaterial parts of human beings”?

Act 27:37 And we were in all in the ship two hundred threescore and sixteen (276) souls[G5590].

Was Paul on the ship to Italy with 276 “immaterial parts of human beings”?

Rev 18:13 And cinnamon, and odours, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine, and oil, and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots, and slaves, and souls[G5590] of men. 

Is the Great Babylon is accused of importing “the immaterial parts of a human beings”, just as she was importing cinnamon, odours, ointments, and so on?

I can go on and on, but, it could be established that the Greek word in question means either “person” (individuals, people, body) or “mind”. Jacob went down to Egypt with 75 persons or individuals. There were 276 people with Paul on the ship to Italy. The Great Babylon is accused of importing human beings (or bodies of men, obviously, not as slaves).

• Fear gripped people seeing the signs and wonders performed by the Apostles on the day of Pentecost. (Acts 2:43)
• Those individuals who don't obey the Messiah would be destroyed from among people. (Acts 3:23)
• 3,000 people were added to the congregation on the day of Pentecost. (Acts 2:41)
• Jesus' mind was troubled (Joh 12:27; Mat 26:38)
• Mary's mind magnified the Lord (Luk 1:46)
• Every individual is instructed to obey the authorities. (Rom 13:1)

There are quite a few passages where this Greek could mean “life”. Obviously, the following passage talks about the death (life being required) of the rich man who garnered all his wealth in barns.

Luk 12:20 But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul[G5590] (life) shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? 

Christ's “soul” was not left in hell.

Act 2:31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul[G5590] was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.

This passage is an allusion to Psa 16:10.

Psa 16:10 For thou wilt not leave my soul[H5315] in hell; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. 

The Hebrew word used here, נֶפֶשׁ (nephesh, neh'-fesh, H5315 in Strong's) is translated several times as “dead body”. See: Num 9:6, 7, 10; Hag 2:13.

Num 9:10 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If any man of you or of your posterity shall be unclean by reason of a dead body,[H5315] ....
Hag 2:13 Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a dead body[H5315] touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It shall be unclean.

“Adam was made a living soul”

1Co 15:45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul;[G5590] the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. 

As we all know, this passage refers back to Gen 2:7.

Gen 2:7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living[H2416] soul.[H5315].

Please note the Strong's numbers of the words “living” and “soul” in Gen 2:7. We see them, exactly in the very same order in passages referring to animals as well.

Gen 1:21 And God created great whales, and every living[H2416] creature[H5315]...
Gen 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living[H2416] creature[H5315] after his kind...
Gen 9:10 And with every living[H2416] creature[H5315] that is with you...

Apart from the grammatical requirements, there is no differences in the Hebrew text of these passages.

Conclusion:

Haven't we heard preachers asking us:

Mar 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?
Mar 8:37 Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

What if Jesus really meant something like this?

Mar 8:36 For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own life (or mind)?
Mar 8:37 Or what shall a man give in exchange for his life (or mind)?

What if  Jesus were using a figure of speech or rhetorical figure like Antanaclasis in Mat 10:28 where both the words translated as “body” and “soul” in fact meant “body”, indicating a complete destruction of it? At least in Indian English, don't we use expressions like “chaos and confusion” to mean a state of “total confusion”? (Please don't tell me that the scriptures don't use figures of speech, more than 60 of them are used.)

We need to let the Holy Spirit to use figurative language or figures of speech. If we can't completely comprehend a literary work in another language just by knowing its grammar and using a dictionary, how do we expect to comprehend the scriptures, written in languages that are extinct, using translations and Strong's Lexicon?

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

Will Christian saints “go to heaven” after death?

Dear in Christ,

One of the main objections against Universal Reconciliation is that it teaches that everyone gets to “go to heaven”, irrespective of their beliefs. Before we examine whether everyone will “go to heaven”, let us examine whether Christian saints will “go to heaven” after their death.

Time and again we get to hear about people who visited heaven and had chit chat with Jesus and sat in his lap, before coming back. Their testimonies almost invariably would mention the gold paved streets of heaven and the mansions made of precious gems and jewels. One needs not to make a trip to heaven to give such “testimonies”, it's available right there in the 21^st chapter of Revelation. These frequent-flyers to heaven and those who trust their “testimonies” haven't noticed that all these descriptions are about the New Jerusalem that comes down from God out of heaven. (Rev 21:1, 2)

By the means of sermons of priests, pastors and preachers and bedtime stories of our grannies, the idea that our afterlife would be in a place called heaven, where we will be living in mansions made of precious stones and going out for jogging and evening walks on streets paved with gold and would be spending most of our eternity singing Hallelujah to the Almighty God, got intertwined into our brains.

Apostle Paul, to whom many of the hidden mysteries were revealed, didn't venture to tell us much beyond:

1Co 2:9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

The rewards that God has kept in store for his faithful is beyond human imagination and perception.

Our ideas about afterlife is not much different from our present existence!

While we are alive on this planet, we acquire land, build fencing or walls around it to ensure that none encroaches into our property. In order to ensure that none encroaches into our heavenly mansion (Joh 14:2), we make enemies for ourselves here, we look up on everyone with suspicion. We forget Jesus' instructions to love and bless our enemies (Mat 5:44; Luk 6:27, 35). We oppress them on the basis of their religion, language, skin color, ethnicity, sexual orientation, to name a few. Nonetheless, we look forward to our own private mansion in heaven.

Continuously singing paeans to God and His Christ and praising them all the time is not LOVE!

1Jn 4:20 If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen?

For a vast majority of Christians, only those who subscribe to their beliefs alone are their brothers. Unfortunately, the Bible doesn't yield such a definition. If anyone could be your neighbor, anyone could be your brother; it's not essential that Jesus had to utter a parable to that effect.

Many do misconstrue the Kingdom of Heaven to be the same as heaven (as in the dwelling place of God, especially, the Old Testament God).

If you were to go to heaven, God won't be there!

Irrespective of whether you are a Preterist, who believes that the fulfillment of the book of Revelation is behind us, OR a futurist, who believes that it lies ahead of us, once it is fulfilled, God would be on this planet earth. Hard to believe, isn't it?

Rev 21:2 And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
Rev 21:3 And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.

Isn't it obvious that the New Jerusalem that comes down from God out of heaven is not in heaven? The tabernacle of God is in the New Jerusalem and NOT in a remote location called heaven! Still can't believe? Please read the passages in as many translations as possible and if need be, in Greek as well.

Even the throne of God would be in the New Jerusalem, that came down out of heaven!

Rev 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
Rev 22:2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

The expression “In the midst of the street of it”in Rev 22:2 connects it to the city, the New Jerusalem, detailed in the previous chapter. So, the throne of God would be in the city that came down out of heaven. In case if you plan to “go to heaven”, your plight would be that of Cain, totally separated from the presence of God, because God's dwelling and His is throne is in New Jerusalem which comes down out of heaven.

So, next time around, whenever you feel like telling someone to “go to hell”, tell them to “go to heaven”, instead!

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

“Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven.”

Dear in Christ,

Prooftexting and Cherry picking have been developed into a fine art by mainstream Christianity. Here is a part of Wikipedia's definition of prooftexting:

Prooftexting (sometimes "proof-texting" or "proof texting") is the practice of using isolated, out-of-context quotations from a document to establish a proposition in eisegesis. Such quotes may not accurately reflect the original intent of the author, and a document quoted in such a manner, when read as a whole, may not support the proposition for which it was cited.The term has currency primarily in theological and exegetical circles.

Mat 7:21 is one of the scriptures often prooftexted to prove that everyone won't be saved. Let's see the scripture in it's context.

Mat 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
Mat 7:16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?
Mat 7:17 So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit.
Mat 7:18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit.
Mat 7:19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
Mat 7:20 Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.
Mat 7:21 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
Mat 7:22 On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?'
Mat 7:23 And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'

The context is of Jesus warning his first century audience (who were listening to the sermon on the mount) about the false prophets who had to come to them ("who come to you"). In his epic work “Wars of the Jews”, Flavius Josephus has made several mentions to the false prophets and miracle workers who attempted to deceive the Jewish people.

How do you apply a passage about false prophets to the man on the street?

The context of Mat 7:21 is about false prophets and the expression 'Lord, Lord' in Mat 7:21 matches with the same expression in Mat 7:22, which is about false prophets and miracle workers.

The population of Bangalore, India (where I live) is 4.3 million. How many false prophets and miracle workers are here? Hardly half a dozen, most of them are Christian preachers. How about the United States of America, the biggest Christian nation in the world? Among the 319± million US citizens how many could be false prophets and miracle workers? A few hundreds or thousands, perhaps! How can anyone apply what is specifically told about such a minuscule section of the human race (false prophets and miracle workers) to a vast majority of it?

Does the passage say anything about unbelievers? NO.
Does it speak about anyone other than those who call Jesus as 'Lord, Lord'? NO.
Does it say anything about anyone other than false prophets and miracle workers? NO.

How do you apply this passage to some random Muslim who lives in the remote areas of Pakistan or Afghanistan? How do you apply this passage to a tribal living in some of the remote hamlets in India? Is there a way to prove that every non-Christian is a false prophet and a miracle worker? (Yes, I know that you have memorized and prooftexted scriptures to exclude non-Christians from the reconciliation accomplished by God through Jesus Christ. If it be the will of God, we will examine those scriptures in their proper contexts, as we progress with this blog.)

Applying this passage to anyone other than false prophets and miracle workers is bad exegesis and bad hermeneutics.

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal

---

I am not oblivious of the fact that Rev 19:20 and Rev 20:10 state that false prophet(s) and miracle workers would end up in the Lake of fire and sulfur. We will discuss those passages in this series.

In my Father's house are many mansions, WHERE?

Dear in Christ,

If you are an ordinary Christian like me, you would have dreamed of spending your afterlife in a placed called “heaven”, somewhere in the remote parts of the universe, or even beyond the universe, where we will live in mansions made of precious jewels and go out on evening walks on streets paved with gold and singing Hallelujah and praises to the Almighty God, day in and day out.

One of the scriptural basis for this kind of thoughts or dreams is:

Joh 14:2 In my Father's house[G3614] are many mansions[G3438]: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
Joh 14:3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

① Does the passage mention heaven?

Please read the passage a few more times, counting the number of times it mentions “heaven”. How many occurrences of the word “heaven” could you count? I got ZERO. (In fact, the word “heaven” doesn't occur in 13^th to 16^th chapters of the gospel of John)

Is the expression “my Father's house” used anywhere else in the scriptures to mean a place called “heaven”? John himself has used exactly the same expression in another context:

Joh 2:16 And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house[G3624] an house[G3624] of merchandise.

We know the proceedings here. We also know that this event took place in the temple at Jerusalem, and not in heaven. The Greek word used in Joh 14:2 is a derivative of the word used here and hence it is impossible to prove that the talk there is about a place called heaven.

② Does the passage say that anyone would be teleported to heaven?

Please read the passage once again. all that it says is: “I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also”.

Jesus would come to the faithful and receive them and they will be with him, wherever he is. Does the passage talk about taking anyone, anywhere?

Same chapter, the very same Greek word, a different meaning!

The Greek word translated as “mansions” in Joh 14:2 occurs just once more in the New Testament.

Joh 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode[G3438] with him.

Yes, I am aware of the fact that the grammatical cases of the noun used in these two verses are different. Nonetheless, in both the passages, Jesus comes to the faithful. In this passage, the heavenly Father also comes, and both of them dwell with the faithful. There is no mention of their taking the faithful to a place called heaven.

“thou shalt follow me afterwards”

One of the passages that I used to believe as offering a trip to heaven is Joh 13:33-36. In fact, I have come across many who believe so.

Joh 13:33 Little children, yet a little while I am with you. Ye shall seek me: and as I said unto the Jews, Whither I go, ye cannot come; so now I say to you.

This is what Jesus said to the Jews:

Joh 7:33 Then said Jesus unto them, Yet a little while am I with you, and then I go unto him that sent me.
Joh 7:34 Ye shall seek me, and shall not find me: and where I am, thither ye cannot come.
Joh 8:21 Then said Jesus again unto them, I go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither I go, ye cannot come.

Neither the disciples nor the Jews could go where Jesus was going, obviously, he was going to the father (“I go unto him that sent me”). We need to understand John 13:33-36 keeping this fact in our minds.

In John 13, while Jesus was addressing his disciples, Peter interrupted him with a question. We need to notice his question and Jesus' reply.

Joh 13:36 Simon Peter said unto him, Lord, whither goest thou? Jesus answered him, Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterwards.

Leave alone the Jews, was Peter permitted to go where the rest of the disciples were not? OR, was Jesus signifying the kind of end that Peter would have to encounter? (Joh 21:18, 19) Does it make sense to think that Peter alone was permitted to follow Jesus to heaven, whereas, the rest of the disciples were told that they can't make it there? There are many scholars who recognize that Jesus was predicting Peter's martyrdom, almost similar to that of Jesus himself.

Eternity is indescribable!

The teaching that heaven is a place full of palatial mansions, all studded with gems and jewels and streets paved with gold, is the result of people grossly misunderstanding and misinterpreting Revelation 21's description of the New Jerusalem as that of a place called heaven.

There is eternal life; there is immortality; but we are not explicitly told about the nature of immortal life and where we would be spending eternity. Probably, that should be one of the reasons why Paul didn't want to go beyond telling us:

Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

(1Co 2:9)

In Christ,

Tomsan Kattackal