The Pioneers’ New Testament

Here is another example of a word with multiple meanings and implications which have been distinguished poorly, if at all, in most English translations. Representing eight different Greek words, whose primary meanings range from guarding a prisoner through the simple measuring of time and ordinary sleeplessness to sobriety and diligent faithfulness, by the use of the single English term “watch” seems careless at best. “Utterly irresponsible” might be a better analysis.

Most of the words, seldom used, can be sorted rather easily. Koustodia, transliterated from the Latin custodia, a Roman military assignment, is used in the New Testament only of the guards assigned to Jesus’ crucifixion (Mt.27:65,66; 28:11).
Agrupnia, simple lack of sleep, appears only in II Cor.6:5 and 11:27, as Paul describes the trials of his life, although the verb form, agrupneo, is three times (out of 4) connected with deliberate, careful faithfulness and prayer (Mk.13:33, Lk.21:36, Eph.6:18), or, in Heb.13:17, serious responsibility for other members of the Body.
Tereo (translated only 2x “watch” (Mt.27:36,54) – vs. 57x “keep”, in the sense of careful observance – and its prefixed form, paratereo (5x) – Mt.3:2, Lk.6:7, 14:1; 20:20; Ac.9:24 – refer simply to observation: “watching” to see what was going to happen, or, in the latter case, to apprehend Paul.
This leaves three, however, that require more detailed attention.

Phulake, for example, and its related words phulax and phulasso, had quite a variety of classical uses, by far most of which, at least in the noun form, referred to a prison (35x), or to the guards – phulax – (KJV “keepers”) assigned to administer them (Ac.5:23, 12:6, 19).
But as early as the third century BC writings of Herodotus, phulake was also applied to a period of time, originally a period of guard duty. In Roman times, the night was divided into four “watches”. Earlier jurisdictions had used three or five such segments. This use is seen in Mt.14:25, 24:43; Mk.6:48, Lk.12:38.
Liddell/Scott also lists the idea of guarding with a view to protection, as in the case of the shepherds in Lk.2:8, or the more common use as a bodyguard.

The verb form, phulasso, is never traditionally rendered “watch” in its 30 New Testament appearances. It is primarily translated “keep” (21x), and refers, parallel to the most common use of tereo, to “keeping” the law, the word of God, or any people, things, or principles committed to one’s trust. It is also used of taking precautions, or admonitions to “beware” (Lk.12:25, II Tim.4:15, II Pet.3:17, I Jn.5:21), and of God’s protection of his people (II Thes.3:3, II Tim.1:12,14; Jude 24).

Nepho, originally used only in the present (continual, progressive) tense, is traditionally rendered “watch” twice, and “be sober” three times. Earlier writers used it consistently as the opposite of methuo “to be drunk”, often as total abstinence. Later, it referred to self-control of any sort, or being sober and wary. One might paraphrase, “take things/life seriously!” The sense can readily be discerned from the words with which it is paired:
I Thes.5:6 – “Let us watch (gregoreo) and be sober (nepho)” (PNT – “Let’s don’t be sleeping like the rest, but be alert and sober.”)
I Thes.5:8 – “Let us, who are of the day, be sober, clothed in a breast plate of faithfulness and love”
II Tim.4:5 – “Be sober in everything ….Fulfill your assignment!”
I Pet.1:13 – “Be sober [alert]; set your hope [confidence] completely on the grace being brought to you”
I Pet.4:7 – “Be sensible (sophronesate) and calm [sober] (nepho) for the purpose of prayer”
I Pet.5:8 – “Be careful [sober] (nephate), be watchful (gregoresate)”

Do you notice the pairing with forms of gregoreo? This brings us to the last, and most common, of the words traditionally translated “watch.”(I Pet.5:8, referenced above).
Gregoreo is simply defined, lexically, as “to be fully awake”, but its New Testament usage is much richer than that. It was traditionally translated “be awake” – I Thes.5:10, “whether we wake or sleep”, (referring to physical life or death), and “be vigilant” (I Pet.5:8, referenced above) once each, and 20x “watch.”

Of these, four (Mt.26:38, 40; Mk.14;34,37) are from scenes in the Garden where Jesus asks for companionship in his lonely prayer.
Nine are admonitions to faithful preparation for Jesus’ / a master’s arrival (Mt.24:42, 25:13; Mk.13:34,35,37; Lk.12:37, I Thes.5:6, Rv.16:15) – more on that in the next study.
Seven are combined with instructions for persistent prayer to buttress one’s own faithfulness and avoid being deceived or turned away (Mt.24:43, Mk.14:38, Lk.12:39, Ac.20:31, I Cor.16:13, Col.4:2, Rv.3:2,3).
In each of the latter two groups, the idea is much more heavily skewed toward alertness than simple physical wakefulness.

Interestingly, although the concepts are closely connected, especially in the parables quoted in Mt.24, Mk.13, and Lk.12, the actual words for “waiting” and “watching” do not appear together, except in hymns and sermons! Combining the two ideas, unfortunately, too often leads to equating them, and therefore to unwarranted passivity in the understanding of both.

While a degree of passivity may be present in many of the “waiting” passages (see previous post), “watching” is most decidedly active, not passive.
Agrupneo, phulasso, nepho, and especially gregoreo, all require deliberate effort, whether in prayer or overt action.

“Watching” is NOT a spectator sport!
Neither is it a lonely, individualistic pursuit. Notice that every one of the imperatives is plural.
May we learn to wait – and watch – together – in determined faithfulness!

The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2011 annual report for this blog.

Here’s an excerpt:

The concert hall at the Syndey Opera House holds 2,700 people. This blog was viewed about 8,800 times in 2011. If it were a concert at Sydney Opera House, it would take about 3 sold-out performances for that many people to see it.

Click here to see the complete report.

This has been a surprisingly difficult study. It began, as several recent ones have, from a conversation at church. There is nothing like an interactive group of the Lord’s people to motivate earnest investigation of faithfulness. It is truly a gift of the Lord’s graciousness!

Jim had commented, almost as an aside, that whereas we usually think of ourselves as “waiting” for the completion of God’s plans, he had been impressed at Peter’s assertion that God himself was “waiting” for his people to get on board with his program (I Pet.3:20). That sparked speculation about how we might be inhibiting or delaying the fulfillment we seek. Are we keeping him waiting?

One excellent thing about such discussions is the way they send you “back to the Book”!

The concept of “waiting” in the New Testament is represented by no less than eight different Greek words! The lexicons are only of minimal help, and Trench’s work on synonyms does not treat these at all, so we are reduced to etymology and context to try to distinguish between them.

Three of the words appear only once, so there is no comparison available to us. Two of these are prefixed versions of meno (#58). Anameno (I Thes.1:10) speaks of waiting for Jesus’ return, and perimeno (Ac.1:4) is Jesus’ instruction to his disciples not to leave Jerusalem, but to “hang around” until they received the Holy Spirit’s empowerment for their assignment. The preposition ana can indicate either “up” or “again”, and peri is usually “around” or “in the vicinity of”. The third word, prosedreuo (I Cor.9:13), refers to people – either Jewish or pagan – who “wait” to perform ritual duties at an altar.

Three other words are prefixed forms of dechomai (“to accept, receive, or welcome”) which we will examine in a later post. It is not translated “wait” in the New Testament.
Apekdechomai, (“to await eagerly, to expect anxiously”), is used 7x. Although the people doing the waiting – uniformly for Jesus’ return – are usually disciples (“we” 5x) Rom.8:23,25; I Cor.1:7, Gal.5:5, Phil.3:20; and in Heb.9:28 “those who are waiting/looking for him,” in Rom.8:19, “all creation” is eagerly anticipating the “revealing of the sons of God” that will accompany that glorious denouement. The use of two prefixes would tend to emphasize the atmosphere of every reference as one of joyous anticipation.

Ekdechomai, (8x), with only one prefix, is usually a more ordinary form of expectation: the lame man “waiting” for the pool to be stirred-up (Jn.5:3), Paul “waiting” for his companions in Athens (Ac.17:6) or for the arrival of Timothy (I Cor.16:11); a farmer waiting for the harvest (Jas.5:7), and ordinary politeness at a church dinner (I Cor.11:33). But it is also used of Abraham’s faithfulness to God’s call (Heb.11:13), of God’s delaying the execution of his judgment (I Pet.3:20), and of Jesus waiting (Heb.10:13) for the final subjugation of his enemies! These latter two are the only references to “waiting” on the part of anyone but “ordinary” humans , other than the Rom.8:19 passage cited above. I am not sure of the implication of that observation.

Prosdechomai, occurring 14x, although its only use in Homer was “to await or expect”, later was more commonly used of welcome or acceptance, sometimes (not always) into the presence of a superior. New Testament references are weighted more heavily toward the older usage, including “waiting for the Kingdom of God” (Mt.15:43, Lk.2:25, 38; 23:51); for Jesus’ return (Tit.2:13, Jude 21); and for a master’s arrival (Lk.12:36), but also Jesus’ welcome of the “wrong” kind of people (Lk.15:2), admonitions to “receive” / care for traveling disciples (Rom.16:2, Phil.2:29), and the “acceptance”of persecuted status on the part of the faithful (Heb.10:34) and their refusal (11:35) to “accept” escape.

Prosdokao, also with 14 uses, although occasionally referring to “ordinary” waiting of people for other people (Lk.1:21, 8:40; Ac.10:24, 27:33) usually leans more toward the idea of expectation (Mt.11:3 and parallel Lk.7:19; Mt.24:50 and parallel Lk.12:46; Lk.3:15). This is true even on a totally human level (Ac.28:6, 3:5). However, there is an urgency evident in II Pet.3:12,13,14, regarding the Lord’s return, probably due to the severity of the persecution that the readers were facing.

Finally, proskartereo, usually translated (8x) “continue” – (which would really fit better with #58) – is only twice rendered “wait” – Mk.3:9 when Jesus requested the use of a boat, and Ac.10:7 of Cornelius’ servant. We will consider the others with the idea of “watch” (coming next!)

So where does this leave us?
Maybe our focus needs to be less on the specific idea of “waiting” and more on what we should be doing while we are waiting! The contexts of the listed references provide a clue: here are a few, and you can check out others.

I Thes.1:10, for example, is preceded by v.9, which speaks of their having “turned away from idols to become slaves to the true and living God.”
The discussion in Rom.8:18-30 includes dependence, not only on the Spirit’s intercession, but also on cultivating his fruit.
I Cor.1:7 is enclosed in an admonition (4-9) regarding growing into the community designed to prepare us for his coming.
While the disciples were “waiting in Jerusalem” for the coming of the Holy Spirit, they spent some of their time “organizing” – Ac. 1:15-26 – (which was NOT a part of the Lord’s instructions!) as well as “paying constant attention to prayer” (v.14), which was.

Later, Peter, who had earlier led the organization effort, writing to brethren under severe persecution (II Pet.3:12-14), reassures them that their longed-for deliverance will come – and urges them to live faithfully in the peace and justice for which they are waiting. (He was not laboring under the modern delusion that one needs government legislation or permission to live faithfully!!!)

Perhaps the most significant of all, although it does not use any of the “waiting” words, is the announcement of the Lamb’s wedding feast, in Rev.19:7. The waiting, of course, is over by then. But the invitation asserts joyfully, “His wife / Bride has prepared herself!” and explains that her radiant garments consist of “the just deeds of God’s people” !(v.8)

None of this should be taken as any kind of disparagement of waiting, or eager anticipation. That is very much in order. But it just might be that the “preparation” part is more practical that we tend to think. Maybe we and our Lord and Bridegroom are both “waiting”.

May we faithfully wait – and prepare – and speed the day!

I was asked to contribute at church this week, and this was the result.  It is not exactly a word study, although it relates to several already posted:  #23, 84 and 85 in particular.
I offer it here as a greeting and blessing to you all at this Christmas season.

Incarnation: Lessons from Clay

 Scriptures: OT: Jeremiah 18:1-6, Isaiah 29:16
NT: I Corinthians 12:12-26, Romans 9:20-21

 This is the season when the Incarnation is celebrated. Unfortunately, the standard celebration stops far too soon. It is easy to be sentimental about a baby in a manger; and pick it up later at Easter time with a lot of talk, most of it not supported by scripture, about Jesus’ death. But that ignores what is probably among the most amazing – and most crucial – parts of the story, the statement in John 1:14 : “The Word became flesh, and lived for a while among us!
“Flesh”: a real, live person! Somewhere along the line, I think probably in the middle ages, “flesh” came to be considered “evil” or “sinful”. The NIV even translates it that way. That can not possibly be true, or Jesus would not have adopted it, or emphasized it to his disciples after the resurrection, when they were frightened, thinking they were seeing a ghost – “A spirit has no flesh and bones, as you see I do!”
In the early church, the acid test of faithfulness (I Jn.4:1-3) was the acknowledgment that “Jesus Christ was come in the flesh!” that he was REAL. Hebrews 2 goes into considerable detail about why that was necessary, in order for him to definitively DESTROY death; but basically, it was because he knew that “show” was superior to “tell” when it came to forming a faithful Kingdom. “Tell” had been tried for a long time – the whole Old Testament period. The letter to the Hebrews makes it abundantly clear that “tell” did not work. That’s why Jesus decided he needed to “show.”

 Even that, though, is only half of the story. The concept of Incarnation has TWO branches: Jesus becoming a genuine, human person for our benefit, and his people becoming a manifestation of his own Body, for the benefit of the rest of the world! Incarnation has become OUR JOB!
Fortunately, the Creator of the universe has graciously undertaken the task of creating that Body – which is a good thing, since we ourselves can be pretty clueless, and often mess things up royally!
Since he created, and therefore owns, all that exists, he is entitled to use every bit of creation to reveal himself and his ways. NOTHING is off-limits – even the dirt under our feet.

 Both Isaiah and Jeremiah referred to God as a potter, and his people as clay, although that analogy appears only once in the new Testament. Notice that God told Jeremiah, “Go down to the potter’s house, and there, my word will come to you!”
Since beginning to work with clay, I have learned many things about how he chooses to work – starting long before a potter begins to form any vessel. I prepare my clay from scratch – digging and mixing it, to achieve a “clay body” which I can use. There are many ways in which this illustrates the effort the Lord expends, also, to create a Body he can use. You can’t understand this without getting your hands dirty, just as we are of no use to the Kingdom unless we are willing to get our hands dirty.

While in some places, usable clay can be found in a single deposit, in this area, successful pottery requires a mixture of four different kinds of clay, none of which is useful alone! This is also true of the Lord’s clay body. You need to feel and handle these clays in order to understand.
The red clay is strong – but good for nothing but bricks. It cracks when shaped, bent, or rolled thin.
The yellow is smooth and pliable, but not strong enough to stand up by itself.
The gray is grainy. It doesn’t stain like the other two, but will not polish to a nice surface. However, I always add it if the pot is intended for cookware, as the grit helps it to resist thermal shock.
The white is sticky, and while it can be used alone if one works very slowly, it does not polish well, but it can be used to remedy the problems of some of the others, and they also shine better with some white added. The mix can also be improved by some clay from elsewhere, like some very fine clay from a streambed in Alaska. Do you see any parallels in the types of people you know?

Before any of these can be used, they need to be powdered, soaked, and strained to remove gravel,sticks, roots, and assorted junk. Only the “junk” is removed. This pounding and straining process does not change the “being” of any of the clays. They still have their created attributes to contribute to the mix, but they are no longer individually recognizable. They have become a part of something entirely new. I can only guess at the proper proportions at this point; it will need to be adjusted later.
Notice that the clay cannot have the “junk” strained out without being wet. The proper amount of water at any time is essential. You all are familiar with the references to “water” as the Holy Spirit. There are just a few attributes that are relevant here. It is not for nothing that Jesus told his disciples to WAIT for the Spirit to empower their assignment. At many points in the process of clay preparation, YOU HAVE TO WAIT. To get the mix properly strained, I would soak this for a week or two, in order that the particles be completely absorbed and soak up as much water as possible.
Then, after straining, you have to WAIT again – while it settles, and excess water is poured off. Until then you can’t even check if you have a useful mix.
After it is dried to a consistency you can handle, if the proportions are not right, one or more ingredients can be added to improve the texture. At each point, the clay has to be thoroughly mixed.
When you are satisfied with the mix, it then has to WAIT again – to sit – for several weeks – (the Japanese potters are said to never use the clay they mix, but leave it for their grandchildren!) – to “mature”. (I don’t know what this does, but the product does not work well if you don’t let it sit.)
Notice that there is a difference between mixing and combining. I tried combining two clays, because I thought it might “look nice”. But they cracked in the firing. Their shrinkage was not alike. Thorough MIXING is necessary for a successful product. A lot of talk is bounced around today about “diversity.” And that can be a good thing – but only if the diverse people are MIXED, and not just “combined.”

 The forming of a pot, its finishing and firing, also require extensive experience on the part of a potter. They must be regulated by both the characteristics and content of the clay body, and the final result that is desired. (Jeremiah and Paul were not potters! The clay does NOT always perform as the potter may have in mind!) But as Jeremiah observed, if a pot is “spoiled”, the potter can readily use the clay for something else. Unfired clay is completely recyclable.
Perhaps the potter will adjust the mix, or even modify his earlier plan.
Perhaps he will need to work more slowly, allowing the clay to become partly firm before adding more.
Perhaps he will need thicker walls, to be scraped later to the shape and thickness he intended.
Perhaps it will be necessary to do preliminary smoothing and polishing before the piece is finished. Even after it is mostly dry, an even, polished surface may require the addition of a thin coating of finer clay, known as “slip”, to correct imperfections. Many hours of rubbing with a smooth stone are needed to create a good shine.

The firing, too, requires that the potter be very familiar with his clay, and know how much heat it can endure.. Earthenware, with its high iron content, cannot endure high-fire temperatures. It melts. But other clays, like fine porcelains, would crumble if only fired to low temperatures. Blackware and horsehair decorations require even lower firing temperatures, or they will be ruined.

 Our focus today, however, is simply upon the preparation of the clay body, and the Body into which the Lord intends to form his people, in order that we may actually become a credible part of the Christmas miracle of the Incarnation. I was not able to find a Gospel reference to the quotation attributed to Jesus in Heb.10:5, but I believe it is hugely relevant to correct many of the common misperceptions that have persisted in what is labeled “Christian doctrine”. Jesus says very plainly, (presumably to his Father), “You didn’t want sacrifices and offerings, but you fashioned a Body for me!” And after detailing some of the failings of the old system, he declares, “Look, I have come to do your will!”

 As a celebration of Jesus’ incarnation at the Christmas season, I commend to you the exercise of combing through the Gospels to list all the reasons why Jesus said he came! I expect you will be as surprised as I was, how radically his own statements differ from “standard Christian teaching”.
But if we are rightly to fulfill the mandate to participate in the Incarnation, it behooves us to find out what Jesus considers that it involves.

May we be properly strained, mixed, and blended into the Body that our Master Potter can use for his purposes!

We have seen how folks at one end of the Christian spectrum err in the direction of self-deprecation and obsession with “surrender” and “sacrifice” (see previous post), but folks at the other end depart just as far from the New Testament message in their insistence upon celebrating having achieved “victory in Jesus” to the exclusion of any recognition of a need to grow up, and to become mature, disciplined disciples.

Unlike “surrender”, nikao, “to be victorious, to conquer, to win, to be successful, to prevail” (L/S) does at least appear in the New Testament: twice it is rendered “conquer”, once “get victory”, 24x “overcome”, and 1x “prevail.” Seventeen of these occur in the Revelation, ten of which refer to folks who have remained doggedly faithful in the face of severe persecution (2:7, 2:11, 2:17, 2:26, 3:5, 3:21, 12:11, 15:2, and 21:7). Three refer to the triumph of Jesus himself (3:21, 5:5, 17:14), and four to the temporary, apparent victory of the forces of evil (6:2 – twice –, 11:7, and 13:7).

Of the rest of the New Testament, one reference is to Jesus (Jn.16:33) as he reassures his disciples that he has already overcome the world, and one is in the parable (Lk.11:22) where he speaks of a strong man being “overcome” by one stronger than he.
The remaining eight are confined to two epistles. In Rom.3:4, Paul is referring to God’s victory in his just judgment, and in Rom.12:21 he urges his readers not to allow themselves to be “overcome by evil”, but proactively to “overcome evil with good.”
John, in his first letter (2:13-14), addresses the young men of his congregation as those who “have been gaining victory” – a present perfect tense – over the evil one. The perfect tense describes action that began in the past, but continues into the present, and perhaps beyond. Later (4:4), he reminds them that their victory over the anti-Christian spirits of the world (v.1-3) is possible because “the Spirit that is in / among you all is greater than what is in the world.” The game isn’t over yet! And in 5:4-5, his assertion is that following the Lord’s instructions is not burdensome, because those who have been born of God (enlisted in the Kingdom) are (present tense) in the process of overcoming the world. The “victory” (nike) that has conquered (aorist tense) the world, is identified as their / our faithfulness! This is yet another place where the dynamic understanding of pistis (#1) is absolutely essential.

The noun nike, and its later form, nikos, is used only five times total. In I Jn.5:4, referenced above, and also I Cor.15:54,55,57, it is celebrating his people’s sharing in Jesus’ victory over death / the grave (refer also to Heb.2, although the word is not there), and Mt.12:20, which quotes a messianic prophecy of Isaiah (42:1-4). In every instance, the “battle” in which both Jesus and his people have “overcome / conquered / been victorious”, is the ultimate struggle against the forces of evil and death. There is no reference whatever to the petty annoyances of life to which some folks love to apply it. (Perhaps they have never recognized the real enemy?) As in so many of our other studies, the real issue, whether on a personal or a corporate level, is “Who’s in charge here?” And the reply is clear (Rv.17:14) –”The Lamb will conquer them, because he is Lord of Lords and King of Kings, and those with him are called (#54) and chosen (#56) and faithful (#1)!”

There are a few other words that are rarely rendered “overcome” or “prevail”.

Peter uses hettaomai (II Pet.2:19-20) in warning his readers that they will become slaves to whomever / whatever they choose to allow to “conquer” them (similar to Paul’s use of nikao in Rom.12:21).
Luke employs katakurieuo (Ac.19:16) along with ischuo, to describe the defeat of the impostor-exorcists at the hands of a man possessed by an evil spirit.

Ischuo also appears in Ac.19:20 of the growth and success of the true message of the Gospel, and in Rv.12:8 of the dragon and his cohorts. Ischuo is more commonly used as one of the “power” words (#31), having primary reference to physical strength.

The prefixed form, katischuo, occurs only twice: emphasizing the inability of the “gates of hades/death” (Mt.16:18) to “prevail” against Jesus’ church, and the way the chief priests were able to beat down Pilate’s objections (Lk.23:23) to their lynch-mob.

Perhaps the most fascinating word of all in this group is hupernikao, a prefixed form of nikao. Liddell/Scott records only three writers to have used it: two of them renowned medical doctors – Hippocrates in the 5^th century BC, and Galen in the 2^nd century AD; and Paul in Rom.8:37.

The preposition huper may refer to something being “above, over, or beyond” normal expectations; or, if a relationship is being described, it can mean “on behalf of, for the benefit of” a person or cause.
As a prefix, it carries the flavor of “exceedingly” or “excessively” (English cognate, “hyper”!)
Medically, an active form of the verb might refer to a patient having “conquered” or “prevailed” to recover from his illness; a passive form might indicate that he succumbed to it. But Paul is not speaking of disease.

He has just listed a host of situations or conditions that might threaten one’s confidence or trust in the love of God. The subject is the all-encompassing completeness of God’s provision for every eventuality (not to avoid it, but to get through it), by the triumph of Jesus’ resurrection, even in the face of the most brutal persecution. It is “in all these things” that we are “gaining an exceptional victory (traditionally, “more than conquerors”) through the One who loved us.”

Slowly and carefully re-read vv.31-38, and let the picture soak into your consciousness.

No shallow boasting of “victory” over a stubbed toe, an unpleasant associate, or even a bad habit, is here. Rather, we are being provided with the “ammunition” required, to exercise the faithfulness described by John (I Jn.5:5), and to participate joyfully in the triumph of our King!

Thanks be to God!

This is another word about which we hear far too much!
Ubiquitous in hymnody, mystical literature, and groups with a pietistic orientation, it does not exist in New Testament writings! Find it if you can!

And with good reason: surrender is the last recourse of the conquered – those who have lost a war – a last-ditch effort to avoid total destruction! It is uniformly coerced – and there is no coercion in genuine Christian teaching! Jesus’ invitation is to deliberate, voluntary enlistment in his Kingdom! His people are called to join the winning team, not to plead for relief from disaster!

Now, it is certainly true that Jesus also spoke of “denying” (#68) one’s own self-interest, and “forsaking” possessions and other attachments (Mt.19:27,29; Mk.1:18, Lk.5:11, 14:23). But please note the tone of the parables with which he commended such action: Mt.13:44-46.
There is no coerced, mournful resignation or renunciation here!

The finder of the treasure in a field is so excited about his discovery that he hurries to sell everything he has in order to purchase the field – apo tes charas – out of his JOY!

Likewise, the merchant, who had been seeking (present tense – continuous effort) for fine pearls, upon finally discovering one of supreme value, deemed it well worth the expenditure of “all that he had.”

These gentlemen were neither mourning nor boasting of what they had “sacrificed” (#95) / “surrendered”. They were celebrating their great good fortune!

The writer to the Hebrews describes even Jesus’ endurance of an ignominious death as being “for the joy that was set before him” (Heb.12:2) – and that expectation as being fully and gloriously vindicated! Even such a dire situation is represented, not as “surrender”, but as ultimate triumph!

So where did all the “surrender” themes come from? My best guess is that it was an artifact of medieval mysticism, which arose as a lonely, introspective pursuit, that resulted when devout individuals were crowded out of the increasingly oppressive and opulent hierarchical institution that had replaced the simple New Testament brotherhood. Lack of a brotherhood leaves one who wishes to be faithful no alternative but a choice between two equally impossible options: either to withdraw into individualism, or to “forget the whole thing”. An extremely painful position.
It was also perhaps enhanced by the elevation to “sainthood” of spectacular “converts” like Augustine, who, tired of their lascivious luxury, “surrendered” it in favor of its opposite; or others who had actively opposed the Kingdom before signing on with the King.

The resulting atmosphere, in which “you have to be really, really bad – or at least say that you are – in order to be properly converted”, creates a dilemma which we have witnessed, in which serious young people have protested in confusion, “I want to commit my life to Jesus, but I can’t say I ran away from him or fought against him! It isn’t true!” It is just plain wrong to put people into such a situation!

If a Kingdom citizen’s deepest desire is faithfully to serve the King, what or to whom is he supposed to “surrender?” I strongly suspect that this teaching is just another effort to play on the vulnerability of sincere people, to feed their tendency to focus on self-condemnatory introspection (which, in addition to being contrived, is only self-centeredness in another costume), and keep them feeling “guilty” enough to be manipulated!

Lord, deliver us from those who demand “surrender,” and free us joyfully to seek your Kingdom above all!

Many of the words that are favorites of folks whose “gospel preaching” consists primarily of attempts to put their audience (read,”victims”) on a massive guilt-trip, occur rarely, if at all, in the New Testament, and seldom with the connotations which those “preachers” trumpet with such insistence. But this has to be one of the most abused words of all. In the traditional KJV that is so dear to their hearts, the English word “convict”appears only one single time (Jn.8:9),and “conviction” not at all! So much for their need to gloat over having brought people “under conviction”, to boast of the “strength of one’s convictions”, or of threatening folks with tender consciences that they must ransack their memories in order to be “convicted” of forgotten (or imagined) transgressions. There is no such teaching to be found in the New Testament – anywhere! (If you can find any, please feel free to comment. But be certain that you accurately quote a New Testament passage!)

The Greek word, elegcho, translated “convict” only in minor manuscripts of the John 8 passage cited above, where it describes the scene of the wannabe executioners slinking away at Jesus’ rebuke, does occur elsewhere, with other translations: “convince” 4x, “rebuke”5x, “reprove” 5x, and “tell one’s fault” 1x. Classically, it represents the language of the courtroom, or of philosophical debate. L/S lists “to disgrace, or put to shame; to treat with contempt; to cross-examine or question; to accuse one of doing wrong; to test or bring to proof; to be convicted (legally) of wrongdoing; to bring convincing proof; to refute (in a debate); to put right or correct; to decide a dispute; to expose a wrong or betray a weakness.”
The common English understanding of “convict” more closely parallels the passages where elegcho is rendered “convince” – Jesus challenges his accusers that they cannot “convince/convict” him of failing God’s standard (Jn.8:46); Paul describes an outsider being “convinced / convicted” (I Cor.14:24) by the prophetic messages of all the brotherhood to acknowledge that “God is surely among you all!”; and James makes the point that one dare not pick and choose only parts of the Law for observation, but that the Law itself passes equal judgment (“conviction”) on every transgression (2:9). Only in his letter to Titus (1:9) does Paul use elegcho in the context of debate or instruction.

Although elegcho was rendered “rebuke” and “reprove” 5x each, the more common word for those terms in Greek was epitimao (24x). Trench distinguishes between the two words, taking issue with the use of the word “reprove” for elegcho, considering that it fails to take into account the possibility of “being brought to one’s senses.” He holds that epitimao carries the notion of blaming, with no indication of whether the blame is deserved or not, and no assurance of its having any effect; whereas he thinks that elegcho describes a confrontation that at least causes a person to see his error, and hopefully to remedy it. This is more or less consistent with the L/S listing of “to assign blame, to censure, or the assessment of a penalty by a judge, for epitimao, although earlier, the term was also used for honor, or a price (the meaning of the root word, timao).

Epitimao is used of Jesus “rebuking” a storm (Mt.8:26, Mk.4:39, Lk.8:24), evil spirits (Mt.17:18, Mk.1:25, 9:25; Lk.4:35, 9:42), and a fever (Lk.4:39), however, and in all of these cases, the effect was both expected and dramatic – so that particular differentiation is probably not valid.

Certainly the use of elegcho in I Tim.5:20, Tit.1:13, 2:15; Heb.12:5, Rv.3:19 (translated “rebuke”) anticipates a change in behavior, as it does also in Jn.3:20, 16:8; Eph.5:11 and 13; II Tim.4:2 (translated “reprove”. Only the confrontation between Herod and John the Baptist (Lk.3:19) seems to have no expectation of improvement.
The instructions for dealing with a brother’s error uses elegcho in Mt.18:15 and epitimao in Lk.17:3.
In II Tim.4:2, both words are used together.
The usage, therefore, seems to suggest that the terms are nearly, if not entirely, synonymous.

Epitimao is the word used of the discussion between Jesus and Peter in Mt.16:22 and Mk.8:32-33, as well as in the incident of the disciples scolding the crowds for “bothering” Jesus with their children (Mk.10:13, Mt.19:13, Lk.18:15) and his correcting (Lk.9:55) their misunderstanding. This was also the demand of the Pharisees who thought Jesus should forbid the praises of his disciples and the children in the Palm Sunday procession and later in the temple (Lk.19:39), and also describes the efforts of the crowd who tried to silence the blind men who were calling to Jesus for help (Mt.20:31), as well as to refer to Jesus’ instructions to his disciples (translated “charged them”) (Mt.3:12, 8:30, 10:48, 12:16; Lk.9:21).

It remains for us to examine the much-quoted passage in John 16:8-11, which is frequently cited as justification for much of the guilt-tripping perpetrated under the guise of “evangelism” (See #18, 43, and 67). First of all, please note that the subject of the verb, elegxei (future tense), no matter how you choose to translate it, is parakletos, the “coach”, the Holy Spirit. It is his job, not ours!
Please note also that the object of the verb is “the world” (ton kosmon), not the disciples, nor those who are contemplating joining them! Indeed, it is in the disciple group, coached and enabled by the Holy Spirit, that “the world” is intended to see a demonstration of Kingdom living, and the revelation that “the ruler of this world” has been defeated!!! (Jn.16:11)
As we have seen, it is perfectly in order for more mature members of the Kingdom to correct the brethren when necessary – please refer to #116, and see earlier references to the epistles to Timothy and Titus in this study, and the familiar Mt.18:15 passage – but it is not our job to reform (convict, rebuke, or reprove) the world, or to attempt to force Kingdom behavior upon those who have no commitment to our King. Kingdom behavior must be enabled by the Holy Spirit – there is no other way!

It is as the “outsider” experiences the life of the gathered group of disciples (I Cor.14-24-25), prophesying (see #45) and interacting under the instruction of the Holy Spirit, that he will be “convinced / convicted”, acknowledging the presence of God.

May we continually strive to become the welcoming brotherhood where this can happen!

Here is another word, requested several times, of which the commonly understood meaning has departed markedly from its historical usage.  It needs to be studied in conjunction with “transformation” (#97) and “repentance” (#6). All three of these share more in common than is usually realized, and all imply deliberate alteration in one’s behavior, rather than simple assent to a set of theoretical propositions or “beliefs.”

Even in traditional English translations, epistrepho, the primary Greek word, out of 39 New Testament appearances, is rendered “convert” or “converted” only 7x.  It is much more  commonly (and correctly) translated “turn” (16x), “turn about”, “turn again” (4x each), “return” (8x), and “come” or “go again” once each.

Likewise, strepho, the same word, but without a prefix, is rendered “converted” only twice, and some form of “turn” 16x.

Obviously, the translators thought they were dealing with a different concept in those aberrations: but perhaps that was due to the theological understanding of their own era taking precedence over etymology.  This is not a rare occurrence.

Liddell / Scott lists 14 meanings for epistrepho.  Remember, they have compiled the ways that a word has been used historically.  By far the most common, as well as the earliest use, is simply “to turn around”.  This is followed by: to put an enemy to flight, to return, to turn towards, to turn one’s attention toward or pay attention to, to turn or convert from an error (to correct), to repent (exclusively LXX and NT), to cause to return, to curve or twist (as a path), to be distorted, crooked (of a tree), or curled (hair), to conduct oneself or behave in a particular way, (and as a participle) earnest or vehement.

The uses of strepho are even more varied, including: to cause to rotate on an axis, to overturn or upset, to plow, to sprain or dislocate a joint, to twist or torture, to plait (braid), to wrestle, to turn something over in one’s mind, to give back, (in alchemy) the transmutation of metals,  to turn to or from an object or person, the revolving or cycling of heavenly bodies, to turn or change.

Of New Testament usage, likewise, the vast majority, for both words, involves physically turning around or returning: Jesus, or someone else, “turned and said …” or “returned” to where they had been before.  As we consider the passages where this is not the case, please keep in mind that the idea of physical turning is the primary meaning.  This implies, as we saw in “repent”, a deliberate change of direction and/or attention.

The most frequent traditional use of “convert” or “be converted” for epistrepho (there are only 7) is in quoting the prophecy of Isaiah (6:9-10) regarding the deliberate choice of the Israelite people not to pay attention to God’s instructions:  Mt.13:15, Mk.4:12, Jn.12:40, Ac.28:27.  The others are Jesus’ instructions to Peter (Lk.22:32) that he should “strengthen his brethren” after recovering from his desertion; James urging his readers (5:19-20) to seek the restoration of one who falls into error; and Peter’s admonition to his listeners to “repent and be converted” (Ac.3:19) to remedy their distress at recognizing their rejection of Jesus as the Promised One.

The only appearance of the noun form, epistrophe, (Ac.15:3) celebrates the enrollment of Gentiles into the Kingdom.

There are nine instances where “turning to God”, whether applied to the people of  Israel (Lk.1:16,17) or to the Gentiles (Ac.9:35, 11:21, 14:15, 15:19, 26:20; II Cor.3:16, I Thes.1:9), is mentioned;  in each, a change of life / direction is clearly indicated, not merely an acknowledgment of some theoretical argument.  This is also the case in Ac.26:28, “turning from darkness to light”.

Turning can also go the wrong direction, as in Gal.4:9 and II Pet.2:21.

The uses of strepho (the same verb, but without a prefix), are even more heavily weighted in favor of physically turning around. The exceptions are Jesus’ declaration (Mt.18:2) that Kingdom membership requires “being converted” to the attitude of small children;  (Ac.7:39) the Israelites’ desire to return to Egypt; and (Ac.7:42) God’s consequent “giving them up”.

In view of this evidence, I am inclined to suggest that other contemporary uses of the term “convert” may be more accurate than  the usual “Christian” usage.  For example:

–        an engine may be “converted” to run on a different kind of fuel

–        a factory may be “converted” to make a different product

–        land may be “converted” to raise a different crop

–        zoning may be “converted” to allow different developmental use

I’m sure you could get any number of good illustrations from these and other such modern usages.

They all share the implication of tangible, observable change – none are restricted to theoretical constructs or opinions.

As we saw in the studies of faith / faithfulness (#1), repentance (#6),  life (#28), transformation (#97), and many others, “conversion” is a much more active concept, with more readily observable results, than is commonly supposed.
It might well be characterized as the process of “naturalization” into Kingdom citizenship, “with all the rights,  privileges, and responsibilities thereby incurred.”

It is the beginning of the life that the gracious King has designed and prepared for his people.

Thanks be to God!

Let’s get one thing straight from the beginning. Scripture is clear, and Jesus said plainly, that he desired (Jn.17:24), planned (Jn.6:39-40), and provided (Jn.14:1-4) for his people to share life with him – permanently. Paul (I Cor.15) even goes so far as to say that without the resurrection (#35), we might as well forget the whole thing (v.17-18)! Although he represents the resurrection of committed disciples to have taken place, symbolically and practically, at their conversion and baptism (Rom.6:1-9, Col.2:12), and asserts that their / our new life has already begun, he clearly expects something more (I Thes.4:13-18) when Jesus returns.

Huge amounts of ink have been spilled over when, exactly, that resurrection takes place. None of the references to it make any mention of “heaven”, as we have seen. Opposing “sides” have stockpiled their textual “weapons”, some to insist that it is all instantaneous at the moment of physical death (citing the thief on the cross), and others to maintain that those who have passed on are “asleep” (a common euphemism for death both in and out of Scripture) until the Lord’s return (as suggested in the I Thes.4 passage). This whole controversy strikes me as rather silly, since, if “time shall be no more” (Rv.10:6), the “timing” couldn’t possibly matter – or even be discernible!

When Jesus spoke of “eternal life” (W.S.#28), it was almost always in the present tense, and predicated, as in Jn.3:36, upon obedience and faithfulness to the Son of God, and not upon subscribing to any list of “doctrines”. Indeed, the tense is occasionally even perfect: Jn.5:24 – (the faithful person) “has passed from death into life”! John reiterates that statement in his first letter (3:14) – it must have made an impression on him!

Nevertheless, (physical) death was / is still a “fact of life”: it was for Jesus himself, and has been for even the most faithful of his people. Jesus is the only one who said anything about “where” he was “going” – and his statement was simply, “I am going to the Father” (Jn.14:12, 28; 16:28), or “to the one who sent me” (Jn.16:5). For Paul, (Phil.1:23) “to depart and be with Christ” was an attractive prospect. But notice that this is embedded in a much longer discourse about faithful living.

Most of the references to a person having died say no more than that: whether the person was faithful – like Simeon, (Lk.2:28), John the Baptist (Mt.14:10-11 and parallels), Stephen (Ac.7:54-56), Dorcas (Ac.9:36), and James (Ac.12:1) – or unfaithful – like both Herods (Mt.2:19, Ac.2:23), Ananias and Sapphira (Ac.5), and Judas (Mt.27:5) – or innocent, like the children of Bethlehem (Mt.2:18)– they just “died”. Please also refer to the previous post regarding the people who subsequently were raised. As noted there, there is no instance where they are said to have “gone” anywhere. The young man at Nain “sat up and talked” (Lk.7:15), Lazarus simply walked out of the tomb (Jn.11:44), and Dorcas “opened her eyes and sat up” (Ac.9:40). Luke (8:55) says that the little girl’s “spirit returned”, without saying from where. Jesus also committed his spirit to the Father at his death (Lk.23:45). Matthew (27:50) and Mark (15:36) speak of his having “released” his spirit, and John (19:30) says “yielded.” As he was stoned, Stephen prayed, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” (Ac.7:59). Please note that the word used in each case is pneuma – “spirit / breath” (W.S.#52) – and not the pagan concept of “soul” psuche. (Refer to discussion in #28, “life”).

We have also treated the word aion, aionios in the study on “life” , and seen that its reference is virtually impossible to pin down. The easy cop-out, rendering it “eternity, eternal, or forever” simply does not work in many places. For example, do you really think Jesus intended to say that he would accompany his disciples (Mt.28:20) “to the end of eternity”? I don’t think so!
Jesus’ responses to people who asked him about “eternal life” – even if the questioner thought they were referring to an afterlife – were exquisitely practical – “Do this, and you will live / enter into life!” is the refrain. Like “entering the Kingdom”, (#19,20,21), this happens during one’s physical life on earth! And a more accurate (yes, “literal”) translation of Jesus’ statement in Jn.11:26, in answer to Martha’s postponement of resurrection until the “last day” (v.24), is “Everyone living, who is faithful to me, will not die forever!” If he had meant “never die”, he would have used oudepote, and not eis ton aiona. Millions of faithful people have died – but not forever!

The epistles, concerned as they are with the faithfulness of living brotherhoods, make rather few references to death, except to say that it is really not a problem. Although Paul, who was probably thoroughly tired of sitting in jail, writes to the Philippians that he’d really like to “depart the be with Christ” (1:23), which he calls “far preferable”, his focus is that “Christ be magnified in my body whether through life or through death” (v.21).
In other contexts, “death”or “dead” is used as a description of total alienation from God and his ways (Rom.6,7,8), of people’s condition before their commitment to Jesus’ Kingdom (Eph.2:1, 2:5, Col.2:13), of the expected complete abandonment of one’s former way of life (Rom.6:11, 8:10, Heb.6:1, 9:14), or as identification with Jesus in his death and resurrection life (Rom.6:1-13, 8:11, I Cor.15, Eph.5:14).
Since the epistles were frequently written in a context of extreme persecution, however, the reality of the constant threat of execution is not ignored. Jesus had given fair warning that the time would come when (Jn.16:2) “everyone who kills you will perceive that he is offering service to God!” Paul himself (Ac.9:1, 22:4) had shared that perception before he met Jesus! But in his new life, he expressed a new attitude in II Cor.1:9-10, and II Cor.4:11,12 is buttressed with v.16-18. John relays Jesus’ message in Rv.2:10 to beleaguered brethren,and Paul reassures the Roman church (8:38) that death does not have the last word.
I really believe the primary lesson here is that it’s not about what happens to ME, either before or after physical death. It’s about faithfully representing Jesus and his Kingdom, regardless of the consequences either now or later!

We can say this because there is yet another glorious truth, far too frequently neglected in what passes for “Christian teaching”. Paul refers to it in II Tim.1:10 – (Jesus) “DESTROYED death, bringing to light life and immortality through the Good News!” and I Cor.15:26 – “The last enemy to be destroyed is death!” “So then, if we are living, we are living for the Lord, and if we die, we are dying for the Lord. Whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord!” (Rom.14:8).
The situation is even more vividly described in Heb.2:14,15: through (his) death, (Jesus) once-and-for-all destroyed the one who has the power of death, that is, the devil, and rescued those who, by fear of death, were held in slavery all their lives! One who does not fear death, cannot be enslaved or otherwise coerced!
“He (Jesus) died on behalf of everyone, in order that those who are alive might no longer be living for themselves, but for the one who died and was raised on their behalf!” (II Cor.5:15).
Jesus himself said it most simply: “Because I am alive, you also will be alive!” (Jn.14:9)

Where? When?
Here is one follower of the Lord Jesus who really doesn’t care.
In the words of an old hymn, “It’s heaven to me, wherever I be, if he is there!”
And of that, his promise is certain.

Thanks be to God!

OK, I might as well admit it at the beginning: I have procrastinated about this study, because I know it will rattle a lot of cages. Ask the average individual who has an “evangelical” bent, of whatever “flavor”, why a person should identify with / “believe in” Jesus, and you are likely to hear some variation on the theme, “in order to go to heaven when you die.” Search the New Testament, however, and you will fail to find a single reference to that objective. It simply isn’t there, folks.
Oh yes, I know that people have concocted elaborate collections of “proofs”, by combining poorly translated phrases gleaned from dissected bits of “verses” completely isolated from their contexts. Most of these owe their “success” (read, “believability”) to the mistaken notion that the “Kingdom of God” (Matthew calls it the Kingdom of heaven) is entirely a future phenomenon – an idea that we have shown to be in error in studies #19, 20, and 21.
A careful perusal of the word “heaven” itself results in a very different picture.

Ouranos, ( as well as its related words) is the only Greek word ever translated “heaven.” It is also rendered “sky” and “air”. These choices were made wholly at translators’ discretion: there is no guidance in the grammar or vocabulary to lead one way or another, except one’s perception of the context – (birds, for example, fly in the “air” – Mt.6:26). If one wishes to translate “literally”, therefore, he must concede that any of these three words is an equally legitimate choice, in every instance.

Historically, the primary meaning of ouranos, according to Liddell/Scott, was “the vault or firmament of heaven/sky, where the stars and other heavenly bodies are set”. It also included “the universe”, “climate”, or “anything shaped like the vault of heaven: a roof, ceiling, lid, tent, or pavilion” or even “the roof of one’s mouth, the palate”, as well as being considered the abode of the gods (but not of dead mortals, however illustrious or exemplary their earthly lives may have been.)

Many of these ideas appear in the New Testament. “Heaven” is a part of creation, along with the earth and the sea (Mk.13:27, Ac.2:5, 2:19, 4:24; Eph.1:10, 3:15; Col.1:16, 1:23; Rv.5:13, 10:6,14:7, 14:15). With them, it will eventually“pass away” (Mt.5:18, 24:35; Mk.13:31, Lk.16:17, 21:33; Rv.20:11).
It is where the stars are (Mt.24:29, Mk13:25, Heb.11:12, Rv.13:10, 9:1); the location of clouds (Mt.24:30, 26:64, Mk.14:62, Ac.1:11); where rain comes from (Lk.4:25, 17:29; Jas.5:18), and how one can predict the weather (Mt.16:2,3; Lk.12:56). It provides a metaphor for great distance or extent (“from one end of heaven to the other” Mt.24:31 and parallels), and “every nation under heaven” (Ac.2:5, Eph.3:15).

But the New Testament also expands the reference to include “the throne of God” (Mt.5:34, Ac.7:49), the dwelling of the Father (14x in Matthew alone), the “place” where both Jesus (Jn.3:13,6:38) and the Holy Spirit (I Pet.1:12) came from; where Jesus presently resides (Mk.16:19, Ac.3:21, 7:55, Heb.9:24, 12:25; I Pet.3:22), and from whence he is expected to return to earth (I Cor.15:47, Phil.3:20, I Thes.1:10, 4:16; II Thes.1:7).
Heaven is represented as the source of visions (Jn.1:32, Mt.3:16, Mk.1:10, Lk.3:22, Ac.2:2, 9:3, 22:6, 10:11, 11:5-10, II Cor.2:2, II Pet.1:18, and throughout the Revelation),
the source of the “assignments” of both John the Baptist and Jesus himself (Mt.21:25, Mk.11:30, Lk.20:4,5),
and also of “signs”, especially regarding the Lord’s identity (Mt.6:1, Mk.8:11, Lk.11:16) and his return (Lk.21:11, Mt.24:30).

It is the abode of some (not all) “messengers” (see reference to aggelos in “Helps for Word Study” lesson 3) – (Mt.18:10, 22:30; Mk.12:25,13:32; Lk.2:15, 22:43), and also of “powers”, both benign and malevolent (Mk.13:25, Lk.21:26).
The names of faithful disciples are recorded there (Lk.10:20, Heb.12:23).
“Rewards” – Lk.6:23,(W.S.#98) and “treasures” (Mt.6:20, 19:21, and parallels) are “on deposit” there.
Decisions regarding matters on earth (Mt.16:19, 18:18) are represented as being made “in heaven”.

Interestingly, however, the much quoted parable of the respective fates of the rich man and the beggar (Lk.16:19-31) does not employ the word ouranos at all, nor do the accounts of any of the individuals raised from death: Lazarus (Jn.11), the daughter of Jairus (Mk.5:35-43, Lk.8:49-56), the widow’s son (Lk.7:11-17), and Tabitha / Dorcas (Ac.9:36-42). None of these regaled their audiences with tales of “visits to heaven” or anything of the kind. We will look at the entirely separate issue of “death” in the next study.

The epistles, which we have referenced only briefly up to this point, reveal a slightly different perspective. Both Paul (Eph.4:10) and the writer of Hebrews (7:26) speak of Jesus’ exaltation “above” or “higher than” the heavens, and Paul details the obligation of all creatures “in heaven and on earth and under the earth” to worship at his feet (Phil.2:9).
Peter refers to the heavens, although “made” by the word of God (II Pet.3:5), “passing away” (3:7, 3:10), “being on fire” (3:12)– (Wait a minute!  that’s not where we’ve been told fire was!) — , and he looks forward, as does John, repeatedly in the Revelation, to “a new heaven and a new earth” (3:13), in which, at last, “justice will settle down to live”!
Our hope (Col.1:5), our Master (Eph.6:9, Col.4:1), the focus of our behavior (Phil.3:20), our destined “dwelling” (physical body?) (II Cor.5:2), our enduring – as opposed to confiscated – possessions (Heb.10:34), our inheritance (I Pet.1:4), are all presently “in heaven”, despite the surprising discovery that nothing is said about anybody but Jesus and the two “witnesses” / martyrs from Rev.11:12,13,15 actually “going there”! (Rom.10:6, Heb.9:24, 4:14).
In fact, Peter (Ac.2:34), Paul (Rom.10:6) and John (3:13) all assert that this is impossible for ordinary mortals!
Although in John’s visions recorded in the Revelation, there are numerous scenes of thousands “around the throne” singing praises, remember that neither the time, the individuals (except for their faithfulness), nor the geographical (or cosmological) location is specifically identified.
In the final scene, the New Jerusalem is seen “coming down from God out of heaven (Rev.21:2) after the introduction of the “new heaven and new earth.”

Stay tuned, and review the studies of the Kingdom (#19,20,21) and “Life” (#28) in preparation for an examination of the New Testament approach to the “destiny” of the faithful.