Christ promises to be present with church courts when they assemble in His Name officially to decide disciplinary matters, Christ likewise promises to be present when these same church courts officially assemble God’s people in Christ’s Name to worship Him. In these official, authorized church gatherings in Christ’s Name, we may rightly expect God’s promised presence.

In Matthew 18:20, Jesus promises that “where two or three are gathered together in My name, I am there in the midst of them” (cf. 1 Cor. 5:4). Does this mean that two Christians gathering at a restaurant for lunch have achieved a Temple experience? Put another way, when can we be confident that God will fulfill His promise to be especially present?
The context of Matthew 18:20 demonstrates that this promise is given to the official courts of the church. Jesus is speaking about church discipline. If a professing believer will not repent of his sin after being confronted, first privately and then with witnesses, Jesus tells us to bring the matter to the “church.” But who is “the church” here? It is an organization rendering judgment on a member. This is the church as a court. But that raises another question: Who sits on that court? Should we convene all the members together to decide a discipline case? No. Rather, the Biblical practice is for leaders to judge the members of God’s people (e.g., Ex. 18:13ff; Dt. 21:1ff; 1 Ki. 3:5ff; Ezra 10:14ff; Acts 15; Acts 20:17ff; 1 Cor. 6:3-6). God has always committed the judgment of sinning members to the spiritual leaders He has appointed, not to Christians casually meeting for lunch together.
Read More
Related Posts:

Written by Dr. Lisle |
Thursday, January 6, 2022
The events of Genesis 1-11 are recorded in the same historical narrative style as Genesis 12-50 with its straightforward prose, its attention to detail in names and ages, and the content of the first eleven chapters flowing seamlessly into the remaining chapters.  Genesis is not written as a parable, poem, myth, or fictional story.  Thus, to assert that Genesis is myth (or mytho-historical) is a violation of exegetical principles.  Moreover, there is no evidence that any biblical author thought of Genesis 1-11 as anything other than straightforward history.

We begin with a brief review of our analysis of William Lane Craig’s claims regarding Genesis 1-11 from his recent article on the historical Adam.  We have seen that Genesis 1-11 has all the markers of historical narrative.  Namely, it is written in the same literary style as the other historical books with long chains of the Hebrew waw-consecutive.  It lists details that are not germane to the point of the narrative, such as specific names and ages of persons (even those not involved in the main events) and highly detailed chronologies.  These indicate history and would bog down a fictional/mythical story.  Furthermore, these chronologies flow seamlessly into the historical figures mentioned in Genesis 12-50 – a section of Scripture that even Craig admits is straightforward history.  In contrast, myths like the Epic of Gilgamesh are usually written in poetic form; yet Genesis lacks the key characteristics of Hebrew poetry.  Clearly, Genesis 1-11 matches the literary form and style of Genesis 12-50.
And what about the content?  Contrary to Craig’s claims, the content of the creation account in Genesis is starkly different from the content of Ancient Near Eastern origins myths.  Pagan origins stories generally involve a very old universe that exists in a state of chaos, until a chaos monster is slain which brings about the good world of today.  Genesis starts with God who speaks the universe into existence in six days, each step being good until the final result is “very good.”  Humans introduce death into the world by sinning against God.  The events are recorded with none of the obvious symbolism or analogies present in parables, but rather as literal events.  All other references in Scripture to Genesis 1-11 take the narrative as literally historical.  Furthermore, the Bible states that the events in Genesis 1-11 have repercussions in the world today – something that is only possible if such events literally happened.  And so, if we are going to be rational and take the text as written, we must admit that Genesis 1-11 is straightforward history.
This of course contrasts with the secular claim that the universe began in a big bang billions of years ago, and that life came about as a result of evolution.  Many Christians have been duped into believing that such secular speculations are “science” or at least supported by science.  Nothing could be further from the truth since science is predicated upon the literal historicity of the Bible including biblical creation as we have explored previously.  Therefore, Christians who have mindlessly accepted evolution but still profess to believe the Bible must somehow deal with the fact that Genesis contradicts the secular origins stories.  Rather than admitting that they don’t believe Genesis 1-11, the usual tactic is to say, “I believe it, just not literally.  I don’t interpret the text the way you do.”  This of course could be done with any portion of Scripture that a person doesn’t want to accept.  A person could equally well declare “I do believe that Jesus rose from the dead – just not literally.  The Gospels are written in the form of myth.” However, the Bible does not give us permission to interpret the text any way we like.  We must interpret it according to its context.  And we have seen that Genesis 1-11 lists the events that happened in the world in straightforward, non-poetic narrative, just like Genesis 12-50.  Thus, we must interpret them accordingly.
All other books of the Bible that refer back to Genesis do so as if the events recorded therein actually happened as written.  Yet, William Lane Craig has stated that he believes that Genesis 1-11 is not to be taken as straightforward history.  So, how does he attempt to reconcile the biblical references to the history in Genesis with his belief that Genesis 1-11 is not straightforward history?  We continue to analyze his recent article on The Historical Adam.
Craig: When we turn to the New Testament, we find the figure of Adam widely deployed, most importantly by Paul.
Lisle: It is clear that Paul understood Adam and Eve to be real people, and the events of Genesis 1-11 to be real history with real consequences in the world today.  See for example, Romans 5:14-15; 1 Corinthians 15:22-23; 2 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:13-14.
Craig: Many scholars have attempted to distinguish between the literary Adam and the historical Adam. The literary Adam is a character in a story, specifically the stories of Genesis 2–3. The historical Adam is the person, if such there be, who actually existed—the actual individual whom the stories are allegedly about.
Lisle: It seems that Craig is going to suggest that New Testament references to Adam are not necessarily always asserting the historical reality of the person (the historical Adam), but possibly references to a character in a fictional, allegorical, or embellished story (the literary Adam).
Craig: By way of analogy, the Pompey of Plutarch’s Lives is the literary Pompey, whereas the Roman general who actually lived was the historical Pompey. What we want to know is how closely the literary Pompey of the Lives resembles the historical Pompey. ­Similarly, we want to know how closely the literary ­Adam of Genesis 2–3 resembles the historical Adam, if such there be—or more precisely, whether New Testament authors assert that the literary Adam of Genesis 2–3 closely resembles the historical Adam.
Lisle: Is there any evidence in the New Testament that the authors thought of Adam as merely a literary character in a story rather than a historical person?  Is there any evidence in Scripture that any of its authors thought that the events recorded in Genesis were not real history, but merely a mythical story with useful illustrations?
Quite the opposite.  Most of the biblical references to the events of Genesis would make no sense unless Genesis is real history.  For example, a fictional story cannot have real-world consequences – something that Craig himself concedes later in his article.
Read More

Death is about separation. Our hope is about reunion. Soul and body will be forever reunited, gloriously. The believing dead and believers who are alive at the second coming will be reunited, and all believers will be gathered to Christ, forever. Our hope reminds us that death is not the final word. In the providence of God, it is one step toward the grand accomplishment and realization of God’s purpose to gather His people to Himself in Jesus Christ. This hope cannot but transform our experience of grief. We certainly grieve in view of the tremendous loss that death has brought into our lives, but we grieve in view of the blessings that are sure to come.

When considering death, what is our hope? Strictly speaking, our hope is not a what but a who. It is Christ Himself and all the benefits that we enjoy in Him. Hebrews tells us that we have a “hope that enters into the inner place behind the curtain, where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf ” (Heb. 6:19–20a). Ralph Wardlaw’s well-known hymn praises “Christ, of all my hopes the ground.” Our hope is in Christ, and our hope is Christ.
In particular, the “blessed hope” of the believer is the “appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works” (Titus 2:13–14). Our great hope is the return of Christ in glory. Every Christian eagerly awaits the return of Christ and the full experience of eternal life in Him—this is our “blessed hope.”
Encourage One Another with These Words
What does this hope look like when we mourn the loss of believing loved ones? How does this hope give us comfort and strength in such times? How can we help our fellow believers to lay hold of this hope in their grief?
Paul’s words to the Thessalonians in 1 Thessalonians 4:13–18 answer these questions. While it is difficult to sort out all the details of what was troubling the Thessalonians, the main lines are clear. This is a young church, and many of its members have been recently converted from gentile paganism. Their believing loved ones have died, and they do not know how to respond biblically. Paul is concerned that they will lapse into the familiar cultural response of “griev[ing] as others do who have no hope” (1 Thess. 4:13).
In this passage, Paul applies the truth of the gospel to the Thessalonians’ mourning. The gospel does not do away with our grief, but it transforms our grief. Paul is going to explain how that is so. There is a direct, practical component to Paul’s teaching. Paul expects the people of the church to “encourage one another with these words” (1 Thess. 4:18). He wants them to take what he says in verses 14–17 and to share these truths as means of comfort to fellow believers in need. This duty does not belong simply to the elders, deacons, or especially mature Christians. It belongs to all believers. We need to gather up the truth of these verses so that we may minister that truth to hurting believers.1
Paul offers at least five lines of comfort and encouragement to grieving believers.

“We believe that Jesus died and rose again” (1 Thess. 4:14).

The first comes in verse 14: “We believe that Jesus died and rose again.” Paul here makes three points. First, Jesus has died. In His death, He conquered death. Jesus paid the penalty of sin that merits death, bore the curse of the law on behalf of sinners, and propitiated the wrath of God. Second, Jesus rose again. After three days in the grave, Jesus was raised to newness of life. His body, transformed by the Spirit, is glorious and fit to dwell in heaven. Possessed by the Spirit and possessing the Spirit, our risen Savior shares the Spirit with us, giving blessing, life, and glory to us by the Spirit. Raised from the dead, Jesus gives us every assurance that we will one day be powerfully and gloriously raised from the dead also. Third, Paul reminds us that “we believe”—that Jesus has died and been raised. Paul is saying more than that we assent to these historical facts as facts. We do assent to them, but we have also placed our trust in Christ as Savior and Lord to accomplish the same for us. Our whole lives are lives of faith in Christ, crucified and raised from the dead (2 Cor. 5:7; Gal. 2:20). Because it is true that Jesus died and was raised from the dead, and because we have put our trust in Him as Savior, we have the comfort we need to grieve in hope and to help our brothers and sisters do the same.

Believers who have predeceased us are “the dead in Christ” (1 Thess. 4:16).

The second line of comfort and encouragement is found in 1 Thessalonians 4:16. Believers who have predeceased us are “the dead in Christ.”2 Even in death, the believer remains united to Christ. Death has not destroyed the bond between that person and Jesus Christ. The whole person remains united to Christ—soul and body. His soul has immediately entered the presence of Christ, which is “far better” (Phil. 1:23) than even life in Christ on earth. He has entered his reward and rest. His body rests in his grave as in his bed, awaiting resurrection dawn. Surely our union with Christ affords us great hope and comfort when we mourn the loss of believing loved ones.

“The dead in Christ will rise first” (1 Thess. 4:16).

Paul’s third line traces a timetable of future events. He says that “the dead in Christ will rise first” (1 Thess. 4:16) and that this will happen immediately after the return of Christ (“for the Lord himself will descend from heaven,” (1 Thess. 4:16).
Read More
Related Posts: