Common Error Types in Interpreting the Revelation

Posted on October 20, 2025 by jackpelham

This is a quick article I’ve written to assist a friend who is researching eschatology (“end times” teachings). The goal is not so much to target specific conclusions about such things, but common methodological errors that I’ve observed many make over the years. You’ll find that much of my concern here is about the state of mind and the character of the reader.

I hope these considerations are helpful to you in your own puzzling over end-times matters.

  1. Bad Assumptions. One big class of mistake is this: To assume in advance that we know what the Revelation is about, rather than letting the book tell us itself. We can impose our own ideas onto the text, rather than really listening to it. Some of the items that follow are specific instances of this general class of error.
  2. Timing. It’s a mistake not to listen to the now-ancient text when it tells is that it was about “things that must soon take place” (Revelation 1:1, and several other such statements). Many assume instead that it was written nearly 2,000 years ago, mostly to tell about events that wouldn’t happen until our time or afterwards. They are not listening to what it says ― which is a terrible mistake to make when handling the Word of God. An excellent study exercise is this: Read the entire Revelation, highlighting every time statement made in it. I.e.: “soon”, “quickly”, etc. Judge for yourself whether the imminence of it seemed to be a pressing theme of the author.
  3. Separating from the Greater Context. It’s a mistake to assume that the Revelation is a stand-alone work, and that it’s not deeply rooted in the rest of the scriptures. This fact can ruin the fun of the casual sleuth, making it obvious that we need to become good students of the wider body of Bible literature instead of just entertaining ourselves by taking a casual stab here and there at what the Revelation means. The one who draws on the rest of scripture in interpreting the Revelation can reach vastly-different conclusions that the one who has nothing else to go on but the Revelation itself. The original audience of the Revelation was not one that was ignorant of the larger body of scripture, but that was expected to be familiar with it.
  4. Separating from Major First-Century Events. Example: There’s a mass resurrection described in Matthew 27:51-53, but many interpreters of the Revelation make no attempt to let this event instruct their understanding of the Revelation. Was this one of the resurrections mentioned in Revelation 20:4-6? If so, which one? And if not, why would it bear no mention in the Revelation, which was written later in the same century as that mass resurrection?
    Similarly, many will read the Revelation with little idea that the Temple in Jerusalem was utterly destroyed in 70AD, in a judgment long foretold by God and his prophets, and that had been recently foretold by Jesus in the First Century. Should this historical fact be in view as we interpret the Revelation? Would the author really have skipped these mega-events in order to tell us a story wholly about something else?
  5. Conflating Metaphor and Non-Metaphor. Example: Some take 6:3 literally (“…the stars of the sky fell to the earth…”), not realizing that the author has already explicitly demonstrated that at least sometimes, he uses “stars” as a metaphor for angels (Revelation 1:20 “…the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches…”). Another such thing to examine is all the “thousand years” talk in Revelation 20. Scripture famously addresses “a thousand years” in not just one other place, but two: Psalm 90:4, and 2 Peter 3:8, both passages rather cryptically, and without explaining themselves, equating the “thousand years” figure with “a day”. Is the well-informed member of the Revelation’s original audience supposed to know this when he gets to Chapter 20? Is he supposed to have the whole body of scripture in mind, or is he supposed to doggedly refuse to consider anything else he has learned from the Word of God as he’s interpreting the meaning of the Revelation?
    NOTE: There may also be instances where errors are made by assuming that passages intended literally by the author of the Revelation were intended instead as metaphors.
  6. Reading Linearly, As If from a Timeline. Many will assume that the way the author presents the material in the Revelation is a simple timeline of events, from start to finish. The miss the possibility that the author, from time to time, presents information in “tableau” fashion, as if to bring the various pieces of a larger puzzle into view before telling the audience how those pieces fit together. For example, I would suggest that Revelation 12:1-6 is just such a “tableau”, bringing to mind this “woman” and this “dragon” (who can be identified from elsewhere in scripture) before launching into an account of the “war in heaven” that involved this dragon. (Read the whole chapter here.) I think it’s highly likely that there are several other such tableau passages in the Revelation, and it may not make good sense to try to read them into the timeline in strict chronological order.
  7. Separating from the Original Audience. Many will read the text as if it had been written for us in 2025, and without a thought as to the fact that it was written nearly 2,000 years ago to an audience contemporary with the author. In other words, we read with only ourselves in mind, where it would make much more sense to read with that original audience in mind. That is to ask, what would they have understood? What would this have meant to them? Knowing what they knew already, how would they have taken this?
  8. Not Accounting for Modern Manipulation. Many today will adopt modern interpretations of the Revelation without having accounted for the biases and motives of those who are promoting those interpretations. They may have no idea what underlying motivations could be at play, such as financial or political motivations, for example. They do not realize they may be being manipulated.
  9. Assuming the End of the World. It is very popular to assume that the Revelation is generally about the end of all life on Earth as we know it. And with this assumption in mind, the reader can easily interpret more and more of the Revelation to be painting such a picture. A very fruitful study, however, is this: List every judgment in the Revelation, noting whether any is said to destroy Planet Earth, or to destroy all life thereon. If it is not expressly stated, are we safe to assume it? And have we done our due diligence in surveying alternative possibilities?
  10. Doing the Math on Revelation 21:1.
    Revelation 21:1 Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.
    It’s easy for us to assume an old Planet Earth being literally destroyed, and a new one being put literally in its place. It’s harder for us, however, to understand why such a thing would be necessary when it comes to Heaven. Just why would that be? What was wrong with the First Heaven that it would need to be replaced? Do we really understand this?
    And what’s up with “the sea was no more”? Isn’t that part of Planet Earth? And if you’re going to get a New Earth, wouldn’t it naturally be expected to come with a New Sea? So why is this part left out in the new picture?
    I submit that these questions (and our great difficulty in answering them well) demonstrates that we are not very well qualified to understand the Revelation. Most of us, it seems, simply take this interpretation (of Planet Earth being replaced with a new one) as what we are being told, and give it little thought thereafter. But I don’t think we should presume this to be true if we can’t explain what could possibly be going on here. Indeed! Have we given any thought to other possibilities? Imagine, for example, that what we’re being told about here were not a literal replacement of Heaven and Earth (without any Sea this time), but simply a new order of things, where Satan is no longer in charge, but God and Jesus are. And would it help you to know that the “sea” is an ancient metaphor for the chaotic reign of evil? What if we’re being told about a new order of things in which there was simply no need for a place for Satan and his rebel angels, since they had already been put permanently in the Lake of Fire? Do we really know enough to rule this out? Are we really in a good position simply to ignore this possibility, and plow headlong into the common assumptions about what the Revelation means?

Let’s face it: Most of us are not Bible scholars, and are simply unequipped in our present state for handling such far-reaching considerations very well. We are amateurs at best. And further, we tend not to understand just how susceptible we are to the way that information is first framed for us by those who present it to us. We have no idea that had it been presented in a different way, or a different order, we might have drawn very different conclusions about it.

I believe that the Revelation was meant to be understood by the well-informed Christians of the day in which it was written. But we are not them. And to complicate our difficulties considerably, it was written to be cryptic, so as not to reveal its treasures to outsiders. We can become insiders if we study enough, but we don’t do ourselves any favors when we simply assume that we are insiders, and that we should naturally understand it without having to work at it pretty hard. Sadly, I’ve seen far too many moderns arrogantly assume that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit will make the Revelation’s meaning plain to them, just by their reading it, and without having to lift a scholarly finger to see what all of this kind of writing had been done in the many centuries of Bible history that preceded the First Century. Well, it’s not working. And even so, though there are a great many such people arrogantly assuming that they’ll understand it, they are not reaching the same conclusions, and are considerably at odds with one another in their interpretations.

Whatever the Revelation is describing, it was to happen in short order, and was imminent at the time the book was published. (There’s considerable disagreement on the timing of this, ranging from the late 60s to the late 90s AD.) It’s a fundamental mistake, then, to go looking for the bulk of its fulfillment in our own day, or even future to us. If you assume it’s about “the end of the world”, then you can easily prove to yourself that it hasn’t happened yet, because you can see that “the world” is still here. But I question the assumption that this is what it was about. I think instead that it was about the end of a temporary order of things that had been running a long time, and that had been prophesied as coming to an end, to be replaced with a new order of things. I believe you’ll find much discussion of this in a Bible study about the “age” and the “ages” and the transition between the two, and the then-imminence of it all. (I asked Grok 3 to compile a list of passages.)

In short, Jesus had finally arrived and had “fulfilled” the Law of Moses, which fulfillment was ushering in a new “age” from what had existed before. I believe that much of the language about these things was metaphorical in nature, such what we might seem to us like “end of the world” talk was only “end of the age”. Similarly, we do well to ask the question about “the end times”: “the end of what?” It’s too easy to assume that it simply meant “the end of existence”, or something like that. But this is much too simplistic a view, and does not serve us well. A brief survey of the body of language about “end times” and “last days” and such can instruct us considerably.

This topic is one for the long-game student, and the casual 1-day seminar student is going to be quite prone to making mistakes in judgment. I do believe the the Revelation can be understood by us moderns fairly well, though not fully. And I certainly see how, if I were wickedly inclined, I could use the Revelation to spin quite a story for modern-day political purposes, making an audience more agreeable to the machinations of some particular political regime. I could tell them that this or that current event is nothing more than the rumblings of such-and-such prophecy about to be fulfilled in our own lives. And I could get them to overlook the logical fallacy that what was written 2,000 years ago as “must soon take place” is to be read by us today as if it were written to us today and about us today. Sadly, people tend to believe what they want to believe, and I could help them imagine all manner of reasons to believe any of a number of false scenarios about our near future.

Interestingly, one of the things that a great many people really want to believe is this: Nobody would be so twisted as to want to deceive me about the right interpretation of the Revelation. But when faced with differing interpretations, they quickly shift to thinking that some definitely want to deceive them, and if not that, that those people are simply mistaken. Well, then, why couldn’t they be mistaken themselves? Is this an impossibility?

Which of these could be wrong?:

  • God would not let me be wrong about this.
  • God would not let my preacher be wrong about this.
  • If I were wrong about this, I would know it.

If the church down the road can get this wrong (as many will certainly believe), then why can’t one’s own church be wrong about these things?


    Posted in Prophecy, Religion | Leave a comment

    If Matthew 18:15-17 Really Is About “Conflict Resolution”, Why Don’t They Obey It As Such?

    Posted on October 13, 2025 by jackpelham

    Bible versions disagree about whether Matthew 18:15 is about “If a brother sins….” or “If a brother sins against you…”. The implications are quite huge and important. But while I’ll explore all that elsewhere, the purpose of this president article is to examine whether the camps that say it’s about “conflict resolution” are doing what it says, or whether they are disobeying it.

    For the record, here’s a pretty straight-forward translation of the passage in question, with the late insertion in red:

    Matthew 18:15 “Now if your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be confirmed. 17 And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, he is to be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”

    You can see a list of the English translations here.

    And here are my questions about obedience to these directions, assuming they are indeed the directions Jesus gave:

    1. How often do Christians in this camp go to the having-sinned-against-them believer to “show him his fault”?
    2. How often do they do it in private?
    3. How often are they really listened to in that meeting ― which is to ask, how often do they truly win their brother over?
    4. When they do not win their brother over in that first meeting, how quickly do they obey and go find one or two others to witness a second attempt at hashing the matter out? How often does it get put off? And how often is it put off indefinitely? How often do they disobey this step, say, by reason of “Oh, I actually forgave the offense.”?
    5. Does it really say, “…but don’t confront him if you forgive it.”? Or is that just a popular assumption by which we let ourselves off the hook?
    6. Hypothetically speaking, what would happen in a church culture that habitually “forgave” these things, and did not press the matter so that the offending brother was pressured to repent of them, as in the instructions?
    7. When the one or two others do go along, how often does it happen that they actually confront him themselves, such that he should “listen to them” as it says ― and how often are they just silent observers?
    8. Do those chosen as witnesses consider themselves under a Jesus-appointed obligation in this matter? Is this a regular occurrence in their Christian lives, or a rare one? Should it be regular?
    9. In the event that the offender does not repent in the second meeting, how often do the two or three confronters actually take it to the assembly?
    10. When it is taken to the assembly, is the matter actually heard by the congregants? And do they actually speak to the offender? Or is this part typically co-opted by church leadership, who step in to “represent” the assembly as proxies? If the latter happens, how is it that the offender ever gets to a chance to hear what the assembly says?
    11. I notice that there is no mention of voting in this text. How many camps assume that it calls for voting the offender in or out?
    12. What did it mean to “treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector”? Does anyone even know? Do modern Christians look this up and find out, or do they never get this far?
    13. Does this shunning equate to what the Didache says here?:
      Didache 15:3 Rebuke one another, not in wrath but peaceably, as ye have commandment in the Gospel; and, but let no one speak to any one who walketh disorderly with regard to his neighbour, neither let him be heard by you until he repent.
    14. Is this command in Matthew 18:15-17 the same thing Paul is writing about here?:
      1 Corinthians 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church[b] whom you are to judge? 13 God judges[c] those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
    15. Is it the same thing Paul is writing about here?:
      2 Thessalonians 3:13 As for you, brothers, do not grow weary in doing good. 14 If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. 15 Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother.
    16. Is it the same thing Paul is talking about here?:
      Titus 3:10 As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

    I have never once in my life seen any church anywhere make a regular and authentic practice of this passage ― whether they think it should contain the insertion or not. I think that the insertion is popularly used to keep the passage from being about sin in general, but even then, then some brother does sin “against them”, they still won’t obey the instructions even in that situation! It’s just a shallow attempt at dodging their Jesus-commissioned responsibility in the matter.

    The result of this neglect is an assembly filled with members who are conditioned to think that as long as somebody “forgives” their offenses, they don’t have to repent of anything or improve themselves in any way whatsoever.

    In short, I see a world of churches who simply do not want to live this responsibly, and who opt instead for some sort of spin on this passage, so as to pretend that it’s OK not to do what the Master commanded.

    And I ask you: even if the insertion is excluded, what’s the harm in that? What’s the harm in teaching the Christian to abandon every sin and error? Would that be so bad? Indeed, the word here for sin (hamartia) simply means “to miss the mark”. It’s an archery term, about that commonplace occurrence of failing to hit the bullseye when shooting. And what would be the harm of training all Christians to hit the mark in living the Christian life?

    Do we really think we know better than do obey Jesus in this?

    If you want to insist on the “against you” insertion, then fine; you have absolved yourself from having to get involved in anybody’s sin if it is not lodged directly “against you”. But I’m not sure how much this helps you, since in this world, believers will sin against nearly every day ― and if not that, certainly every week. Why, then, do you not handle it as directed when it does happen?

    Why cheat the Lord’s instructions and pretend that “forgiving” the sin is a reason not to confront it as directed? Why neglect the edification and correction of that brother, and leave him out in the cold to improve himself without your Jesus-commanded assistance?

    Doesn’t that kind of behavior smack of this?

    Luke 10:29 But he, desiring to justify himself, said to Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who stripped him and beat him and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road, and when he saw him he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he journeyed, came to where he was, and when he saw him, he had compassion. 34 He went to him and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he set him on his own animal and brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 And the next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper, saying, ‘Take care of him, and whatever more you spend, I will repay you when I come back.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, proved to be a neighbor to the man who fell among the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” And Jesus said to him, “You go, and do likewise.”

    I don’t think this parable was really about literal wounds from robbers; I think it was about helping one’s neighbor in need, whatever the trouble. And I don’t think that Jesus was applauding the behavior of those who would “pass by on the other side”. Rather, I think he condemned it.

    So I don’t see how you’re helping yourself, friend, when you claim that this passage is not about sin in general, but only about “conflict resolution”, when you won’t even obey it faithfully in that instance. I think it shows a problem with your heart if you are not driven to obey the Master.

    Jesus wanted his followers to follow him in every principle. He wanted them to have help with everything, no matter how small, how large, or how often they had to address it before they finally got it right, and could obey it habitually. That was the way of life he handed down to his ekklesia. But this is so not the kind of life taught in the churches today.

    James 5:19 My brothers, if anyone among you wanders from the truth and someone brings him back, 20 let him know that whoever brings back a sinner from his wandering will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.

    Who will do this work for Jesus in such faithless churches?

    Much could be said about this, of course, but it has already been said, and by Jesus and his own apostles. Why, then, should one such as I bother to say it again on his own watch? Are not the scriptures sufficient?

    Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

    Matthew 18:15 Translations with and without “Against You”

    Posted on October 13, 2025 by jackpelham

    Here are 64 English Bible translations of Matthew 18:15. Of these, 53 adopt the “against you” idea that didn’t appear until the 4th or 5th Century AD in the Codex Washingtonianus. Earlier manuscripts lacked the “against you” idea, and spoke only of “If your brother sins…”, and not of “If your brother sins against you…”. The way it seems to me, the implications of this difference are huge. I’ll write about all that elsewhere, but the purpose of this page is simply to display the different English translations conveniently for your study.

    The 11 renderings in blue font lack the insertion.

    —————————————————————————–

    KJ21 – “Moreover, if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    ASV – And if thy brother sin against thee, go, show him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    AMP – “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens and pays attention to you, you have won back your brother.

    AMPC – If your brother wrongs you, go and show him his fault, between you and him privately. If he listens to you, you have won back your brother.

    BRG – Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    CSB – “If your brother sins against you, go tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    CSBA – ‘If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    CEB – “If your brother or sister sins against you, go and correct them when you are alone together. If they listen to you, then you’ve won over your brother or sister.

    CJB – “Moreover, if your brother commits a sin against you, go and show him his fault — but privately, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won back your brother.

    CEV – If one of my followers sins against you, go and point out what was wrong. But do it in private, just between the two of you. If that person listens, you have won back a follower.

    DARBY – But if thy brother sin against thee, go, reprove him between thee and him alone. If he hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    DLNT – “But if your brother sins against you, go, expose him between you and him alone. If he listens-to you, you gained your brother.

    DRA – But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.

    ERV – “If your brother or sister in God’s family does something wrong, go and tell them what they did wrong. Do this when you are alone with them. If they listen to you, then you have helped them to be your brother or sister again.

    EASY – Jesus said, ‘If your Christian friend has done something wrong against you, you must go and speak to him. When you are alone with him, tell him what he has done that is wrong. He may agree with what you say. If he does, then you can call him your friend again.

    EHV – “If your brother sins against you, go and show him his sin just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have regained your brother.

    ESV – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    ESVUK – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    EXB – “If your ·fellow believer [L brother (or sister)] sins against you, go and ·tell him what he did wrong [L reprove/convict/correct him] ·in private [L between you and him alone]. If he listens to you, you have ·helped that person to be your brother or sister again [L gained/won back your brother (or sister)].

    GNV – ¶ Moreover, if thy brother trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he hear thee, thou hast won thy brother.

    GW – “If a believer does something wrong, go, confront him when the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have won back that believer.

    GNT – “If your brother sins against you, go to him and show him his fault. But do it privately, just between yourselves. If he listens to you, you have won your brother back.

    HCSB – “If your brother sins against you, go and rebuke him in private. If he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    ICB – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him what he did wrong. Do this in private. If he listens to you, then you have helped him to be your brother again.

    ISV – “If your brother sins against you, go and confront him while the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have won back your brother.

    PHILLIPS – “But if your brother wrongs you, go and have it out with him at once—just between the two of you. If he will listen to you, you have won him back as your brother. But if he will not listen to you, take one or two others with you so that everything that is said may have the support of two or three witnesses. And if he still won’t pay any attention, tell the matter to the church. And if he won’t even listen to the church then he must be to you just like a pagan—or a tax-collector!

    JUB – ¶ Therefore if thy brother shall sin against thee, go and reprove him between thee and him alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    KJV – Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    AKJV – Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

    LSB – “Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault, between you and him alone; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    LEB – “Now if your brother sins against you, go correct him between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    TLB – “If a brother sins against you, go to him privately and confront him with his fault. If he listens and confesses it, you have won back a brother.

    MSG – “If a fellow believer hurts you, go and tell him—work it out between the two of you. If he listens, you’ve made a friend. If he won’t listen, take one or two others along so that the presence of witnesses will keep things honest, and try again. If he still won’t listen, tell the church. If he won’t listen to the church, you’ll have to start over from scratch, confront him with the need for repentance, and offer again God’s forgiving love.

    MEV – “Now if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    MOUNCE – “If · your brother sins, · go and point out his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won back · your brother.

    NOG – “If a believer does something wrong, go, confront him when the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have won back that believer.

    NABRE – “If your brother sins [against you], go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother.

    NASB – “Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    NASB1995 – “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    NCB – “If your brother wrongs you, go and take up the matter with him when the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over.

    NCV – “If your fellow believer sins against you, go and tell him in private what he did wrong. If he listens to you, you have helped that person to be your brother or sister again.

    NET – “If your brother sins, go and show him his fault when the two of you are alone. If he listens to you, you have regained your brother.

    NIRV – “If your brother or sister sins against you, go to them. Tell them what they did wrong. Keep it between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them back.

    NIV – “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over.

    NIVUK – ‘If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over.

    NKJV – “Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother.

    NLV – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him what he did without other people hearing it. If he listens to you, you have won your brother back again.

    NLT – “If another believer sins against you, go privately and point out the offense. If the other person listens and confesses it, you have won that person back.

    NMB – Moreover, if your brother trespasses against you, go and tell him his fault between him and you alone. If he hears you, you have redeemed your brother.

    NRSVA – ‘If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.

    NRSVACE – ‘If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.

    NRSVCE – “If another member of the church sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If the member listens to you, you have regained that one.

    NRSVUE – “If your brother or sister sins against you, go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone. If you are listened to, you have regained that one.

    NTFE – “If another disciple sins against you,” Jesus continued, “go and have it out, just between the two of you alone. If they listen to you, you’ve won back a brother or sister.

    OJB – And if your Ach b’Moshiach sins against you, go and reprove him in private, just between the two of you; if he listens to you, you have gained your Ach b’Moshiach.

    RGT – “Moreover, if your brother trespasses against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have won your brother.

    RSV – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    RSVCE – “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother.

    TLV – “Now if your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault while you’re with him alone. If he listens to you, you have won your brother.

    VOICE – Jesus: This is what you do if one of your brothers or sisters sins against you: go to him, in private, and tell him just what you perceive the wrong to be. If he listens to you, you’ve won a brother.

    WEB – “If your brother sins against you, go, show him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained back your brother.

    WE – `If your brother does something wrong to you, go to him. Talk alone to him and tell him what he has done. If he listens to you, you have kept your brother as a friend.

    WYC – But if thy brother sinneth against thee, go thou, and reprove him, betwixt thee and him alone; if he heareth thee, thou hast won thy brother.

    YLT – `And if thy brother may sin against thee, go and show him his fault between thee and him alone, if he may hear thee, thou didst gain thy brother;

    Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

    Are the Hypocrites Between You and God?

    Posted on July 31, 2025 by jackpelham

    (Please pardon the ALLCAPS. I authored this on Facebook, where it’s the easiest form of emphasis.)

    Back when I was in the “one true church”, we’d invite a lot of people to church and I’d occasionally run across one who would shun church categorically on account of all the hypocrites in religion. Such a response quite obviously sidesteps the question of what THEY should be doing — which is not to say that it must necessarily be a dodge, or be dishonest, irrational, and irresponsible. But it requires a nuanced and wise response — better than I ever managed to figure out back then.

    At the time, I thought I was quite clever to respond along these lines: “Well, if you’re letting those people keep you away from God, you are farther from God than they are.”

    But this, too, was a dodge to some degree. Did I deal headlong with the problem of hypocrisy in the churches? No, just as the one invited was not (yet?) dealing headlong with the question of his OWN spirituality. Rather, it was just a semi-clever semantic argument. And in retrospect, I don’t remember that it ever convinced anybody. Indeed, it seems more one of those things more intended to speak to my fellow churchmates, rather than to the one objecting to the hypocrisy. That is, to reassure them that we were in fact doing the right thing.

    But WERE we doing the right thing? Well, yes and no. If you were to score us all-around, you’d probably find that we had adopted better doctrine than most churches, were more dedicated and active, took it more personally, were more accountable and more invested in it. I could have easily said to that naysayer, “Oh, you might be right about the churches in general, but you need to see THIS church; it’s different!”

    And I’d have been right; it WAS different. But it was also the same. It had its successes, its bright spots, its strengths, its accomplishments. But it also had its weaknesses, too. And we were largely blind to them. To me now, it’s plain as day that one of the huge and glaring problems was that we didn’t faithfully practice the commands in Matthew 18:15-17.

    Matthew 18:15 “Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault just between the two of you; if he listens to you, you have won him over. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two others along, so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be confirmed. 17 And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, he is to be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”

    Many of my churchmates will think I’m crazy about this. “WHAT???,” they would say, “We followed Matthew 18 all the time!!!”

    But did they really? Yes, they’d confront each other about sin, but not whenever it happened. There was frequent hesitation to do it, and there was the frequent dodge of saying, “Oh, well, I FORGAVE that sin, so I didn’t have to confront it.” Uh, did Jesus SAY you don’t have to confront it if you forgive it????

    (See, all they’re thinking about is their own part in it, and they’re not thinking about what’s best for the one who sinned— that he get help dealing with it properly.)

    Yes, we did Matthew 18 more than any OTHER church I’ve ever seen. But never once in 17 years of being there did I ever see an instance of the congregational meeting Jesus called for. Not once. In 17 years.

    And I’ve never seen that ANYWHERE. Any. Where.

    So, then, we were a partially-restored church at best. But when the subject of hypocrisy arose, we’d take a defensive stand against it, employing some rhetoric like I mentioned above, rather than to take the matter of hypocrisy straight-forwardly. And it makes sense to me now that we did not UNDERSTAND the matter of hypocrisy straight-forwardly back then, for we were caught up in it ourselves, and hadn’t worked our way out of it.

    Why couldn’t we see that Matthew 18 was so much about the GOOD of the one who sinned? Why couldn’t we see that it was also about US having the courage to help a brother? Why wouldn’t we see that this is what the Master commanded, and that he did not list the exceptions to the rule that we commonly assumed?

    When God told King Saul to completely destroy an enemy and all their flocks, and Saul saved some of the flocks, God confronted him about it, and Saul actually claimed he HAD obeyed. God’s incisive reply was, “What, then, is this bleating of sheep in my ears?”

    To God, it was obvious. Not so much to Saul.

    And why not? Well, Saul’s problem was that he was not “a man after God’s own heart” like imperfect David was. David would mess up terribly, but he kept coming back to God. Saul, on the other hand, was aloof and dishonest about his sins, even to the point of denying the obvious. That’s quite twisted and self-deceived, and yet here he was, doing it in the name of God himself, as the anointed king of Israel! And that’s pretty messed up.

    So, this person I had invited saw a problem with hypocrisy in the churches, and I had seen it, too — except not so much in my own church, and not so much in my own life. The dubious prayer, “I thank you, Lord, that I am not like those sinners over there,” comes to mind.

    Of course, what SHOULD have happened is this: I should have looked that person in the eye and said, “You know, hypocrisy is a HUGE problem, germane to us all, and we all stumble in it if we’re going to espouse some certain principle, for we will most likely fall short in it, and have need to keep correcting ourselves until we have mastered the thing. I’m glad you’re concerned about hypocrisy, and the challenge for all of us is to be more concerned about it when WE do it than when others do it.”

    But I wasn’t wise enough then to see it that way. Rather, I was contented with my snappy comeback about how “that makes the hypocrites closer to God than you are.”— as if the MAIN thing that is needed here is simply to be a member of a church — as if the church members have pretty much accomplished what REALLY needs accomplishing, merely by virtue of being members, and as if the rest of what is needed is sure to follow.

    But it was NOT sure to follow. 17 years, and never once did I see such a meeting as Jesus commanded. Not once. There was a sensibility at work in the church that somehow quietly assumed that we knew better than Jesus on this subject. If such a meeting were really necessary, surely the LEADERS would call it. And they DIDN’T call it, so it must not really be necessary. That’s about as far as the “reasoning” ever needed to go to satisfy us.

    But this is what the Lord, Master, Teacher, Creator, and Messiah commanded:

    Matthew 18:15 “Now if your brother sins, go and show him his fault just between the two of you; if he listens to you, you have won him over. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two others along, so that on the testimony of two or three witnesses every matter may be confirmed. 17 And if he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, he is to be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.”

    There are no exceptions stated here. One (pretty bad) book I listened to recently pretended something like this: If the offense is too great to be overlooked in love, then you should….

    And NOW it occurs to me that this fine-sounding argument is really quite twisted. Overlooked in LOVE? If “love” would overlook an offense without confronting it, why in the world would the loving Master command the confrontation? Indeed, why did HE confront so much sin and error and ignorance? Was he sinning to do so?

    Perish the thought!

    He even asked them “are you still so dull?” — and I can’t count the times he confronted ignorance and challenged attitudes and repeated commands. This was not sin; it was his MISSION. He called them to REPENTANCE. He expect them to actually CHANGE their minds and change their actions.

    Best I can tell, we were about the best church running. Even so, we stopped half way there. It’s as if our goal had been to worship a Half Jesus, never REALLY listening to the whole of him and his teachings.

    And why couldn’t we see this?

    Well, there are probably several reasons for this. Pride comes to mind — that and a fair dose of persecution complex, where we assumed that if we were being persecuted we must be in the right — and where we assumed that if we were in the right, we were WHOLLY in the right, and not in need of improvement ourselves.

    Indeed, if were HAD realized just how much improvement of which we were in need, wouldn’t we have understand what was REALLY going on in Matthew 18? Wouldn’t we have seen that it was the very practice that could lead us all quickly to maturity in Christ?

    But we had found our groove — our comfort zone. We were comfortable being in between the worldlier churches and Jesus, counting ourselves better, yet not being willing to listen actively and meticulously to ALL he commanded. We were comfortable being less comfortable than they were, but not comfortable going all-out to obey Jesus no matter what — and not comfortable THINKING about it, so as to figure this out.

    But I see it now.

    Posted in Character, Dysrationalia, Philosophy, Religion | Leave a comment

    The Righteous, Order, and Matthew 18:15-17

    Posted on July 19, 2025 by jackpelham

    The righteous recognize that there’s a proper order of things, initiated by God himself. They understand that they, and everyone else, were created according to the image and likeness of God ― and they understand this metaphorically, not that they look like God, but were designed to be like him in some other ways. They understand that God has many qualities, and is honest, rational, responsible, kind, stern, resolute, proactive, just, and serving, to name a few. They understand that he wants them to be like this, too, even though they cannot possibly equal him in every way, since they lack both his powers and his role as God and Creator.

    Continue reading →
    Posted in Character, Religion | Leave a comment

    Like Strangers in a Foreign Land

    Posted on July 14, 2025 by jackpelham

    I had known I’d need more exercise,
    But had hoped it wouldn’t take much.

    I had known my diet needed more attention,
    But had hoped it wouldn’t take much.

    I had known my kids needed more of my time,
    And that my retirement needed more preparation,
    But had hoped it wouldn’t take much.

    I had known I should love my friends and family more,
    And that my character needed more effort,
    But had hoped it wouldn’t take much.
    And I had known that my religion required more devotion,
    But had hoped it wouldn’t take much.

    And then I studied Jesus and discovered that
    Although it sure might look like this life
    Is just about getting from day to day,
    It’s really about getting from world to world ―
    About preparing for the next world while still in this one,
    If we dare.

    It’s about who will care enough to undergo the training
    For that world to which any of us could go if he cared enough.

    And then, bit by bit, I began to see things differently here ―
    To see the challenges less as needless and stupid bothers,
    And more as necessary training for what is to come.
    And I began to see how that the first and greatest commandment
    Calls for all one’s heart
    And all one’s mind
    And all one’s soul
    And all one’s strength.
    And it all started to make sense to me.

    And I, who had hoped it wouldn’t take much,
    Have come to see that the real glory in life
    Isn’t just in getting by, but in learning
    To give one’s all for worthy purposes.

    And now I think that this world is about
    Finding people for that next world
    Who want to live that way,
    And who already have some
    Practice in doing it ―
    Who have some skin in the game.

    Our bodies are hard-wired from birth
    To seek out the easiest way,
    But the test here seems to be not about our bodies,
    But about we will live in our spirits.

    And we could ― if we wanted ―
    Adopt in our spirits, in this very lifetime,
    The way of that second world ahead of time,
    While we are still here in this one,
    Living like strangers in a foreign land,
    And striving for more than seems
    Natural and normal to the others.

    And this is how God seems to pick
    Who gets to go there
    When we are done.

    Posted in Character, Philosophy, Poetry, Religion | Leave a comment

    The Delusion upon which the “Two-Party System” in the US Operates

    Posted on June 26, 2025 by jackpelham

    The corrupt “two-party system” that has a chokehold on the US seems to operate on something like the following delusional thinking:

    DEMOCRATS

    1. What I think my party stands for is very good.
    2. What I think the other party stands for is very bad.
    3. When my party messes up, it’s excusable because of the good they’re trying to do. Mistakes do happen.
    4. When the other party messes up, it just proves that what they stand for is very bad.
    5. I can trust what my party tells me. If it were not so, they would have told me.
    6. I cannot trust what the other party says. It’s corrupt to the core, whether it comes from error or intentional deceit.
    7. I can trust my party to tell me what the Constitution says and means.
    8. If I were wrong about this, I would know it. If there were a better way than this, I would know it.

    REPUBLICANS

    1. What I think my party stands for is very good.
    2. What I think the other party stands for is very bad.
    3. When my party messes up, it’s excusable because of the good they’re trying to do. Mistakes do happen.
    4. When the other party messes up, it just proves that what they stand for is very bad.
    5. I can trust what my party tells me. If it were not so, they would have told me.
    6. I cannot trust what the other party says. It’s corrupt to the core, whether it comes from error or intentional deceit.
    7. I can trust my party to tell me what the Constitution says and means.
    8. If I were wrong about this, I would know it. If there were a better way than this, I would know it.

    THE TRUTH

    A. The leaders and elected officials and bureaucrats and civil service workers of both parties thrive off of the corruption in the US.

    B. Both parties claim allegiance to the Constitution when it suits them to do so, but neither does all it could to support and defend the Constitution.

    C. The system thrives off of its negligence to prosecute the wrongdoing of the players. And this simply feeds the fire that keeps numbers 1-6 above in play.

    D. They keep us divided on purpose, pitting us against one another, when the PRIMARY conflict — the one that really matters — is between them and the Constitution they publicly swear to uphold. If that Constitution needs changing, why don’t they change it, rather than cheating it?

    E. There are indeed differences between us philosophically, and these differences are deliberately fed and structured so as to keep the division viable. As long as it’s roughly a 50/50 split, the deadlock seems readily believable. “If only we could get control of all three branches—-THEN we could really get some reforms done!”

    F. There is no provision in the US Constitution for political parties at all — and much less, any provision for there being only TWO of them, nor for those two parties having a chokehold on the Congress and on the electoral system.

    G. Americans don’t read about the Constitution, and don’t really care what it says, as much as they may talk about it. (See point 7 above.)

    H. Most people are content to live under points 1-7. The system works for the masses, who are content to live in it, even though it may be considerably aggravating to them. They are not apt to think it through, nor to push for much reform.

    I. The outliers, who DO think about such things and who study the Constitution for themselves are very few in number, and have very little power under the Constitution, because the Constitution was based on the since-debunked assumption that most people will act rationally in their own best interests. (This idea is known as the “standard economic model”.) The framers assumed that the public would be as thoughtful about the process as they themselves had to be while designing the structure of the system.

    J. Meanwhile, the officials keep taking those Oaths to support the Constitution, but in almost every case, it’s a huge lie, for they have no intention whatsoever of keeping it. And the public knows so little of what the Constitution says that they wouldn’t know a violation of it if it bit them in the hiney. See #7 above.

    K. It’s similar to a good-cop/bad-cop system. The Democratic side of the artifice and scheme seems tasked with leading the way in moving away from the Rule of Law under the Constitution, and the Republican side is tasked with making a show of fighting this corruption, while generally failing to stop it much. (They have a “victory” occasionally, but on the whole, it’s a losing battle, and the Conservatives eventually end up working to conserve the corruptions they were speaking out about a decade earlier.)

    L. The people — most of them — find this system very believable, and are quite willing to occupy themselves with the thoughts in items 1-7 above. They will not think their way out of it.

    M. The majority of them might well appreciate it (in time, after the dust settled) if the system were completely reformed, but someone else would have to do it FOR them, for they are not apt to figure it all out for themselves, and much less, to do any work to that end. Indeed, what CAN they do legally but to vote and to protest and to petition the incorrigible and vast government? But voters tend to vote, concerned about RIGHT NOW, and not with the big picture in view. Indeed, they do not spend much time considering the big picture, but are content with the view in items 1-7 above.

    N. So yes, our government is corrupt and most certainly could use a reform so sweeping as to rival the reform of a total abolishment and rebuilding of the government.

    O. But that government thrives off of the delusion of the masses, and continues to feed and maintain that delusion, restructuring it as needed to keep the machine running — always trading in emotions and biases and lies, rather than in virtue, justice, and sound policy.

    P. And why is government like this? Because you can’t get rich being a public servant and protecting the Rule of Law under the US Constitution. It’s about having money and power. And if the OFFICIALS were virtuous, the corrupt PUBLIC couldn’t keep voting themselves funds from the public treasury. So the pandering continues, along with the corruption that results from it. The corrupt leaders prey on the corruption of the public, who themselves are not sitting at home thinking about the PRINCIPLES behind all this, anyway.

    Q. It’s a very base system, and far from the honorable, noble thing it is held out to be.

    S. It keeps its secrets and protects its crimes. It commits atrocities from time to time, and covers them up. It molests those who seem to threaten the system too much to be risked or tolerated. And it has great powers of coercion, highly organized and highly effective.

    T. It would take a LOT of public servants willing to sacrifice themselves for the cause to turn this corruption around. Meanwhile, lacking that, this system is likely more vulnerable to failing under its own weight. But to counter this, it continues to build the US empire across the world, drawing more from from others, to keep from bankrupting itself. It has no charter for this, of course, but don’t expect the citizens to notice this. (See point #7 above.)

    U. The majority of the citizens claim to be Christians, but do not follow the teachings of Jesus well enough that they end up hating all this corruption and becoming the kind of self-sacrificing people who are apt to change a corrupt system. They end up being highly trained in giving lip service to Jesus while not living as he taught and demonstrated they should live — which situation is strikingly like the way they handle the Constitution. Jesus sees all this, but he does not MAKE them repent. Instead, repentance is for volunteers only, and very few among the people are volunteering for this “narrow way”.

    V. Other than the *original* teachings of Christianity, what other religion is going to result in the kind of non-corrupt public we need and the kind of non-corrupt public servants we need? Islam? Judaism? Taoism? Hinduism? Confucianism? Buddhism? The American churches have not cared to discover the original teachings of Jesus in the scriptures, and to put them into practice. Instead, they have made just another worldly religion out of what used to be the one true religion — as if Jesus weren’t real after all, and were NOT going to judge them for taking on the name of Christian in vain.

    W. Only people of such high character (like Jesus) can withstand the temptations that the wicked bring to bear against government officials. If we can’t get enough of those people, both in office, and in the voting booth, there’s no hope of doing much better than the current morass. A valiant president, if we can get one, can be tolerated by the system until he has termed out — and if not, he can be impeached/convicted or assassinated — and once he is done in office, all his reforms overturned. He might make a splash, but he can’t create the tidal wave necessary to wash away even HALF of this great delusion that plagues this country.

    X. The people who actually understand these things, and who can resist the temptation have attained these high virtues not BECAUSE of the institutions of which they are members, but IN SPITE OF THEM. They are too few in number, and have no special leverage in this system, although their philosophy is superior to the going philosophy of the system. And this system is not going to reorganize itself so as to give those people more power in the oversight of this government.

    Y. And so it is that this system is exceedingly worldly, based on delusion, and REQUIRING it to keep functioning. A righteous, reality-based people would reject the system, but there are far too of those, by four of five orders of magnitude.

    Z. A righteous king could save us from this, but he’d pretty much have to kill or imprison the sitting government to do it. And then what would we do when he dies and the king’s stinking son takes over? So, the only real and long-lasting solution here is to make the PEOPLE themselves more righteous — MUCH more righteous. And how are you going to do that with the fake Jesus we get at church, or with the government itself educating the citizens at school?

    Posted in Activism, Character, Fallacy, Philosophy, Politics, Religion, Rule of Law | Leave a comment

    Acts 2:38 — “Receive” or “Take”?

    Posted on June 25, 2025 by jackpelham

    KJ21 Then Peter said unto them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    ASV And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    AMP And Peter said to them, “Repent [change your old way of thinking, turn from your sinful ways, accept and follow Jesus as the Messiah] and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ because of the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    AMPC And Peter answered them, Repent (change your views and purpose to accept the will of God in your inner selves instead of rejecting it) and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of and release from your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    BRG Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    CSB Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    CEB Peter replied, “Change your hearts and lives. Each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    CJB Kefa answered them, “Turn from sin, return to God, and each of you be immersed on the authority of Yeshua the Messiah into forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh!

    CEV Peter said to them, “Turn to God and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    DARBY And Peter said to them, Repent, and be baptised, each one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for remission of sins, and ye will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    DLNT And Peter says to them, “Repent, and let each of you be baptized on-the-basis-of  the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    DRA But Peter said to them: Do penance, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins: and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    ERV Peter said to them, “Change your hearts and lives and be baptized, each one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ. Then God will forgive your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    EASY Peter said to them, ‘Each of you must stop doing wrong things. You must change how you live. If you believe in Jesus Christ, then we will baptize you. God will forgive you for the wrong things that you have done. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit, who is God’s gift to you.

    EHV Peter answered them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    ESV And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    ESVUK And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    EXB Peter said to them, “·Change your hearts and lives [Repent] and be baptized, each one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    GNV Then Peter said unto them, Amend your lives, and be baptized every one of you in the Name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins: and ye shall receive the gift of the holy Ghost.

    GW Peter answered them, “All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift.

    GNT Peter said to them, “Each one of you must turn away from your sins and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, so that your sins will be forgiven; and you will receive God’s gift, the Holy Spirit.

    HCSB “Repent,” Peter said to them, “and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    ICB Peter said to them, “Change your hearts and lives and be baptized, each one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    ISV Peter answered them, “Every one of you must repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus the Messiah for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift.

    PHILLIPS Peter told them, “You must repent and every one of you must be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ, so that you may have your sins forgiven and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For this great promise is for you and your children—yes, and for all who are far away, for as many as the Lord our God shall call to himself!”

    JUB Then Peter said unto them, Repent and be baptized each one of you into the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    KJV Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    AKJV Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    LSB And Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    LEB And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized, each one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    TLB And Peter replied, “Each one of you must turn from sin, return to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; then you also shall receive this gift, the Holy Spirit.

    MSG Peter said, “Change your life. Turn to God and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, so your sins are forgiven. Receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. The promise is targeted to you and your children, but also to all who are far away—whomever, in fact, our Master God invites.”

    MEV Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    MOUNCE And Peter said to them, “Repent and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NOG Peter answered them, “All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Yeshua Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift.

    NABRE Peter [said] to them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the holy Spirit.

    NASB Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NASB1995 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NCB Peter answered, “Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NCV Peter said to them, “Change your hearts and lives and be baptized, each one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NET Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NIRV Peter replied, “All of you must turn away from your sins and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then your sins will be forgiven. You will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NIV Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NIVUK Peter replied, ‘Repent and be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NKJV Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NLV Peter said to them, “Be sorry for your sins and turn from them and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, and your sins will be forgiven. You will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NLT Peter replied, “Each of you must repent of your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NMB Peter said to them, Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NRSVA Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NRSVACE Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NRSVCE Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NRSVUE Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    NTFE “Turn back!” replied Peter. “Be baptized—every single one of you—in the name of Jesus the Messiah, so that your sins can be forgiven, and you will receive the gift of the holy spirit.

    OJB And Kefa said to them, “Make teshuva (repentance, turning from chet to Hashem) and each of you submit to a tevilah of teshuva in the Shem of Yehoshua HaMoshiach, for the selichat avon of you, and you will receive the matanah of the Ruach Hakodesh.

    RGT Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the Name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    RSV And Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    RSVCE And Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    TLV Peter said to them, “Repent, and let each of you be immersed in the name of Messiah Yeshua for the removal of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Ruach ha-Kodesh.

    VOICE Peter: Reconsider your lives; change your direction. Participate in the ceremonial washing of baptism in the name of Jesus God’s Anointed, the Liberating King. Then your sins will be forgiven, and the gift of the Holy Spirit will be yours.

    WEB Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    WE `Stop your wrong ways and turn back to God,’ answered Peter. `And then everyone of you can be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ. Your wrong ways will be forgiven you, and you will receive the Holy Spirit.

    WYC And Peter said to them, Do ye penance [Penance, he said, do ye], and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, into remission of your sins; and ye shall take the gift of the Holy Ghost.

    YLT and Peter said unto them, `Reform, and be baptized each of you on the name of Jesus Christ, to remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit,

    KATA BIBLON

    Now look at the interlinear tools at Kata Biblon for this verse:

    Suppose that our traditional readings of Acts 2:38 went like this following version, which I derive from plugging in the words just above where we normally read “receive”:

    And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will grasp, clutch, cling-to, seize, lay-hands-upon, take by violence, carry off, seize, possess, catch, find out, detect, overtake, and understand the gift of the Holy Spirit.

    (I left out “of a deity” as the outlier here. We can discuss that at some other time.)

    Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

    Is Jesus the Leader or the Exemptor?

    Posted on June 6, 2025 by jackpelham

    If you were to listen to some,
    You’d get the impression that Jesus
    Came to save people from doctrine, diligence,
    Duty, accountability, difficulty, distress, and danger,
    Rather than to lead them securely through it.

    Posted in Religion | Leave a comment

    What Exactly is Hebrews 9:27 Saying about Dying Once?

    Posted on May 13, 2025 by jackpelham

    You’ll see roughly 60 English translations of Hebrews 9:27 below. I have listed them below for your examination. Here are our questions, with my brief answers:

    Q: Four of these translations specify “only once” or “but once”, but does the Greek have the equivalent of a “but” or an “only”? in this verse?
    A: No. Here’s BlueLetterBible’s interlinear. Note that you won’t find any “but” or “only” here. You can also double check the verse at Mounce’s Reverse Interlinear here.

    Q: Isn’t this verse, even without the “only” or “but”, a rule that humans only die one time, and that a judgment follows that death?
    A: Logically speaking, that’s going too far. The rule that says “It is appointed for each student to take PE once before graduation” is not the same as the rule that says, “No student shall take PE more than once.” Similarly, the rule, “It is appointed for each incumbent to be audited once during his or her term of office” is not the same as the rule, “It is appointed that no incumbent shall be audited more than once during his or her term in office.”

    Many have supposed Hebrews 9:27 to be giving a rule that includes this part: “No human shall die more than once.” If that were a rule, it would have consequential implications for certain eschatological questions, such as “What happened to the boy that Elijah raised from the dead ― was he supposed to go on living until the Second Coming of Jesus?” But if Hebrews 9:27 contains no such rule, then there’s no requirement (as far as I have read in scripture) that someone could not die twice. Is this me telling you that this boy died twice? No! We are not told what did happen to him afterward. Nor are we told what must or should have happened to him afterward, except that he was to face judgment. And we can wonder at whether he faced judgment immediately after he died. Did Elijah raise him back to life so fast that there was no time for the boy’s soul to face God for judgment? And if that had happened, would that break the rule about the judgment part? Or would the rule still be true if the judgment had been delayed until, say, after he died again a second time ― or until the Second Coming? I suppose it would still be true, as long as he was (eventually) judged.

    I must admit before that I was biased early on in my church life by hearing this verse discussed as if the Greek said “only once” or “but once”. This programmed me to think that I had an argument when it says “…once to die”, that I really had a point in saying, “Aha! It says once to die, and not more than that.” But I can see now that the verse didn’t make it its job to point out every detail about how death works. In other words, it says that the “once” is mandatory, but it neither implies nor demands that it could not happen more than once. Clearly, someone (such as myself), could read that into the verse, but that would be Jack’s idea, and not the writer’s idea, for the driver makes no such statement, and the context doesn’t demand such an extremely strict reading, either. I could be hard-headed about it, of course ― and many do ― but there’s no responsible way to keep insisting that more than once is disallowed.

    A Preterist might have an easy time with Lazarus, and reason simply that Lazarus would have remained alive until Jesus came back to get him in 70AD. And I could not rule that out. But with the widow’s son, raised back to life by Elijah in 900 BC, roughly, would be quite old by the time of Jesus’ Second Coming, whether that happened in 70AD, as the Preterist would think, or whether it hasn’t happened yet to this day, as a Futurist would believe.

    I have done much writing on the difficult mass resurrection of Matthew 27:51-53, and in many places, I have argued Hebrews 9:27 as an “only once” rule. I regret this, and will be careful to correct those arguments, wherever I can find them in print.

    Here are the English verses.

    __________________________________________

    KJ21
    And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the Judgment,

    ASV
    And inasmuch as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this cometh judgment;

    AMP
    And just as it is appointed and destined for all men to die once and after this [comes certain] judgment,

    AMPC
    And just as it is appointed for [all] men once to die, and after that the [certain] judgment,

    BRG
    And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

    CSB
    And just as it is appointed for people to die once—and after this, judgment—

    CEB
    People are destined to die once and then face judgment.

    CJB
    Just as human beings have to die once, but after this comes judgment,

    CEV
    We die only once, and then we are judged.

    DARBY
    And forasmuch as it is the portion of men once to die, and after this judgment;

    DLNT
    And just as it is destined for people to die once and after this comes the judgment,

    DRA
    And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment:

    ERV
    Everyone must die once. Then they are judged.

    EASY
    Every person must die once. After death, God will judge each person.

    EHV
    And, just as it is appointed for people to die only once and after this comes the judgment,

    ESV
    And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment,

    ESVUK
    And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgement,

    EXB
    Just as ·everyone [L people] ·must [is/are destined/appointed to] die once and ·then be judged [T after this the judgment],

    GNV
    And as it is appointed unto men that they shall once die, and after that cometh the judgment:

    GW
    People die once, and after that they are judged.

    GNT
    Everyone must die once, and after that be judged by God.

    HCSB
    And just as it is appointed for people to die once—and after this, judgment—

    ICB
    Everyone must die once. After a person dies, he is judged.

    ISV
    Indeed, just as people are destined to die once and after that to be judged,

    JUB
    And as it is appointed unto men to die once, and after this the judgment;

    KJV
    And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

    AKJV
    And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

    LSB
    And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

    LEB
    And just as it is destined for people to die once, and after this, judgment,

    TLB
    And just as it is destined that men die only once, and after that comes judgment,

    MSG
    Everyone has to die once, then face the consequences. Christ’s death was also a one-time event, but it was a sacrifice that took care of sins forever. And so, when he next appears, the outcome for those eager to greet him is, precisely, salvation.

    MEV
    As it is appointed for men to die once, but after this comes the judgment,

    MOUNCE
    And just as it is appointed for mortals to die once, and after that to experience judgment,

    NOG
    People die once, and after that they are judged.

    NABRE
    Just as it is appointed that human beings die once, and after this the judgment,

    NASB
    And just as it is destined for people to die once, and after this comes judgment,

    NASB1995
    And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

    NCB
    And just as human beings are destined to die but once, and after that to face judgment,
    NCV

    Just as everyone must die once and then be judged,

    NET
    And just as people are appointed to die once, and then to face judgment,

    NIRV
    People have to die once. After that, God will judge them.

    NIV
    Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,

    NIVUK
    Just as people are destined to die once, and after that to face judgment,

    NKJV
    And as it is appointed for men to die once, but after this the judgment,

    NLV
    It is in the plan that all men die once. After that, they will stand before God and be judged.

    NLT
    And just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment,

    NMB
    And as it is appointed unto men once to die, and then comes the judgment,

    NRSVA
    And just as it is appointed for mortals to die once, and after that the judgement,

    NRSVACE
    And just as it is appointed for mortals to die once, and after that the judgement,

    NRSVCE
    And just as it is appointed for mortals to die once, and after that the judgment,

    NRSVUE
    And just as it is appointed for mortals to die once and after that the judgment,

    NTFE
    Furthermore, just as it is laid down that humans have to die once, and after that comes judgment,

    OJB
    And in as much as it is appointed for men to die once and after this HaMishpat [Yom HaDin],

    RGT
    And as much as it has been appointed to man that he shall die once (and after that comes the Judgment),

    RSV
    And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment,

    RSVCE
    And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment,

    TLV
    And just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after this judgment,

    VOICE
    Just as mortals are appointed to die once and then to experience a judgment,

    WEB
    Inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once, and after this, judgment,

    WE
    People must die, and after that they will be judged.

    WYC
    And as it is ordained to men, once to die, but after this is the doom,

    YLT
    and as it is laid up to men once to die, and after this — judgment,

    Leave a comment