Some Surprising Facts About our Christian Resurrection

 Perhaps the most important question of all time, to a lot of people, is, What happens after we die?  Is there life after death?   This question has puzzled mankind since Adam, and there are many different theories suggested.   And God is rather clear in the Bible on this subject, as He would be, since Scripture claims in various places that He loves His children—so He would tell us “where we’re moving to.”  

So, let’s study what the Word says on the “moving” issue.  Let’s promise ourselves that what the Scripture says is more important than what our church says.  It looks like the correct doctrine includes an intermediate state, not Catholic.  Few people believe this anymore--it has either been warped or lost.  But it’s definitely in Scripture.  Studying that is the ultimate focus of this blog.

The most detailed explanation of life just beyond the grave is found in Jesus’ account of the rich man and Lazarus.  See Luke 16:22-31, where Jesus says: 

²² So it was that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. ²³ And being in torments in Hades, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. ²⁴ “Then he cried and said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.’ ²⁵ But Abraham said, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and you are tormented. ²⁶ And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that those who want to pass from here to you cannot, nor can those from there pass to us.’  ²⁷ “Then he said, ‘I beg you therefore, father, that you would send him to my father’s house, ²⁸ for I have five brothers, that he may testify to them, lest they also come to this place of torment.’ ²⁹ Abraham said to him, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’ ³⁰ And he said, ‘No, father Abraham; but if one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.’ ³¹ But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead.’”

What do we see?  

1)      The previously poor man is in “Abraham’s bosom,” v.22.  He is “comforted.” The rich man is “afar off”—a “great gulf fixed” away-- in hades, Scripture says. Yet they’re both likely in the same place, since they can see and talk to one another. Abraham's bosom is the good part of this place, but the "hot" section is the bad part.  We conclude "hades" is the proper name for the whole place. The word is used several times in Scripture (beware--some versions goof this up).  So hades had two parts, separated by a great gulf.   

2) The rich man in the suffering region then becomes the focus.  He is “in torments.”  He “cries out” in agony.  Thirst is a serious problem, since a flame is nearby. 

3)    He has a memory--he is well aware of his previous life, since he remembered his brothers and now wants to see them saved from this.  This adds to his mental anxiety while there.

4)    As vv 27-31 show, there is no way that someone in the lower region can warn those still alive.  Thus, if that is also a precedent, seances would be meaningless, today as well as then.  

5)    Jesus, as the designer of hades, is tough on the man who is eventually to be cast to hell:   

a.  Through Abraham, He is willing to let him suffer, acknowledging “you are tormented” --yet without relieving him.   

b.  When the man complains of his suffering, Jesus through Abraham even taunts him, reminding him of the reversal of roles for the two of them—and telling him, too bad, he can’t change his fate 

I'm saying that these statements are real, not just a "parable that doesn't apply to us."  Modern theologians don't want to consider this a doctrine, because it is uncompassionate.  I don't think it is a parable, since it has named Lazarus, and parables don’t give names.  This is God’s truth for what happens after death. Let's say it was a parable--would Jesus set forth a myth about what happens when we die--would He express an untruth on such an important issue?  Especially considering we know so little about the subject elsewhere in Scripture.  Would He say, "Hah!  I got you.  This was a parable, which means it's all untrue (?).  I just want you to continue worrying about this very important question."  I think not.  

Part of the reason I believe this is a truth is the related backup Scriptures, below.  Another reason is that it was universally believed by the earliest church fathers; they were brilliant men in their knowledge of Scripture, and believed it was truth.  They knew their Greek backward and forward, they knew the culture, they could have asked questions of the apostles, or someone only a generation from them.  Consider also that that early church was the most dynamic and godly church in history; so I believe their theology was accurate, and God blessed them accordingly by touching their evangelism greatly.    

Now here are other supporting Scriptures for the intermediate state: 

1. Luke 23:43 records Jesus’ words on the Cross to the dying and just-saved thief alongside:  

  And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

What's Paradise?  Think with me: if the saved poor man’s first stopover after death, from Luke 16, is “Abraham’s bosom,” as we saw above, and if the first stopover for the just-saved thief is in “paradise,” we have to conclude that paradise is another name for Abraham’s bosom.  But we showed above that Abraham's bosom and Hades are in the same place.  And we saw that  paradise is another name for Abraham's bosom--and that means they're all the same place. Paradise is not heaven, but, like with Lazarus, it's the good part of hades.    Neither person we're talking about goes directly to heaven.  They both go to hades, the intermediate state. 

2. Jesus went to hades too, when He died, as proved by Matthew 12:40 and parts of Acts 2:22-27, the words of Peter:  

For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth

“Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles, wonders, and signs…you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; ²⁴ whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it. ²⁵ For David says concerning Him:  Moreover my flesh also will rest in hope.²⁷ For You will not leave my soul in hades, nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.

So Jesus did not die and go straight to heaven; nor did He go to hell, called “gehenna” in Greek, the lake of fire, a different Greek word.  Jesus told the thief He was going to paradise with Him--yet these verses clearly show, He went to hades. So this proves, again, paradise is not heaven, but is in the good part of hades.  “In the heart of the earth” doesn't sound like heaven, right?  Hades is presumably located deep in earth.   His soul did not remain in hades long—three days and nights. 

Perhaps your Bible uses "hell" when it should be called "hades."  It also uses "hell" in some versions for Greek "gehenna" and "tartarus."  Those, however, are three separate Greek words, signifying 3 separate places.  The English words should be different, rather than combining them all as "hell."  Blame William Tyndale.  He took these three Greek words, meaning different things, and translated them all "hell" in English.  A proper modern translation would catch this. 

These truths about the intermediate state were so universally believed by the earliest Christians that it became part of the original Apostles’ Creed:  I believe in God the Father Almighty…and in Jesus Christ…was crucified, dead and buried.  He descended to hades (the Greek word); on the third day rose from the dead…

Jesus did not go to hell, but gave hope to the waiting godly souls in hades.

3. John 14:1-3:  

“Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. ² In My Father’s house are many mansions;  if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. ³ And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.

Note the underlined phrase.  This proves that when the righteous die, they do not go immediately to heaven to be with Jesus.  Why?  Well, He has to “come again” (His second coming) and pick us up, and then we go to heaven.  If we were already in heaven (i.e., by rapture, so called), He would not have to “come again” to get us.  No, we are in the heart of the earth, in hades, waiting for “pick up.” The pick up will be better than ziplining, better than being the delivery token for an Amazon drone, I’ll bet.  

4. John 5:28-29:

Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice ²⁹ and come forth—those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

Thus, both groups will “come forth” (at the second coming) to the Judgment, possibly at the same time (your denomination may not believe this "judgement at the same time" idea).  So hades will be emptied all at once.  If we’re already in heaven, as so many think, the resurrection would be no big deal--since we're "already there," in spirit. It would be just picking up the body.  But the important thing would be being with Jesus in heaven--but this has already been going on, according to them. But they are wrong.  It will be a total resurrection, body and soul--a big deal, as Scripture points out excitedly.  It gets us, soul and body, from hades to heaven, not from heaven to heaven with a body. 

    5. I Corinthians 15:22-23:

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ’s at His coming.  

So when are we "made alive," that is, body and soul together?  When Jesus comes again, not at time of death.  (And at His second coming, not the "rapture.")

6.  I Thessalonians 4:16-17:

For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.

The first verse indicates the Second Coming (not the 3rd coming, as rapturists believe).  Note that "the dead in Christ" will rise.  It doesn't say "their bodies will arise," but "the dead" will rise.  Also note that verse 17 says we will "meet the Lord in the air."  Many modern commentaries say our spirit goes immediately to heaven when we die; and say that when Jesus comes down, He comes with the spirits of His saved people to pick up their bodies.  But that can't be, since we will "meet the Lord in the air."  "Meet" here suggests "first time I've seen you," since its definition in Vine's Expository Dictionary says "the official welcome of a newly arrived dignitary." 

     8. Finally, I Peter 5:4:

and when the Chief Shepherd appears, you will receive the crown of glory that does not fade away

Thus, this does not happen when we die; it happens "when the Chief Shepherd appears"--at His Second Coming.

Hopefully these many Scriptures will be convincing.  But, you ask, "I don't think anyone teaches this, how can it be correct?"  Well, many Mennonites, some Brethren, some Amish, some in the Restoration movement, some conservative Anglicans still teach this. 

Well--so most of us has had it wrong for centuries?  How could that be?

The speculation is, teaching on the intermediate state has gotten dropped because the Reformation tried to get as far away from the Catholics’ false teaching on purgatory.  Purgatory teaches that (a) the Intermediate State can cleanse your sins and (b) it can change final status. Double False.  Scripture shows that hades (the real Intermediate State) does not change final status, as we saw in Luke.  The sincere pleadings of the rich man were greeted coldly. The rich man encountered Jesus not as merciful, but as Judge.  Remember, few are saved (Matthew 7:14).  We are shocked and sometimes uncomfort- able about seeing this "negative side" of God.  But He doesn't think as we do.  We cannot imagine, for instance, how deep is God’s hatred about sin.  If you’re unsaved when you go into hades, you’re unsaved when you go out.  Period.  There is no Scriptural basis for “cleansing from sin” in that state either.  The idea that you can purge your own sin is completely false and anti-Biblical, as Scriptural points out, and I point out in many blogs. Jesus has done that cleansing from sin for us. The “works vs faith” argument was what kick-started the Reformation—a just movement in its beginning, but it went to wrong theology on some points to get away from looking Catholic. 

Next, Catholicism teaches that there is a special status for those classified as “saints”—they get to go straight to heaven.  Everybody else has to go to purgatory to “work off” their sins.  False.  Scripture is clear that everyone saved is a saint.  There are no “status” Christians.  Philippians 1:1 says:   

Paul and Timothy, bondservants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, with the bishops  and deacons. 

 If saints are only the “status” Christians, why is Paul calling every Christian a “saint,” and, oh yes, let’s not forget the bishops and deacons.  How do you explain that?  

John Calvin, who formulated many Protestant doctrines (not my favorite person, as I have a blog on him), dropped the intermediate state doctrine.  So both Catholics and most Protestants have it wrong.  You’ve got to read Scripture for yourselves, folks. 

Now let us deal with verses the "straight to heaven" folks love:  Start with I Thessalonians 4:14, which I'd like to add context by adding verses 16 and 17: 

For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who sleep in Jesus. 16 For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord.

Now remember, "sleep" refers to death. Start by looking at v. 17, "we who are alive...shall be caught up together with them..to meet the Lord in the air."  Who is "them?"  It's  "those who sleep in Jesus."  The verses, taken together, mean that the Christian dead will rise from the grave at His second coming  (yes, His second coming), answers first the Thessalonian question about "what happens to the dead?"  They go to heaven at the second coming.  Then he also adds those who are alive at the time and Christians who are alive at that time will rise from hades and join them to "meet the Lord."  That's how Jesus will "bring with Him" both groups to heaven.  Paul will join them, with Jesus, who will "bring" us to heaven AT THAT TIME. "And AT THAT TIME (the second coming) we will "always be with the Lord."  

PS.  This explanation is simple and uncomplicated, as long as you don't believe in a separate Rapture.  Keep in mind, a separate rapture means that Jesus comes three times, which is un-Scriptural.  They're saying, first was His Incarnation; second, His "rapture;" third, His coming in judgment.  I have a separate series of blogs on this.  If you DO believe in a Rapture, the explanation for how who goes to heaven when twists Scripture around like a pretzel to figure out. I won't even try; somehow I feel that God would make it simple to figure out the important question of "where do we go when we die?"

Another favorite Scripture of "straight to heaven":  Ephesians 4:8-10:

Therefore He says: “When He ascended on high He led captivity captive, And gave gifts to men.”  9 (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)

"Captivity captive" is confusing for even the experts to figure out.  It could mean either He is referring to the "enemy soldiers" captured, or the rescue of our own men held captive by the enemy. So, flip a coin.  If you choose the latter, Jesus is bringing out of hades His children, taking them to heaven. If you choose the former, Jesus is making a display of enemy forces dragged through the city in chains (commonly done in Roman victories).  He triumphed over them by His death and resurrection.  Who are those enemy forces?  That idea is probably best interpreted by Colossians 2:15, where it is said of the "principalities and powers"--the powers of sin and death--that "He made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in the cross." 

The fact is, this "captivity captive" verse speaks of unusual things that we can't expect to build a theology of "where do we go when we die?" around.  Look at Matthew 27:52-53, when Jesus died:

and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; 53 and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Was that a repeatable event?  Can we form a theology around Matthew 27:52 about when our bodies are raised from the dead? I'm saying the earlier verses, Ephesians 4:8-10, could also have been a strange, non-theologically-based event too.  In any event, since I suggested "flip a coin," I'm saying this is not a proof for either side, and is not relevant to forming a doctrine on.

Another verse for "straight to heaven:"  Philippians 1:23:

For I am hard-pressed between the two, having a desire to depart and be with Christ, which is far better.

Paul is just wondering which is better--to live and support Christians, or to die and be with Christ.  I don't think Paul put any theology on this "what do I prefer" question (nor should we!).  For that reason alone, Paul is not thinking doctrinally.  Consider also that Christ, or His Spirit, could be in hades with the spirit of a Christian after death, so He is "with" us in hades. So this verse does not lock the case for the "straight to heaven" group either.

Another favorite of theirs is Act 7:56, 59, at the martyrdom of Stephen:

and (Stephen) said, “Look! I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God!” 59 And they stoned Stephen as he was calling on God and saying, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.”

Well, this too could be a special case: Stephen is the first New Testament martyr; plus, he has given a severe admonishment to the Jews about their history defying God, and Jesus confirms him by showing up.  Naturally, a man would react by saying, "Jesus, receive my spirit."  Keep in mind, that's what a man is quoting, and doesn't have to be doctrine God can approve of for everyone.  Think of the musings of Job; they're not all correct.     

Finally, II Corinthians 5:8:

We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.

This is clearly the "straight to heaven" folks' favorite verse. But...when there are abundant verses telling us differently, should we believe that God changed the doctrinal implications and only indicated the change clearly by this one verse?  Would God do that on such an important teaching as "where we go when we die?"  

So, as I'm speaking with mostly "straight to heaven" crowd--we should consider opening our mind to a different definition of this verse.  We really ought to consider the phrase doesn't really say that "one leads immediately to the other." And, since Jesus is omnipresent, why couldn't Jesus be in heaven with God and be in hades in Spirit, comforting and speaking with His children there too?

So what I see is, none of these verses lock down the "straight to heaven" idea. My eight verses on the intermediate state logically string together a solid case for the good side of hades, then later heaven at His second coming.    

It's not a new idea. After all, it was believed by the Jews for a thousand years, then believed by the young church for another 600 years, then the Catholic church perverted it.  

If you want to know more about what Scripture really says on How Do You Get Saved, so you can graduate from earth eventually to heaven, you need to know that Catholics and many Protestants have not emphasized the right doctrine.   I have a blog just on salvation, and another on initial and final salvation.  Smarter, though, would be to read the Gospels over and over, noting what Jesus says on that very subject.  He is quite clear.

Acknowledgement:  David Bercot, CD, “Life After Death."  Scroll Publishing

Abortion What the Bible Says About Killing the Innocents

 I want to tell you a Bible story that will illustrate how God feels about abortion. Consider this: America has really not retracted from the disastrous Roe v Wade decision.  We still allow nearly one million babies to be killed in the womb in the U.S. every year. We tinker with abortion by not allowing it later, etc, restricting it a bit, but we’re still not anywhere close to shutting it down. I read about how Asians around the world are still memorializing the 2004 earthquake and tsunami that killed 228,000 people. An astounding number, don't you think? If you do 260 more just like it, you finally get close to the number of babies murdered through abortion in the U.S. since Roe (1973) was enacted, through today. That’s 60 million little lives lost.

Here is the Biblical story that relates to our subject.  Start with a “religious” practice of the Canaanites—namely, they killed their children as a sacrifice offering to their god, Baal, whose title was Prince, Lord of the Earth.

Can you believe that Ahab, a Jewish king, also got hooked on this practice?  It wasn't his notorious wife Jezebel's idea, but he had his own tale of evil when he hooked up with the Canaanites in doing this. The Canaanites were so evil that God told Israel to attack them and not leave a single soul breathing.  Here is II Chronicles 28:3:

He (Ahab) burned incense in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, and burned his children in the fire, according to the abominations of the nations whom the LORD had cast out before the children of Israel.

This horrific act seems beyond understanding. Why did Ahab do it? Well, Baal was a god of fertility, which meant the religion included ritual orgies, sodomy and prostitution, and adultery with swapping wives and fornication with other men’s virgin daughters.  So maybe the sexual “benefits”  were worth killing a son for. (It helped if you had many wives and many sons, which kings typically had; the pain of losing one was lessened).

Later, a reform king tore down all the "high places" where this ritual went on.  But these were restored by a still later Jewish king--Manasseh.  He did the same shocking thing as Ahab, killing his child. But he did even worse: he promoted it among the people! Many Israelites followed his lead. From II Kings 21:11:

“Because Manasseh king of Judah has done these abominations (he has acted more wickedly than all the Amorites who were before him, and has also made Judah sin with his idols)...

More on Manasseh’s sin, II Chronicles 33:2-3, 6-7:

But he did evil in the sight of the LORD, according to the abominations of the nations whom the LORD had cast out before the children of Israel. 3 For he rebuilt the high places which Hezekiah his father had broken down; he raised up altars for the Baals, and made wooden images; and he worshiped all the host of heaven and served them...6 Also he caused his sons to pass through the fire in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom; he practiced soothsaying, used witchcraft and sorcery, and consulted mediums and spiritists. He did much evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke Him to anger. 7 He even set a carved image, the idol which he had made, in the house of God…

Unbelievable that he would do a carved image in God’s house. God is also against killing innocents and out-of-marriage sex--and totally against mediums and spiritists, as you see in Deuteronomy 18:9-14:

“When you come into the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not learn to follow the abominations of those nations. 10 There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft, or a soothsayer, or one who interprets omens, or a sorcerer, 11 or one who conjures spells, or a medium, or a spiritist, or one who calls up the dead. 12 For all who do these things are an abomination to the LORD, and because of these abominations the LORD your God drives them out from before you. 13 You shall be blameless before the LORD your God. 14 For these nations which you will dispossess listened to soothsayers and diviners; but as for you, the LORD your God has not appointed such for you.

As you can see, making their children “pass through the fire,” a sacrifice murder of their own child (similar to abortion, my main point), was mentioned as early as Deuteronomy. This practice, and God’s hatred of it, had been known a long time by the Jews. So these two kings, Ahab and Manasseh, were in direct violation of an earlier command of God.

But let’s get back to our story. Manasseh’s sin (promoting it to the people, and doing it in God's house) was so great in the eyes of God that He promised His anger could not be quenched. The sad words are in II Kings 21:12-15, right next to verses above:

… therefore thus says the LORD God of Israel: ‘Behold, I am bringing such calamity upon Jerusalem and Judah, that whoever hears of it, both his ears will tingle. 13 … I will wipe Jerusalem as one wipes a dish, wiping it and turning it upside down. 14 So I will forsake the remnant of My inheritance and deliver them into the hand of their enemies; and they shall become victims of plunder to all their enemies, 15 because they have done evil in My sight, and have provoked Me to anger since the day their fathers came out of Egypt, even to this day.’”

The key is in the next verse:

Moreover Manasseh shed very much innocent blood, till he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another, besides his sin by which he made Judah sin, in doing evil in the sight of the LORD.

It was the innocent blood. Blood of little children. "From one end" of Jerusalem "to another" meant lots of people followed his lead. Jesus loves little children. How was Manasseh’s sin greater than Ahab, so that Ahab wasn’t threatened with this judgment? I suspect because, as the verse above says, “by which he (Manasseh) made Judah sin.” He publicized it, and lots of people followed. So the murder of the innocents was that much greater. (But I suspect it doesn’t total America’s sin thus far, over 60 million souls!)

Israel should expect judgment, and--perchance, if there is widespread repentance, God is OK again, right? Well, now you’re going to see a part of God you don’t want to see.

We’ve all heard about how Jonah, after being burped out of a big fish, preached to the vicious Assyrians, you heard about their repentance—and how God changed His mind of His promise of judgment on them and rolled it back. Great story about God’s mercy. Yes, we’ve all heard of the Jonah story, and there are many kids’ books about it. But did you know that Manasseh repented, and had a great reformation? Have you ever heard what happened after that? I suspect not. Well, did you ever hear about how his grandson Josiah had the greatest revival in human history? What, you’ve never heard that one either? Not surprising, considering God’s reaction to these wonderful repentances is “unexpected.” Let me warn you:  We all just need to know more about God. We have imagined His mercy is unending— but for a nation, that might not be a true image. Kind of important since He has the keys to every nation's judgment.

First, Manasseh’s judgment and repentance. From II Chronicles 33:11-16:

And the LORD spoke to Manasseh and his people, but they would not listen.11 Therefore the LORD brought upon them the captains of the army of the king of Assyria, who took Manasseh with hooks, bound him with bronze fetters, and carried him off to Babylon. 12 Now when he was in affliction, he implored the LORD his God, and humbled himself greatly before the God of his fathers, 13 and prayed to Him; and He received his entreaty, heard his supplication, and brought him back to Jerusalem into his kingdom. Then Manasseh knew that the LORD was God. 14 After this he (Manasseh)…took away the foreign gods and the idol from the house of the LORD, and all the altars that he had built in the mount of the house of the LORD and in Jerusalem; and he cast them out of the city. 16 He also repaired the altar of the LORD, sacrificed peace offerings and thank offerings on it, and commanded Judah to serve the LORD God of Israel.

So, you say, based on this contrition, the land was forgiven, right? Jerusalem was saved, right? Uh, no…He died right after that. Then there was a short reign of his son, who was killed. Then his grandson Josiah comes to power. During his reign, the priests find the buried Book of the Law, blew the dust off, and read it to him. He tore his clothes in distress, and urged his aides to seek a prophetess (not the same as a medium, this person was touched by God and 100% of her prophecies came true). II Kings 22:13 records Josiah's great words:

“Go, inquire of the LORD for me, for the people and for all Judah, concerning the words of this book that has been found; for great is the wrath of the LORD that is aroused against us, because our fathers have not obeyed the words of this book, to do according to all that is written concerning us.”

Later, he does a “clean-up” operation like his grandfather, only better; and this is what joyous Scriptures record, from II Kings 23:1-10:

Now the king (Josiah)...read in their hearing all the words of the Book of the Covenant which had been found in the house of the LORD. 3 Then the king stood by a pillar and made a covenant before the LORD, to follow the LORD and to keep His commandments and His testimonies and His statutes, with all his heart and all his soul, to perform the words of this covenant that were written in this book. And all the people took a stand for the covenant.4 And the king commanded Hilkiah the high priest, the priests of the second order, and the doorkeepers, to bring out of the temple of the LORD all the articles that were made for Baal, for Asherah, and for all the host of heaven; and he burned them outside Jerusalem in the fields of Kidron, and carried their ashes to Bethel. 5 Then he removed the idolatrous priests whom the kings of Judah had ordained to burn incense on the high places in the cities of Judah and in the places all around Jerusalem, and those who burned incense to Baal, to the sun, to the moon, to the constellations, and to all the host of heaven.6 And he brought out the wooden image from the house of the LORD, to the Brook Kidron outside Jerusalem, burned it at the Brook Kidron and ground it to ashes, and threw its ashes on the graves of the common people. 7 Then he tore down the ritual booths of the perverted persons that were in the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the wooden image. 8 And he brought all the priests from the cities of Judah, and defiled the high places where the priests had burned incense, from Geba to Beersheba; also he broke down the high places at the gates which were at the entrance of the Gate of Joshua the governor of the city, which were to the left of the city gate… 10 And he defiled Topheth, which is in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, that no man might make his son or his daughter pass through the fire to Molech.

Josiah goes farther in reform than his repentant grandfather, because and he goes out of his way to defile the worship places of false gods—and because he gets the populace involved with making a covenant to God. The main thing is that he stopped the sacrifice killing of children.

He goes even further yet. In honor of religious holidays that he’d just heard about, he institutes a Passover festival (memorializing God’s miracles which saved them from Egypt). We read this joyous event in II Chronicles 35:18:

There had been no Passover kept in Israel like that since the days of Samuel the prophet; and none of the kings of Israel had kept such a Passover as Josiah kept, with the priests and the Levites, all Judah and Israel who were present, and the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

All in all, he was praised as a wonderful king—he gets higher praise than King David. Think about that! From II Kings 23:25:

Now before him there was no king like him, who turned to the LORD with all his heart, with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the Law of Moses; nor after him did any arise like him.

So, you say, God forgave the land, right? Jerusalem was saved, right? If God could give the vicious, godless Assyrians a break when they heard Jonah, then He could give His favorites, the “apple of His eye,” a break, right? Uh….no. Only five verses after the great Passover festival, only four verses after the verses recording the reformation above, Josiah was simply…dead. Explanation? From II Kings 23:26:

Nevertheless the LORD did not turn from the fierceness of His great wrath, with which His anger was aroused against Judah, because of all the provocations with which Manasseh had provoked Him.

So, great reformation and the greatest revival in history could not bring forgiveness. I remind you, what were the “provocations” that were unable to save Jerusalem, despite two stupendous reforms? Killing the innocents.  Immediately after Josiah, it turns out that the Israeli kings, and soon the land, too, are in the hand of their enemies. They are captives, slaves, for life.

You can see why this story is not in books, not in sermons, and not well-known. We don’t like stories with a bad ending. But God is a God of Judgement, as well as a God of Grace. Kill the innocent—by government fiat--and a country gets a bad ending. 

So shouldn't we expect the same for the U.S.--since we have not even repented? A country who seems to lack the spiritual power to slow down or stop the status quo of killing a million innocents a year?

Now if any of my readers out there had an abortion, or encouraged one, that's a different subject than judging a country. We’re talking about your individual soul. You will have different consequences than Israel if you repent. Murder will get you to hell—unless you repent and begin living your life for Christ, who came to die to pay for your sin. Become a “living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God,” as Romans 12:1 puts it. It’s never too late to confess and begin to have guilt-free living.

Acknowledgement: Ancient Paganism, Ken Johnson

Fire and Brimstone Preaching--Good Idea or Bad Idea?

 First things first:  We’re defining “fire and brimstone” as, preaching righteously against a sin, or a burden of sins that's on every life, or reminding people of Satan or hell, or using the term "blood" or other "offensive" terms.  Let’s look at Peter.  In his very first sermon, in Acts 2:19-21, he began with a quote from Joel 2:

I will show wonders in heaven above And signs in the earth beneath: Blood and fire and vapor of smoke. ²⁰ The sun shall be turned into darkness, And the moon into blood, Before the coming of the great and awesome day of the Lord. ²¹ And it shall come to pass that whoever calls on the name of the Lord Shall be saved.’

So he begins his preaching by giving graphic images of the devastation of the Day of the Lord, including "blood" and "fire." Such a terribly negative introduction, don't you think?  This was, at least, book-ended with hopeful statements. God would give His people prophecies, dreams, and images; and He would respond if they call on His name.  Right after the scary statement above, Peter wasted no time in reproaching everyone (Acts 2:22-24a) for a recent incident that was still raw on their nerves—he accused them (notice, he did not place the responsibility on Pilate or on the Pharisees) of crucifying their Messiah.  He didn’t shy away from blunt language:

Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a Man attested by God to you by miracles… ²³ Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death;²⁴ whom God raised up…

Note how confrontational Peter is, YOU have crucified Him, you have put Him to death.  Note particularly his calling them “lawless.”  The Jews thought they knew the law, and had abundant scribes and lawyers to tell them exactly how to be lawful to the finest degree possible; so being accused of lawlessness was a gigantic slap in the face, was it not?

He points more emphatically at their mistake in verse 36 in the same sermon:

“Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”

This directness about their sin makes this “fire and brimstone” preaching.  What was the reaction? Surprisingly, a good one, from Acts 2:37-41:

Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” ³⁸ Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized…" and, “Be saved from this perverse generation.” ⁴¹ Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them.

Three thousand people saved!  An astonishing result from one “fire and brimstone” sermon.  These people turned completely around; as later verses show, they were on fire for Christ. 

If something works in a sermon, you do it again, right?  Peter, after healing a lame man, is equally forceful in his reproach of the Jews, in Acts 3:13-15:

…God…glorified His Servant Jesus, whom you delivered up and denied in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to let Him go. ¹⁴ But you denied the Holy One and the Just, and asked for a murderer to be granted to you, ¹⁵ and killed the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses

Peter again won’t let them escape blame by saying "He never really said He was God."  The Jews knew that certain things He did, certain names He called himself, were idiomatic to Jews, and He clearly claimed Godhood. They knew that Pilate tried hard to prevent this crucifixion, but the Jews wouldn’t let Jesus off the hook.  Peter is again forceful with his language; “you killed the Prince of life,” you delivered Him up, you traded Him for a murderer.  He also accused them of denying Christ.  To do that was a serious charge; if unrepentant, it is a ticket to hell, as Jesus points out in Matthew 10:33:

But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven

Then Peter seems to open the door for them to escape blame, in Acts 3:17:

“Yet now, brethren, I know that you did it in ignorance, as did also your rulers.

But how acceptable is it to accept that as a relief from guilt?  Will they agree to say, “Yes, we killed Him, but we did because we were ignorant.” They really knew that their ignorance was their own making; when they screamed for His blood, they were just doing what senseless rioters do. So Peter's backhanded "compliment" was only a temporary respite.  His censorious language reaches its peak in verse 23:

And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet (Jesus) shall be utterly destroyed from among the people. 

A bold statement.  I can only surmise that legitimate rumors of a resurrection must have spread by now,  or else they would have called Peter a lunatic, since he claimed His resurrection in v. 15 above.  So, he told them that if they don't hear Jesus' words, they'll be destroyed.  You just never hear this confrontational preaching anymore, do you?  In any event, except for the priests, the response was amazing, as Acts 4:4 says:

However, many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of the men came to be about five thousand. 

Considering that households generally took on a faith together, this suggests at least 10,000 people, including wives and older children, either were saved in this sermon, or have been saved soon after, to follow the father.  When compared to 3000 souls added in his previous sermon, shortly before, this sermon, also classed as "fire and brimstone," might’ve saved another 10,000 people!  Two fire and brimstone sermons, 13,000 saved!  This is shocking, is it not?  .  

Now of course, you might beg off from the obvious conclusion that I'm hinting at, saying, "Wait!  It was an unusual time; the Jews were ultra-sensitive as to what they did, so that made the emotional impact greater."  Well, think on this:  how do sensitive people react when you push their raw emotional buttons, telling them they were wrong and how God will avenge justice on them? The wrong way, that's how.  They mostly don't get repentant, they get angry.  This result was a miracle, really.  I suspect the unusual result was because the Holy Spirit approved his sermon and convicted people's hearts. Maybe you'd say "the Holy Spirit did something special here just to “kick off” Christianity’s start."  Well, “doing something special” is my point.  I believe God honors the boldness of the Word preached, and the Holy Spirit acted to convict as a result.  

Couldn't the Holy Spirit do the same again, acting on a preacher's boldness?  Preachers need to understand that the results are not theirs to claim—the results are God's action.  The Holy Spirit can make a man sick with conviction far better than the preacher can. Your first motive should be to honor God, not to coolly, intellectually persuade people of the benefits of Christianity.  You want to tell the truth about both sides of God, His grace and His jealousness about letting another "god" being first in your life, whether it's envy, greed, sex, whatever, In sermons, pastor should speak of His compassion and His judgment, despite continual harping from the baby Christian gallery about our "narrowness" in the way to heaven, or how we scare people away, and "fear is not a good reason to be saved." If pastors have or respond to such beliefs, they will lack confidence in the greatness of God's Gospel to convince people. Suppose that a pastor is never blunt about sin, and worries about a negative response to such preaching so much that he never delivers a fire and brimstone message.  Given that this is the OPPOSITE from the above, shouldn't he expect results that are the opposite--namely, few people truly saved, congregations immersed in the world, little prayer or Scripture reading to apply what they hear or read?  Are you in a church where everyone loves the pastor because he delivers comfortable messages, even has good timing with jokes? Well, how many parishioners are on fire for God there? How many congregants are willing to do the evangelistic work, how many of you step up and do your gift God gave you? Who, over dinner at a restaurant, say, likes to talk a lot about what Christ is doing to you and people you know? You say, "we don't get that--only the newly saved folks act like that--for a few weeks."  Agrees with my point.  Does your pastor want to save souls more than worry about how some of the people feel about him?  If that's the case, he should be willing to give the hard line, give fire and brimstone a try, right? His model is in God's revealed guidebook, the Book of Acts.  That model is approved from the best teacher, right?  God the Holy Spirit.  But if pastor rejects it, maybe he's got that devil's disease, called "fear of the world."  So how can the Holy Spirit bless his messages? Is this why in many churches, the Holy Spirit is MIA? You see the liturgy, the fine use of words in a fine pastor, at a fine church building, with fine people. Maybe you are linked in to the status folk.  But how many new souls does that get added to you?  It could even be that with bland preaching, your church adds, instead, more “worldly Christians” to his membership (that’s an oxymoron—being worldly and a real Christian doesn’t exist).  These lukewarm people nurtured by a comfy gospel often become trouble in hard times.  They actually get angry and fearful if the Holy Spirit goes to work, changes the length of the service beyond the  60 minutes "that it's always been" and gets some people on fire and starts to shake up the place.  If pastors listen to their complaints, and gets worried himself, he might suppress anything considered "radical" today--such as a revival.

My conclusion is, the Holy Spirit liked Peter’s sermons, and blessed them by convicting people and bringing more souls to heaven.  May God be praised.  When you see these results, why not copy it, pastors? Are you bold enough? 

What we increasingly have, nowadays, is the pastor preaches on the sins that beset America, like homosexuality, etc.  It's easy to attack those kind of sins--because pastor assumes nobody in the congregation have "those" sins--and everyone in the seats agrees.  He will win their favor for sure, as long as the sins outlined belong to someone else.  "Amens" will bounce off the rafters from the old men and women. But I attest that America's REAL problem is divorce, pride, greed, our lost youth killing their spirits with THC marijuana, or oxy, or Adderall, or some other addiction.  Or killing themselves spiritually from fornication and pornography.  Let's see pastor really tag THOSE buttons.  "Baby" Christians everywhere will squirm with discomfort, nag him for being negative, even throw him out.  If they can't get him out by insurrection and scandalous rumor-mongering, they will simply rise up and change churches to where comfort can be re-obtained.  

In Acts 4, Peter preaches like that again, this time before the religious rulers, after a miraculous healing.  If Peter had used worldly logic, it would suggest that he “back off” from a fire and brimstone style with them, knowing that they had the power to imprison him, and then no one would hear the gospel from him again. Better to "go softer" than to be forced to go silent, right?   But the Holy Spirit gave him the fire and brimstone words, as we’re told in Acts 4:8, and you can see his forthrightness in the sermon in verses 10-12:

Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders of Israel… ¹⁰ let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead… ¹¹ This is the 

‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’

¹² Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.

Note that Peter really accuses them of conspiracy to murder.  I would also just like to note, for present day woke readers, the “bigoted intolerance” of Peter’s—or really God’s —statement in verse 12, that there is no salvation in any other faith, like Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.  No salvation in the Jews trying to obey the law--which they had strained and failed at for thousands of years. 

This time, the results are radically different. Namely, the Spirit does convict them--that you can tell because of the anger. They are filled with outrage, gnashing their teeth against him.  And they wouldn't repent from killing Jesus. And they might have even committed the unpardonable sin--attributing to Satan the power of the Holy Spirit. 

So, you say, ah-ha, fire and brimstone has negative results too.  But, hey, it did have a "good" result too--namely, they knew what they did, and made it clear that they rejected Jesus again.  That will come up at the Judgement day, and they will know their guilt is real.  

But, results we have today are radically different.  There are lots of people who THINK they're Christians, but only because they haven't had their gut checked by a confrontation about their sin, or why they're really coming to church (it may be just to be a person of status).  They love to hear about Jesus (or their version of the "sissified" Jesus that is carefully sculpted by the pastor, by avoiding Jesus' confrontational sermons).  These people--we're speaking of millions in America--are deceived today--why is that, you say?  Because when the "rubber hits the road," they will abandon Christ in droves should serious persecution comes.  As long as America gives a good economy and freedom of worship, they have a wonderful relationship with Him.  They are, when you get down to it, lukewarm; they are not hot enough for Christ, for His Lordship in ALL their lives.  They can't handle persecution or serious trials that God might bring their way.  Not hot for Jesus enough to retain optimism and endurance, no matter what.  Nor were they cold--like those Jews were.  But what happens to lukewarm "Christians?"  Jesus vomits them out of His body; see Revelation 3:15-16:

‘I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were either cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will vomit you out of my mouth

Now you may argue another angle.  You could say that, sure, some people are beyond hope, but: if we could have more miraculous healings, as Peter had in Acts 4, we could get more people saved today.   My answer is three-fold:  First, despite His own healings, Jesus was crucified.  So more cool miracles won't save your butt either.  Secondly, the Jewish rulers were not worried about the miracle in Acts 4; their concern was that Peter was preaching that Jesus was raised from the dead. Note verses 1b-2:

…the priests, the captain of the temple, and the Sadducees came upon them, ² being greatly disturbed that they taught the people and preached in Jesus the resurrection from the dead.

  My third reason is, Jesus knew that salvation by miracles had a twofold design; first, it was to pull more people around to hear His great words.  The words were the key, not the healings; they were calculated to convict of sin, which is essential in being saved.  As you can see in John 2:23-25:

Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in His name when they saw the signs which He did.²⁴ But Jesus did not commit Himself to them, because He knew all men,²⁵ and had no need that anyone should testify of man, for He knew what was in man

Secondly, His miracles testified that He was God.  Nobody before had ever brought sight to the blind, only Him.  All of this says, miracles from God can't bring lasting revivals, given the cynicism of these days.  Sure, they will like the Antichrist's miracles (see 2 Thessalonians 2:9), but their perverse discernment shows that they are too stiff-necked and rebellious to repent and endue persecution.  

Now let’s turn to the deacon, Stephen, a fire and brimstone preacher in the “worst” way.  Just like Peter, when Stephen used fire and brimstone style on the religious rulers, the results were again disastrous. He was stoned to death. But God approved Stephen's style, as His miracle in Acts 6:15 clearly implies:

And all who sat in the council, looking steadfastly at him, saw his face as the face of an angel.

He had that pre-glorification glow--the kind we'll all have who are headed for heaven.  

Why did God want Stephen to preach that way, when it resulted in him being killed?  The biggest reason was, God had told the apostles to preach to the Jerusalem first, then to spread out--to Judea, to Samaria, to the world (Acts 1:8).  But the saved folks weren't doing that. So God was willing to let them suffer persecution.  As a result of Stephen's martyrdom, they did spread out--when they fled elsewhere--and brought the Gospel to the whole world. 

Now Stephen uses language guaranteed to touch their “hot buttons” more than Peter, in Acts 7:51 and 52:

“You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you. ⁵² Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you now have become the betrayers and murderers

Stiff-necked!  Uncircumcised! (That must’ve hurt—circumcision was a badge of honor to them).  You always resist the Holy Spirit. He told them that they were persecutors, betrayers, and murderers.  This over-the-top language, calling people names, is guaranteed NOT to save, especially those who had their conscience seared, making them possibly demon-oppressed.  So why did God want Stephen to do it? Why would maybe He might want you to do it (we're not talking about a sermon now, we're talking about you and an individual.  Here was the stranger side of evangelism, a possible approach when the sinner has seen the power of God in the past, and yet still refuses). Maybe for judgment day. Or again, as we've implied, over-the-top preaching will expose the worst in people, when they get super-angry, and we get to see who they really are underneath.  Who knows, maybe they will actually see themselves as rebels against God too. Here are people who know how to keep up surface appearance; they worked at being nice, as tolerant and not radical; they were civilized, not overcome with anger.  Maybe, if they saw themselves acting this way, they might see what they really are, and repent.

Here's yet another reason:  We all should be “watchmen,” when culture starts to turn rotten. Ezekiel 33:2-6 explains the idea: 

…let the people of the land take a man from their territory and make him their watchman, ³ when he sees the sword coming upon the land, if he blows the trumpet and warns the people, ⁴ then whoever hears the sound of the trumpet and does not take warning, if the sword comes and takes him away, his blood shall be on his own head. ⁵ He heard the sound of the trumpet, but did not take warning; his blood shall be upon himself. But he who takes warning will save his life. ⁶ But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, and the people are not warned, and the sword comes and takes any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at the watchman’s hand.’   

The definition of “warn” is to “inform someone of an impending danger…give someone forceful advice about their actions.”  If you are the watchman, it is your obligation to use forceful (i.e, fire and brimstone) language on frequent occasions to steer them clear of danger.  If you don’t, judgment is on you.  A sober reason to change preaching styles now and then!

Now, you pastors and others, may argue that you are following a Scriptural path, as I John 4:7-8 points out:

Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. ⁸ He who does not love does not know God, for God is love.

So you say, "How can we do fire and brimstone, in light of these "love" verses?  I'm a pastor; how can you think that fear-obsession, that fire and brimstone, is love?"  But let's talk about the real meaning of love.  If a man loves his wife, he protects her, right?  That's a given.  Suppose he comes home from work, and sees his house completely engulfed in a raging fire.  Toxic smoke is pouring out, he can hear the stairway collapsing.  Then he sees his wife, outside, with a strange look on her face, walking steadily toward the house. Maybe she wants to save the baby.  But the firemen are on the scene, ready to do that.  But she still wants to  hurry and save the baby, or her brain has become disoriented by the toxic chemicals. So what does husband do?  Firemen are busy; no time to call anybody's attention to the danger, she will be in the house within seconds.  He steps out in front of her--she goes around him, moving on toward disaster.  He runs up to her, tells her in strong language to stop.  She ignores him, persistently moving ahead.  She's getting close to the front door.  Then he has to do things that are "unreasonable," in most situations.  He wrestles her, tackles her, puts a knee in her back to prevent her from walking into the fire.  

Well, what is hell, after all?  It's far worse than this fire. It's forever.  None of us can imagine God doing that to most people, but we trust His Word to tell the truth. We need to act like it's the truth.  There are times when we should act desperately.  The real truth is, the majority of people will go to hell.  No, you don't believe that, do you?  Proof?  Matthew 7:13-14:

“Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. 14 Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it.

.  Yes, you've read it many times.  But do you meditate on His words, really think what He's saying here?

 And we know how certain people live, that some of them can't be Christian, if you go by Scripture, as fewer people do nowadays.  Maybe our own loved one is on a path to hell, per the Bible.  Let's say they were married twice, and are now enjoying life and love with a boyfriend.  You say, "no harm done--they love each other."  You know, we don't know when they may die, or you might die, and the kind of relationship-designed message you can give them about the Gospel would not be delivered to them.  I'm talking about the serious sin, in this case sexual immorality (such as Revelation 21:8:

But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”

  You must believe that every Scripture is God's truth.  Yes, sexual immorality is listed alongside sorcerers, and idolaters!  You must believe it from God's Word before speaking to them.  Your warning of hell--that's love, you must believe that too.  It's never too early to get those Scriptures out, get pointed with them.  Hey, we are talking about the dangers of hell, with fire and brimstone.  I guarantee you of one thing.  Even if they cut off relationship with you for being "weird," the desperation on your lips (the desperation of your words will prove that you love them) will haunt them for a long time. You can at least slow them down on their hypnotic walking to hell.  We need to be a continual watchman.  We have the answers.  They don't.  Give them the knowledge. 

Now let's take another angle on this subject of the proper sermon.  When Peter preached to Gentiles, beginning with Cornelius in Acts 10, his approach was completely different.  No more fire and brimstone.  Why?  Well, he saw the Gentiles as a foreign mission.  Jews previously had minimal relations with Gentiles, particularly about religion.  Most of the Gentiles knew little about this Jesus of Nazareth.  They seldom even spoke to the Gentiles.  So the words to the Gentiles were those of instruction and education about Jesus.

So, we see that fire and brimstone preaching was highly successful--or highly non-successful--with the Jews, who knew the Scripture--and knew that Jesus fulfilled many of the prophesied words on the Messiah. Well, speaking of people who likewise should have plenty of Scripture and knowledge, isn't that the U.S. mostly through our history? But today, things are different.  We have lots of Bibles, lots of Christian "tradition," as each denomination defines it.  But hardly anybody reads Scripture.  And parents aren't teaching their children.  As many studies prove, people's knowledge of Jesus has been lost.  So it's like preaching to the Gentiles again. I'm NOT saying that means preaching that God is only love, Christianity is all about benefits, etc.  Preaching to the unknowledgeable is simple:  Tell both sides of God. After you've given the Real gospel in different ways and they don't act, then hit on them with fire and brimstone often.   Go for expository preaching on Matthew through John, cover all sides of God, and how Jesus talked frequently about hell.  Teach about sin, about money and the world, about hell.  You'll see a huge wall of resistance going up.  Either they repent or they leave.  You can tell the sinner from the saved, in how they respond.  Many people would rather believe Scripture is lying on this subject, rather than what it says about the devil and hell. Straighten them out on that.  Tell them you can't cherry-pick Scripture.   

Pastors, resist the urge to assume that everyone in your church is saved, so you conclude not to aggressively warn them.  You say to yourself, the devil has not captured anybody in my church.  (Of course, it doesn't help that you haven't   been preaching on the wiles of the devil.) Yes, it's true that pastors are diplomats--so by nature they push back on this idea.  If the prophetic voices are active, let them speak the hard word to everyone. (That would involve accepting all gifts, changing the service--like the church did in Acts.  Is that bad? Look at the American morals--are we salt to the world?)  The problem I see, is pastors tend to suppress prophetic voices among their leaders.  It seem so negative, and so scary with unpredictability in services. (How pastors hate things beyond their control!  Are they willing to let the Holy Spirit have control?)  Pastors consider the prophets, the sources for those utterances, as speculative, emotionally driven, only believable with a large grain of salt, and pastors don’t like to deal with problems that seem to always result when someone gets their feelings hurt when these guys talk.  And that's even among churches that believe all the gifts are for today.  If pastors don't believe that, they'll shut down the naysayers even quicker.  Many churches like tongues and emotionalism, but the prophet who bewails some of their sins, they still don't like.

Also, church discipline, commanded in Scripture, is totally ignored (I have a blog on that subject).  But take a look at Paul’s statement in I Corinthians 10:11-12.  This was after his listing past sins of lusting after evil things, sexual immorality, etc, all of which are pointed out explicitly in Scripture.  Gee, you might ask, do you really want to mention these terrible things that people are capable of doing?  Here is his answer:

Now all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come. ¹² Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall.:

Some Scriptures are for our admonition, to shake a finger at us, to warn us, lest we fall.  Fall, in the above Scripture, might mean going to hell, or taking steps in that direction (a good verse for those who mistakenly believe "once saved, always saved.")  Such admonishment is needed to remind ourselves that we are sinful people and need God every day.  So when was the last time you heard a pastor preach on one of the fallen people in Scriptures, preaching deeply about that person's sin, and concluding the sermon with “so as far as we know, he is in hell even today. We could go there ourselves, taking the path he took.”  Not going to happen, right?  Pastors are trained in seminary that negative preaching is "sadistic."  I know this for a fact.  He is told to begin a sermon lighthearted, and end on a positive note, to send everyone home happy. Keeps everyone coming back, tithing, paying the bills. But God’s goal is sometimes not to make us happy—but to call us up short, to make us sober and vigilant, sometimes to make us introspective.  To make us take a good hard look at ourselves, trying to strip away the self-deception that we fall prey to if we are not bathed in Scripture, which gives us a realistic look at ourselves.

Since pastors are often not very good at encouraging us to do these things, may we desire to be closer to God, and warn ourselves to put an end to our own sins and self-deception.  And pray for pastors to become leaders, with more spine.  Willing to warn us away from falling; may God have mercy on us.