Focusing too much on one passage
Like some other subjects (the Atonement, for example) -- the
whole concept of God's judgment (or judgments) can be a tricky issue if we focus
on one passage here or there. The main reason being: not every single relevant
point is taught in every single relevant passage. I'll give you an
example:
In 1Th 4, Paul says (vv 16,17 particularly) that Christ will
return from heaven, and the dead in Christ will rise first; THEN we will ever be
with the Lord! If one reads these verses alone, without comparing other
scriptures (some of Paul's included), then one might conclude that there is
absolutely no judgment at all intervening between resurrection and
glorification, and that everyone who is raised must be glorified.
Of course, this conclusion is pretty obviously contradicted by
-- among other passages -- Ecc 12:14; Mat 25;31-46; Acts 10:42; Rom 14:10-12;
2Co 5:10. There will plainly be a judgment, some sort of judgment, intervening
between resurrection and the Kingdom of God -- although there is room for some
different opinions about: where that judgment takes place, how long it will
last, what it will consist of, as to procedure, order, etc, etc.
So why does Paul, in 1Th 4, not mention judgment at all? Has
he forgotten that there will be one? Of course not! It seems to me that he
doesn't mention it because it wasn't the main point he had in mind at that time.
He was intent on comforting some believers who were grieving for those who had
died... by simply reminding them that, when Christ returned, they would all be
reunited -- both living and dead together. Death before Christ returned would be
no barrier to entering his Father's eternal kingdom; they would be raised from
the dead!
I think Paul didn't feel the need to say, once again, "Oh, by
the way, as you should already know, there will be a gathering together of all
the responsible, living and dead, and a great judgment before the Lord's
tribunal, where every man and woman will stand and give some account, and by the
way again, some of those who are raised will be rejected and condemned to a
second death... before the rest of us will be gathered together and given the
blessing of immortality, etc, etc." Such a digression, or detour, would have
spoiled his message, or at least introduced a negative element in what Paul
intended to be very positive and comforting.
Think of it this way: let us say that Dad is going to work one
day, and the little kids know that he will be near their favorite ice cream
store. So they beg him, "Please bring home some ice cream this evening." And he
says, "I will", and he does.
Now, to the little children, all they care about, and in some
sense all they "know", is that: (a) Dad went off to work, (b) Dad bought ice
cream, and (c) Dad came home with it! They don't know, nor at that point do they
care to know, that between the time Dad left home and the time he returned, he
made six stops and 17 telephone calls, wrote nine letters, had 12 conversations
with 25 people, and ate lunch himself. All they want to know is: Where's the ice
cream!?
So sometimes, in especially complicated subjects, or subjects
that span the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, it is a mistake to assume that
-- since such-and-such isn't mentioned here -- it doesn't happen. But the
"argument from omission" is a notoriously unreliable argument. Because something
isn't mentioned, then it MAY not happen. But, just as well, it MAY happen, and
God just doesn't bother to tell us... because (1) it isn't necessary for us to
know, or to think about at this time, or (2) it would have detracted from His
main message at this point, or (3) we are EXPECTED to compare one Bible passage
with another, and figure out for ourselves that, yes indeed, such-and-such DOES
happen too -- because it says so over there if not right here!
So... once again... to say that -- for example -- we are all
being "judged" NOW does not contradict the principle that there will be a
gathering together and a summary judgment when Christ returned. On different
levels, and with different emphases, both ideas may be -- in fact, ARE --
true.
Or to say, on the basis of Rev 20, that there will be a
"second death" at the end of the millennium -- for some at least -- does not
contradict the idea that there will be a "second death" for others at an earlier
judgment, that is, the one when Christ returns to set up God's
Kingdom.
