Investigative Judgment

[woobadooba]

WOO--The apostles believed and hoped that Christ would return in their life time. Through the NT that theme is evident. Look at this text--notice the phrase that I have emphacised. Notice the word "WE". Did Jesus come back and take them back then?? NO!! Peter is using the same reasoning--he thought that since they knew there was going to be a pre-advent judgment--then of course it would have to start with them. They did not know the "times".

1Th 4:16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

Wrong! Peter knew that the FINAL phase of God's judgment for believers would take place at the second coming. But notice how in the text Peter uses the word "begins" as if to say that the judgment has a continuity to it. Thus he is without a shadow of a doubt referring to a particluar phase of the judgment. And what other phase would that be but the investigative aspect of it!

By the way, notice how Peter says, "the time has come"! That is present tense. In other words, it's not like he was expressing his hope in some future event that would take place, but that he was stating that it was happening even as he spoke! "The time has come", not the time will come, but "The time has come"!

Also notice that he says it begins with the household of God, and how he includes himself, so as to say that he is currently being judged. It says nothing about the judgment beginning with the dead! Yet, your understanding of the IJ states that the judgment begins with the dead rather than the living.

By the way, please stick to the text! Don't try to mesh other texts that have an entirely different context to 1Pt. 4:17.

You can compare scripture with scripture all you want, but I want an exegesis of the text, not an eisegesis!

 

[Cliff2]

So what phase of the judgment is Peter talking about then?

You really amaze me Cliff. You have a wonderful way of avoiding legitimate questions!

Not at all, that text you quote has nothing to do with what you claim it to say.

Look at what it is saying.

Judgement begins at the house of God, no more and no less.

Nothing at all to do with what you say.

 

[Cliff2]

[font=Times New Roman, Times][/font]​

[font=Times New Roman, Times]

[font=Times New Roman, Times]Chapter 49​

[font=Times New Roman, Times]The Judgment[/font]
​

[/font]

Click here for info on the "Judgement"
[/font][font=Times New Roman, Times][/font]
[font=Times New Roman, Times]How will the opening of the investigative judgment be made known to the world?
"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come." Rev. 14:6, 7.
[/font][font=Times New Roman, Times]NOTE. - It is seen that there are two phases of the judgment brought to view in the Scriptures, the investigative and the executive. The investigative judgment takes place in heaven before Christ comes, in order to ascertain who are worthy to be raised in the first resurrection, at His coming, and who among the living are "accounted worthy" to be changed in the "twinkling of an eye," at the sounding of the last trump. It is necessary, therefore, for the investigative judgment to take place before the second advent, as there will be no opportunity for such a work to be done between the coming of Christ and the raising of the righteous dead, who are to be clothed with immortality in the act of rising from the grave. The executive judgment of the wicked occurs after the extent of punishment which they are to receive has been decided by the saints who were raised to sit on thrones of judgment (Rev. 20:4, 5) during, the thousand years (1 Cor. 6:1-3). The investigative judgment is that which is announced to the world by the angel's message of Rev. 14:6, 7.[/font]

 

[Cliff2]

[font=Times New Roman, Times]

[font=Times New Roman, Times]Chapter 49​

[font=Times New Roman, Times]The Judgment[/font]


​

[/font]

Click here for info on the "Judgement"
[/font]
[font=Times New Roman, Times]How will the opening of the investigative judgment be made known to the world?
"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come." Rev. 14:6, 7.
[/font][font=Times New Roman, Times]NOTE. - It is seen that there are two phases of the judgment brought to view in the Scriptures, the investigative and the executive. The investigative judgment takes place in heaven before Christ comes, in order to ascertain who are worthy to be raised in the first resurrection, at His coming, and who among the living are "accounted worthy" to be changed in the "twinkling of an eye," at the sounding of the last trump. It is necessary, therefore, for the investigative judgment to take place before the second advent, as there will be no opportunity for such a work to be done between the coming of Christ and the raising of the righteous dead, who are to be clothed with immortality in the act of rising from the grave. The executive judgment of the wicked occurs after the extent of punishment which they are to receive has been decided by the saints who were raised to sit on thrones of judgment (Rev. 20:4, 5) during, the thousand years (1 Cor. 6:1-3). The investigative judgment is that which is announced to the world by the angel's message of Rev. 14:6, 7.[/font]

The IJ did not begin in Peter's time because the events of this verse had not taken place.

"And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come." Rev. 14:6, 7.

 

[woobadooba]

Not at all, that text you quote has nothing to do with what you claim it to say.

Look at what it is saying.

Judgement begins at the house of God, no more and no less.

Nothing at all to do with what you say.

Cliff, is there some reasonn you are ignoring the whole text? Here is what it says:

"For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God, and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?" 1Pt. 4:17

Notice how the judgment to which Peter is referring has both a beginning and an end. Hmmmmmmmmm.

Now, what is the beginning, what phase is it? The investigation of course. And notice how it doesn't begin with the dead as you say, but the living! Afterall, Peter was alive when he said this, and according to him it was during his time that it began. That is why he said, "Now the time has come for judgment to begin"

Cliff, there are a lot of people viewing this, and when you say that all it says is that it begins "with the household of God", and you leave out the part that says, "the time has come", you really make yourself look bad.

Moreover, what other judgment could it be referring to? It has a beginning and an end, and the end, according to the context of the passage, is referring to the destruction of the wicked! Thus the beginning must necessarily be the investigative aspect of the judgment, the same aspect that you believe began in 1844!

So, address the text aright please! If you don't have an answer then that is ok, but don't try to make it look like the text is saying something it isn't, or not saying as much as it is!

By the way, I told you from the beginning, that I don't want pages of information. Does Ellen White do your thinking for you? Can't you understand these things without referring to her writings?

I want your answers, not hers! Be a thinker, not a mere reflector of another's thoughts.

 

[Cliff2]

Cliff, is there some reasonn you are ignoring the whole text? Here is what it says:

"For the time has come for judgment to begin with the household of God, and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?" 1Pt. 4:17

Notice the words that I put in bold. I did this to make it easier for you, since you have trouble seeing them.

Notice how the judgment has a beginning and an end. Hmmmmmmmmm.

Now, what is the beginning, what phase is it? The investigation of course. And notice how it doesn't begin with the dead as you say, but the living! Afterall, Peter was alive when he said this, and according to him it was during his time that it began.

Cliff, there are a lot of people viewing this, and when you say that all it says is that it begins "with the household of God", and you leave out the part that says, "the time has come", you really make yourself look bad.

Moreover, what other judgment could it be referring to? It has a beginning and an end, and the end, according to the context of the passage, is referring to the destruction of the wicked! Thus the beginning must necessarily be the investigative aspect of the judgment, the same aspect that you believe began in 1844!

So, address the text aright please! If you don't have an answer then that is ok, but don't try to make it look like the text is saying something it isn't, or not saying as much as it is!

By the way, I told you from the beginning, that I don't want pages of information. Does Ellen White do your thinking for you? Can't you understand these things without referring to her writings?

I want your exegesis, not her eisegesis! She has been wrong on many points, theologically, so how can she really be trusted to exegete a passage aright?

I want your answers, not hers! Be thinker, not a mere reflector of another's thoughts.

Why do you ignore my previous post where I answered your question.

When I give you an answer do not ignore what I have said.

The IJ started when the events of Rev. 14:6,7 took place, not as you claim in Peter's time.

This has nothing to do with EGW.

 

[woobadooba]

The IJ did not begin in Peter's time because the events of this verse had not taken place.

Cliff, you are doing exactly what I thought you would do, beating around the bush!

You are not addressing the text! I want an exegesis, not an eisegesis! By the way, you can't prove that the events in part haven't taken place during the time of Peter!

Ok, do you mean to tell me the gospel wasn't being preached during the time of Peter? That is what you are saying since that is one of the events that was described in the passage that you quoted!

Cliff, just addres the text please. What judgment was Peter referring to? Since it has a beginning and an end, thus having two phases, what phase was he referring to that begins with the household of God? And was Peter living at the time he said this or was he dead?

These are simple questions Cliff that the text is very clear on. I'm not the one avoiding questions, you are!

 

[Cliff2]

Cliff, you are doing exactly what I thought you would do, beating around the bush!

You are not addressing the text! I want an exegesis, not an eisegesis! By the way, you can't prove that the events in part haven't taken place during the time of Peter!

Ok, do you mean to tell me the gospel wasn't being preached during the time of Peter? That is what you are saying since that is one of the events that was described in the passage that you quoted!

Cliff, just addres the text please. What judgment was Peter referring to? Since it has a beginning and an end, thus having two phases, what phase was he referring to that begins with the household of God? And was Peter living at the time he said this or was he dead?

These are simple questions Cliff that the text is very clear on. I'm not the one avoiding questions, you are!

When you determone what is correct doctrine you look at all the texts concerning what is written on the subject.

You are looking at one text that you want to hang all your thoughts on.

Look at all the others that point to the IJ starting about 1800 years after the time of Peter.

When you do it correctly your text does not support the IJ starting in Peters day at all.

 

[StormyOne]

When you determone what is correct doctrine you look at all the texts concerning what is written on the subject.

You are looking at one text that you want to hang all your thoughts on.

Look at all the others that point to the IJ starting about 1800 years after the time of Peter.

When you do it correctly your text does not support the IJ starting in Peters day at all.

The question though is what judgment is Peter referring to?

And hanging a belief on one text is not unusual.... its done quite often... by well meaning folks....

 

[woobadooba]

When you determone what is correct doctrine you look at all the texts concerning what is written on the subject.

You are looking at one text that you want to hang all your thoughts on.

Look at all the others that point to the IJ starting about 1800 years after the time of Peter.

When you do it correctly your text does not support the IJ starting in Peters day at all.

So what judgment is he referring to Cliff? Is he referring to some imaginary judgment that will never happen? And what other judgment could he be referring to when he speaks of the destruction of the wicked according to the context of the passage?

And are the words "begins" and "end" and "now the time has come" meaningless to you?

 

[woobadooba]

To Cliff and All,

I know you probably think I am some sort of heretic. But I just want to inform you that, I am the type of Christian that questions things. I don't just take someone's word for it and say, "That sounds good to me".

I want to know that what I believe is the truth. I am not comfortable accepting things on blind faith.

When I first became a Christian I did just that, accepted everything on blind faith. Yes, I read my Bible, but it was always someone elses interpretation that I went by.

But then I learned how to study the Bible, how to exegete passages, and identify the idiomatic from the literal; and I discovered things about God's word that were foreign to what I believed.

The reason why I am telling you this is because I sense that there is a spirit of pharisaical pride amongst us, pride that keeps people from growing spiritually and intellectually.

Why is it that people are afraid to face the truism that there may be something that they could be wrong about? Why is it so hard to admit that they are wrong?

I choose not to live in ignorance! I go by what I see in the Bible, and that is the way that God always intended for it to be!

 

[StormyOne]

Woobad,
I hear what you are saying, and have no problems with it, however there are some who will question your standing as an adventist if you question what they feel are the "pillars of faith." So there will always be a reluctance to engage in discussion about those doctrines that have come to be viewed as infallible and without flaw....

I appreciate your approach, and your desire to find the truth... unfortunately when one has the mindset that they already have "all the truth" that person will not even consider that there is more to know.... that has been my observation and my experience....

 

[HoneyDew]

With that said, I hope to hear more from woobadooba and others. Others, including Storm.

 

[jonno]

Hello everyone

Allow me to suggest an interpretation of the text in question. I am a firm believer in context. This is something that does not appear to be important in what I believe to be the formation and belief in some doctrines. In this case it is also evident.

Looking at the context of the entire chapter I come to the conclusion that the word judgement is misinterpreted. This is not a judgement as in investigative,executive or such.

God is not there( in Peter's time) deciding whos been naughty and whos been nice and whether He does that in 1844 is also questionable. The great all knowing and all powerful God that I serve does not need an investigation for this purpose nor does He have any explaining to do to heavenly intelligences re the fate of man (as is indicated in the fundamental beliefs. He knows the beginning from the end. I believe this doctrine is based on a too far stretched analogy of the function of the earthly sanctuary and ignorance of the fact that all earthly law and related ceremonial acts had its fullfilment in the birth, life, death, ressurection, and immediate priestly duties of our Lord and saviour, Jesus Christ.

But back to my suggested interpretation.

In the context Peter is telling the church to expect trials and tribulations as a form of refinement and also chastisement. The same greek word is used in 1Cor. 11:32. Please read this text along with the entire chapter of 1Peter4. before replying.

Bless you

 

[woobadooba]

Hello everyone

Allow me to suggest an interpretation of the text in question. I am a firm believer in context. This is something that does not appear to be important in what I believe to be the formation and belief in some doctrines. In this case it is also evident.

Looking at the context of the entire chapter I come to the conclusion that the word judgement is misinterpreted. This is not a judgement as in investigative,executive or such.

God is not there( in Peter's time) deciding whos been naughty and whos been nice and whether He does that in 1844 is also questionable. The great all knowing and all powerful God that I serve does not need an investigation for this purpose nor does He have any explaining to do to heavenly intelligences re the fate of man (as is indicated in the fundamental beliefs. He knows the beginning from the end. I believe this doctrine is based on a too far stretched analogy of the function of the earthly sanctuary and ignorance of the fact that all earthly law and related ceremonial acts had its fullfilment in the birth, life, death, ressurection, and immediate priestly duties of our Lord and saviour, Jesus Christ.

But back to my suggested interpretation.

In the context Peter is telling the church to expect trials and tribulations as a form of refinement and also chastisement. The same greek word is used in 1Cor. 11:32. Please read this text along with the entire chapter of 1Peter4. before replying.

Bless you

I disagree.

You see, "judgment", according to the context of this passage is referring to the eschatological judgment. How do I know this? It's quite simple.

When Peter asks, "what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?" he is speaking of the finality of the wicked, the implication thus being that they will be destroyed in the executive stage of God's judgment. "end" = eschatological or executive stage/phase.

Interestingly, Peter also states that this Judgement has begun with the household of God, thus identifying a continuity in God's judgment.

And so when Peter speaks of judgment insofar as stating that it "begins with the household of God", he is nonetheless referring to the investigative phase of God's judgment.

Hence, it is still the eschatological judgment, but Peter is thereby emphasizing that there are two parts, a beginning and an end to this judgment. We call them the investigative and executive phases, and rightly so because there must be a trial before the judgment is executed.

Now, it is important that we understand something about the investigative aspect of God's judgment. It isn't that God doesn't know the finality of all choices insofar as where people will choose to base their confidence and trust, rather it is for believers to know that God isn't finished with us yet!

In short: The investigative judgment isn't for God, it's for us!

In other words, what Peter is telling the people in warning them about the judgment beginning with the household of God is that they better not think for one minute that just because they said, "I believe in Jesus" that all will be well and they can do as they please.

Based on my own experience, and the experiences that other Christians have shared with me over the years, I think it is safe to assume that since he mentioned trials and sufferings of believers withinn the context of judgment, it could be that the people were starting to waver in their faith, to believe that as long as they just accept Jesus Christ as Lord by profession of faith, that they could live the common life, so as to avoid persecution, to lesson the degree of suffering as it were.

Let's face it, it was a hard time to be a Christian. They didn't have the religious liberty that we have today; so they were severely persecuted for their faith. And those who were new converts were most likely looking for any way out, that they could find to avoid such persecution.

But Peter is telling them, IN OTHER WORDS, "You made a choice to live for Christ. And you won't be saved merely by some profession of faith. You must stick things out and produce good fruit. Your lives are under investigation. Will you prove that you are sincere about Christ or will the "end" of God's judgment prove that your heart was always with unbelievers?"

That is the message that I get from the immediate context, as well as from the general context found in the letter itself.

Hence, the investigative aspect of God's judgment is not for God, as if He doesn't know what's going to happen, but for us to know that God can see everything that is happening in our lives, and will judge us by such actions, and not merely by some profession of faith!

 

[Cliff2]

I suggest that everything concerning the judgement is read and then it is easy to see that the judgement did not start in Peter's time at all.

 

[jonno]

Woo: I need to answer you point by point if you do not mind.
Firstly "end" in this context does not appear to mean end of the times or "executive stage". It means a result. You are basing your argument that judgement means eschatological on your interpretation of "end"
Secondly you say that this judgement begins with the living house of God including a living Peter. How do you interprete the following text;
Heb 9vs27 "And as it is appointed unto men once to die and after this the judgement.

 

[woobadooba]

Firstly "end" in this context does not appear to mean end of the times or "executive stage".

What other end could Peter be referring to in speaking of what will happen to the ungodly?

In exegesis one learns to look for key words to ascertain the meaning of the text. "end" and "judgment" when pieced together can't be referring to anything else but the judgment which concerns the wrath of God--the eschatological judgment.

If you can't see it, then that's fine, but I offered a pretty good case for it. But I haven't seen you offer a good case for your refutation of it, as of yet.

Secondly you say that this judgement begins with the living house of God including a living Peter. How do you interprete the following text;
Heb 9vs27 "And as it is appointed unto men once to die and after this the judgement.

Friend, I don't like to play these text mesh games. In exegesis this is a no no. That verse has a different context to it in that it is referring to actual death, and what occurrs thereafter, namely judgment.

For, the Bible does state that the dead in Christ shall rise on the day of God's judgment. But notice how the word is judgment in Hebrews 9 and not judging! There is a difference. Thus judgment according to this context denotes the idea of the executive phase wherein the dead in Christ, by manner of their resurrection and ascension to God, testify to the validity of God's decision concerning the salvation of their souls. Hence, the decision has already been made, and so the execution of that decision will take place at that time.

But I think that you think that people either go straight to hell or straight to heaven when they die. SDAs don't believe this. So, let's leave that issue for another thread, and address the blatant phaseology of God's eschatological judgment, so as it appears in 1 Pt. 4:17

Now then, the interesting thing is that Judgment that Peter is referring to is the same judgment found in Heb. 9, although in this context he reveals that there are two phases of it, the beginning and the end--the investigative phase and the executive phase.

You must not fail to see that he uses the word judgment. What other judgment could he be referring to when he speaks of an end?

As for the results argument that you posed, yes, their are results. And what are the results of God's judgment? Believers will be saved eternally and the wicked will be destroyed. Thus salvation and destruction = the results of God's judgment. And Peter makes this quite clear in the text when he says, "what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?" Well, we must assume he is referring to unbelievers; and what will be the end of unbelievers? And when will it happen?

The answer is obvious.

To those who are SDA and think I am denying the 2300 day prophecy, I am not. What I am denying however, is the time that we(SDAs)have always been led to believe that the IJ began--1844. Now, since I believe in the 2300 day prophecy, I conclude that something did in fact happen in 1844 related to this prophecy, but I just don't know what that is as of yet. But I do know this, it wasn't the IJ, since Peter made it very clear that that began during his time.

 

[Cliff2]

What other end could Peter be referring to in speaking of what will happen to the ungodly?

In exegesis one learns to look for key words to ascertain the meaning of the text. "end" and "judgment" when pieced together can't be referring to anything else but the judgment which concerns the wrath of God--the eschatological judgment.

If you can't see it, then that's fine, but I offered a pretty good case for it. But I haven't seen you offer a good case for your refutation of it, as of yet.



Friend, I don't like to play these text mesh games. In exegesis this is a no no. That verse has a different context to it in that it is referring to actual death, and what occurrs thereafter, namely judgment.

For, the Bible does state that the dead in Christ shall rise on the day of God's judgment. But notice how the word is judgment in Hebrews 9 and not judging! There is a difference. Thus judgment according to this context denotes the idea of the executive phase wherein the dead in Christ, by manner of their resurrection and ascension to God, testify to the validity of God's decision concerning the salvation of their souls. Hence, the decision has already been made, and so the execution of that decision will take place at that time.

But I think that you think that people either go straight to hell or straight to heaven when they die. SDAs don't believe this. So, let's leave that issue for another thread, and address the blatant phaseology of God's eschatological judgment, so as it appears in 1 Pt. 4:17

Now then, the interesting thing is that Judgment that Peter is referring to is the same judgment found in Heb. 9, although in this context he reveals that there are two phases of it, the beginning and the end--the investigative phase and the executive phase.

You must not fail to see that he uses the word judgment. What other judgment could he be referring to when he speaks of an end?

As for the results argument that you posed, yes, their are results. And what are the results of God's judgment? Believers will be saved eternally and the wicked will be destroyed. Thus salvation and destruction = the results of God's judgment. And Peter makes this quite clear in the text when he says, "what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?" Well, we must assume he is referring to unbelievers; and what will be the end of unbelievers? And when will it happen?

The answer is obvious.

To those who are SDA and think I am denying the 2300 day prophecy, I am not. What I am denying however, is the time that we(SDAs)have always been led to believe that the IJ began--1844. Now, since I believe in the 2300 day prophecy, I conclude that something did in fact happen in 1844 related to this prophecy, but I just don't know what that is as of yet. But I do know this, it wasn't the IJ, since Peter made it very clear that that began during his time.

Your conclusion is flawed and is wrong.

As far as I know there is not another SDA that would agree with you on this issue.

There are some SDA's that do not agree with the IJ but this one of yours is not even close to the truth.

I have suggested to you, look at all the texts that are on the IJ and see where they stand with your view?

Then come back and see if you still hold the same view as you do now?

 

[woobadooba]

Your conclusion is flawed and is wrong.

As far as I know there is not another SDA that would agree with you on this issue.

There are some SDA's that do not agree with the IJ but this one of yours is not even close to the truth.

I have suggested to you, look at all the texts that are on the IJ and see where they stand with your view?

Then come back and see if you still hold the same view as you do now?

Cliff, you really dissappoint me. You don't even know how to defend what you believe. you keep telling me that I am wrong, but really Cliff, anyone who has seen my comments can see that you have been avoiding my questions the whole time.

You keep telling me that I am wrong, yet you never prove it!

The pharisees did the same thing to Jesus!