Fear of the Investigative Judgment or Confidence in God’s Grace?

Last week, I noticed an interesting divide in how our class thinks about salvation and final judgment. Some of us believe that God will ultimately save everyone, while others hold that salvation is only for those who exercise their free will and actively choose to accept Jesus.

Even among those who believe in free will, there’s further disagreement about how salvation works. Is it entirely through God’s grace, or does obedience meaning keeping the commandments play a role? These questions are not new; Christians have been debating them for centuries.

Today, I want to briefly outline these different perspectives and then explore a unique Adventist doctrine called the investigative judgment and the close of probation. But rather than just explaining the doctrine itself, I want to examine its implications when viewed through the lens of grace. I think this perspective adds something meaningful to the conversation of final judgment.

One of the biggest questions Christians have wrestled with for, well, pretty much forever is this: Who will be saved in the end? It’s fascinating how differently people approach this.

Take Universalism, for example. This view suggests that because God is love (which Scripture affirms) and because He desires everyone to be saved (which Scripture also affirms), then wouldn’t it make sense that He will ultimately bring everyone home? Universalists believe God’s grace is so powerful that it will eventually overcome sin for every person.

Here are some of the key Bible verses they point to:

• 1 Timothy 2:4 – God our Savior… desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
• John 12:32 – And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.
• Romans 5:18–19 – Just as one trespass led to condemnation for all, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all.

But this perspective raises significant questions: 

• If salvation is guaranteed for everyone regardless of their choices, then the ability to choose between good and evil loses its meaning. 
• If there are no eternal consequences for serious wrongdoing, it would take away the incentive for moral behavior and also suggest that God is all about mercy and not justice. 

Most traditional Christian churches push back on Universalism, arguing that salvation is not universal which also has biblical backing. Now, within this broad belief, there are two major theological perspectives. To fully understand these perspectives, we need to recognize their underlying assumptions, the so-called lens with which they view theology. 

Calvinism views everything through the lens of God’s absolute sovereignty which is the belief that nothing happens unless God has knowingly and willingly decreed it. From this perspective, Calvinists teach that God has predestined some for salvation (the “elect”), while others are left to condemnation.

This belief is grounded in passages such as:

• Ephesians 1:4–5 – He chose us in him before the foundation of the world.
• Romans 9:15–16 – For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.

For some, this doctrine provides comfort, trusting in God’s sovereign plan. Others, however, struggle with the idea that salvation is predetermined rather than freely chosen.

In contrast, Arminianism, developed as a response to Calvinism, uses God is love as their assumption or lens and emphasizes human free will. It teaches that God extends an irresistible grace that comes before any human decision, making it possible for all individuals to freely accept or reject the gospel. 

Supporters of this viewpoint to verses such as:

• John 3:16 – For God so loved the world… that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
• 2 Peter 3:9 – God is not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.

Seventh-day Adventists, emerging from the 19^th-century Arminian tradition, firmly reject the Calvinistic idea of predestination that God arbitrarily decides who will be saved. They emphasize that God is love (1 John 4:8) and extends grace to all, but individuals must choose to accept it through faith.

One interesting thing about Calvinists is that they interpret the entire Bible through the lens of God’s absolute sovereignty, applying this framework from beginning to end. In contrast, Arminians, using the lens of God is love, do not apply it as broadly. Instead, they focus mainly on specific issues like predestination. This led to an important question: If God is love, why does He allow evil in the world? Why do bad things happen to good people and why God of love is not doing anything about it?

Seventh-day Adventists tackled this issue head-on. They applied the lens of God is love, a perspective borrowed from Arminianism, across the entire Bible. To address the problem of evil and suffering, Seventh-day Adventists developed the doctrine of the Great Controversy, the belief in a cosmic battle between God and Satan. This framework seeks to answer a fundamental question: If God is love, why does He allow suffering?

​ Adventists interpret passages like Revelation 12 (depicting the war in heaven) and Job 1, 2 as evidence of a cosmic conflict between God and Satan, known as the Great Controversy. This perspective views suffering not as a random misfortune but as part of this larger spiritual battle. In this framework, God permits evil to fully manifest to demonstrate His justice and mercy to all creation, including unfallen angels and other celestial beings, as suggested in Job 1. Rather than eradicating evil immediately, God allows its true nature to be revealed, ensuring that His character is vindicated before ultimately bringing evil to an end.​

Ellen G. White emphasized that the full extent of Satan’s character was not apparent to the angels or unfallen worlds until the death of Christ. She wrote, “Not until the death of Christ was the character of Satan clearly revealed to the angels or to the unfallen worlds”. This event served to solidify the loyalty of heavenly beings and dispel any lingering uncertainties about Satan’s true intentions (DA pg. 79).

Therefore, the broader theme emphasizes that the unfolding events on Earth serve to vindicate God’s character before the entire universe. While the idea of vindicating God’s character is biblical, what sets the Adventist perspective apart is how they apply it to final judgment, particularly through two distinctive doctrines: The Pre-Advent Investigative Judgment and the Close of Probation. 

When we talk about the Pre-Advent Investigative Judgment and close of probation, we’re looking at one of the most unique beliefs in Seventh-day Adventist teaching. It’s all about understanding what Christ is doing in heaven right now and what that means for our salvation.

Here’s how it works: After Jesus rose from the dead, He went up to heaven and took on the role of our High Priest. This role actually mirrors what the priests did in the earthly sanctuary. 

The earthly sanctuary had two main areas that help us understand this concept:

• The Holy Place, where priests did their daily work, offering sacrifices and sprinkling blood to represent forgiveness of sins
• The Most Holy Place, which was super special – the high priest only went in there once a year on Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) to cleanse the sanctuary of all the accumulated sins

Based on Hebrews 8 and 9, Seventh-day Adventists believe that when Jesus ascended to heaven, He began His work as High Priest in the Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary, interceding on behalf of believers. This phase of His ministry, known as the intercessory ministry, involved applying the benefits of His atoning sacrifice to those who put their faith in Him.

Adventists interpret Daniel 8:13, 14 as providing a timeline for this intercessory work:

“Then I heard a holy one speaking; and another holy one said to that certain one who was speaking, ‘How long will the vision be, concerning the daily sacrifices and the transgression of desolation, the giving of both the sanctuary and the host to be trampled underfoot?’ And he said to me, ‘For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall be cleansed.’”

Based on the day-year principle of prophetic interpretation, Adventists understand the 2,300 days as 2,300 years, beginning in 457 B.C. and ending in 1844 A.D. At this point, they believe Jesus transitioned from the Holy Place to the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary to begin the final phase of His ministry, the Investigative Judgment, which parallels the cleansing of the earthly sanctuary on the Day of Atonement.

Think of this investigative judgment as a thorough review of everyone who’s ever claimed to follow Christ. 

This judgment serves several important purposes:

• It reveals who among the dead and living are faithful to Jesus. Their names and deeds are written in heavenly books, and they are opened for the entire universe to examine.
• This process vindicates God’s character to the universe and demonstrates how His grace has transformed believers.  

Adventists interpret that when this judgment is completed, the opportunity for people alive to change their decision about following God will end. Adventists refer to this as the Close of Probation and cite Revelation 22:11 (Let the evildoer still do evil… and the righteous still do right) as evidence that after this point, no one’s status before God will change.

These distinct beliefs, when viewed through the lens of “God is love,” have helped Adventists interpret the Bible holistically, balancing the understanding that God is both just and merciful. Reading it from this perspective fosters a deep appreciation for Adventist theology. Regardless of whether one agrees with this viewpoint, it provides a compelling response to a common question: How can a loving God allow suffering while still being fair?

Here’s the problem: when we read Adventist prophecy, we don’t always see God as loving. Many of us remember feeling scared—worried about our mistakes, afraid of God closing probation and deciding our fate. Instead of feeling love and peace, we felt anxiety and fear. Why is that? 

The early Adventists, including Ellen White, initially understood the doctrine of investigative judgment without a full grasp of the grace of God as it is emphasized today. At the time, many believed that keeping the Ten Commandments, with a special emphasis on the Sabbath commandment, was essential for salvation. As a result, the investigative judgment and the close of probation were seen as critical moments where one had to confess all their sins and be fully prepared before probation ended. Since they believed the investigative judgment had already begun in 1844, there was a strong sense of urgency. This mindset, whether intentional or not, led to a legalistic approach in the church which most of us are aware of. 

A significant turning point came when E. J. Wagner and A. T. Jones, the editors of Sings of the Times magazine studied Galatians, Ephesians, and Romans with Ellen White. They discovered that the law that was “done away with” was actually the Ten Commandments, not just the ceremonial law as previously taught. When they presented these findings at the 1888 Minneapolis General Conference, they met strong resistance, particularly from Uriah Smith who was the editor of Review and Herald, and George Butler, the president of the General Conference of SDA Church. Ellen White wrote several letters stating that the actions of the church were a mistake. In response, she wrote several books on Christ and His grace like “The Desire of Ages” and “Steps to Christ” to help shift focus from the Ten Commandments to Christ’s righteousness.

To understand this shift, it’s helpful to recognize two phrases commonly used in Adventist literature:

• When Adventists refer to perfection or perfectionism, they mean legalism, the idea of achieving salvation through strict observance of 10 commandments.
• When they speak of the righteousness of Christ, they mean grace, the gift of salvation through faith in Jesus.

Because of their early emphasis on law-keeping, other Protestant churches often viewed Adventists as a legalistic sect rather than a Christian denomination. The main criticism centered on Ephesians 2:8-9, which teaches salvation by grace through faith, not works.

In response, Adventists clarified their position stating:

• Salvation comes through faith alone, with obedience being the result of salvation, not its cause
• The Investigative Judgment isn’t about earning salvation but about demonstrating God’s justice and grace to the universe

But they presented it in a way that made it seem like they were never wrong, even when they were. As a result, many today continue to waver between both sides of this doctrine.

Today’s Adventist teaching on the Investigative Judgment boldly emphasizes:

• Christ’s sacrifice is complete and sufficient (Hebrews 9:26)
• The judgment confirms genuine faith (1 John 5:13)
• Believers can have assurance through grace, not personal perfection

This theological development has brought Adventist teaching more in line with the Protestant understanding that salvation is truly a gift of grace, not something earned through obedience.

I am going to give you a link to a presentation by Pastor Ty Gibson from Light Bearer Ministry affiliated with the Adventist church talking about these things. He didn’t mince words in this presentation. 

https://www.adventistlearningcommunity.com/resources/18869

Throughout history, Christians have wrestled with the question of who will be saved in the end.  Some emphasize God’s sovereignty, others focus on human free will, and Adventists add a unique perspective with the Investigative Judgment. Whether you believe that everyone is saved or only some, at the heart of this conversation lies a deeper question: Should we fear judgment, or can we rest in God’s grace?

Early Adventists, driven by urgency and a legalistic mindset, approached the Investigative Judgment with a sense of fear and obligation, a belief that one had to be fully prepared before probation closed. A sect of Adventists still today emphasizes this faulty belief using the old writings of the church. However, as Adventist theology matured, it shifted toward a grace-centered understanding, aligning with the biblical truth that salvation is by faith alone. Instead of viewing the judgment as something to fear, Adventists now see it as an assurance that God’s justice is fair, and that grace truly transforms lives.

The Investigative Judgment does not determine who is good enough to be saved, rather, it reveals the power of Christ’s righteousness in those who trust Him. It assures believers that their faith is not in vain and that God’s love and justice will be fully vindicated before the universe.

So, do we approach the Investigative Judgment with fear, or with confidence in God’s grace? If salvation depends on our efforts, fear makes sense. But if salvation rests fully on Christ, then we can have peace. As 1 John 4:18 reminds us: “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear.”

In the end, the Investigative Judgment is not about whether we have done enough, but about whether Christ’s sacrifice is enough and the answer to that is a resounding yes.

Questions: 

• How can we grow in our understanding of God’s perfect love so that we approach judgment with confidence rather than fear?
• How can we balance the call to live faithfully with the assurance that salvation is not based on our performance but on Christ’s righteousness?

Reinhard: The old Adventist teaching spread all over the world, including the place I came from. The investigative judgment is a big deal among Adventist believers because it’s a doctrine that brings them to this church, and some of them still believe in it rather than in the counter-doctrine of grace. Calvinism holds that once saved, always saved, and some people believe in predestination. I believe some people think that if you’re going to be saved, that’s predetermined. But I think most critics of that theory believe it’s still deficient, that it leads to spiritual atrophy because it opens the gate for people to do anything, even against the law, and still feel they are going to be saved. I think that’s not the case. I think there are some restrictions, but people live under grace with faith. We are only human, so we are going to make mistakes, but grace covers us once we believe, accept Jesus, and follow His commandments.

So, in one way, yes, once you are saved, you are always saved. But if somebody makes major mistakes, they are not going to be saved. Predestination is tied to that idea. I think God predestines all believers. Ephesians 1:4 says that God chose us before the foundation of the world. That’s a very big statement. How long ago was that foundation of the world? So if God has known us for billions of years, isn’t that something? It’s a wonderful statement that God already knew—especially those who are going to believe and therefore be saved. I think it’s a wonderful statement: God already chose us, if we stay on course. We’re not perfect. God knows that, but the investigative judgment scares people, especially believers, and maybe this is a good and positive fear—just to remind us to stay on course. Being Adventist, I think we have to see where we are at this point and then how we are going to adjust by faith, not only by obedience. To me, obedience results from having faith in God.

Kiran: What would be a major mistake, a bigger sin that would be treated differently from the smaller sins? Jesus said, for example, that if a man lusts after a woman in his mind, he has already committed adultery. Do you think this is enough to knock us off the path to salvation?

Reinhard: When Jesus saved a woman who was about to be stoned to death for adultery, her male partner in that sin was not mentioned. Jesus told the crowd, “Let he who is without sin throw the first stone.” He showed that the love of God, the grace of God, can erase sin resulting from human weakness and can do so repeatedly. Of course, God hates sin, but as a believer, I think God repeatedly forgives us for sins. I don’t know how to separate or differentiate between major sin and small sin. But overall, with His death on the cross, God will forgive our sins. However, fear of punishment helps us try to live right, in obedience to His word. As humans, we’re going to fall here and there in our lives. So it’s a good thing to be reminded that as long as our heart and mind are turned towards Jesus as our Savior, we can feel pretty secure in our belief in salvation.

Anonymous: In Psalm 51:6, it says, “Behold, you desire…”—David is still talking to God—”You desire truth in the inward parts, and in the hidden part, You will make me to know wisdom.” The hidden part is, you know, I think there’s another one in Psalm 19:12: “How can I know all the sins lurking in my heart? Cleanse me, Lord, from these hidden faults.”

So we have to worry about the sins of secrecy, the sins that only we know about. When you steal, you’re going to be found out; when you badmouth someone, everybody hears it. Some sins are visible to everyone, and some sins only the person knows about themselves. These are the sins that God judges us on. In these sins, God offers forgiveness, God offers cleansing. Like David, He is training us: “And in the hidden part, You will make me to know wisdom.” It is God’s word that cleanses us from that kind of sin. But if we refuse, or we don’t even admit that we have this kind of sin and continue doing it, then no grace can cover us.

Donald: It seems to me that the structure that the Seventh-day Adventist Church finds itself within—certainly, it is broader than just the investigative judgment, but that is central. There is no question about that. And it just seems to me that you could have the whole thing absolutely correct and still lose salvation. It’s a structure for a church organization, but it’s not a structure where I find my salvation.

So, you know, theologians, people who are Bible students, Bible learners—you know, people of the Bible—okay, spend your time there if you’d like. And that’s fine, just be sure that you have the other aspects cared for. But to me, this is a system. I hate to describe it as such, but I’ve often used the term “corporate Adventism.” This is the way in which the church was formed—on the basis of a disappointment. They got it wrong. So what do we do? We do it again and hope this time it’s right.

I hope it’s not sacrilegious to say that it’s irrelevant because I have to know my Savior, and I have to understand what the Savior wants for me and from me. And when you, Kiran, described how behavior might be the issue—good behavior versus bad behavior—to me, bad behavior is not in the instruction manual. The instruction manual is about good behavior, and life will probably be better for you in a sin-filled world, but there’s no guarantee of that either.

But it’s not a matter of, “Oh, I wish I could steal,” or, “I wish I could use the Lord’s name in vain.” Those are not things I would hope for if I thought I could get away with them. So, I don’t know. I would like a response from some core Seventh-day Adventists. I mean, I’d love a response from each one of you, but from core Seventh-day Adventists especially.

This is off track a little bit, but I’ll make it short. Sandra Enterman, from Australia, back in 2020, decided that she would put on an Adventist music video for people who couldn’t get out. She’s been doing it for five years now. Every Friday night, she pulls people together. It’s not polished whatsoever, but you’d recognize the songbook they’re singing from. To me, that is the hope of Adventism. That is the richness of Adventism—that somewhere around the world, somebody came up with that idea and is using a common book of songs that I can appreciate and start the Sabbath with. But the investigative judgment? I’m not sure.

Don: Kiran’s talk transported me back to my days in Bible doctrines class. I thought I was back in school for a little while, reviving some long-lost memories. I see it as a fairly simple way of looking at it in perspective: judgment can have two outcomes. You can be vindicated in judgment, or you can be condemned in judgment. And I see the investigative judgment—whatever you want to hang on to that idea—as a vindication. Judgment is joyful because the result of judgment is that you’re vindicated.

And why are you vindicated? You’re vindicated because Christ paid the price for us, and it’s His grace that vindicates us. So to me, this is good news. We have spent most of our collective church life focusing on the condemnation of judgment, but I think the grace in judgment is that sin is not just something we do—it is a condition of our lack of oneness with God. When we understand the concept of grace, we understand reconciliation with God, bringing us back into oneness with Him. That is what judgment is designed to convey—that we are not condemned because of the sacrifice of Jesus. So to me, it’s good news. Judgment is joyful.

Reinhard: Exactly. In every event—especially this one, which marks the closing of human history—I think there will be a point where the judgment is final. People who are saved will be, as you put it, separated and proclaimed as saved. And those who are condemned will face what is called eternal condemnation—death.

But in Psalm 130:3-4, it says, “Lord, if You kept a record of our sins, who, Lord, could ever survive? But You offer forgiveness, that we might learn to fear You.” So I think the psalmist also recognized that we are going to keep falling into sin. Of course, we must try to stand up again. The psalm is very clear: if God kept a record of sins, who could survive? But He offers forgiveness so that we might learn to fear Him.

That ties into my previous comment—if God continually condemned us for our sins, we would be overwhelmed with guilt. But God has already forgiven us. Some scholars say that when Christ was crucified, He forgave the sins of all who have lived, are living, and will live in the future. That is good news. God’s grace assures us that He will forgive us for what we have done wrong, even when we condemn ourselves in our own minds.

I think we need to let go of that feeling—the worst feeling we have—that we are condemning ourselves for something we did that we think is not according to God’s will. We have to remember that God’s forgiveness is always available to us.

Carolyn: I have always heard of the investigative judgment, but in my heart, I’ve always sung the song—and it’s taken from the Bible—My sins are all cast to the depths of the sea. I also remember the verse where God says, I remember your sins no more.

And this has haunted me because there is a part of this whole study that says if our name comes up in the investigative judgment—and maybe I’m using the term out of context, so help me if I am—but if my name comes up and I have sin there, I could be lost. And so I wonder: where did the sins go when they went to the depths of the sea? If they’re not supposed to be remembered again, then how does this process fit together? I don’t find continuity in this whole doctrine.

I have tried over the years. And I’m not trying to be a rebel or anything like that, but I struggle to find the comfort that I feel when I truly grasp grace. At the end of the day, I ask the Lord to take charge, to give me grace, and I ask for forgiveness. But then the investigative judgment always comes back into my mind. Did I miss something?

Kiran: That’s why we all have this bipolar disorder—one moment, we’re legalists; the next, we’re grace believers. We’ve been struggling with this irreconcilable theology for all these years. The mistake was on the part of the early Adventists, who didn’t fully understand grace.

If God wiped out your sins, they’re wiped out for good, right? The investigative judgment has nothing to do with us. According to how Adventists interpret it, it has everything to do with the celestial beings. It’s about showing them, Look, Jesus went to Earth, sacrificed His life for them, and gave them grace. This grace transformed these people. Look, this is my character. This is my love. This is my vindication.

In fact, it is Jesus who is being judged by the celestial beings. I mean, I don’t know how much you want to believe that, but it has nothing to do with me sitting here trying to confess every sin. Even if I confess the sins I know, what about the sins I don’t know—the ones hidden in my heart? Who is going to confess those? It doesn’t make sense.

That’s why, if you view Adventist theology through the lens of grace, you suddenly realize that the two big issues that early Adventists agonized over just don’t hold together. Now we’re trying to rework them to make them somehow fit.

It’s like yesterday—my son was fascinated with icicles. I broke one and put it in a flower pot so it would slowly melt. After a while, it broke under its own weight. And then he tried to put the pieces back together, not realizing that they wouldn’t fuse again. That’s exactly where we are right now. We’re trying to piece together something just to hold on to the legacy of Adventism. But when you see through the lens of God’s grace, it doesn’t make sense anymore.

Dr. Weaver once said that if a doctrine doesn’t stand on the righteousness of Christ or isn’t Christ-centered, you should just throw it out. Well, if I’m misquoting you, Dr. Weaver, I apologize, but that’s what I remember.

Carolyn: I have been asking this question forever. It just feels so completely divided. I don’t find the continuity that I need.

In the moment, when I’m talking to the Lord, when I’ve given Him my life—including my hidden sins—I feel wonderful because of grace. I know my sins are forgiven. But then I have to wake up and live another day.

And then the thought comes: What if I swore and took the Lord’s name in vain because someone almost hit my car and I died before I had the chance to ask for forgiveness? This thought has been in my mind for years. It’s hard to shake.

I just want to live in the joy and freedom of knowing my sins are forgiven. I want the freedom that I see in some of my friends who aren’t Adventists—how they talk about how wonderful God is because He has freed them from the burden of sin and placed grace over them completely.

Donald: Having worked for the church for 40 years, I’m grateful to the corporate church and its 28 core principles by which the Seventh-day Adventist Church operates. But we all know that not all 28 principles are followed uniformly throughout the world. They ebb and flow based on culture, place, and time. And the corporate church doesn’t come down hard on that—it still allows the Seventh-day Adventist Church room to breathe. I have always admired that about the church.

But there’s a church I know that is vibrant, packed, and has the kind of programming you would hope for in any Seventh-day Adventist Church. It has multiple services and everything you could want. And believe it or not, the corporate church is shutting the pastor down. I’m not going to get into why that has transpired. He’s articulate, well thought out—his doctrine may not be exactly how I would prefer to hear it every Sabbath.

Then you have a nearby corporate church speaking negatively—or at least dubiously—about that vibrant church. We could spend years trying to reassemble and pull people back together again, trying to recoup the loss. And to me, that is sad. I like to think that our church—my church—can actually live in two spaces and still feel okay about the orientation of that church that has a synthesis sign in front of it.

David: Most of our group are products of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and I think they are a wonderful group of people. So in that sense, I wouldn’t criticize the church at all. But I absolutely, 110% agree with everything Donald said in his remarks today.

Christian churches have shifted from being God-driven social and spiritual communities in the very beginning to man-driven structured systems of organized doctrines and theologies. And these become very, very detailed. We’ve sat here today for an hour discussing those details, and it’s driving us all nuts. And you have to wonder—is it necessary?

I look back to the Gospels and the teachings of Jesus and His parables, and I ask: Is there any organized theology in them? Maybe others can extrapolate some, but I can’t. Or maybe it’s just that I won’t. We’re talking about the end times, we’re talking about salvation, and I still don’t think we’ve adequately separated the end time as either our own personal, individual death—which is certainly an end time from our perspective—or as that moment when the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse appear over the horizon and scare us all to death. I think it’s very important to try to tease that out.

Because either we want to be saved so that we can live after death, or we want to be saved so that we can live a good life here and now. Which is it? And I would go back to Kiran’s testimony, which he has shared several times in this class—his experience of sitting on a water tower, feeling sorry for himself, unhappy with his inner spiritual state. He has an epiphany, he seeks help, and he finds help from someone who happens to be an Adventist. He joins the church, and the rest is history.

What was Kiran saved from on that water tower? He wasn’t scanning the horizon for Four Horsemen. He was looking inside himself. He was still a young man, nowhere near his own end time, and yet, at that moment, could we not say he was saved? I think he was. I think that’s what happened.

So I would hate to think that he’s still going through life worrying about being saved when he’s already there. I don’t think we’ve really gotten to what we mean by the end time, and we still haven’t defined what we mean by the kingdom of heaven—whether it’s here on earth or only in the life hereafter.

And unfortunately, whenever we start discussing those things, we end up in the minefield of theology. But if we would just focus on the Gospels, we avoid the minefield. We don’t need theology. We can ignore it.

Don: David will expand upon those thoughts next week.

* * *