Bible Study Group

I made this chart to show something that often gets lost in English Bible translations.

Several different biblical words are commonly translated as the single English word “hell,” even though they do not mean the same thing in context. When you line the words up with how Scripture actually uses them, a pattern starts to emerge.

On the left side are the original terms, Hebrew and Greek, and what they mean in their own contexts. In the middle is how final judgment is described, especially in Revelation and 2 Peter. On the right is what Scripture says comes after judgment.

I’m not trying to force a conclusion here. I’m just putting the words, the sequence, and the verses side by side and letting the text speak for itself.

If you’ve never noticed that Death and Hades are thrown into the lake of fire, or that the old heaven and earth pass away before the new creation appears, that’s the kind of thing this chart is meant to highlight.

If you see something you agree with, disagree with, or want to ask about, I’m genuinely open to the conversation. Scripture can handle honest questions.

NO EXCLUSIVE PRIESTHOOD: RECOVERING WHAT GOD ACTUALLY INTENDED

There is a widespread assumption in modern Christianity that God established, desired, or continues to require an exclusive priestly class that stands between Himself and His people. This idea is often treated as ancient, sacred, and unquestionable. But when Scripture is read plainly, according to its context, that assumption does not hold.

The Bible presents a very different picture. From the beginning, God’s intent was not restricted access, hierarchical mediation, or spiritual gatekeeping. His intent was a people drawn near, a shared priesthood, and direct access grounded in His promise and fulfilled in His Son.

What follows is not a rejection of leadership, order, or teaching. It is a rejection of a fabricated priesthood that Scripture itself does not advocate.

GOD’S ORIGINAL DESIGN: A KINGDOM OF PRIESTS

When God redeemed Israel from Egypt, He did not immediately give them a law, a priestly caste, or a sacrificial system. He first revealed His purpose.

At Sinai, God declared that His intention for Israel was to be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Exodus 19:5–6). This was not symbolic language. It was a concrete calling. God invited the entire people to draw near, to hear His voice, and to live as a priestly nation with direct access to Him.

This was not an exclusive model. It was national. Shared. Corporate.

But the people withdrew. They feared proximity. They asked for mediation instead of access (Exodus 20:18–19). That moment matters, because it explains everything that followed.

HOW AN EXCLUSIVE PRIESTHOOD EMERGED

The Levitical priesthood was not God’s original goal. It was the Levites response to what God truly commanded, when Israel refused to live as a priestly people, that is when Moses asked who would stand with the Lord, the Levites stepped forward (Exodus 32:26).

The Levites obeyed when others drew back. God permitted their service, but this was concession, not culmination. Because of Israel’s transgression, distance, and resistance, the Torah was given as a guardian and a teacher, not as a source of life or access (Galatians 3:19–24). Law, ritual, and priesthood managed separation. They did not create intimacy.

This distinction is critical. The existence of a priesthood does not automatically mean it reflects God’s ideal. Sometimes it reflects human fear.

THE TORAH AS A TEACHER, NOT A DESTINATION

The Torah was never meant to be the endpoint. It functioned as a visual curriculum, a system of enacted instruction.

🧭 It guarded the people from destruction while pointing forward (Galatians 3:23)
🖼️ It taught through symbols, sacrifices, feasts, and purity laws (Hebrews 10:1)
🔍 It trained Israel to recognize the promised heir of Abraham (John 5:39)

Every detail served as an object lesson. The priesthood, the sacrifices, and the rituals were temporary representations, not permanent replacements for God’s original intention.

CHRIST RESTORES WHAT WAS LOST

In Christ, the pattern reverses.

Jesus does not establish a new exclusive priesthood beneath Him. He fulfills priesthood entirely and restores access fully (Hebrews 7:23–28). He stands as the one mediator, not the first in a new chain (1 Timothy 2:5).

Through Him, what was offered in Exodus 19 is restored, not redefined.

🕊️ Believers are called living stones, built together (1 Peter 2:5)
👑 They are named a royal priesthood, not a dependent laity (1 Peter 2:9)
🫱 Access is opened, not redistributed (Hebrews 4:16; Hebrews 10:19–22)

This is not symbolic language meant to preserve hierarchy. It is declarative language meant to dismantle it.

LEADERSHIP WITHOUT ONTOLOGY

Scripture absolutely affirms leadership. What it does not affirm is ontological elevation.

Elders and teachers are appointed from within local congregations based on maturity and faithfulness (Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5–9). Their role is functional, not mediatorial.

🛠️ They equip the saints, not replace them (Ephesians 4:11–12)
📖 They guard and teach the Word, not redefine it (Acts 20:28–32)
🤝 They serve among the body, not above it (1 Peter 5:1–3)

They do not possess higher spiritual status. They do not stand between God and His people. They are accountable to the same Word they teach (Galatians 1:8–9).

WHY THE PLAIN READING MATTERS

This entire pattern only becomes visible when Scripture is allowed to speak plainly.

Plain reading does not mean careless reading. It means reading according to how language works.

📜 Narrative as narrative
🎶 Poetry as poetry
🔎 Metaphor as metaphor
🌄 Vision as vision

Context determines function. Once the context explains the meaning, the text can be understood, trusted, and applied (Nehemiah 8:8; Luke 10:26). This is not rebellion. It is yielding. Yielding to what God actually said.

THE CORE PROBLEM WITH AN EXCLUSIVE PRIESTHOOD

An exclusive priesthood claims what Scripture does not grant.

🚫 It claims that access must be mediated when Christ opened it.
🚫 It claims that interpretation must be centralized when Scripture addresses the people.
🚫 It claims authority over conscience where only God speaks.

That model is not ancient faith preserved. It is a later construction imposed.

WHAT IS BEING ADVOCATED

What is being advocated here is not chaos, independence, or rejection of order.
It is a return.

🔁 A return to shared priesthood.
🔁 A return to functional leadership.
🔁 A return to Scripture read plainly and lived faithfully.

God did not redeem a people to place them back behind a veil. He redeemed them to draw them near. There is no exclusive priesthood in Christ. There never was supposed to be.

It’s the truth. 🤣❤️ our annual reminder to be aware of poles this holiday season, you never know when they’ll sneak up on you. #walkies #dogwalks #trainingdogs #dogparents

LET GOD BE TRUE: WHY SCRIPTURE MUST BE READ PLAINLY, IN CONTEXT, OR IT CANNOT FUNCTION AS REVELATION
(Rom 3:4)

Here’s the core issue underneath a lot of Christian disagreement today. It isn’t “Catholic vs Protestant,” and it isn’t “educated vs uneducated.” It’s whether the Bible can be taken as meaningful communication from God, using the plain reading of the text and a literal interpretation governed by context. If it cannot, then no one can honestly claim to know what God has said, because the moment “plain meaning” is declared unreliable, authority shifts from what is written to whoever claims the power to redefine it (Deut 4:2; Prov 30:5–6; 1 Cor 4:6).

God did not reveal Himself through private codes that require an elite class to unlock. He spoke through ordinary language, real grammar, real history, and recognizable literary forms so that real people could read, understand, and respond in faith and obedience (Deut 30:11–14; Neh 8:8; Ps 119:130; Luke 1:1–4). If God intended His Word to be inherently inaccessible, He could have revealed it as an ongoing stream of private interpretations. Instead, He caused it to be written, preserved, read publicly, tested, and taught openly (Hab 2:2; Col 4:16; 1 Thess 5:21).

This is not “anti-leader.” It is “pro-Scripture,” and therefore truly “pro-church,” because the church is healthiest when it is continually corrected by what God has already spoken (Acts 17:11; Gal 1:8–9).

GOD SPEAKS FIRST, AND HE SPEAKS CLEARLY

Scripture doesn’t present God as vague, hidden, or needing human gatekeepers to make His words usable. The Bible presents God as a communicator who holds people accountable for understanding what He has said. That only makes sense if His words are accessible in their intended meaning (Deut 30:11–14; Matt 22:29; Luke 10:26).

When God rebukes His people, He does not say, “You lacked the right interpretive office.” He says, “You did not listen,” “You did not believe,” “You did not obey,” and “You did not know the Scriptures” (Isa 1:18; Matt 12:3; Matt 22:29; John 5:39–40). The responsibility placed on the hearer assumes the message is intelligible.

CONTEXT IS NOT A LOOPHOLE, IT IS HOW LANGUAGE WORKS

“Plain reading” does not mean wooden reading. It means you read the words as words, in their setting, the way communication actually works. Context includes the immediate passage, the whole book, covenant placement, and valid cross-references where Scripture itself connects themes and definitions (Neh 8:8; Acts 17:2–3; Acts 8:30–35).

When Scripture uses poetry, metaphor, symbol, parable, or vision, it does not stop having meaning. It communicates meaning through recognizable forms, and the text itself, plus its biblical background, gives you the intended referent (Ps 78:2; Prov 1:6; Matt 13:34–36; Rev 1:1–3). Symbolic language still points to real things. It is not permission to make the text mean whatever a later system needs it to mean (Isa 8:20; Mark 7:6–13).

If “the plain meaning in context” is treated as unreliable, then interpretation becomes a power game, because the text no longer governs the reader. The reader, or the institution, governs the text. That is how confusion multiplies, and that is why so many doctrines end up resting on “silence,” implication, or imported definitions instead of what is actually written (Deut 4:2; Prov 30:5–6; 1 Cor 4:6).

SCRIPTURE IS A CLOSED CATEGORY BECAUSE REVELATION IS A CLOSED CATEGORY

Scripture is not “anything religious that was written.” Scripture is what God spoke through His prophets and apostles and caused to be written as a public, testable standard (Rom 3:2; Eph 3:3–5; 2 Pet 1:19–21; Jude 17).

That category is closed by divine action, not expanded by later agreement.

This matters because many people, from many traditions, try to solve disagreements by appealing to a higher human layer. But Scripture repeatedly moves in the opposite direction. When conflict arises, the appeal is to what God has said, not to who has the power to redefine it (Isa 8:20; Acts 15:15–18; Gal 1:8–9).

Even apostles are judged by fidelity to the already-delivered gospel. That one fact alone destroys the idea that later authorities can override Scripture while still claiming to serve it (Gal 1:8–9; 2 Cor 1:24).

THE HOLY SPIRIT DOES NOT REPLACE THE TEXT, HE WORKS THROUGH IT

A huge confusion in modern debates is the way people talk about the Spirit as if the Spirit’s role is to provide private interpretations that bypass the text. But Scripture never describes the Spirit that way.

The Holy Spirit teaches, reminds, convicts, and applies what Christ has already spoken, and what God has already caused to be written (John 14:26; John 16:13–15; 2 Tim 3:16–17). He does not compete with Scripture, and He does not contradict Scripture. He illuminates the truth that is already there, so that believers understand, believe, and obey (1 Cor 2:12–14; 1 John 2:27).

So the issue is not “me and my Bible versus the world.” The issue is whether we will treat Scripture as the Spirit’s public, objective standard, or treat Scripture as raw material that only becomes meaningful after a human authority processes it.

If someone claims, “The Bible cannot be understood by its plain reading in context,” what they are really saying is, “God’s Word is not sufficient as communication.” And once that claim is accepted, authority has already moved away from God’s speech and into human management (2 Tim 3:16–17; John 10:35).

WHY THIS MATTERS FOR EVERY CHRISTIAN, IN EVERY TRADITION

This isn’t a niche argument. It affects everything.

If Scripture is clear enough to bind the conscience, then no one may bind consciences beyond what is written (Deut 4:2; 1 Cor 4:6). If Scripture is not clear, then conscience becomes captive to whoever claims interpretive control, and that is spiritually dangerous, even if it comes with good intentions (Col 2:8; Mark 7:6–13).

And the New Testament assumes believers can and must test what they hear.

🧪 Believers are commanded to examine teaching, not swallow it whole (Acts 17:11; 1 Thess 5:21; 1 John 4:1).

🧠 Believers are called to grow into discernment, not dependency (Heb 5:12–14; Eph 4:11–14).

📖 Believers are corrected by Scripture, not by claims of status (2 Tim 3:16–17; John 10:35).

⚖️ When a human claim conflicts with what Scripture plainly says, the human claim must yield (Isa 8:20; Rom 3:4; Gal 1:8–9).

That is not disrespect for leaders. That is the exact job description Scripture gives to the entire body, because the church is not a separate ruling class. The church is the people of God, all under the headship of Christ and all accountable to what is written (Col 1:18; 1 Cor 12:27; 1 Pet 5:1–3).

LET GOD BE TRUE, WITHOUT TURNING PEOPLE INTO THE ENEMY

When I say, “Let God be true and every man a liar,” I am not saying every person is malicious. I am saying every person is fallible, including me, and therefore every human claim must be judged by the one standard that does not change, the written Word of God (Num 23:19; Rom 3:4; Isa 40:8; 1 Pet 1:24–25).

People can be sincere and still be wrong. A tradition can be ancient and still be wrong. A consensus can be widespread and still be wrong. Truth is not created by age, volume, or institutional confidence. Truth is grounded in what God has actually said (Isa 8:20; Mark 7:6–13; Gal 1:8–9).

THE DECIDING RULE

Here is the simplest test of where authority really sits.

If Scripture must submit to an institution or a system of interpretation, then Scripture is not supreme in practice. If institutions must submit to Scripture, then Scripture remains the final authority, and the Spirit remains free to teach Christ’s people through what He inspired (John 16:13–15; 2 Tim 3:16–17; Rom 8:14).
So no, this is not rebellion.

This is yielding to the Holy Spirit through what He has already caused to be written, letting God speak first, and letting every lesser voice take its proper place (John 14:26; John 16:13–15; Rom 8:14; Gal 5:18; 2 Pet 1:19–21).

God is true.

His Word stands.

And His Spirit leads His people in the truth, not away from it (Rom 3:4; John 17:17; John 10:35).