Enduring to the End to be Saved: What Does that Mean?

 What did Jesus mean when he said, "But they who shall endure to the end the same shall be saved?"[1]

---

[1] Calling on the name of the Lord to be saved and enduring to the end to be saved are two different things, and we can’t have it both ways. So what was Jesus referring to when he said a person must endure to the end to be saved? The end of what? The end of our natural lives? What is it a person must endure to the end of to be saved? 

We get some help from the prophet Joel concerning this seeming contradiction to the free gift of salvation based on faith and "not by works lest any should boast". Joel predicted a time would come when God’s people would be able to call on him to be saved. This was not possible in Joel’s time. After Jesus rose from the dead, on the day of Pentecost, Peter confirmed that time had finally come. The thief, hanging on a cross next to Jesus, did that very thing. 

So where do the words of Jesus about “enduring to the end” come into play? How do we rightly discern between Jesus and Joel, who appear to contradict each other?

The conflict is resolved when we understand that, in this verse, Jesus is not referring to the same time Joel referenced but rather to the Time of Jacob’s Trouble also known as The Great Tribulation. Joel predicted that time period as well, but that time has not come yet. 

We are presently living in the time Peter heralded on that long ago Day of Pentecost, which initiated the Dispensation [or Age] of Grace—the time of Christ in You—by the Holy Spirit descending and remaining (taking up residence within the bodies of Believers). Later on, the apostle Paul confirmed that our bodies are now the Temple of God. 

The time of “Christ in You” had its beginning on the first Feast of Pentecost following the resurrection of Christ, commonly known among Christians, as The Day of Pentecost. This Feast of the Lord is also known as Shavuot, the Feast of Weeks. 

Shavuot is a harvest feast, and this is significant. Because, the Day of Pentecost/Shavuot kicked off the greatest age of harvest this world has ever known or ever will know. At the time of this writing, we are still living in the time of God’s harvest…and that harvest is saved souls, won to Christ and supernaturally translated from the Kingdom of Darkness into the Kingdom of His Dear Son. 

There are three harvest feasts that represent and foretell the "Accepted Time," the "Time of Favor, "Age of Grace" (the time we are living in as this is being written), 1.) First-fruits 2.) Shavuot/Pentecost 3.) Trumpets

The three stages of harvest (soul winning and in-gathering) these feasts predict and represent are 1.) Jesus the First Fruits from the dead 2.) Shavuot/Pentecost, which is the main harvest (souls saved) following the First Fruits. Paul called this the Time of Favor. This is the time Joel predicted that calling on the Name of the Lord for salvation would be possible  3.) Rosh Hashana; the Feast of Trumpets also called the Feast of In-Gathering, consummates the main harvest with the sound of a trumpet. Those "In Christ" will be gathered. The dead in Christ shall rise first, then the living will be changed and caught up to meet the Lord in the air.

After that, come the gleanings. This happens during the Feast of the Lord called the Day of Atonement. It is during the time this feast predicts and represents, that enduring to the end will be the only way to be saved. It was to this time, The "Time of Trouble" that follows the Time of Favor, that Jesus referred to when he said one must "endure to the end" to be saved.

 The harvest of Shavuot began over 2000 years ago, when Jesus said “Look! The fields are already ripe for the harvest!” 

The great harvest of the past 2000 years, will be gathered in at the Resurrection of the Dead in Christ and the Catching Up those living IN HIM at the time of his coming in the air ^{1 Thessalonians 4:16-18}. This is predicted in the *Feast of the Trumpets—Rosh Hashanah—which is a two day feast.   

After that, come the gleanings during the Time of Jacob’s Trouble, the Great Tribulation—the time Jeremiah predicted people would say “The summer is over; the harvest is ended, and we are not saved.”

When Jesus said, “They that endure to the end will be saved,” he was referring to those left behind when the main harvest of the Feast of Weeks is finally gathered in at the Feast of Trumpets (resurrection/rapture).   

At the time of this writing, we are living in the time of “Christ in You,” the “Age of Grace,” and anyone can call upon the name of the Lord and receive forgiveness of sins and Eternal Life—be saved ^{Romans  10:9-13}. Those who do not call upon the Name of the Lord during the time of  “Christ IN You,” and are alive during the Time of Jacob’s Trouble (foretold by the Feast of Lord, the Day of Atonement), must “endure to the end” at which time, those who have endured and are still alive will experience a dramatic deliverance. The gleanings (those who are left after the main harvest) will be gathered in after the main harvest is completed.

*For more study on the Feasts of The LORD and what they mean to both Jew and Gentile alike, The book, REDEMPTION: Bible Prophecy Simplified, by this author, is a detailed study of Bible prophecy based on the Feasts of the Lord . This writer also calls them, the “Prophetic Feasts of Hope.” There are seven of them, and they are all about the HOPE that is in us, God’s REDEMPTION of our bodies, souls, and the earth, through his risen Son, Jesus the Messiah.

Being single divorced & formerly abused at church

Article contributed by Connie Smith

I first posted this article in 2013. Since then, there has been some [but still far too little] change in how formerly abused divorced women are viewed and treated in churches, so it is time to re-visit.

My thanks go to Connie Smith for contacting me and having the courage to share her story in hopes that others might be helped.

How single, divorced, and formerly abused women are viewed and treated within their local churches: My Story, By Connie Smith

   I am a formerly abused wife who experienced verbal, emotional, and physical abuse within my marriage. My pastor was aware of the abuse before my husband and I separated, because I had gone to him for help with our situation. After my husband and I finally separated due to physical violence, my pastor told me to drop the restraining order I had been granted and to allow my violent husband back into the house. 

   A few members of my church family were secretly supportive of me after my husband and I separated, but they did not dare let our pastor know of their support as he had made it very clear that the head of the home needed to have his “rightful” and “entitled” place back in our home. 

   I wanted to honor God, but I also wanted to stay alive. I had my husband arrested for his physical violence against me, and then he filed for a divorce, which I agreed to. After that, I tried to put the pieces of my life back together and to remain at my church with the people who I felt were my church family. I had been attending and serving there for all of my Christian life, and my children and I needed our church family’s support and friendship more than we ever had before.

   We did not get it.

   For quite some time after the divorce, I felt as though I had been branded by my “sin” of divorce and was being forced to wear the shameful scarlet letter. Although (to my knowledge) my former husband was not subjected to the same derogatory attitudes from the Christian community as I was.
   Even though I had not committed the sin of adultery, and I was not the one who sought the divorce, I felt a kinship with the woman in the Bible who had been taken in adultery and was condemned to be stoned before Jesus intervened and saved her life. There was no doubt that she had sinned, but where was the man in that situation? He was there, and he had sinned too, but he had not been condemned to death like the woman had been.

   Why not? He had committed adultery too. But, for whatever the reason, his sin had simply been overlooked by the male leadership of his day.

   As a divorced, formerly abused, woman, I found it increasingly difficult to feel welcomed and loved at the church I had called home for eight years. In all the time I had been there, I had never felt pain and rejection such as this. I was hurting. I had experienced a devastating loss. I had loved my husband. The divorce was not my idea, and I fully expected my church family to rally around me and my children with comfort and support. I expected they would weep with me and help me to bear a very heavy burden.

   I have watched as Christians supported those who have lost spouses due to death, but while I was experiencing personal devastation when my marriage ended in divorce, there was no group of caring people gathered around to support me and my children in our loss. Why is it that Christians fail to realize that in divorce an overwhelming loss is suffered, as well as in widowhood? As a psychology major and having gone through divorce myself, I can tell you that divorce is also loss that requires a grieving process.  However, the Christian community rarely accepts it as such. 

     I struggled with wanting to be accepted by my church family but felt condemned by many of them for granting my abuser a divorce and attempting to move on with my life. As I became stronger and more confident that I had done the right thing in leaving my abusive situation and cooperating with the divorce that he sought, I sensed strong attitudes of disapproval coming from my church leadership and from much of my church family. 

   I found myself leaving church services with my “tank empty” so to speak. Instead of being uplifted and encouraged, I felt condemned and discouraged.

   After my divorce, there was no doubt that I was being viewed differently by the leadership of my church than before. And that, in turn, influenced the way my fellow church members viewed me.

   I reached out to a woman in my church who told me that the church leadership was more accepting of her once she changed her “divorced” status by marrying again.            

   Another woman who had divorced an abusive spouse finally gave up and left our church after our pastor directed many degrading comments and jabs at her about being divorced. But I clung to the hope that, for me and my family, things would change for the better.

   After my experience with abuse, divorce, and the resultant decline in the level of respect I received from my church leadership (and from some of the members as well), I felt a desire to reach out and help women who were going through the painful issues of abuse and divorce by starting a support group at a facility associated with my church—both my educational background and personal experience more than qualified me to lead such a group. In a meeting with our all male Board of Directors, I was able to communicate the fact that divorce is just as much a loss as death—sometimes worse—because the lost spouse is still alive.
   I also wanted to help raise awareness of the discrimination directed towards divorced and previously abused women in our church who were still single. I hoped to bring about positive change. I wanted to be a healing link between church leadership and divorced women who had experienced marital abuse.

   I felt I was getting nowhere with the Board members. It was like I was speaking to a brick wall, and it hit me like a ton of bricks, that not only was I considered unfit for leadership at my church because I was divorced, but the mere fact that I was not married was also being held against me!

   They did finally agree to allow me to start the group with the stipulation that I use approved materials. That was a standard, reasonable, request. But I was stunned when I was told that in order to hold the meetings, a married woman had to co-facilitate with me.

   This was outrageous to say the least, especially coming from a denomination that has traditionally ordained women as pastors and leaders. Being married, to my knowledge, had never been a requirement for church leadership—certainly not among the male leadership. It seemed strange to me that the only qualification the Board of Directors was concerned about in the matter of my co-leader, was that she be married.

   It was a sad day, for me, when I felt forced to leave the place that had been my church home for so long. But I felt as if I had been spinning my wheels and there was no more tread left. It was time to go.

   I visited a new church where I was welcomed with open arms.  I felt grateful that there was a church in my city where functional equality between men and women was taught and practiced. No one there condemned me for protecting myself and my children by granting a divorce to an abusive spouse.

   This season is all about Jesus, our Redeemer’s birth, and I want to pass on that same support, that I am now receiving from my new church family, to hurting women where ever you may be. I want to encourage you not to give up on the promises that the Lord has given in his Word, and to remain faithful to His promises that are encased in love.

   Have you experienced the horrors of abuse and then added to that the pain of rejection from brothers and sisters in Christ who were supposed to be there for you in your time of trial? Remember, you are redeemed through the birth of that small baby who was laid in a manger, and his hands are reaching out for you today!  Yes, YOU! 

   If someone has branded you with a scarlet letter, rip it off! Remember it is the scarlet life-blood that totally redeems you. Let no one keep you branded. There is a confidence that comes when we realize that the Lord has redeemed us. We often will not even have to speak, and the nay-Sayers will see that we are changed. Sometimes our silence is stronger and more convicting on their hearts than words could ever be. 

   And remember that whatever has happened to you has happened to Him. Our Lord was abused and rejected. And like him, we were meant for victory. We were made to glorify Him!

Eve's Name was not Eve

The name of the first woman was not “Eve” but rather the Hebrew name, Chavvah [pronounced Kavah]. God did not give her this name. It was given to her after The Fall by her husband, who was never commanded or commissioned by God to name his wife.  

Portions of this post are excerpts from the Hungry Hearts Bible Commentary.

The name “Eve,” comes from a Greek transliteration, which transformed the Hebrew name, Chavvah [meaning "Life"], into a series of Greek letters forming the word, Ava [which has no meaning], and from there, to the English name, “Eve”  [which likewise has no meaning past its historical connection with the first woman].

Eve is generally cloaked with a literary and theological burqa, invisible except for the magnitude of her sin which covers every inch of her and undulates with ecclesiastical breezes in one direction or another, as she moves among us seeking a place of rest and redemption. When her name is paired with that of her husband, as in "ADAM and Eve," She becomes a clichéd misnomer in the minds of many, an ancient legend, a mythical person, her existence is sometimes denied even among professing believers. 

What is difficult to understand, is why Bible translators, scholars who should know better, uniformly and consistently use the Greek transliteration of Chavvah’s name in the Hebrew portion of the Holy Scriptures. This is astounding and can only be attributed to a combination of antisemitism and misogyny. Because of this, the name, Chavvah is largely unknown to English-speaking believers. This is because the name in the Greek texts is **“transliterated from Hebrew to Greek, and not translated. And that, is the short version of how Chavvah meaning "Life" is transformed into Ava/Eve, names that have no meaning. 

Credit where credit is due, goes to the Jewish translators of the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures), these at least translated Chavvah's Hebrew name into a corresponding Greek name--Zoe. Both Chavvah and Zoe mean "Life."

The name Chavvah [Life] was bestowed on the first woman by the first man, because he said she was the mother of all living. At least, that was the reason he gave for "naming" her [just like he did the animals?]. 

Some claim he named her when he said "She is called woman because she is taken from man." This writer respectfully disagrees. He was not naming her in this instance,  She was called woman from the instant of her creation. God called her that and gave the man knowledge of it. No doubt it was an inspired utterance on his part, but the first man did not name the first woman when the LORD GOD presented him with his wife. He was simply stating what was already a fact.


Fact: Before he sinned, it never occurred to ***‘âdâm-**Iysh that naming his wife could lower the status of ‘âdâm-*'Ishshah to an inferior position, thus creating an illegitimate hierarchy that transferred de facto power over the female mortal to himself (and by extension "headship" to all men over all women). It is more than interesting, and more than coincidence, that during the time of his innocence, such a though never occurred to the first man. But it occurred quickly enough after he sinned. The first man's power-grab was the smoothest and most successful in history. 

*'Ishshah: Hebrew for woman/wife
**'Iysh: Hebrew for man/husband 
*** ‘Adâm (pronounced: audawm): The name the Creator called all people (Genesis 5:1-2)
And there was absolutely no resistance from the woman! 

Why?

Was the first woman so relieved her husband was no longer angry with her that she failed to notice that allowing him to name her, appeared to place him in charge of her by lowering her status to that of the animals [he had been privileged to name before she was created]? Never-mind that God had commissioned the namings so Iysh could be made aware of the fact that as the animals needed equal and opposite counterparts, he also needed of one].

Following are a couple of proposed reasons for the uncontested coup: 1.) The woman felt relieved and flattered. Flattered by her husband giving her a name that means "Life," (considering her recent actions in precipitating death and ejection from Paradise). 2.) Relieved because the couple had just had a major rift when the first-husband attempted to throw the first-wife under the bus, while trying to save his own skin by volunteering hers. How horrified she must have been when loyalty fled and he blamed both God and his wife for the fact that he voluntarily disobeyed the command concerning the fruit. No blow was too low to save himself, despite that there is no scriptural evidence that his wife pressured him to disobey God or that he resisted the temptation at all. He eagerly tasted the fruit (we know it wasn't the fruit that brought death. It was the disobedience). So, given all the drama and blame-shifting [and no doubt anger and recriminations] that took place after "bite-remorse" set in, when Iysh finally appeared to calm down and give 'Ishshah a name as wonderful as "Life," she must have felt tremendous relief that she was back in favor with her husband. 

Was ‘âdâm-'Ishshah so relieved that she and her husband had finally "made up," that she either did not notice or chose not to comment on the fact that he had just usurped her name, the name given to her by God [and to the entire mortal creation]. No matter, from that point on, in his eyes, the name ‘âdâm would be applied only to himself. 

God's male creation, co-named as ‘âdâm equally with God's female creation, had now become "ADAM," top dog. The name was his and his alone.
 
This was the first fulfillment of the prophecy, given to 'Ishshah (Genesis 3:16), about how sin would transform her previously gentle gentle husband into a power-hungry creature ^{Genesis 3:16}. 

Contrast how 'iysh had been content to co-reign-over/co-manage all other creation along with his wife before he sinned. It was only after he sinned, that he chose to dominate his wife and manage her. In order to accomplished this, his first move was to usurp the name ‘âdâm for himself alone. 

He stole it when he "named" his wife, Chavvah. It was a brilliant strategy, a coup d'état of stellar proportions, and a total success.  

Forever after, he would be known as ADAM--the one who the entire race was named after--inaccurate as that may be. And ‘âdâm-'Ishshah would lose even the complimentary, Chavvah--which means "Life."


Chavvah, would never be translated accurately in the Hebrew portions of Christian Bibles. The entire world, throughout history would forever know her as "EVE," a name which means nothing at all. Again, to credit the Hebrew translators of the Septuagint, they did actually translate (as opposed to transliterate) Chavvah into the Greek, Zoe (G2222 which also means "life". 

 Yes, you read correctly. The transliterated word "Eve," does not even have a real meaning. And the very first woman, ‘âdâm-'Ishshah, has been hidden from the collective view--except for her sin (but even that is considered second rate as compared to ADAM's). Chavva has been covered from head to toe in a literary and theological burqa--forever invisible and marginalized.

Literary Burqa: G2096 Eva a word with NO MEANING

 Although online Strong's concordances (such as the one on the Blue Letter Bible website) assign the meaning of "Life" to the name "Eve," this is not accurate. It is done presumptuously, as can be seen in the Strong's original concordance published in 1894 (not the contemporary "Strongest Strong's" or the "New Updated Improved Strong's" etc., et al..). In the Original Strong's Exhaustive Concordance, the definition of Eve G2096, is simply "The First Woman."

But Chavvah is a lovely and accurate name, so how could an evil motive be ascribed to it? Remember Caiaphas, who predicted the atoning death of our Savior. God allowed him to say something that was absolutely true, but the motive was absolutely evil. 

The first man, gifted with an awesome intellect, struck the first blow in the war between the sexes. And he did it using the name. It was a stroke of genius. He won the first battle through diplomacy. He gained the ascendancy and conquered peaceably...by flattery. Equal in creation and equal in The Fall, the fact that the first man took it upon himself to "name" the first woman, showed the depth of his new-found contempt for his now-fallen wife.

The fact that she meekly absorbed the blow without argument or retaliation was an immediate and direct fulfillment of prophecy and attested to the strength of her desire for a restored relationship with her husband. Her turning, just as the LORD God had predicted, was in the direction of her husband. This set precedence for traditional-role-religionists and complementarians to adopt that moment in history as their moment and forevermore claim the first man possessed a God-given authority that the scriptures never assigned. 

The first woman, 'Ishshah, (later called, Chavvah), accepted the usurpation of her God-given status and co-title of ‘âdâm. this was sin manifesting in her own fallen life. Her Creator had told her this would be her weakness and the consequences of turning to husband over Creator would be severe (this sin would easily beset all womankind):  Her "turning" would be to her husband instead of to her God, thereby feeding her husband's sin (one that would easily beset all mankind). One of the results of his sin would be a strong desire to dominate his wife. 

History has shown God's predictions to be true in the case of men and women, and contemporary statistics [on world-wide violence against women/marital violence and abuse], show that little has changed from the day the first couple was ejected from The Garden. 

The first woman's name was never Eve, And the Spirit of the Living God never approved, commanded, or commissioned the literary and theological burqa that men, cultures, denominations, and churches have draped her with and so zealously guard against removal of.

The good news is, that despite the success of ADAM's coup, after The Fall, God, in His Word, continues to recognize the functional equality of both sexes by calling all people--women and men--'âdâm.

Draw Close to--Not Away From--from God

What or who do we love that draws us away from [possibly even out of] intimate fellowship with our Creator?  Do we have the courage to ask the Spirit of the Living God to show us?

Lord, show me the things or people in my life that alienate my mind from you. Lead me in your ways according to your Word and by your Spirit. Let my thoughts, my words, and my ways be pleasing to you --Psalm 139:23-24

"For thus declares Adonay YHWH Look I will deliver you into the hand of them whom you hate, into the hand of them by whom your mind is alienated [from ME]" --Ezekiel 23:28  

[...The same yesterday today and forever ...These things are given to us for our examples ...for our good  ...That it may be well with us ...Hebrews 13:8, 1 Corinthians 10:6 ... Deuteronomy 6:18]

The spiritual discipline of daily [prayerful] Bible reading acquaints us with our Savior. It helps us know his ways, hear His voice, and teaches us to judge all things [in our lives and hearts] according to His Word.

It gives us the courage to pray what David prayed in Psalm 139:23-24, "Search me O God and know my heart Test me and know my thoughts And see if there be any wicked way in me And lead me in THE WAY EVERLASTING

...Selah