Commandments

Question 1: I am concerned about Genesis 1:28 where it says that God directed man to "replenish" the earth. This would indicate that the earth was previously (before the Genesis account) inhabited. Could you explain?

ANSWER: The Hebrew word (male’/or mala) translated "replenish" did not, and does not, mean "to refill" or "to fill a second time." The same is true of the 16th century English word "replenish." At that time, the primary meaning of the word simply meant to "stock" or "fill," as was also the case with the Hebrew word. The same Hebrew word is also found in Genesis 42:25 and there we see it (as in many other passages) translated simply as "fill." The use of the word "replenish" then in the 1611 KJV is understandable. Nonetheless, the New King James Version, necessarily updates the English to accommodate modern usage and correctly says, "FILL the earth," reflecting the original intent of the author and the understanding of the early translators.

Question 2: What is the difference between the Ten Commandments and the law of the tabernacle?

ANSWER: Depending on usage, the phrase "law of the tabernacle" could possibly have reference to the Ten Commandments, since the commandments (on two tables of stone) were kept in the ark of the covenant which, in turn, was kept in the tabernacle. The phrase could also be used in reference to those "laws" regarding the design of the tabernacle or those laws governing the communion of man with God through the tabernacle.

Question 3: Exodus 20:13 says, "Thou shalt not kill." Does this refer to animals and other creatures, or to human beings?

ANSWER: This passage prohibits the premeditated murder of a human being. That it refers only to humans is clearly seen in that God (before the New Testament) di­rected the killing of sacrificial animals (Leviticus, Chapter one).

Note, as well, in Genesis 18:1-8, that the messengers (angels) of the Lord ate the flesh of animals. See also Acts 10:13-14.

Question 4: Do not some Old Testament passages teach that the Ten Com­mandments will stand forever (Psalms 111:7-8)?

ANSWER: No! The words "for ever" in the Old Testament mean "throughout the appointed time" or "age lasting." For example consider carefully the usage in Exodus 12:14; Leviticus 6:18; Leviticus 7:36; and Numbers 10:8. In these the words "for ever" clearly mean "throughout (or in) their (your) generations." Notice too, the Old Testament says that circumcision was to be an "everlasting covenant" (Genesis 17:13). Yet, Paul says in Galatians 6:15 that circumcision avails nothing in Christ! In Numbers 25:13, Moses said that the Levitical Priesthood would be "everlasting," but in Hebrews 7:12, we learn that it had been changed. How can this be? Clearly, the same is true with these as with the Sabbath. They were to exist "for ever in their generations," throughout their appointed times.

Question 5: What does “pertaineth” mean in Deuteronomy 22:5?

ANSWER: The word translated “pertaineth” in the subject passage means “something prepared.” In this case, the passage means ‘a woman shall not wear that which has been “prepared for” the man and the man shall not wear that which has been prepared for” the woman.’ Such is an “abomination unto the Lord thy God.”

Question 6: Why did God require that some foods were unclean and others were unclean (Leviticus 11)? Do we respect these distinctions today? If not, why not?

ANSWER: The primary reason for the distinction by God of the clean and the unclean was undoubtedly to establish laws that would discourage the Israelites from associating with the inhabitants of surrounding nations in order that they might not be partakers of their vices and idolatries. The Jews were taught to hate and abhor these practices in others and would, therefore, naturally be repulsed by those who did so and would have little to do with them. In addition, because of the climate and conditions of that time, there were also secondary beneficial results as to dietetics and sanitation that resulted from compliance with these laws. It was necessary, as well, that the Israelites (the people whom God chose, through whom would come the Messiah) keep their lineage pure in view of this fact (Genesis 49:10; Exodus 34:15-16; Deuteronomy 18:15-18). This fact having been accomplished in Christ, and with the Old Law having been taken out of the way by Him (II Corinthians 3:1-18; Galatians 3:19-29; Ephesians 2:15; Colossians 2:14), Christians are not bound to recognize these clean/unclean distinctions. In fact, to the contrary, as clearly stated in the following New Testament passages that are binding upon all men everywhere today: Acts 10:9-18; Colossians 2:16; I Timothy 4:1-5. Therefore, for the Christian today, “every creature of God is good and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer.”

Question 7: In Deuteronomy 18:14-17, God said the Israelites could set a king over them, but when they did, I Samuel 8:4-7 says God was displeased with them. Please explain.

ANSWER: Deuteronomy 18:14-17 is not discussing a physical king over Israel, but, rather, it is a prophecy concerning Christ (Acts 3:22-23). I Samuel 8:6 says that “Samuel” was displeased with the Israelites’ demand for a king, because he thought they were rejecting him. God said that was not the case; that they were in reality rejecting Him, not Samuel. At God’s instructions, Samuel protested to the people, but because of the hardness of their hearts God allowed them to have the government for which they pleaded after warning them of the consequences to come. He allowed them to have a king that they might learn from this, that royalty itself could never secure the salvation that they expected, unless the occupant of the throne submitted altogether to the will of the Lord. They learned in Saul that true salvation was not in men, but only in God; a lesson for us today!

Question 8: God said kings were not to multiply horses, silver, and gold, but David and Solomon had many horses and much silver and gold. Did they disobey God?

ANSWER: They disobeyed God, but not in the owning of possessions that were given to them by God (I Chronicles 29:12-14; II Chronicles 1:12; II Chronicles 9:22). The passage of which you inquire is found in Deuteronomy 8:13-14 and is spoken to the children of Israel. In context, God is saying, ‘don’t let the accumulation of wealth cause you to forget what I have done for you in bringing you out of Egypt into the promised land; remember my commandments, judgments, and statutes, which I command you this day.’ God never forbade wealth, only the misuse of it through putting trust in it, rather than in the one that gave it!

Question 9: In Deuteronomy 20:11-14 the Lord through Moses said the Israelites could marry women they had captured in war. How do we harmonize this with God’s command not to marry women of the land?

ANSWER: Certainly, God directed that such marriages should not occur (Deuteronomy 7:3). In Deuteronomy 20:14, God is not changing His mind and allowing such marriages to occur. In fact, marriage is not even under discussion. You are reading something into the passage that God did not intend. The fact of slaying only the men and taking their women, little ones, and cattle as spoils of war does not indicate marriage to the women. If one would so assume, he would also have to assume marriage to the little ones and the cattle, which also were taken as spoils of war. These were undoubtedly brought captive in some form of servitude, but to read marriage into the context goes too far in fabricating a biblical contradiction.

Question 10: Why was Ham punished for laughing at Noah, but Noah was not punished for being drunk?

ANSWER: It is very probable that this was the first time that wine was produced and that its intoxicating effect was unknown to Noah. Indeed there have been instances where one has mistakenly taken drink that was later found to be intoxicating. For example, apple cider is usually found to be non-intoxicating, but may unknowingly become intoxicating. Indeed there have been instances where such was mistakenly imbibed. Upon realization of its alcoholic content, however, it is to be penitently discarded! To be an innocent partaker prior to realization of the alcoholic content would not then have been indicative of intent to sin! There is no indication in the passage that Noah was a drunkard or that he intentionally became drunk and, since we see him as a man accustomed to doing all that God commanded (Genesis 6:22), it would seem that the result of his drinking was but an unintended mistake of which he would have been sorrowful and penitent. At the very least, it should not be assumed he was a drunkard in need of punishment!

On the other hand, Ham’s expressed attitude was not one of mistaken innocence, but rather one of mocking contempt for his father whom he was bound to honor. He was rightfully punished for his attitude and action!

Question 11: Why was David and Bathsheba not stoned to death according to the Law of God?

ANSWER: Generally speaking, the reason why they were not stoned was for the same reason the woman of John 8:1-11 was not stoned. Jesus, as God, did not insist that the penalty of Leviticus 20:10 be carried out, but, to the contrary, He, as God, chose to forgive that sin. We are told in II Samuel 12:13 that God did the same thing in the case of David. As David's creator, He chose to forgive Him. We cannot know all of His reasons, but it seems reasonably safe to assume that perhaps one of His reasons had to do with the promise that He had previously made to David in II Samuel 8:12-14, the fulfillment of which showed His grace and mercy, not only to the sinning pair, but toward all men, including you and me, which involves a possible second reason. Those things that happened under the Old Testament were to be examples for us today (I Corinthians 10:11) and were written for our learning (about both the goodness and the severity of God – Romans 11:22) that we might have hope (Romans 15:4). Certainly many today, equally guilty, have found hope through the mercy and forgiveness of God that was shown David and Bathsheba. It should also be remembered that they did not totally escape punishment for what they did! They lost the child of their adulterous union, a child for whom they would have been gladly stoned to death had it meant that he would have lived!

Question 12: Why was Uzzah killed (I Chronicles 13:9-10)?

ANSWER: Because he violated the command of God by "putting forth his hand to the Ark" (II Samuel 6:6-7). God had previously given commandment that man "shall not touch any holy thing, lest they die" (Numbers 4:15). In touching the Ark, Uz­zah sinned and the anger of the Lord was kindled against him (I Chronicles 13:10). In­deed, this should be an example and an admonition for us today (I Corinthians 10:11). God expects to be obeyed! There is no excuse for sin (I Samuel 15:22-23).

Question 13: What does Solomon teach in Proverbs 21:9, 19? Does he mean we should escape and separate from wives who are angry and contentious? If so, who will turn them to God (I Corinthians 7:16)?

ANSWER: No! Solomon is not teaching that the married should separate. God has ordained that there be one husband and one wife for life; that marriage can only be terminated by death (Romans 7:1-3) or in the case, and for the cause, of fornication (Matthew 19:9), provided that the one putting away their mate is totally innocent in the matter!

A proverb is a short, wise saying, expressing a truth in terms that enable clearer understanding. Solomon is simply stating the truth, in both of these proverbs, that it is often easier to withstand the elements outside the home than it is the storms within the home caused by one who is angry and contentious! Certainly, as you imply, those who are so need to be converted and turned toward God! Also, we can see in this truth the wisdom of marrying one who is already a Christian and, therefore, not given to fits of anger and of a contentious attitude.

Question 14: Why did God command Israel two destroy many cities when they took the Promised Land? Why did He choose Israel to be His instrument to wipe out these people?

ANSWER: God had promised this land to the children of Israel who were to faithfully maintain that pure lineage through which the Messiah was to come. Those who previously occupied the Land of Canaan were idol worshippers who in time past had turned away from God and were engaged in all kind of unlawfulness, even that of offering their own children in death to idols. They had debased themselves as did those before the flood and God did not want His people to be associated with, nor to marry among these heathen, lest they be, also, turned away from Him and that lineage be destroyed! He, therefore, as God, made the decision to destroy the sin filled land as He did in the flood and since the land had been promised to the Israelites, it was God’s choice that they should remove the heathen whom they were to replace! It is interesting to note that they were given the land as a gift by the grace of God, but they had to do something to get the grace (Joshua 1:2)!

Question 15: God gave the command, “Thou shalt not kill.” Why then did He command them to kill the Canaanites?

ANSWER: The sixth commandment “Thou shalt not kill” had nothing to do with national wars! It meant that one person, of all to whom the commandment was given, was not, with premeditation, to murder another!

Question 16: What does it mean that we should not be “overly righteous” (Ecclesiastes 7:16-17)?

ANSWER: It does not mean that we can do too much for the Lord by being too righteous (Luke 17:10). We are being instructed by principle to avoid a self-sufficient righteousness, thinking and acting like we are something we are not. We are instructed here as well not to involve ourselves in the opposite extreme of utter laxity toward and in sinful practices, i.e., “over much wickedness.”

[Return to Index]