Other New Testament Questions

---

 

Question 1: What is truth?

ANSWER: Jesus Himself answered this question in John 17:17, "Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." This means that all of the truth that pertains unto life and godliness can be found only in the Bible (II Peter 1:3); that there are no additional truths to be found in any man or in any religious organization! It is by this Book, that all will one day be judged (John 12:48).

 

Question 2: Who is the man Paul saw in his vision of II Corinthians 12:1-4?

ANSWER: That Paul is speaking of himself is established in Verse six of this chapter. He begins to speak of himself in Verse four as "a man in Christ" in order to avoid in this chapter what could possibly have been seen as excessive boasting because of what he said in the pre­ceding chapter. In Chapter eleven, he stated that he was not one whit behind the very chiefest apostles (Vs.5) and then speaks at length about his accomplishments and suffer­ings in the cause of Christ. He did not do this for personal glory, but rather to counter the charges brought against him by Judaizing teachers. It is clear from Chapter eleven that Paul found this kind of argument personally distasteful, but, nonetheless, necessary. In Verse one he had asked the Corinthians to bear with him a little in what might seem to be the folly of boasting. After having done so, Paul begins Chapter twelve by stating that it was not well (expedient) for him to carry this type of dis­cussion further. He, therefore, changed subjects and began discussing  "visions and revelations of the Lord." In order to avoid what might appear to be excessive boasting, he does not refer directly to himself, but rather indirectly as "a man in Christ."   

 

Question 3: Does the establishment of our faith in the four gospels assure us of the promises of Jesus?

ANSWER: Inspired writers often use the word "faith" to refer to that "system of faith," "which was once for all delivered to the saints" (Jude 3), i.e., the New Testament. The books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are a part of this "system of faith" and they, along with the other books of the New Testament, contain the precious promises of Jesus (II Peter 1:1-4).

 

Question 4: Why did the wise men bring gifts to Christ?

ANSWER: It was customary in the east at that time to show respect for those of high office by presenting gifts. Their bringing gifts to Christ was quite appropriate since the wise men believed Him to be "born King of the Jews" (Matthew 2:2).

 

Question 5: What kinds of men were chosen to go with the apostles?

ANSWER: The character of one of these is seen in a description of Barnabas, a companion of the apostle Paul, "a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and faith."

 

Question 6: Was Theophilus a Christian and very rich?

ANSWER: It appears from the phrase "those things wherein thou hast been in­structed" (Luke 1:4) that he likely was a Christian. The phrase "most excellent Theophi­lus" (Vs.3) indicates that he was a man of means and high office. To what degree, however, we are not told.

 

Question 7: Why did Paul often use diatribe in His writings?

ANSWER: The word "diatribe" is defined as abusive language. I do not believe that this definition is descriptive of Paul's writings! We must remember that the apostle simply wrote "words" as directed by the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 2:13). The "words" as given by the Holy Spirit were those necessary to communicate the will of God in the most effective manner. At times, especially when dealing with sin (I Corinthians 4:18-21), the words were filled with indignation. At other times they were filled with love and tenderness (II Corinthians 2:4). Always were they designed and proclaimed to the better­ment of men's souls!

 

Question 8: Why are Paul's writings referred to as epistles and letters?

ANSWER: An epistle is the same thing as a letter. The words are equal in mean­ing. The apostle's writings are so-called, because (at the direction of the Holy Spirit) they were, and indeed are, letters of communication (or messages of authority) written for distribution to others (Colossians 4:16), including all people today!   

 

Question 9: What does it mean when some say, "All will be judged alike?"

ANSWER: In referring to the Judgment Day (See Matthew 25:31-46), John said in Revelation 20:12, "And I saw the dead small and great stand before God; and the books were opened." The words "small and great" convey the idea that no matter what position is held in this life; no matter how great; no matter how educated; no matter how much money, we all (presidents, kings, religious leaders, farmers, housewives, and la­borers) will be judged in exactly the same way. Certainly, this is the case, because "God is no respecter of persons" (Acts 10:34). All people will be judged solely by the words (New Testament) of Christ (John 12:48) with consideration to the things they have done in the body (while in this life), whether it be good or bad (II Corinthians 5:10). Those who disobeyed the New Testament while in the body "shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous (obedient) into life eternal" (Matthew 25:46).

 

Question 10: Would you kindly show me how the Samaritans were bap­tized, since they did not receive it of Christ or His apostles?

ANSWER: Please read John, Chapter four. In Verse forty-one we see that Jesus taught the Samaritans and, in Verse forty-two, they came to believe that He "is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world." That their belief in Christ resulted in baptism cannot be denied (John 3:26; John 4:1-2). Also in Acts 8:5-6, we see Philip preaching to the people of Samaria. Then in Verse twelve, we find them being baptized. In Verses fourteen and twenty-five, Luke tells us that the apostles, Peter and John, also preached to the Sa­maritans, undoubtedly in fulfillment of the prophecy of Christ in Acts 1:8, "ye (the apos­tles) shall be witnesses of me in all Judea, and in Samaria, and to the uttermost part of the earth."  

 

Question 11: What was Paul's thorn in the flesh?

ANSWER: Though we cannot be absolutely certain. it appears likely that Paul was afflicted with some sort of vision impairment. Please refer to the following passages: Acts 9:1-9 & 18; Galatians 4:13-15; Galatians 6:11.

 

Question 12: What is the meaning of the "foolishnesss of God?"

ANSWER: This biblical phrase does not mean that God is foolish or that He does foolish things. It simply refers to those things that God appoints or commands that appear foolish to men. For example, in I Corinthians 1:21, we are not to understand that preaching is foolishness, but rather that sinful man by worldly wisdom perceives (falsely) that preaching is foolishness. Please read carefully I Corinthians 1:18-31.

 

Question 13: Why was Stephen taken out of Jerusalem to be stoned to death?

ANSWER: It was the custom and law of the Jews (See Leviticus 24:16 & 23; Numbers 15:35-36; I kings 21:13; and Hebrews 13:12-13)

 

Question 14: Why did Jesus command His disciples at the first not to go to the Gentiles?

ANSWER: The passage under consideration is Matthew, Chapter ten. Here we find what is called "The Limited Commission." The disciples were told to go only to "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Vs.6). Jesus said, "I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matthew 15:24). Though His personal ministry was to be only to the Jews, He, as God, evidently purposed from eternity that the Gentiles should (at a time which He would determine) become fellow heirs with the Jews (Ephesians 3:1-11). That the Gentiles would be called by His name only after the tabernacle of David was rebuilt (the church, on Pentecost) was prophesied in Amos 9:11-14. We read about its fulfillment in Acts 15:15-17.

Though we haven't been told the reasons why the gospel should first go to the Jews, it seems quite appropriate that God should cause such to happen, since they were chosen from the beginning as those people through whom the promised Messiah was to come.

 

Question 15: Is Pentecost a Jewish feast or was it begun by Christ for the purpose of giving the Holy Spirit?

ANSWER: There were three major Feasts of the Jews that occurred once every year: Passover, Tabernacles, and Pentecost. The Feast of Pentecost came fifty days after Passover on the first day of the week. It was known by three other names; Feast of Harvest (Exodus 23:16); Feast of the First fruits (Leviticus 23:17); and Feast of Weeks (Exodus 34:22). It is clear then that the feast of Pentecost was established and kept thousands of years before Christ.

Jews on this day would come to Jerusalem from every nation under heaven (Acts 2:5) to worship. It is believed that there were more people in Jerusalem during this time than any other; an appropriate day on which to first proclaim the saving power of the Gospel of Christ. It was toward this particular Pentecost Day of Acts, Chapter two, that many prophecies concerning the establishment of His kingdom had pointed (Isaiah 2, Daniel 2, and Joel 2). All of these found their fulfillment in the birthday of the Church of Christ on the Pentecost Day of 33AD.

 

Question 16: Would you please tell me about the synoptic Gospels: the date of each and their problems?

ANSWER: The first three accounts of the Gospel, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, are often called the synoptic Gospels (from the Greek word “sunopsis,” a seeing together). This is because they have much in common and, generally, present the Lord's life and ministry in Galilee in much the same way. There is much speculation as to the dates of each and the order in which they were written. However, most scholars agree that all three were written before 70AD, most likely between 40AD and 63AD. Since specific dates cannot be accurately assigned, guessing which of the three was written first would not be wise.

Problems alleged to exist between the synoptic gospels are only in the minds of those who reject the verbal, plenary inspiration of the Bible (I Corinthians 2:12:13; II Timothy 3:16). There are no problems with the inspired Word of God. It is truth!

 

Question 17: Who wrote the book of Hebrews?

ANSWER: Most of the 1st and 2nd century churches, and also the early church fathers, received the epistle as written by the apostle Paul. Much internal evidence also offers proof that it is his writing, e.g., Hebrews 10:34, 13:23. As well, the structure and arrangement of the book is very similar to the other writings of Paul, especially his epistles to Rome and Galatia. By far, the greater weight of evidence and scholarship supports this reasoning.

 

Question 18: How are Christians chastised?

ANSWER: First, we must realize that God does not chastise by sending evil, suffering or sickness upon the children whom He loves. However, neither does God protect us (as individuals or congregations) from the consequences of our sins, but rather permits us to be chastened thereby that we might not engage further in the sin, causing us to be partakers of His ho­liness and producers of the peaceable fruit of righteousness (Hebrews 12:10-11).

 

Question 19: Are people possessed by "demons" today?

ANSWER: No! However, the fact of "demons" during the time of Christ cannot be denied (Matthew 4:24). But their presence at that time was for a specific purpose, i.e., in order for Christ to prove His divinity, by showing His power over Satan. Jesus clearly taught in Matthew 12:22-30 that he had come to bind Satan. He mightily accomplished that deed, as seen in Revelation 20:1-3. This binding of Satan and his servants resulted in their power being limited only to evil influences. Today, when the faithful child of God resists these influences in obedience to the Word of God, the devil will flee from him (James 4:7). People today are not possessed by demons, as were some in the first cen­tury!

 

Question 20: Is it right to withdraw fellowship from sinners who will not repent?

ANSWER: It is commanded, but must be done in accordance with God's will. Please read Romans 16:17-18; I Corinthians 5; II Thessalonians 3; I Timothy 1:19-20; and Titus 3:10-11.

 

Question 21: After the death of Jesus, how many sons did Mary bear? Name them all.

ANSWER: Most scholars agree that since there is no account of Joseph appear­ing at the crucifixion that he had, by this time, died. This being true, and given the fact that Mary would now be very nearly fifty years of age, it would be highly unlikely that she had additional sons following the death of Christ. However, from Matthew 13:55, we learn that, during the life and ministry of Christ on this earth, He had four brothers whose names were James, Joses, Simon, and Judas. In the following verse, we are told that He also had sisters. How many, or their names, is not revealed.

 

Question 22: Is the grave Hell?

ANSWER: In the Old Testament the Hebrew word “Sheol” was often translated as "hell." Other times it was translated as "grave." This does not mean that Hell is the grave; neither does it mean that the grave is Hell, in the sense that the question is asked! Sheol is the place of disembodied spirits, not a hole in the ground. The equivalent of Sheol in the New Testament is Hades. This Greek word in the King James Version is most often translated as Hell, but is also translated as the grave (I Corinthians 15:55). It often does not refer to the place of eternal torment! For example (Acts 2:27): In reference to Jesus, the passage says, "Because thou will not leave my soul in hell (Hades) . . ." Jesus did not go to the place of eternal torment, but rather He went to a place called Paradise (Luke 23:43).

Sheol/Hades is the place where all spirits go when death occurs. The righteous go to a place within Hades called Paradise or Abraham's Bosom (Luke 16:22); the unrighteous go to a different place in Hades; a place of torments (Luke 16:19-31). In II Peter 2:4, this place of torments is also called hell. The Greek word for hell in this passage is Tartarus. Both the righteous and the unrighteous will remain in the Hadean world (in either Paradise or Tartarus) to await the resurrection and final Judgment. After Judgment, the righteous will go to heaven (the new heavens and new earth-II Peter 3:13) and the unrighteous will go to hell, the place of eternal punishment (Matthew 25:46). The Greek word translated "hell" that denotes this final place of the wicked is Gehenna!

When the words Sheol/Hades are translated as "grave," the root meaning remains the same. It is the place of all departed spirits! It is nowhere suggested in God's Word that the piece of earth into which our bodies are placed upon death is the "hell" to which we refer above! This is to say that the grave is neither Tartarus, nor Gehenna!

 

Question 23: If the lost are going to suffer an eternal burning, will it be in heaven or on earth?

ANSWER: It will be neither in heaven, nor on the earth. Peter tells us that this earth will be totally destroyed (II Peter 3:10). Only the righteous will go to heaven (Matthew 25:34). A different place has been prepared for the sinner; a place of everlast­ing fire (Matthew 25:41) and everlasting punishment (Matthew 25:46). In Matthew 5:29-30, this place of everlasting punishment in the English language is called "hell." In the Greek language, the word is “gehenna.”

 

Question 24: Is it true that there is no place of eternal punishment (hell)?

ANSWER: No! It is not true! Just as surely as the Bible teaches that there is a heaven, it also teaches that there is a hell! Please read the following passages: Matthew 25:30, 41,46; Revelation 14:10-11; II Thessalonians 1:7-10; Revelation 20: 10-15.

 

Question 25: What will burn in hell? The soul? The flesh? Or both?

ANSWER: At the resurrection all will be bodily raised; the good and the bad (John 5:28-29). All will be judged (Matthew 25:31-46). The righteous will go into life eternal, the bad into everlasting punishment (Vs.46). Both the resurrected body and the soul of the wicked will be cast into hell (Matthew10:28)!

 

Question 26: Is it right to "judge."

ANSWER: We are commanded not to judge unrighteously (Matthew 7:1-5). However, we are commanded to judge righteous judgment (John 7:24)!

 

Question 27: Is it right for a Christian to judge his enemy by praying that God will do bad things to him?

ANSWER: No! "Ye have heard that it hath been said, thou shalt love thy neigh­bor and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good unto them that hate you, and pray for them that despitefully use you, and persecute you; that ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven . . ." (Matthew 5:43-45).

 

Question 28: What baptism did John the Baptist receive? Where was he baptized?

ANSWER: The Bible does not reveal the answers to these questions. However, it is certain that if he was baptized or not baptized, it was according to the will of God. But whether he was or not has no bearing on Christ's command that under His New Testa­ment, all (without exception) must believe and be baptized (immersed for the remission of sins) in order to be saved (Mark 16:15-16; Acts 2:38).

 

Question 29: Since “Peter, means “rock,” why do Churches of Christ teach that Matthew 16:18 does not say that the church was built upon Peter? It was on this occasion that Jesus gave him the name Peter or Rock!

ANSWER: In reference to Peter, the original Greek word employed is petros. This word is of masculine gender and means a fragment or piece of rock; a stone. The rock upon which Christ was to (and did) build His church is from the Greek word petra which is feminine in gender and means a bedrock or solid foundation and cannot be properly used to refer to that which is masculine; in this case, Peter! These Greek words are of different meaning and of different gender! With these facts in hand, the passage can be properly understood only as follows: ‘And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter (masculine - a small fragment) and upon this rock (feminine - bedrock; foundation – the confession that I am the Christ, the Son of the living God), I will build my church.’ There can be no other foundation than Jesus Christ (I Corinthians 3:11), because He is the “chief cornerstone” of the church. Without a “cornerstone;” a “keystone” that ties together and anchors a building, there is no foundation! However, with Him as the “chief cornerstone,” we, indeed, are given to understand (Ephesians 2:19-22) that the apostles and prophets constitute the remainder of the church’s foundation on an equal basis. None is placed above the other! In other words, the apostles and prophets who wrote and testified about the church are equals in her foundation, with none, including Peter, having a preeminent place. Christ only has the “preeminence,” as the “keystone” or “cornerstone,” “In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto a holy temple in the Lord: In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit” (Ephesians 2:21-22).

The reason that Christ called Simon by a different name at this particular time was simply because Peter had just called Jesus by a name expressive of His true character (the Christ) and He, reciprocating, called Simon, son of Jona (a dove), a name expressive of his true character (a stone), undoubtedly a reference to the firm stand that Peter would take one day in the cause of Christ (John 21:18-19).

 

Question 30: Please tell me something about “anti-Christ” for proper understanding.

ANSWER: First of all allow me to assure you that the premillennial idea that “the (one) Antichrist” is going to come before the end of time to wreak havoc upon mankind does not come from Scripture, but rather from the imaginations of men. The apostle John is the only one in Scripture to use the term “antichrist,” both in I John 2:18,22; 4:3 and II John 7. In I John 2:18, we note that “many” antichrists had already (at that time) come. So the idea of one Antichrist is not biblical! The term “anti” simply means “against.” John uses the term antichrist to refer to certain men at that time who were “against” Christ, because of the false doctrine that they taught. These men were called “Gnostics,” a group who believed that they had knowledge that was superior to all others. This group taught that Jesus did not come the first time in the flesh; and that which was seen as Christ was only an appearance or manifestation. John said that these men in so teaching were “against” Christ or “antichrist.” In I John 4:3, he tells Christians how they were to distinguish the Gnostics from true Christians, i.e., if they confess that Christ came in the flesh, they are of God. If they do not confess that Jesus came in the flesh, they are not of God, but rather anti-Christ.

As these Gnostics, there are those today who teach this and other false doctrines and may as well be referred to as “antichrist” in the general sense of the term since these, too, are “against” Christ. We are to "try" or “test” what is being taught us by the word of God to determine whether or not the teacher is of God (I John 4:1)! If not, they are “antichrist.”

 

Question 31: Does the New Testament bind circumcision on people of today?  Would it be sinful to participate in a celebration of circumcision during which there is killing and eating of animals in the traditional way?

ANSWER: Circumcision was an Old Testament law, bound on the people who lived under that law (Leviticus 12:3). However, the Old Testament was fulfilled and taken out of the way by Jesus Christ at the cross (II Corinthians 3:1-18; Galatians 3:19-29; Ephesians 2:15; Colossians 2:14; Hebrews 7:12). The New Testament of Jesus Christ that became effective at the cross (Hebrews 9:16-17) does not bind circumcision on any: “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God” (Romans 2:28-29). “For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but a new creature (Galatians 6:15).

In order to properly answer the second part of the question, we need reference to at least four passages of Scripture: Romans 14:1-23; Acts 15:19-20; II Corinthians 6:14-18 & II John 9-11.

Romans 14:1-23 teaches that it may or may not be sinful to eat meat offered to idols, i.e., meat used in religious rituals There is nothing inherently (in and of itself) sinful in eating meats that have been so used (Verse 14). However, such becomes sinful if, in the eating of meat used in religious rituals, it causes a weaker brother (one who has a conscience against eating such meats) to stumble. If the weaker brother is encouraged to eat such meats in violation of his conscience, he has sinned and the one who has caused him to sin by eating the meat has, consequently, also sinned (Verses 13, 15, 20, & 21). If anyone doubts as to the sinfulness of a particular activity (in this case, eating of meat used in religious rituals) and goes ahead and does it, they have sinned (Verse 23). So then, to eat such meat is not sinful, except when our conscience is doubtful or when we cause another to eat such meat when their conscience is doubtful.

Acts 15:19-20 causes us to consider the matter further, for here we learn that it is sinful to eat meat with the blood in it! The reason given in Leviticus 17:10-14 for not eating blood is  "Because the life of the flesh is in the blood." The fact that "the life is in the blood" was true when James spoke and it is true today. Thus, the commandment by the Holy Spirit, through James, that Gentiles, then and now, should (as did the Jews) abstain from such. Further, there is no justification for restricting this commandment solely to the eating of blood sacrificed to idols, as some would do!

II Corinthians 6:14-18 & II John 9-11 demand two further considerations: (1) Any activity or relationship that would cause one to compromise his or her Christian principles would be sinful and (2); Any activity that would cause one to promote a doctrine in opposition to the doctrine of Christ would, as well, be sinful. In short, to participate in any kind of celebration that would compromise the doctrine of Christ or promote teaching contrary to the doctrine of Christ is wrong and sinful!

 

Question 32: Does the Greek in Hebrews 10:4 imply that “the blood of bulls and goats no longer take away sin? Did not these sacrifices forgive sin?

ANSWER: The Greek does not use, nor does it imply, the words “no longer.” The Greek reads as follows: Impossible for blood of bulls and goats to take away sin! The Greek word, translated in the KJV “impossible,” is adunatos, which is defined as: impossible, could not do, impotent, not possible, weak. The Greek word for the three English words “to take away” is aphaireo, which is defined as: to remove, cut off, take away. There is no hint of anything else being included in these words or this passage.

The blood of bulls and goats could not take away sins. The sins were simply “passed over.” God devised a plan in this action that would temporarily preclude accountability for the sins committed under the Old Law. In that action, there was made a remembrance of those sins year by year through knowledge of the fact that those sins were only “passed over,” but not remitted! Thus did they have a conscience (a continual awareness) of those sins (Hebrews 10:1-2). Had they been completely forgiven through those sacrifices, they would have had “no more conscience of sins” (Hebrews 10:2). Final and complete absolution for those sins would only come by the shedding of the blood of the perfect sacrifice (Hebrews 9:15; Hebrews 9:25-28; Hebrews 10:12). The sins “passed over” were not finally and completely absolved until then.

 

Question 33: How can we show that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are a part of the New Testament?

ANSWER: As follows: (1) The Law of Christ is seen in the Gospel accounts to be contrary to the Law of Moses. For example: Matthew 5:21, “Ye have heard it was said by them of old time . .” In Matthew 5:22, Jesus would say, “But I say unto you . .” See the same contrasts in Matthew 5:27 vs. Matthew 5:28; Matthew 5:33 vs. Matthew 5:34; Matthew 5:38 vs. Matthew 5:39; Matthew 5:43 vs. Matthew 5:44; and Matthew 19:7 & 8 vs. Matthew 19:9. (2) The Gospel of Jesus Christ was to be preached in all of the world, bringing salvation to all who would believe and obey Him (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16; Luke 24:46-47). The Law of Moses was only for the House of Israel (Exodus 19:3; Deuteronomy 5:1-3). (3) What His followers were to preach, as they went into all of the world, was not what Moses or Elijah (the First Covenant/Old Testament) had taught, but rather what Christ (the Second Covenant/New Testament) had taught while He was with them (Matthew 17:1-5; John 14:26). (4) Surely, none would suggest that the Lord’s Supper was a part of the Old Testament (Matthew 26:26-29).

 

Question 34: Was the first covenant faulty or was the fault with the people?

ANSWER: Both! Hebrews 8:7 says clearly the first covenant was not faultless. None can argue that point! The fault of it was that it could not fully redeem fallen man, as would the second covenant. It was not faulty in the sense of a construction error! It was constructed by a perfect God to serve its intended purpose, i.e., to “bring us unto Christ” (Galatians 3:24).  Hebrews 8:8 says that fault was also found with the people. The fault of the Old Testament was also that faulty people could not keep it perfectly. Only Christ did that (Hebrews 4:15).

 

Question 35: Can we worship God on Sundays only?

ANSWER: No! We may worship God on any day of the week (Acts 2:46). However, the worship acts of partaking of the Lord’s Supper and giving are restricted to the first day (Sunday) only (Acts 20:7; I Corinthians 16:1-2).

 

Question 36: Please explain about the kingdom and the church.

ANSWER: Throughout the Bible we read about the establishment of the kingdom. In Daniel 2:28-45, he prophesied that the kingdom would be established in the days of the fourth world kingdom from that time, that is, the Roman Empire. In Verse forty-four, he tells us that once the kingdom was set up, it would never be destroyed. It was in the days of the Roman Empire (Luke 3:1) that John the Immerser began preaching, "Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Mark 1:14-15). Later in Matthew 16:13-19, Jesus said, "I will build my church" (Vs.18), which He also called the kingdom of heaven (Vs.19). It is highly significant that the Son of God said, "I will!" He did not say perhaps or maybe! He said, “I will build my church." In Mark 9:1, He said, "Verily I say unto you, that there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power." When Jesus, after His resurrection, ascended back to the Father, He was given "dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations and languages should serve Him: His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and His kingdom that which shall never be destroyed" (Daniel 7:13-14).

Ten days after Christ ascended, Peter on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2) proclaimed that He had been raised up to be enthroned (Vs.30) at the right hand of God (Vs.34), and had been made both Lord and Christ (Vs.36). The prophecies and promises of the coming kingdom were all fulfilled in a mighty way and, on this great day, Peter used the keys to the kingdom promised to him by Jesus (Matthew 16:19) to open wide its door. He pre­sented the terms of entry, and for the first time men and women were ushered in as citi­zens of the kingdom that would never be destroyed. "And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved" (Acts 2:47). From this time on, references to the kingdom in the Bible prove it to be in existence. (See Colossians 1:13; Hebrews 12:28; Revelation 1:9).

Consider also what Jesus said in the establishment of the Lord’s Supper before His death. He said, “I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom (Matthew 26:29)! Luke records it as follows: “I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God should come” (Luke 22:18). When Christians are assembled, Christ is in their midst (Matthew 18:20). When we partake of the Lord’s Supper, we are communing with each other and with Christ (Matthew 26:29). Where does that communion take place? In the church (Acts 20:7) and in the kingdom (Matthew 26:29)! They are one and the same!

     

Question 37: Why is the wages of sin death? If for instance, I will be wondering why is it that not only sinners undergo death. All people die, both the righteous and the unrighteous.

ANSWER: Romans 6:23 is clear that the wages of sin is death. The “death” being discussed here is not physical death, but rather spiritual and eternal death. Death itself means to “separate,” or “a separation.” In physical death the soul separates from the body (James 2:26). When one sins in this life he or she is said to be spiritually dead (Ephesians 2:1; Colossians 2:13), in that he or she has been separated from God (Isaiah 59:1-2). This is spiritual death. If one does not rid himself of these separating sins in this life through obedience to the Gospel of Christ, he will be forever separated from God in the life to come in the lake of fire and brimstone, which is the second death Revelation 20:14-15). “All” people who are old enough and sane enough to be accountable to God commit sin and, therefore, experience spiritual death. However, not “all” will experience eternal death! Some who would be righteous through obedience to the Gospel are “quickened” (made alive), having experienced the new birth (John 3:3-5) and are reconciled to God (II Corinthians 5:17-21) and return to be in fellowship with Him (I John 1:3-7). These will enter into eternal life (Matthew 25:34, 46). Those who would be unrighteous, through continuing disobedience to the Gospel, will experience eternal death by being “punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of His power” (I Thessalonians 1:7-9; Matthew 25:41, 46).

 

Question 38: Are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John a part of the New Covenant?

 ANSWER: Clearly, there are but two Covenants (Galatians 4:24), a first and a second, a new and an old (Hebrews 8:7), a glorious one and a more glorious one (II Corinthians 3:7-8)! Since there were only two Covenants given, all scripture must necessarily be contained in one or the other.

In Matthew 5:21, Jesus quoted from the Old Covenant (Exodus 20:13) and then in Verse 22 said something new and different that was not in that Old Covenant. The same is true of Matthew 5:27, 33, 38, and 43. He quoted from Exodus 20:14, Leviticus 19:21, Exodus 21:24, and Leviticus 19:18, respectively. In each case Jesus said something new and different that was not in the Old Covenant. Since what Jesus said (including Matthew 19:1-9) is understood to be scripture, by which all who live under the New Covenant will one day be judged (John 12:48), and since it is scripture that is new and different from that of the Old Covenant, there being but two Covenants, it logically follows that what Jesus said “must” be contained in that New Covenant.

Further, since the Old Covenant was taken out of the way at the Cross (Ephesians 2:15; Colossians 2:14), it is evident that those who lived under the Old Covenant will be judged by the words of that Old Covenant and not by the new and different things spoken by Jesus. This being true, we must then again logically conclude that the new and different things that Jesus spoke in Matthew 5 are not included in, nor a part of the Old Covenant by which they will be judged. Again, if the things He spoke are not a part of the Old Covenant, since there are only two Covenants, what He said “must” then be a part of the New Covenant!

Each account of the Gospel of Christ, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John make up the first four books of the New Covenant. These, coupled with the Book of Acts through The Revelation, constitute the totality of the New Covenant of Jesus Christ!

 

Question 39: What is separation from the world?

ANSWER: This question is mostly answered above. We are to be in the world, but not of the world. We are not to participate in the sins of the world, neither are we to love the things that are in the world (I John 2:15-17). A person functioning as one in the world cannot be a faithful Christian, because the things that are in the world stand opposed to things spiritual. The Christian’s focus will always be toward things that are above, not on the things of this earth (Colossians 3:1-5).

 

Question 40: Who was the best loved of Jesus’ disciples?

ANSWER: It was John! The three most close to Jesus were Peter, James and John. They alone were with Him on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1), at the raising of Jairus’ daughter (Luke 8:51), and shortly before His betrayal as He prayed to the Father (Matthew 26:37). Peter was not the one most loved by Christ because it was he who asked the one that Jesus most loved who was to be the betrayer (John 13:23-24). It was not James because Herod caused him to be killed with the sword before the book of John was written (Acts 12:1-2). It could then, of the three, be only John!

 

Question 41: John the Baptist was Elijah coming to complete his work. Is this true?

ANSWER: John the Baptist was not literally Elijah risen from the dead. John the Baptist, born of Elizabeth and Zacharias, came in the spirit and power of Elijah, i.e., in the likeness of Elijah to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children (by uniting them religiously), and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make a people prepared for the Lord” (Luke 1:17). See also Matthew 11:7-15. In these passages we have the fulfillment of prophecy, as recorded in Malachi 3:1 and Malachi 4:5-6.

 

Question 42: Are you saying that the Old Testament is obsolete to the church after the coming of Jesus (From Zambia)?

ANSWER: The Old Testament has been taken out of the way and replaced by the New Testament of Jesus Christ. Please read again carefully the following passages: Romans 7:4-7; II Corinthians 3:13-14; Galatians 3:24-25; Ephesians 2:13-16; Hebrews 7:12 / 8:7. In Colossians 2:14, we see that the handwriting of ordinances (Old Testament) was blot­ted out; that it was against us and contrary to us. Therefore, He took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross! This means that its laws and commandments no longer bind us. For example, we today do not have to offer animal sacrifices; we do not have to burn incense; we do not have to go to Jerusalem to worship; and we do not have to use instruments of music. These all were Old Testament precepts. Today, all people everywhere are bound only by the New Testament. It, and it alone, is our religious guide today! It is true that some of the principles of the Old Testament can also be found in the New Testament. For example, both the Old and the New tell us that it is sin to commit murder. The sin of murder today, however, is not a result of our transgressing the law that was in the Old Testament. We today sin by transgressing the law regarding murder that is in the New Testament and by it we shall be judged (John 12:48). We today will not be judged by how we live according to the Old Testament. Those who lived before the Old Testament was taken out of the way at the cross of Christ will be judged by it!

Consider this: Under colonial law, a Zambian was not permitted to commit murder! After colonialism, a Zambian is not permitted to commit murder! Which law is binding upon Zambians today and, if he commits murder today, under which law will he be judged? Of course, he will be judged by Zambian law. But why by Zambian law? Why not by colonial law? Simply because colonial law was replaced by Zambian law! Zambian law is the only law for Zambians that is in effect today! The same is true of the Old and New Testaments!

 

Question 43: II Timothy 3:16 talks about all Scripture as having been God-breathed, but in your answer you have disqualified this. Is not Psalms 150 still inspired?

ANSWER: Yes, Psalms 150 is still inspired, but, nonetheless, it is inaccurate to say that we have disqualified II Timothy 3:16. The Old Testament is just as God-breathed as is the New Testament. However, this does not mean that because those Old Testament words were inspired that they bind us today. Those words were God’s Word for the people who lived before the cross! The New Testament is God’s Word for the people who live after the cross! God replaced the inspired Old Testament with the inspired New Testament (Hebrews 7:12; Hebrews 8:6-7). Based on your statement, you are suggesting that because you do not offer animal sacrifices today, you are disqualifying the Old Testament as being God-breathed! You must ask yourself, “why do I not today offer animal sacrifices when the God-breathed words of the Old Testament ordered such to be done?” The reason you do not offer animal sacrifices today is because the Old Testament has been taken out of the way and because the New Testament does not authorize such sacrifices today! Both Testaments are God-breathed, but both are not binding on Christians today!

This is the reason why we are not permitted to go back to Psalms 150 to try to find justification for the use of instruments in worship today! In order for their use to be justified today, we would have to find that justification in the New Testament by which we who live today will be judged! However, there is no justification for their use to be found anywhere in the New Testament! Bottom line? There is no New Testament authorization for instruments in worship to God! Ephesians 5:19 and Colossians 3:16 are New Testament instructions and exhortations relative to acceptable worship for all Christians for all time. In these passages, we are taught that our singing is to be corporate (collective or congregational) with vocally enunciated words by which we teach and ad­monish one another! No other type of music is authorized, and would, therefore, be sinful!

 

Question 44: Did the people who rose from the grave on the day of Jesus’ crucifixion have to die again? And what was God’s purpose in raising these folks and them walking around?

ANSWER: The Bible does not tell us who these people were other than the fact that they were saved peo­ple or "saints." Upon their resurrection they went into the city of Jerusalem and for the purpose of appearing to many. Though the purpose of their appearance is not given, it seems reasonable to as­sume that it was done to convince the Jews of the power and divinity of Christ. Beyond this we have been told nothing. All else is conjecture and speculation. We may consider the following, but can draw no conclusions! If they were raised in their natural bodies of flesh and blood, it is certain these could not enter heaven in that state (I Corinthians 15:50) and would, therefore, have to die a second time or at some point be changed from one with a flesh and blood body to one with a spiritual or resurrection body (I Corinthians 15:51-53)! If they were raised in the promised resurrection or spiritual bodies of the faithful (I Corinthians 15:35-54; II Corinthians 5:1-4) that are incorruptible, or were raised with physical bodies that were subsequently changed by God into spiritual or resurrection bodies, it would then appear at least, though uncertain, that they did not have to die the second time! In any case, however, if they were to be separated from either the natural flesh and blood body or the spiritual resurrection body, then another death would have occurred, since death is biblically defined as a separation of the spirit from the body (James 2:26)! 

 

Question 45: Why did Jesus tell Mary not to touch Him after the resurrection?

ANSWER: This question has caused much speculation over the years. Some believe that because Jesus said He had “not yet ascended to the Father” that she being physical was not permitted to touch Him because it would cause Him to become unclean! However, this could not be the reason since, in Matthew 28:9, Jesus permitted the disciples to hold Him by the feet in worship, and in John 20:24-29, where He told Thomas to touch His wounds. The probablilities, then, would likely be: (1) that Jesus knew that Mary wanted to verify what she thought she was seeing by touching Him. So Jesus, is simply saying, ‘Mary, there’ll be time for that later. I want you to go tell my brethren that I have risen and will soon be ascending to my Father;’ or (2), it may be that Mary was wanting to worship Him by clinging to His feet, as did the disciples in Matthew 28:9, and Jesus, as above, not wanting any delay, simply told her, ‘don’t cause undue delay by holding on to me.’ I want you go right away and tell my brethren that I have risen. There will be time for this during the forty days before I ascend to my Father.’

 

Question 46: We don’t know the day or the hour of His coming, but certain signs will tell us the season of His coming. We will not be snuck upon as a thief does, because the generation of the fig tree will not pass until these things be fulfilled! Agree? I would also like to touch upon the ‘clouds’ and ‘air’ of I Thessalonians, but I think this will be all for now!

ANSWER: No! We do not agree! Your position seems to be that we will almost know the time Christ will return, but not the instant He will come. In fact you state that, “We will not be snuck upon as a thief does.” You further state that God did not leave us ignorant about the matter!

You also seem to be trying to base your thinking upon the various definitions that may be applied to the Greek word, “Hora,” which Strong’s defines as hour, day, instant, or season. How you suppose that this implies that we will know in what season the Lord is going to come, but not the instant, is not reasonable!

The verses that you use to support your thesis actually teach the opposite of what you are trying to prove. Matthew 24:43-46 teaches that just as we don’t know when a thief is going to come, we don’t know when Christ is going to come. Do you know in what “season” the thief is going to come and rob you? What are the signs given that a thief is going to come and rob you? Absolutely none! This is why He tells us to watch and be ready at all times!

You say, “We will not be snuck upon as a thief,” but Peter said, by inspiration, that “the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night” (II Peter 3:10). It would seem that Peter, being led and directed by the Holy Spirit, is correct! Wouldn’t you agree?

Your notion about the parable of the fig tree referring to that time shortly before Christ comes is also in error. It is clearly obvious that everything mentioned before Matthew 24:34, occurred during the generation that lived at that time. To avoid the force of this fact by stating that “this generation” meant the “generation of the fig tree” is without logic or biblical support. I am surprised that you did not also refer to Strong’s for this definition. He says, the Greek “genea” means an “age,” “generation,” “nation,” “time,” taken from the root “genos” that means “diversity,” “generation,” “kind,” “nation,” “offspring,” or “stock.” Without doubt, it refers to the generation of people who lived at that time. In fact in that generation (a period of forty years), in 70 A.D., everything prophesied by Christ in all of the preceding verses, having nothing to do with His Second Coming, came to pass, just as He said! Note that Christ, in Verse 34, is answering the question found in Verse three, “When shall THESE THINGS be.” Christ tells them when in this verse: ‘THESE THINGS shall be before this generation passes!’ He is not saying that these things shall come to pass during the lifetime (generation) of a fig tree! Neither is He saying that the signs of a fig tree are to precede the Second Coming, but rather as they recognized the changes that occurred in a fig tree they were told to also recognize the signs that He said would precede the destruction of Jerusalem! It all came to pass. None of these have anything to do with His Second Coming!

In Verse 36, He begins with the word “But,” which is intended to show a contrast between what He has just said and what He is going to say! He has said, these are the signs given that will precede the destruction of Jerusalem He answered that question. Now He is going to answer the question about His Second Coming: “But” of that day and hour (His second Coming) knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only! There were signs given preceding the destruction of Jerusalem, “BUT” there will be no signs given preceding the Second Coming of Christ! Nobody knows when, or will know when, it is going to happen! Just as there were no signs given to those in the days of Noah, there shall be no signs given preceding the coming of the Son of man. Business will be going on as usual and He will come as a thief in the night (II Peter 3:10). Therefore, be watching and waiting. We don’t know the “day” (Matthew 24:36)! We don’t know the “hour” (Matthew 24:36)! We don’t know the “times” (I Thessalonians 5:1)! We don’t know the “seasons” (I Thessalonians 5:1)! We only know that He “so cometh as a thief in the night (I Thessalonians 5:2). A thief comes without signs and warnings. He comes unexpectedly! So it will be at the Second Coming of our Lord!

If you are saying in your letter that you are the watchman who has been assigned to tell us what you said, we have a major problem, because what you have said does not square up with what God has already said. May I respectfully suggest that you restudy these matters without preconceptions supported by denominational doctrine!

Once this is squared up on the basis of truth, we would be delighted to hear about your notions of ‘clouds’ and ‘air’ as found in I Thessalonians 4:17!

 

Question 47: (a) What is withdrawal of fellowship? (b) What is its purpose? (c) Is it optional? (d) Can it be avoided? (e) When should it begin?

ANSWER:

(a) Withdrawal of fellowship is a part of the action of disciplining Christians who habitually sin while refusing to repent! The matter can best be understood by reading and studying closely Matthew 18:15-18; Romans 16:17; I Corinthians 5:1-13; II Thessalonians 3:6-15; I Timothy 1:19-20; and Titus 3:10-11. By reading these passages, we learn that withdrawal of fellowship does not occur until every possible action to win the wayward person’s soul back to God with love, kindness, and patience has been exhausted.

(b) The primary purpose of disciplining a wayward member is to win a lost soul back to Christ! Also, when there is sin in the church and one remains arrogant and unwilling to repent, the sin and the sinner must be withdrawn from in order to maintain the purity of the body of Christ, lest the sin affect the rest of the church (I Corinthians 5:6-7).

(c) Church discipline, including withdrawal of fellowship is not a matter of option, but rather is a direct command to be obeyed (I Corinthians 5:4; II Thessalonians 3:6) and

(d) cannot, therefore, be avoided.

(e) When one is known to be in habitual sin, the action of “corrective discipline” is to begin. This is the part that involves love and patience in teaching the sinner the truth and doing all to win him or her back. This being fully exhausted, the action of withdrawal of fellowship must then be undertaken.

 

Question 48: (a) Is it wrong to refuse to disfellowship? (b) Can we disfellowship someone with whom we have a personal grievance? (c) Must the whole church act together? (d) What if the disfellowshipped person still comes to church? (e) What should the church do when the sinner repents? (f) Which sins require disfellowshipping? (g) Should false teachers be disfellowshipped?

ANSWER: 

(a) Yes! It is wrong to refuse to disfellowship, if the need to do so is present (II Thessalonians 3:6).

(b) If by personal grievance you mean someone has sinned against you, the answer is yes, but only after carefully and lovingly following the procedure as set forth in Matthew 18:15-18.

(c) Yes! The whole church must act as one (I Corinthians 5:4).

(d) If the disfellowshipped person continues to come to church, he is not to be counted as an enemy, but is to be admonished to repent and return as one would to a brother whom he loves.

(e) We read about the sinner of I Corinthians 5 who repented and returned in II Corinthians 2:6-8. Here Paul says, ‘stop punishing him, forgive him, comfort him, and confirm your love to him.’ The principle of the returning prodigal son of Luke 15:11-32 is total and complete restoration!

(f) Any sin of which one refuses to repent is grounds for church discipline. Matthew 18:15-18 involves sins between brethren. I Corinthians 5:11 lists specific sins, representative of all sin. Romans 16:17 refers to sins of dividing the body of Christ and false doctrine. II Thessalonians 3:6-15 includes the sins of walking disorderly, i.e., not in accordance with apostolic teaching and busybodies that refuse to work. In I Timothy 1:19-20 teaches that we should disfellowship those who have turned away from the faith and those who blaspheme. Titus 3:11 talks about a heretic in the KJV, which means a factious man (one who divides), as translated in the ASV. Any and all unrepented of sin that would cause a soul to be lost is subject to church discipline!

(g) Yes! False teachers who refuse to repent are to be withdrawn from (Romans 16:17; I Timothy 1:19-20).

 

Question 49: Does the New Testament teach that God selects specific individuals such as Hitler, to positions of high government?

ANSWER: As relates to Romans 13, we obviously get into a very deep subject. I believe, first of all, that God sees a picture that we don't see from the standpoint of scope and detail. He not only sees and understands what has happened, He sees what is going to happen and the effect that today has on the future! How His providence affects what He sees for tomorrow, we don't know and cannot know! We may look at a Hitler, Stalin, or even a Clinton and ask why, not being able to see tomorrow and only today, There's no way we can correctly answer that question. There is no doubt that God ordains or orders the powers that are and are to be (Romans 13:1). I find it difficult to believe, however, as your friends suggest, that God looked for an Adolf Hitler to ordain personally, but I can buy into the idea that God ordained Hitler in the sense that he permitted him to come into power as a result of sinful men conspiring and agreeing, sometimes by looking the other way, to his installation, the result of which has brought much hatred and killing. God didn't say, 'Come on Hitler, your just the guy I want to start a world war and to kill all of these people!' Men sinned across Germany in allowing his appointment to that position based on their choice. Other countries erred significantly in putting there heads in the sand to avoid dealing with what they knew was a significant problem that would likely have worldwide effects. They were all, as is always the case, free moral agents, who made the wrong choices and, thereby, caused many to suffer from the consequences of their wrong choices! Wrong choices did it, not God! God did not “cause” these people to make the wrong choices, nor did He “cause” Hitler to sin. Man, by God's order or ordination, if you please, was made free to make the wrong choices. God does not make man's choices for him. In this case, man did make the wrong choices and God permitted those choices to run their course, i.e., Hitler and his effect on society! In this sense I believe God ordains powers today. Effectively, I suppose it is to say that God ordains that there be powers and authorities, but the selection of those powers are to be by the choices of men who then must live by those choices! How God in His providential guidance will, through, and as a result of those choices, affect tomorrow, I do not know! I do not know the working of His mind, nor how His providence works and cannot, therefore, project its possible future effect. I must leave it in His hands. Nonetheless, I do believe that we are expected to obey those powers as long as they do not overrule or violate God's laws (Romans 13:1; Acts 5:29).

 

Question 50: If we are no longer bound by the laws of the Old Testament, why do we have to abstain from eating blood (Acts 15:28)?

ANSWER: The law to abstain from eating blood was a law given through inspired men by the Holy Ghost (Acts 15:19-20; Acts 15:28-29). It was a law, both under the Old Testament and the New Testament. The same can be said about many laws. For example: Under the Old Law they were not to commit murder (Exodus 20:13). We, too, under the New Law are told if we commit murder, we will not enter heaven (Galatians 5:19-21). If I commit murder, what law will I be judged by? The New Law, of course! The same is true of eating blood! If I do so, I will not sin by transgressing the Old Law, but because I transgressed the New Law, i.e., the law that was given by the Holy Spirit in Acts 15!

 

Question 51: Should a prayer spoken in an unknown language be interpreted so that all members may be able to say “Amen” (I Corinthians 14:15-17)?

ANSWER: Yes! According to the basic premise of I Corinthians, Chapter fourteen, should one in a worship service lead a prayer in a foreign language unknown to others present, interpretation would be necessary, since all present must pray with the spirit and with the understanding. Without interpretation such could not be accomplished! We should understand, however, that men cannot miraculously speak in foreign languages today, since miraculous gifts passed away with the completion of the New Testament. The purpose of miracles and signs, including speaking in foreign languages, in Bible times was to confirm the Word of God (Mark 16:20) that was being spoken, but not yet written. When the Word of God (the perfect law of liberty – James 1:25) was completed, the “gifts” were to fail, cease, and vanish away (I Corinthians 13:8-13). Since the perfect Word of God was confirmed and written about the end of the first century, it follows that at that time the miraculous, including speaking in tongues, passed away according to the will of God. Since we today have the same completed and confirmed Bible, which provides “all things that pertain to life and godliness” (II Peter 1:3), there is clearly no need for the “gifts” today. 

 

Question 52: The book of Revelation is said to be difficult to understand. What kind of questions should I ask myself when reading the book?

ANSWER: Since the book was written in symbolic terms, it is important to understand those symbols, which requires an involved study of them, as used elsewhere and throughout the word of God. They must be understood consistently since truth is always consistent. Therefore, one of the most important questions to consider is, (1) “Am I being consistent in my application and understanding as relates to other portions of God’s Word?” Beyond this, we must inquire as to, (2) “Who wrote the book,” (3) “To whom it was written,” (4) “At what time in history was it written,” (5) “Under what circumstances it was written,” (5) and “For what purpose it was written.” We must always be extremely careful not to force future application into a passage or passages when such is not warranted. Many have tried in error to do so with the book of The Revelation in spite of the fact that the book relates primarily to those “things which must shortly come to pass” (Revelation 1:1), i.e., at, and shortly after, the turn of the first century. Certainly the latter part of the book deals with the victorious saints in heaven, but to cause all of the symbols in the book to relate to things future from this day forward is to go beyond that which is written!

 

Question 53: Jude 12: Was the love feast a common practice of the early Christians. If so, why do Christians of today not do the same?

ANSWER: Yes! The early church often gathered to have such feasts, not as a practice of worship, but most usually as a way of helping provide for those who were without the necessities of life. The church today often does the same, but does not usually refer to these periods of fellowship as “love feasts,” though some still do. We must be very careful not to make such feasts binding on others, as there is no biblical directive to engage in such today. Neither must we allow such meals to creep into the worship practices of the church. In I Corinthians 11, it is evident that the Lord’s Supper had been adulterated by the congregation at Corinth to include such a feast, an activity that was soundly condemned by the Holy Spirit through the apostle Paul.

 

Question 54: Is there a difference between heart, mind and soul as used in Matthew 22:37?

ANSWER: The meaning of loving Him with all of the heart means that we should love him with all our might and power. We will love him more than anyone or anything!

The meaning of loving Him with all of the soul means that we should love Him with all of our life. It means that we will live for Him no matter the cost, even to the point of death.

The meaning of loving Him with all of the mind means that we should submit the totality of our will and thinking to His Word!

 

Question 55: What does the biblical phrase “obey you father and mother and your days will be long upon the earth” mean?

ANSWER: This idea is found first in the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 5:16): "Honour thy father and thy mother, as the Lord thy God hath commanded thee; that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." The meaning here is, that they would be more happy, useful, and virtuous if they obeyed their parents than if they disobeyed them.

In the commandment as recorded in Exodus 20:12, the promise is, "that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." This referred to the Promised Land of Canaan. The meaning is that there would be a special providence falling to those who were obedient to parents. The apostle Paul, in Ephesians 6:3, repeats that promise and says that obedience to parents was connected at all times with long life. None can doubt that obedience to parents’ results generally in longer life because obedient children are kept from those things that often shorten life. None would direct his child to be a drunkard, a gambler, or a murderer. But these things that generally result from being disobedient to parents, very frequently cause premature death. No disobedient child can have any assurance that he or she will not fall into such things. Obedience to parents then will assure long life. It will cause one to know how to control ungodly desires that lead to self-destruction, e.g., the use of dope, alcohol, evil companions, etc. that often bring about early death. More especially, one who is disobedient to parents, sins thereby, and that sin will result in loss of the soul, if repentance is not forthcoming!

 

Question 56: Where did Satan and the angels come from?

ANSWER: All things that were in heaven were created by God (Satan and other fallen angels - Job 1:6; Job 2:1; Jude 6) and all things that are in heaven were created by God (Psalms 148:2-5; Colossians 1:16). 

 

Question 57: Jesus Christ said that when God’s kingdom comes that God’s will is going to be taking place here on earth. Is this already happening in our world today?

ANSWER: The words of your question are taken from the Lord’s model prayer, but imply wrongfully (Matthew 6:9-13). Christ is simply teaching us to pray that God’s will or direction will be performed by each who would be His follower in the kingdom and also that God’s will would overrule the will of each. This is the example that Christ set! Christ prayed, “not my will, but thine be done.” We should do the same and pray for God’s providential aid in doing so! Certainly, many in the kingdom today are living with lives in subjection to the will of God, not perfectly, but surely faithfully!

 

Question 58: Is there anything like “over-righteousness, over-wiseness and over-wickedness” as far as reality in the Christian race is concerned (Ecclesiastes 7:16-17)?

ANSWER: Yes there is a danger of all three. Reference in this passage (Ecclesiastes 7:16-17) is to “extremism.”  An example of extremism in religion is seen in the men of Athens that Paul addressed in this fashion: “Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious (KJV).” In the NKJV, we read, “Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very religious.” These were guilty of “over-righteousness,” having gone to irrational religious extremes. We must avoid the same! Being “over-wise” would be to reject the wisdom of God in favor of the wisdom of men (I Corinthians 1:18-24). Being “over-wicked” would be to intentionally engage in sin, as set forth in I Corinthians 6:9-10 and Galatians 5:19-21. This type of intentional sin stands in contrast to unintentional sin in which we all engage (I John 1:8-10). The faithful of God will avoid “extremism,” to the left or to the right (Deuteronomy 5:32).

 

Question 59: Should the last twelve verses of Mark’s account of the Gospel be included in the canon of Scripture?

ANSWER: Yes! Although the Vaticanus and the Sinaniticus are the two oldest manuscripts “now” extant (fourth century) and exclude these verses, they are not the oldest to be used. Jerome 382 AD, responsible for the Latin versions, had access to manuscripts older than these two that included these verses. The Syriac, Peshitta (150 AD), Curetonian, Latin, Gothic, Egyptian (Coptic), Sahidic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and the Georgian versions of the New Testament, all of which are older that the two MSS above, all contain the last twelve verses of Mark. There are 618 other MSS that also contain the last twelve verses of Mark. (Score 628 to 2). Nearly 100 ecclesiastical writers (before the two subject MSS were written) refer to the last twelve verses of Mark. Between 300 AD and 600 AD there are about 200 more writers, all containing the last twelve verses of Mark. Victor of Antioch refers to the very many MSS, which he had seen, that satisfied him that the last twelve verses were contained therein. Others writing before these two MSS were, Papias, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Vincentius, etc., etc., and the list goes on and on.

It is also worthwhile to note that the Vaticanus leaves out many other passages of scripture, such as, Genesis 1-46, Psalms 105-137, Hebrews 9:14-13:25, all of I & II Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and Revelation. The Sinaiticus has its omissions, as well, but also contains “The Epistle of Barnabas” and “The Shepherd of Hermas” as part of the New Testament. Which should be accepted and which should be excluded? Why would any suggest that the last twelve verses of Mark should be excluded and the many other missing passages included? Prejudice? Obviously! If one were ethical and honest, to exclude one would demand the exclusion of all! However, if all were excluded, including the Book of Revelation, it would spell disaster to the false doctrine of Premillenialism, a doctrine generally held by the “Faith Only” folks. They want to keep the missing Book of Revelation, since they believe (falsely) that it supports their Premillenial doctrine, but want to discard the missing last twelve verses of Mark that, if not excluded, spells disaster to their (falsely held) “Faith Only” doctrine: Mark 16:16, Christ speaking, says, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.”

Dean John Burgeon, a scholar and author that studied intensely these two MSS at length and wrote about the last twelve verses of Mark attests to their authenticity and further states, “I insist and am prepared to prove (which he did) that the text of these two Codexes (B and Aleph) is very near the foulest in existence and that they exhibit fabricated texts is demonstrable . . . We suspect that these two manuscripts are indebted for their preservation, solely to their ascertained evil character.” That they “exhibit the most shamefully mutilated texts which are anywhere to be met with: - have become, by whatever process (for their history is wholly unknown), the depositories of the largest amount of fabricated readings, ancient blunders, and intentional perversions of the truth—which are discoverable in any known copies of the Word of God.”

There is no doubt that the last twelve verses of Mark belong in the New Testament of Jesus Christ!

 

 

 

[Return to Index]