What's the Answer? 362 Answers to Bible Questions

Foreword

It is with no thought of speaking ex cathedra that the present volume of Questions and Answers is sent forth, but rather with recognition of the fact that in regard to many of these questions others may feel that the answers given are very inadequate and perhaps even opposed to the Truth of Scripture. However, I have endeavored to meet each problem presented from the Word itself and I can say, "I believed;

therefore have I spoken." The book is submitted to the Christian reading public in the hope that it may be helpful in removing some difficulties and perplexities, but I trust that no one will take any word of mine as final, but will ever remember what is written in the Scriptures: "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" (Isa. 8:20). If this book stirs the hearts of many to search the Scriptures more diligently, it will have accomplished one of the purposes I had in mind in preparing it. The other, of course, is to impart to my brethren that which I hope will be for their blessing and edification.

H. A. Ironside

Part I: General and Doctrinal

1. What is the meaning of "image" and "likeness" in Genesis 1:26?

By "image" I understand representation, and by "likeness" moral conformity. Adam was made in the image and likeness of God. He was set on earth to represent Him and as such was a spirit being; that is, unlike the lower animals, he was spirit and soul and body. Only a spirit being could be in the image of God. As a sinless man, he was also in the divine likeness. After his fall the image was marred and the likeness was lost. So we read later on that "Adam begat a son in his own image, after his own likeness." This describes all men since.

Though still in the image of God (for we are, as to our personality, spirit beings) yet that image has been sadly marred by sin and we are in the likeness by nature of our fallen first parents. When we are born again, the Spirit of God begins His blessed work of conforming us to the likeness of Christ and when at last He appears in glory, we shall be again in the image and likeness of God.

2. Is it right to use ordinary baker's bread at the Communion of the Lord's Supper, or should it be unleavened, as leaven is a type of evil and Christ is the sinless One?

I believe there can be no question that the bread used by the Lord, when He instituted the Supper, was unleavened, but, on the other hand, the age of types and shadows has now passed away and I do not see anything in the New Testament which implies that the bread used in the Lord's Supper must be unleavened, or that the wine must of necessity be either fermented or unfermented. I think the wisdom of God is shown in this, for oftentimes it might be impossible to procure unfermented wine or vice versa; and the same might be true in regard to bread. There are circumstances where one could not procure unleavened bread or other circumstances where one could not procure that which was leavened. All Scripture speaks of is "the bread" and "the fruit of the vine." It does not definitely indicate the actual nature of the bread or the actual condition of the juice of the grape. Neither in the accounts given in the Gospels nor in I Corinthians 10 and 11 are we given more definite information regarding the nature of the elements. Some might refer to I Corinthians 5, but there the apostle is clearly drawing a lesson from the typical teaching of leaven in the Old Testament, and the unleavened bread referred to is not the bread of the Lord's Supper but is that sincerity and truth which should characterize believers as they feast on Christ.

3. What is meant by the Shekinah? I do not find it in my Bible.

The Shechinah, or Shekinah (it is spelled both ways)

is a Hebrew word, used in the ancient Jewish commentaries (the Targums) for the Light that shone between the cherubim above the Mercy Seat, in the Tabernacle and the Temple of Solomon. It really means "the Dwelling" and referred to God as dwelling between the cherubim. It did not appear in the second temple. It was the sign of God's manifested presence in Israel.

4. What is the meaning of Jehovah-shammah and where is it found in Scripture?

Jehovah-shammah means "the Lord is there" and is so translated in Ezekiel 48:35.

5. Please explain the difference between the King James Version and the American Standard Version. What do you think of Moffat's translation?

As to the Bible translations, the most generally used is the Authorized Version, sometimes called the King James Version because it was authorized for use in churches in England by King James I. Nearly three hundred years later the American Standard Version was produced, and it is in some respects to be preferred to the older version, though it has never gained the favor of people generally that was expected.

The differences are not very important, but are based upon some older texts which were not in evidence when the Authorized Version was being translated. Moffatt's translation is spoiled by the translator's modernistic views, though in some respects it is a very excellent rendering of the original. I keep it for reference, but would not use it as an authority.

6. Are we under the law of the Ten Commandments or was this law only for Israel?

The Epistle to the Galatians is the divine answer to this question. The Ten Commandments constituted the essence of the covenant that God made with Israel— the covenant that was never made with Gentiles as such. See Deuteronomy 5:5-22. This was a covenant of works. This covenant has now been set aside by the new covenant which is a covenant of pure grace. The old covenant had in the Ten Commandments the standard of righteousness for that dispensation. But the standard of righteousness of the new covenant is given in the New Testament and manifested in Christ Himself.

7. Why was Jesus baptized by John the Baptist?

John's baptism was a call to confession and repentance preparatory to the coming of the long-promised King. We are told that "the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John" (Luke 7:29). That is, in their baptism, they acknowledged that what God said about them was true. They were sinners lost and ruined, deserving only death and judgment. Their baptism was the confession of this.

Jesus, the sinless One, identified Himself with this repentant remnant by undergoing the same ordinance and thus taking His place with them before God; and when John would have forbidden Him, He said, "Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness" (Matt. 3:15). It was as though He had said, "Permit this, John, for in My baptism I am identifying Myself with these confessed sinners and pledging Myself to fulfill every righteous demand of the throne of God on their behalf."

They have well been likened to debtors, each one giving a note for his debt—a debt which, however, they could never hope to pay. Jesus by His baptism endorsed all these notes, guaranteeing full payment Himself.

8. When Jesus said in Matthew 28:19, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," was He giving a commission for the present age? Do we now carry out this national commission? Does it not rather refer to kingdom baptism in the Great Tribulation?

There has been a great deal of very unscriptural teaching based upon Matthew 28:19. There is not the slightest intimation there that whole nations were to be baptized. It is the world-wide commission of evangelization under which we are now operating. The word translated nations (ethnos) is the ordinary word for Gentiles as such. It refers to all nations and peoples who are not Jews. When Paul wrote that the Gospel was preached for the obedience of faith among all nations, he used exactly the same word. Therefore this commission applies throughout the entire dispensation.

9. If baptism is not essential to salvation why should anyone be baptized in this dispensation?

Nothing is essential to salvation but simple faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, based, of course, upon a sincere repentance, but the truly saved believer delights in the will of God, and as our Lord has expressed His will in commanding His disciples to go into all the world and "teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost," no subject Christian would question the importance of obedience to this word.

10. What is the "one baptism" of Ephesians 4:5?

It is unquestionably the only baptism that Christians can possibly observe; that is, water baptism, in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Jesus commanded this and His command has never been rescinded.

To assert otherwise is to make the Word of God of none effect by human tradition. The baptism of the Holy Spirit took place once for all in the beginning of the dispensation, and every believer comes into the good of it when he trusts the Lord Jesus Christ. But water baptism is the outward confession of the Lordship of Christ and the faith of God's elect. Therefore, we read "There is . . . one Lord, one faith, one baptism." The effect of the Spirit's baptism is referred to in the previous verse, where we read, "There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling." If the one baptism of the next verse refers, as some teach, to the Spirit's baptism, then you have here a repetition which does violence to the text.

11. What is meant in I Corinthians 15:29. where the apostle speaks of those who are baptized for the dead?

This verse teaches that believers take the place by baptism of those who have fallen in the ranks through death.

Just as soldiers are recruited in place of those who have died in battle, in order to fill up the regiment, so believers take the place in baptism as soldiers of Christ and fill up the ranks of those who have died.

12. Is baptism in water essential to salvation?

Nothing is essential to salvation but personal faith in the Lord Jesus. The Gospel is God's wonderful story of His death, burial, and Resurrection. This was what Paul preached as essential to salvation and he was careful to distinguish it from ordinances. He says, "Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel" (I Cor. 1:17). If baptism were a part of the Gospel, Paul could never have consistently used such an expression. This does not mean, of course, that he ignored baptism. His converts believed and were baptized and this is the Scriptural order. Baptism is the expression of subjection to Christ as Lord and pictures our death, burial and resurrection with Him.

13. Is the baptism of the Holy Spirit individual or is it collective?

Dispensationally it is collective and took place once for all at the beginning of this age, but each individual comes into the good of it when upon receiving Christ, he is sealed with the Holy Ghost.

14. Please explain I Peter 3:21, the first part of the verse.

Baptism, like the Flood of Noah, is a figure of salvation. Noah was saved through the Flood by being in the ark. In our baptism we picture our death and resurrection with Christ, who passed through the flood of judgment for us and now is seated at God's right hand. The fact that He has borne our sins and settled the sin question, and that God has taken Him up to glory, gives us the answer or demand of a good conscience.

15. Is not water baptism the teaching of the New Testament to be observed after people are born again?

Undoubtedly. The divine order is clearly set forth in Acts 18:8—"Many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized." But if others do not see this we are not to be their judges.

16. Was not the Corinthian church in the body of Christ? They were baptized by the Holy Spirit. Were they also baptized in water?

Surely. See Acts 18:8. There is not an atom of evidence that the baptism of the Holy Spirit supersedes or takes the place of baptism in water. Note the specific case of Cornelius and his household as recorded in Acts 10.

17. Does Paul mean to teach in I Corinthians 11:3-16 that a Christian woman is to wear a veil or a covering during prayer or testimony to denote her place and sphere in the Christian social order? If so, why the teachings of verse 15:

"Her [long] hair is given her for [Greek "anti"— in place of] a covering"?

The Apostle Paul was instructing Christian women as to modesty when taking a public part in Christian assemblies in order that they might not be confused in the minds of others with immoral women who went about unveiled. The covering of the hair is a divinely given veil, and is her glory, distinguishing her in outward appearance from the man whose hair is not normally of the same character, though a man might let his hair grow; but if so, it would be effeminate and so considered by the Greeks. I do not think this was so among the Jews, so that I assume that I Corinthians 11 has to do with conditions prevailing at that time, and in any other place of course where similar conditions are found. Certainly even in our day, it looks far more becoming for Christian women to appear in meetings for worship and testimony where men are present, with their heads covered or veiled.

18. What is your explanation of I Timothy 2:12?

I think this verse and the related passage in I Corinthians 11 should make it perfectly clear that it is not the mind of God for a woman to take the preeminent place in the regular church meeting, that is, in what you might call the official public meeting of the church. Were she there to insist on rising and teaching, she would be usurping an authority which is not rightfully hers. But this has no reference whatever to outside activity, such as conducting a Bible class, speaking in testimony meetings, or witnessing for Christ on her own responsibility where no question can rightfully be raised of her usurping authority over another.

19. Please explain the difference between "barren"

and "unfruitful" as used in II Peter 1:8: "For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ"

"Idle" is a better translation than "barren."

20. What is the meaning of "selah." as used in the Psalms?

The term signifies a rest in the music. Its exact meaning is "to lift up," that is, to lift up the hands from the instrument. Spiritually, it might suggest the meditation upon what has been previously read.

21. Do I Peter 3:3 and I Timothy 2:9 mean that women should not be outwardly adorned without also being spiritually adorned, or do they mean they should be spiritually adorned without being outwardly adorned at all?

I think that in all such matters as dress and personal appearance, a Christian woman should seek to act in the fear of the Lord and in accordance with His Holy Word. He has commanded women to dress modestly, and if they do this I see no Scriptural objection to their dressing becomingly. In fact, I think Christian women should be concerned about a respectable and attractive appearance. The passages mentioned do not forbid this, but they do insist that the outward adorning must not be the prominent thing. It is the inward adorning that counts. The passage in Isaiah 3 (vss. 18- 24) was a rebuke to the proud and haughty, who gave more attention to personal adornment than they did to walking before God. This, of course, would still apply in principle.

22. I am troubled about Deuteronomy 22:5. In the light of Scripture, would it be wrong for me to permit my girls to wear such garments as snow suits in winter and slacks in summer?

I do not believe this verse means that women should not wear the same kind of clothing that men wear, or that men should not wear similar clothing to that of women. In Eastern lands, men, as a rule, wear long garments, and women, as in China, wear trousers and jackets, but in each case it is men's and women's clothing. The thing which God forbade was for men to put on garments belonging to women, or women to put on garments belonging to men. To exchange in this way would be unseemly. I do not think it would touch, for a moment, the question of wearing such garments as you refer to, which are simply a matter of ordinary custom.

23. If one is suffering from an incurable disease and life seems increasingly hard, would it be wrong, in view of the fact that God's Word says "to depart, and to be with Christ ... is far better" (Phil. 1:23), if one neglected the body and allowed the illness to progress without hindrance until release came by death?

While our hearts go out in deepest sympathy to any who may be suffering in the way you suggest, we need to remember that the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit and we are not to neglect it, but to give it the rightful honor that belongs to the tabernacle in which God dwells. In His own time He will call His children to be with Himself. But while He wills our remaining here we should seek in every way to keep our bodies in the best possible condition for His service and glory.

24. In a Christian gathering, the question came up as to whether or not a Christian could or would commit suicide. If so, where would he go, to Hades or Paradise?

I have no hesitancy in answering your question in the affirmative as to the possibility of a real Christian's committing suicide, and of course such a one would go immediately to be with the Lord. I question if anyone under ordinary circumstances commits suicide unless mentally diseased. That a Christian may become so diseased is perfectly plain, and such a one would not be responsible for taking his own life. I have known a number of persons whose piety I could not doubt, who became insane and eventually committed suicide. Sometimes it has been only a temporary aberration and they have lived long enough to regret it greatly, but nevertheless died in real peace.

25. What is meant by the word "shamefacedness"

in I Timothy 2:9?

The word translated "shamefacedness" in that passage really means "modesty." It is the opposite of "boldness of face," that which, alas, characterizes so many today.

26. What is the meaning of the word "amen"?

It means "Let it be established." Our Lord speaks of Himself as the "Amen," that is, the "Establisher."

27. Does I Corinthians 7:14 mean that if the husband is a Christian, the wife will be saved, and vice versa?

This verse does not definitely promise that the unsaved husband of a Christian wife will be saved, or vice versa, but it does tell the saved partner to pray earnestly for the other one, trusting that the result of a godly life and earnest prayer may be the conversion of the one who is unsaved.

28. In the case of a man and wife both of whom were previously married to other partners and divorced because of incompatibility before they were married to each other, and have now been brought to Christ, what advice should be given them as to continuing in or severing then- present relationship?

According to the Word of God, all sin and iniquity is put away eternally when people trust the Lord Jesus Christ.

The adulterous marriage into which these people had entered was simply one of their many sins. God has now forgiven them fully and completely and has taken them up in their present relationship, therefore the word applies, "Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called" (I Cor. 7:20). It would be both foolish and wicked to try to break up that which is now a Christian home because of sin committed in the days before conversion.

29. I am told an engagement is as sacred as actual marriage and that if once engaged one is bound for life to the other person. Is this so?

Among the Jews a betrothal was considered virtually as sacred as marriage and yet even the latter could be easily annulled. But the Word of God nowhere tells us that an engagement is inviolable. It is a promise to marry, but is always contingent on satisfactory relations between the contracting parties. Not until actually married have they entered into what should be an inviolable compact. However, jilting is a shameful thing. An engagement can be honorably dissolved only by consent of both parties. But where either feels that he or she would make a grave mistake by marriage to the other, there should be a frank acknowledgment of the fact and a release should be sought.

30. Must the innocent party involved in a divorce have concrete evidence, substantiated by witnesses, or would circumstantial evidence be sufficient to justify the innocent party to be married again on Scriptural grounds?

Certainly there should be positive evidence that the other party has actually been guilty of violating his or her marriage vows. A Christian should never seek to so press things in a matter of this kind as to rush ahead of the Word of God. It is very easy to build up a case on suspicion that may be absolutely without foundation. In regard to this matter, as to all others, the Biblical principle should be kept in mind, "In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established."

31. To what was Christ referring in His answer to the Pharisees regarding divorce when He said it was not so in the beginning? (See Matthew 19:8.) Did He mean to imply there were no divorces?

He was directing the attention of His hearers to the fact that in the beginning, God Himself, when He instituted marriage, gave one woman to one man, and that for life. The Jewish law brought in the principle of divorce because of the hardness of men's hearts, but now in the dispensation of grace the original principle stands. Of course, where one has been unfaithful to his marriage vows, as indicated above, he himself has nullified the marriage, but this does not alter the fact that in the divine plan marriage was intended to be for life.

32. In Ephesicms 2:8 what is "the gift of God"?

In this verse "the gift of God" refers, of course, to the entire work of salvation, including faith. Faith is the gift of God in this sense: "Faith cometh by hearing" (Rom. 10:17), or literally, "Faith cometh by a report and the report by the Word of God." That is, as God's Word is heard or read attentively, faith springs up in the soul through divine energy.

33. Is remarriage after divorce permissible under any circumstances in the Christian dispensation?

Our Lord's words in Matthew 19:9 ought to make it perfectly clear that there is one cause for which people may be divorced, leaving the innocent party free to marry again. That cause completely destroys the marriage tie. This has been recognized by Christian teachers through the centuries as the one valid ground for divorce and remarriage. Many also believe that I Cor. 7:15 indicates that willful desertion is a complete annulment of the marriage tie.

34. I have read several questions and answers in regard to divorce and remarriage, but still I am not satisfied.

The Word of God says very distinctly, "A woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth" (Rom. 7:2). How, then, can you say that the innocent party in the case of a divorce for immorality is free before God to marry again while the other partner lives?

Matthew 19:9 is absolutely clear as to the proposition stated in the last part of the question. The Lord would not have put in the exception there mentioned if He did not mean exactly what the passage says. There would be no sense to the exception if every one who put away his wife and married another committed adultery. On the other hand, the other passage quoted simply states a general principle. It always remains true that a "woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as [her husband]

liveth." But a man who has been divorced for immorality is no longer her husband. Therefore she has no husband living and she is not bound to him. Those who teach otherwise are seeking to put a yoke upon many an innocent person, which the Word of God nowhere sanctions, and they are endeavoring to bring condemnation upon those whom God's Word justifies.

35. Please explain Romans 7:1-3 in the light of grace. Does not Paul say that grace establishes the law? Has the law of Romans 7:1-3 been nullified by grace?

In the passage in question the apostle is not referring to the law of Moses at all, but to the law of the land. A woman given in marriage is bound by the law to her husband so long as her husband lives. This principle, of course, always abides. If he whom she took as a husband ceases to be that, then conditions are different, but the apostle does not have this in mind in Romans 7. He speaks of the normal situation.

The only instruction we have as to divorce with the privilege of remarriage on the part of the innocent person is in the fifth and nineteenth chapters of Matthew, where our Lord Himself is the speaker.

36. Is it permissible for a man who has been twice married, the first wife having been divorced because of immorality before he was converted, to hold office as a deacon?

Deacons are to be the husbands of one wife. That is, the deacon must not be a polygamist. But in such a case as you mention, the relationship to the first wife has been dissolved both legally and Scripturally, and the man is qualified for the office of a deacon if the life otherwise is right. Read Matthew 19.

37. Why was polygamy right in Old Testament times?

The polygamy of the Old Testament was always contrary to the mind of God. It was simply an evidence of man's selfishness and self-will. The Lord Jesus said, "Have ye not read, that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife; and the two shall become one flesh?" (Matt. 19:4-5, R.V.). Notice it is not "cleave to his wives," but "to his wife." It was the hardness of men's hearts that led to polygamy.

38. What is the Biblical teaching of James 5:13-16?

This passage is not to be confounded in any way with what is commonly called "extreme unction" or anything of that kind. It was all unofficial. The elders were to be called in to pray with the sick one, anointing him with oil in the Name of the Lord, and the promise was that the prayer of faith (not the anointing) should save the sick, or, as the Greek has it, "relieve the exhausted one." There is no reason why anyone should not act on this today, but, on the other hand, it is not a direct command but rather a permission. For instance, who would be absolutely certain that he could qualify as an elder of the Church, not simply an elder of a denominational group? In the beginning the Church was one.

39. Is the phrase "forgive us ... as we forgive/' legal ground, or do you take it to be the same forgiveness as that spoken of in I John 1:9?

I understand the forgiveness of the so-called Lord's Prayer to be virtually the same as I John 1:9, if you are applying I John 1:9 to the believer. Of course, the principle there is true of all men, saved or unsaved. It is only when people come to God confessing their guilt that they find forgiveness.

40. Do you believe that the so-called "Lord's Prayer" is a prayer for us to repeat word for word, or that He gave it as a pattern?

I do not understand that the Lord meant that we were to use the prayer word for word, but rather that it was a model as to how we should present our petitions to God. We never read of its being used liturgically in the book of Acts and it is never referred to in the epistles, but, of course, every petition in it is one that we may well use. It has its place particularly in connection with the disciples before the Cross rather than after.

41. How do you interpret II Peter 2:20-22 in the light of John 10:28,29?

Peter is speaking to false professors. Throughout the entire chapter he is warning the saints against these evil teachers who have made a profession of Christianity but have turned from the holy commandment delivered unto them and have gone back into lives of sin and uncleanness. There are many such in the professing Church, but they have never been regenerated. Notice that the dog was still a dog and the sow was still a sow. In John 10:28 and 29 our Lord is speaking to His sheep who are different indeed from the Devil's washed sows and snarling dogs. It is one thing to know the way of righteousness intellectually. It is another thing to have received a new and divine nature.

42. How did the man get in without a wedding garment? If that represents the Church, an unsaved person often gets in; if it represents the kingdom of God, that would be impossible.

The supper of Matthew 22 is the great Gospel Feast and the guests are those who presumably have accepted the invitation. You will notice that in verse 2 it is called a parable of the kingdom of heaven. The kingdom of heaven is the entire sphere of profession during this present age, as set forth clearly in Matthew 13:41: "The Son of man shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity." False professors will then be eliminated, but till that day, to use another figure, the tares and the wheat will grow together.

43. I have been told that lob, Shem. Melchizedek and Cheops, the builder of the Great Pyramid, are one and the same person. Is there any Scripture passage that proves this?

There is not. This was one of the weird theories of Dr. E. W. BuUinger, but is built on a wild system of reasoning absolutely unsupported by Scripture.

44. Who was Melchizedek?

Melchizedek. There is not the slightest intimation in Scripture that he was a supernatural creature as some have vainly imagined. He was the King of Salem and a priest of the Most High God who clung to the Noahic revelation and had not departed into idolatry. The fact that he appears on the pages of Holy Scripture without genealogy makes him typically like the Son of God.

45. An evangelist has come to our town who preached that "the atonement was for healing the body as well as for salvation." Is this Scriptural?

It certainly is not the teaching of the Word of God except in the sense that the atonement was, of course, for the redemption of the body as well as the redemption of the soul, but all who believe in our Lord Jesus Christ have already been redeemed by His precious blood as far as their salvation is concerned. We wait for the redemption of the body which is to take place at the Second Coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The passage on which faith healing propagandists generally rest their belief is Matthew 8:16,17: "When the even was come, they brought unto him many that were possessed with devils:

and he cast out the spirits with his word, and healed all that were sick: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses." This, however, does not teach that Christ's atonement was for sickness as well as for sin. It has no reference whatever to the work of the Cross. It tells of His gracious ministry as He went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed of the Devil. Whenever He healed a person He bore in His deep sympathies all that the afflicted one endured. When the poor woman touched the hem of His garment, He perceived that "virtue had gone out of him" (Mark 5:30). It cost Him something to heal the sick. It is absurd to apply this to the work of the Cross. By that wondrous work He has put away forever the sins of all who believe on Him.

Therefore judgment can never reach them. If by the same work He had put away their sicknesses no believer would ever suffer pain or physical death.

The amazing thing is that men continue to proclaim the false doctrine of the present redemption of the body when they themselves daily give evidences of physical infirmity; and eventually they all die of sickness or accident. But thousands follow such teachers in fullest confidence, never realizing the fact that both Scripture and experience contradict the entire system.

46. What is Bullingerism and do you consider it a safe system of Bible teaching?

Dr. E. W. Bullinger, whose name has been linked with certain extreme dispensational views, was a Church of England clergyman who died a few years ago. He was a voluminous writer and particularly in his earlier years kept very close to Scriptural teaching, but as the years went on he developed a system which has done incalculable mischief.

Ignoring our Lord's words to Israel, in Matthew 23:38, "Your house is left unto you desolate" (thus setting aside Israel for the time being), Dr. Bullinger taught that the entire book of Acts was God's final call • to Israel and that the churches there spoken of were simply kingdom assemblies, but that the Church, the body of Christ, did not come into existence until Paul's Roman imprisonment.

Failing to see that in the Acts God was simply calling out, first from the Jews and then from the Gentiles, a people who together constituted the body of Christ, Dr. Bullinger became hopelessly confused and confusing. His system virtually involves the rejection of all the general epistles and all of Paul's epistles except those that were written in prison, taking it for granted that these latter superseded for the Church all other Scripture. Because these latter epistles made no mention in so many words of baptism with water nor of the Lord's Supper, Bullingerism rejects both these hallowed ordinances as having no place in the Church Age. Dr. Bullinger apparently failed to realize that the writings of the Apostle Peter were both later than the last of those by Paul, as evidenced by the fact that Peter speaks of Paul's letter to the Hebrews and of "all his epistles" as having already gone into circulation when Peter wrote his second letter. The writings of the Apostle John also were all written nearly thirty years after Paul's martyrdom.

In his later years, Dr. Bullinger taught "soul sleeping" and it is a noteworthy fact that many of his followers in Great Britain have become annihilationists, while on the other hand, many in America who have accepted him as their teacher have become restorationists, even going so far as to teach the final salvation of the Devil and all fallen angels.

While there is much that is good in Dr. Bullinger's books, we warn all, who desire to profit by their reading, against them. It may be confidently said concerning them that whatever they contain that is true is not new, but may be found in much clearer and better presentation in many other writings; while on the other hand, what is new is not true but calculated to deceive the unwary and turn people aside from the simplicity that is in Christ.

47. In I Corinthians 14 we read of "tongues" and in chapter 11, of "the Lord's Supper." Since tongues are now entirely done away, why do you still observe the Lord's Supper?

I fail to understand the mental or spiritual attitude of the questioner. Who said tongues were entirely done away?

Of the gifts we read in I Corinthians 12:11 that the Holy Spirit divides "to every man severally as he will." Evidently He has not "willed" to give certain of the miraculous gifts for many centuries, but there is no definite statement as to their actually being done away. He is sovereignly free to bestow any of them at any time if He chooses to do so. As to the Lord's Supper, we are told, "As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come." He has not yet returned. In love to Him, we delight thus to remember Him and to show His death as we await His return. It is not legal to do this. It is the same kind of affection that leads a child to delight to look upon the likeness of a deceased parent. We love the picture because we hold in our affections the memory of the one who has gone. People who would do away with the precious Christian ordinances on the plea of exalting grace little understand the effects of grace in the soul.

48. What proof have you that the Lord's Supper is a church ordinance to be observed by the body of Christ in the present dispensation?

The question itself betrays the bias of the writer. The body of Christ as such does not observe any ordinances— nor does it ever meet in any place on earth, for it consists of all believers from Pentecost to the Rapture. The Lord's Supper is for the local church "in every place." "Till he come" (I Cor.

11:26) sets the time when this ordinance will no longer be needed or observed.

49. What books are left out of the Bible?

No book is left out of our Bible that ever belonged to it. The Bible we have is the Bible the Church of God has had for nineteen hundred years. The Roman Catholic Church at the Council of Trent about the time of the Protestant Reformation, added the books of Apocrypha to the Bible as though they were inspired Scripture, but they were never so considered by the earlier Church and have no rightful place with the other books.

50. What authority do Roman Catholics have for saying that the books of the Maccabees were cut from the Bible by the Protestants?

None whatever. Until the Council of Trent in the sixteenth century declared the books of the Apocrypha, including the Maccabees, to be a part of inspired Scripture, they were not so regarded by the Church generally. The books of the Old and New Testaments are the only books authoritatively acknowledged by the Church throughout the Christian centuries. The Apocrypha consists of books that were not written in the original Hebrew or connected with the Old Testament.

51. What is the teaching of Scripture as to the observing of Lent?

I take it that the question of observing Lent is entirely an individual matter. The Word of God does not command it. If people think it helpful spiritually, there is nothing against it. However, we must be careful not to put ordinances or extra-Scriptural ritual on a level with the divine Word. Consider carefully Galatians 4:9,10.

52. Why do Roman Catholics insist on the authority of church tradition?

They maintain that oral traditions have come down from apostolic days, and have exalted these to the level of the Bible. In some instances they even put tradition above the Bible, as the Jews did in the days when our Lord was here on earth. It is for them to say why they do this.

53. Where in the Bible do we read of prayer to saints?

There is no place in the Bible where prayer is made to a saint, though in Job 5:1, one of Job's friends asks the question: "To which of the saints wilt thou turn?"

54. I notice that the Seventh-Day Adventists teach that the scapegoat in Leviticus 16 represents the Devil, who, they say, is eventually to be punished for all the sin that he has brought into the world. Is this correct?

In Leviticus 16:5 we read that Aaron is to take the "two kids of the goats for a sin offering." In verse 10 we are told that one of these is the scapegoat, or the goat of departure.

These two goats simply represent two aspects of Christ's work. The goat whose blood was carried into the Sanctuary for sin represents the great truth of propitiation. The scapegoat over whose head the sins of the people were confessed gives us the truth of substitution. It is almost blasphemous to speak of the scapegoat as representing Satan. Carried to its logical conclusion, this view would make Satan the great sin offering — a thought abhorrent to every spiritual mind.

55. In Revelation 2:20, what is meant by eating things sacrificed to idols?

Of course, every one of these letters was written to actual assemblies, and the conditions depicted in them prevailed literally at that time. The church at Thyatira, for instance, was evidently tolerating a woman who, as a prophetess, taught that it was perfectly right and proper to participate in idol feasts and commit fornication in honor of deity. These were common sins in pagan lands. This the Apostle John rebukes. But if you look at the letter figuratively, then, of course, eating things sacrificed to idols pictures having fellowship with that which is not of God, or the union of the Church and the world.

56. Since the soul is the seat of the emotions, will and intellect do you believe an animal has a soul?

Genesis 1:21 says, according to the original Hebrew, "God created great whales and every creature wherein is a living soul." Animals, therefore, consist of body and soul, the soul being the seat of emotion and all animal instincts. But in the case of the animal, the soul dies with the body. In the case of man, this is not true. Jesus says, "Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul" (Matt. 10:28). With man the soul and spirit are inseparable, both in life and in death. After death, man is sometimes spoken of as a spirit, as for instance, we read in Hebrews 12:23, "The spirits of just men made perfect." He is also spoken of as a soul, as we read in Revelation 6:9: "I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain," etc.

57. Are we to understand that the persons spoken of in Hebrews 6, who fall away and cannot be renewed again to repentance, are people who were once born again, but have lost their salvation?

This is an ever recurring question. It would be well for persons troubled about it to make a thoroughly consistent study of the entire Epistle to the Hebrews. The sixth chapter cannot be understood apart from the rest of the book. Briefly, however, we may say that beyond all question those there referred to are apostate professors, persons who had accepted Christianity in place of Judaism, but afterwards turned away from the new revelation, and went back to the former system.

They were apostates who had never been regenerated, as verse 9 clearly shows. One could have all those things mentioned in verses 4 and 5 without having salvation. No one who has ever been born again can ever become unborn.

Eternal life would not be eternal if it were forfeitable.

58. Is salvation positional only? Is there not something more?

When a man is saved, two things take place. There is a work done in him and a work done for him. The work done in him is regeneration. He becomes a new creature in Christ Jesus, with new desires, new hopes, new ambitions, and, thank God, with new hatreds. He hates the old things in which he used to live and he loves the things of God. At the same time that he is regenerated he is also justified. This latter is something altogether outside himself. It is God's declaration that He now counts him righteous through the finished work of Christ.

59. Is it not legal to insist on tithing in this dispensation of the grace of God? Where do we get any command to tithe in the epistles, which we all recognize to be written for the Church?

Tithing was in force before the law was given.

Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek and Scripture commends him for it. In the present dispensation the command is given very definitely: "Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him" (I Cor.

16:2). This has particular reference to sustaining the work of the Lord and ministering to the needy.

"As God hath prospered him" suggests some kind of standard and that standard is evidently to begin with the tithe, for we read in Romans 8:4, "that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." The righteousness of the law demands the giving of the tithe. Therefore, a consistent Christian cannot fulfill that righteousness by giving less than the tithe, but, as God enables, will gladly give more under grace than he would be obliged to give if he were a Jew living under law.

60. Can I do anything at all to help effect my own salvation? Is not salvation altogether of God?

I am not quite sure that I understand your question.

If you are wondering if it is possible for you to do anything toward effecting your own salvation in the sense of making any kind of satisfaction for your own sins, then, of course, the answer is "No." As an old hymn puts it:

All the doing has been done,

As God has clearly shown, When by the offering of His Son His purpose He made known.

That work is finished. It is complete, and on the basis of it God offers salvation to every poor sinner who is ready to receive it.

But if you mean, Is it possible to do anything in the sense of accepting or rejecting the message? of course, then one needs to remember that "God . . . commandeth all men every where to repent" (Acts 17:30), and the answer to the Philippian jailer's question, "What must I do to be saved?" is "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved" (Acts 16:30-31). Just as it is possible to refuse to repent and to refuse to believe, so it is possible to obey the Gospel, as Scripture puts it, by owning one's sin and trusting the Saviour.

61. I have this question regarding John 19:34. If the blood cleanses, what does the water represent?

Cleansing by blood is judicial and has to do with the purging of our consciences before God. Cleansing by water is practical and has to do with the washing of water by the Word of God. "Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word" (Eph. 5:25, 26). In the redemptive work of our Lord Jesus we have provision for both aspects of cleansing.

62. What do the words "water" and "Spirit" mean in John 3:5?

New birth is by water and the Spirit. The water is a picture of the Word. In Psalm 119:9 we read: "Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word." In Ephesians 5:26, we read of "the washing of water by the word." Jesus said to His disciples, "Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you" (John 15:3). The Apostle Paul tells us we are born again by the Word of God, and the Apostle James says, "Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth"

(James 1:18). But it is not the Word alone; it is the Word ministered to the soul in the power of the Holy Spirit. This produces the new birth.

63. Does "whosoever will may come" mean that anybody who wants to come to Christ can do this of himself, of his own free will?

"Whosoever" means whosoever. Only a biased theologian with an ax to grind could ever think that it meant only the elect. Moody was right when he said years ago: "The 'whosoever will's' are the elect: the 'whosoever won'ts' are the non-elect."

64. Will the heathen be damned or lost because they do not believe in Christ?

The first and second chapters of Romans make it perfectly clear that the heathen will be judged for their own sins, not for the rejection of a Saviour about whom they have never heard. Each one will be judged according to the light he has had.

65. John 3:16 says that "God so loved the world."

Does this mean the world as a whole or merely the elect?

John 3:16 is a universal offer of salvation to all men everywhere. God does not quibble; He says exactly what He means.

66. If salvation is absolutely by faith apart from works, why does the Scripture speak of judgment on those who do not obey the Gospel? (I Pet. 4:17; see also Col. 3:1 and 5 to 7). Evidently there is something more to the Gospel than believing.

To obey the Gospel is to believe the message that it brings. It is to take one's place as a lost sinner before God in repentance and to put his trust in the Saviour that the Gospel sets forth. The Gospel is not a list of rules and regulations, as was the law. It is a proclamation of free salvation for all who submit to Christ's claim.

67. I understand that you teach that repentance is a prerequisite to salvation, that is, that a man has to show a certain amount of sorrow for sin before God will cooperate with him and save him. Is this your position?

It certainly is not. In the first place, repentance is not mere penitence or sorrow for sin. Repentance is simply a man's recognition of his own true condition before God. No man would desire to come to the Saviour unless he realized his need of a Saviour. The realization of this need and the acknowledgment of it is, in the truest sense, the work of repentance. Thus men repent and through believing the Gospel are eternally saved. We who are saved, however, have done more repenting since we were converted than we did before.

68. In regard to the doctrine of eternal security, a brother told me of a man who at one time labored in a very marvelous way with him as a Christian and today denies all that he ever taught and believed, and goes so far as to denounce the Lord Jesus Christ. He led souls to Christ, prayed with them and worked with them. How does this square with the teaching that a saved man can never be lost again?

Scripture tells us very plainly how to account for just such cases. They are apostates, not simply backsliders.

They were never born again. In Hebrews 6, after writing of such, the apostle adds, "But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation." The things referred to in the earlier part of the passage might all be true of a man and yet he might not have salvation at all. If this is not plain, consult my book on The Epistle to the Hebrews where I have discussed this in detail. The Apostle John explains the state of such people in his first epistle, chapter 2, verse 19:

"They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all [altogether] of us."

As to the apparent blessing that may have accompanied their ministry before they became apostates, our Lord Himself indicates that that is not a proof of salvation, when He says in Matthew 7:22, "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and . . . done many mighty works?" and He will say unto them, "I never knew you."

Notice He does not say, "I used to know you but I do not know you now." The statement is positive that He never knew them.

Their profession was false all the time. Of those who are really saved, He says, "My sheep hear my voice and I know them, and they follow me," etc. (John 10:27).

69. I understand that you teach the eternal security of all believers. I had a very bitter experience with a minister who teaches this doctrine. I know him to be a very wicked man and yet he says because he was once saved he will always be saved. Do you think this is in accordance with the teaching of Bible holiness?

No, indeed, we do not think anything of the kind.

Any wicked man who talks about being once saved and therefore always saved is either an out and out hypocrite or is deceived by the Devil. Saved people love holiness and hate sin.

Jesus says, "My sheep hear my voice and . . . they follow me." It is of these He says, "I give unto them eternal life and they shall never perish" (John 10:27-28). May I suggest that readers troubled on this question secure a copy of my booklet The Eternal Security of the Believer.

70. After reading your book "The Eternal Security of the Believer" I was led into a discussion of John 15:6, "If a man abide not in me," etc., and was unable to harmonize it with John 10:27, 28. Can you remove this difficulty?

I think if you will carefully consider the meaning of the vine in both the Old and New Testaments, your difficulty will be removed. If you will look at the Eightieth Psalm, the fifth chapter of Isaiah and the tenth chapter of Hosea, together with many other passages which you might look up in a concordance, you will see that the vine represented the nation of Israel, which God intended to be a testimony for Himself in the world; but instead of bearing fruit for God they brought dishonor upon His Name, and so He has set Israel aside. In place of Israel, our Lord Jesus says, "I am the true vine," and He links with Himself all who profess faith in His Name as branches in that vine. This is the professing Church, which has taken the place of Israel as a testimony for God in the world.

But you need to remember that there are no natural branches in the living vine. All have to be grafted in. There are many who profess to be Christians and are in that sense connected with the vine, but, if I may use a horticultural term, the graft has never struck; that is, there is no real faith. Therefore they do not abide in the vine. These are non-fruitbearing professors who are eventually destroyed in judgment. All genuine Christians bear fruit in some measure. It is important, however, to remember that the theme of John 15 is distinctly fruitbearing, not life; but, of course, fruit-bearing depends upon life.

71. What is the meaning of this expression in the fifth chapter of Matthew: "Blessed are the poor in spirit, for their's is the kingdom of heaven"? This seems to pronounce a blessing on poverty of spirit when we are admonished to be filled with the Spirit.

I think you will get the point of our Lord's words "Blessed are the poor in spirit" if for a moment you will allow me to change the figure. Suppose it read "Blessed are the poor in purse" — what then would be the meaning? Surely that blessing was for those who have no financial assets. Now, then, who are the poor in spirit? They are those who acknowledge before God in deepest repentance that they have no spiritual assets whatever, on the basis of which they can claim anything from God. Mary sang, "He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away" (Luke 1:53). As long as man is rich in his own estimation, rich in spirit, he can claim nothing from God; but when he owns that he is a poverty-stricken sinner, then there is a place for him in the kingdom of heaven. God gives His Spirit to those who are themselves poor in spirit.

72. Does God know what I will do?

The Scriptures clearly teach that God is omniscient.

That is, God has all knowledge. Past, present, and future are all one to Him. The prophetical element in Scripture makes this perfectly plain. He foretold through a prophet the birth and behavior of King Josiah hundreds of years before he was born, and of King Cyrus, the Persian, long before he appeared upon the scene. The following passages from the book of the Prophet Isaiah affirm God's foreknowledge: 41:21-23; 42:8-9; 44:7; 46:9-10. To this, many more passages might be added. In Psalm 73:11 it is the wicked who in their unbelief say, "How doth God know? and is there knowledge in the most High?" I may add that God's foreknowledge of what I will do in nowise interferes with my free will. God knew that the people of Israel would reject the Lord Jesus Christ and that Judas would betray Him. Nevertheless, both Israel and Judas acted in free will. I am responsible for all my actions, though God sees the end from the beginning.

73. What is involved in the expression "cleans-eth from all sin" in I John 1:7? Is the blood constantly cleansing?

While the tense is in the present continuous, this does not mean that the blood of Christ is constantly cleansing or washing the soul, but teaches that because it ever abides before God upon the Mercy Seat, as the blood of the sin offering, the believer is ever seen as cleansed. Our failures do not affect the cleansing efficacy of that atoning blood. The propitiatory sacrifice of Christ has availed for all our sins from the cradle to the grave; the moment we believe, it cleanses fully and completely in the sight of God.

This is true of all who walk in the light. It does not say, "If we walk according to the light," which would make our cleansing dependent upon constant abiding and would vitiate the whole Gospel of grace. But we read, "If we walk in the light." That is, if we have come out of the darkness of nature into the light of God's presence. It is where we walk, not how. All believers are in the light; all unbelievers are in the darkness. "Ye were sometimes darkness, now are ye light in the Lord" (Eph. 5:8).

That light, while it shows up all our sinfulness, also reveals the blood that cleanses. The blood is in the very place from which the light shines: in the holiest, on the Mercy Seat. For practical cleansing we need "the washing of water by the word" (Eph.

5:26). That is, the Word of God has to be applied continuously to our consciences in the power of the Holy Spirit, that thus we may be kept from the defiling influence of the world, the flesh and the Devil.

74. I believe that there were many before our Lord rose from the dead who were born again, saved by their faith in Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit of course was not yet given.

But now, the moment a person gets the heart belief in Jesus Christ he gets the Holy Ghost. I do not believe that Cornelius, of whom we read in Acts 10, was born into the family of God until Peter gave him the Word of God. Some teach that when Cornelius was visited by the angel (Acts 10:22) he was born again. I say that if that was the case, there was no reason for God's sending Peter to him. Am I correct?

In all dispensations men have been quickened or born again when they believed the Word of God, which is the incorruptible seed. But new birth is not the same thing as salvation in the New Testament sense. Cornelius was undoubtedly quickened before Peter went to him giving words whereby he should be saved, that is, brought into the full New Testament knowledge of salvation. Before this his prayers and alms had come up for a memorial before God. "They that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. 8:8). Therefore the prayers and alms of Cornelius were evidently the fruit of a regenerated soul.

75. Why are you so sure that when a person is saved he is saved for all time and will not be lost again? Was not Saul one who was saved and yet died outside of God?

We are sure that a man once saved is saved forever because the Word of God tells us that "he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ"

(Phil. 1:6). Our Lord Jesus declared emphatically, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." If one soul were ever lost who had at one time been saved, then he would be plucked out of the hands of the Father and the Son. It is questionable if King Saul was ever a child of God. He was a man after the flesh in whom were some splendid qualities, and who at one time gave great promise, but he was never really surrendered to God.

76. What do you understand the "porter" to be in John 10:3?

I understand the porter in John 10 to be distinctly John the Baptist, but if one views the word spiritually he might say that the Holy Spirit was the porter. Actually, however, it was through baptism that the Lord Jesus took His place among the remnant in Israel.

77. Please explain James 2:17. Does this noi seem to contradict Romans 4:1-6?

There is no contradiction whatsoever between what the Spirit of God inspired the Apostle Paul to write in the letter to the Romans and that which He also inspired James to write in the epistle that bears his name. The difference is this:

in Romans we are told how a guilty sinner is justified by faith alone before God, whereas in James we are shown how the professed believer is justified by works before man. If this distinction is kept in view there will be no difficulty about the two passages.

78. What is the meaning of John 20:23? Are there certain persons to whom the Lord gave power to forgive or retain sins as taught by the Roman Catholic Church?

The commission that our Lord gave to His disciples on that occasion is that under which we all labor to the present time. He does not say a word about any special priestly company, for, of course, all believers are priests in the New Testament dispensation, and all believers have the Holy Spirit, and it is given to all of us in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ to proclaim remission of sins to men who believe in Him, and to solemnly assure them that their sins remain upon them if they refuse to trust in Him. It is well to remember that the Apostle Peter was among those to whom the Lord was speaking that day in the upper room, and when he himself declares remission of sins to Cornelius and his Household, he does it in the following words: "To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins" (Acts 10:43). Notice there is not a word of confession to a priest, but a simple declaration that all their sins would be remitted the moment they believed in Jesus. This was Peter's understanding of our Lord's words and settles the matter for every believer.

79. What is the meaning of Hebrews 9:22: "Without shedding of blood is no remission"? I am told this was a Jewish idea but that Jesus saves by His life.

Leviticus 17:11 says, "For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul." The life is in the blood but blood shed is life given up. So Jesus said, "This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins"

(Matt. 26:28). Hence by His blood is remission to be obtained.

80. Is it true that all men are in Christ since the work of the Cross?

It is not. Paul speaks of some of his Christian kinsmen and says, "Who also were in Christ before me" (Rom.

16:7). "In Christ" is union and it is by life and the Spirit. "If any man be in Christ it is a new creation" (II Cor. 5:17, literal translation).

81. What is the Scriptural background for predestination? Would you say that God in His infinite wisdom chose those who would be Christ's "before the foundation of the world" and that He ordained it that they would be convicted by His Spirit of sin and "allowed" to take Christ as their Saviour and that none others can know Him and confess Him? My strength for this belief is mainly Romans 9.

The question you ask is one which, as you know, has perplexed the minds of devout Christians throughout the centuries. There are two things that are absolutely clear in Scripture — one is that God by His foreknowledge has predestinated all who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ "to be conformed to the image of his Son" (Romans 8:29).

Predestination is never to heaven, nor yet to hell; but always to special privilege in and with Christ. All who believe in Him were chosen in Christ "before the foundation of the world." This is the plain teaching of Romans 8 and Ephesians 1.

On the other hand, it is just as clear from Scripture that God is not willing that any should perish but that He desires that all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.

Therefore, the Gospel preacher can declare without any kind of mental reservation the blessed fact that whosoever will, may take the water of life freely (Rev. 22:17). This is not at all a question of being allowed to take Christ as Saviour. It is an earnest entreaty to do so. No man will ever be lost because God would not allow Him to be saved. Jesus said, "Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life" (John 5:40).

There has been a great deal of idle speculation regarding some of the strong statements in Romans 9; but the mistake results from dragging heaven and hell into that chapter, where properly speaking the apostle is not dealing with eternal issues, save in the most incidental way. He is speaking of special privilege here on earth. For instance, when we read, "The children being not yet born, nor having done any good or evil ... it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger,"

this has nothing whatever to do with salvation or reprobation.

It is simply the plain statement that God has chosen Jacob to be the father of the Israelites and thus to occupy a superior position to Esau, who was destined to become the father of the Edomites.

I have discussed this fully in my comments on this chapter in Lectures on the Epistle to the Romans.

82. Please explain Romans 14:15-20 and I Corinthians 8:11. If we give offense to a brother unknowingly, how can we be charged with destroying that brother?

The passages in question are intended to inculcate the important principle of consideration for the weak consciences of others. There are many things instructed believers are free to do from which others whose consciences are still legal would shrink, fearing they might thereby incur the judgment of God. Christian charity would lead us to be very careful in regard to these who so readily stumble. If they see us do something which seems to them to be wrong and yet they are emboldened by our example to do the same, they do not act in faith, and "whatsoever is not of faith is sin," for "he that doubteth is condemned if he eat" (Rom. 14:23). This does not mean, of course, that he will be eternally damned. This latter word is an unfortunate translation here. But he is condemned in his own conscience, and so his spiritual experience is hurt or destroyed. Of course, the destruction has no reference to the loss of the soul. It is rather the destruction of experience and testimony. Let us seek to enlighten our weak brethren through the Word and not attempt to stampede them into a liberty which they do not yet understand.

83. If it be true that Christ gave Himself a ransom for all, as the Bible says, to whom was the ransom paid?

Scripture itself says that Christ "gave himself a ransom for all" (I Tim 2:6), and whatever Scripture says is absolutely true. The ransom was paid not to the Devil, as some have suggested, but to the divine justice. It was necessary that God's holiness and righteousness should be vindicated, and He has Himself done this by providing the ransom. The words in Job 33:24, "Deliver him from going down to the pit: I have found a ransom," are in accord with the universal testimony of the Word of God.

Human illustrations are always inadequate to picture fully divine truth, but we can at least understand the principle if we think of a just judge sentencing the offender to the full penalty of the outraged law, and then bearing that penalty himself.

This our God has done in giving His blessed Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

84. In Jude 4 we read of ungodly men who were before of old ordained to this condemnation. If these men were ordained of God to be ungodly how could they be held responsible and does not this seem to imply unrighteousness with God?

You are misreading the passage. They were not ordained to be ungodly but being ungodly they were ordained to condemnation, which is a very different thing and fully in accord with divine righteousness.

85. Were the instructions to Hosea, found in chapter 1 of this prophecy, to be literally carried out? Would a righteous God command anyone to do wickedly?

Of course the only reply to the second question is "No." But the fact that it is coupled with the inquiry regarding Hosea's instructions would seem to imply that the writer imagines that Hosea was told to do something which was contrary to righteousness. This evidently arises from a misunderstanding of the entire passage.

Hosea was asked of God to go into the slave market and there to purchase or redeem a poor outcast slave who was herself a daughter of infamy and had never known anything but unholy relations. Hosea was to take her as his own wife and love her in spite of her former defilement. In doing this he was but illustrating what Jehovah had done for Israel. While of course such a relationship might naturally be considered a most abhorrent one, there was nothing wicked or unrighteous in it.

It was the very opposite. It was a triumph of grace. And we need to remember that perhaps after all, Hosea's affections were concerned in the matter, for there have been many instances where even a denied and immoral woman has won the heart of a good man. If the entire story is seen in its spiritual application, however, it becomes one of the most touching pictures we have in all Scripture of the grace of God to lost sinners.

86. Did our Lord Jesus actually bear punishment for the sins of all men or believers only?

Christ died for all. It was not a question of an exact amount of punishment for so many sins but because He Himself was the eternal Son of God become flesh He offered an infinite sacrifice, thus making an avail- able propitiation for all men. But God views Him only as the actual Substitute for those who put their trust in Him.

87. Does Paul in Romans 8 teach a second work of grace or the yielding of our wills?

There is no such doctrine in Scripture as "the second work of grace," though there is often in the lives of believers what looks like a second or distinct work. That is, one who has been converted for some time, but has not known very much of real subjection to the Lord, undoubtedly enters into a life of wonderful blessing when he obeys the injunction to present his body a living sacrifice unto God, and to yield himself unto Christ as alive from the dead. This is the teaching of Romans 6 and Romans 12. In chapter 8 you have the great outstanding truth of the indwelling Spirit of God controlling the yielded believer so that his life becomes triumphant and fruitful.

88. What is the difference between the fruit of the Spirit and the fruits of righteousness?

The expression "fruit of the Spirit" refers, of course, to the graces manifested in the lives of those who are controlled by the Holy Spirit of God, love, joy, peace, etc., as set forth in Galatians 5:22-23, whereas the fruits of righteousness refer rather to what is subjective in one's own soul, the quiet, restful enjoyment of Christ which results from a righteous life in the fear of God. When chastening is accepted as from the Lord and the soul is exercised by it, there is growth in grace and piety. These things are the peaceable fruits of righteousness.

89. Is there any Scriptural basis for believing in a "limited atonement"?

I do not find anything in Scripture that would suggest the term "limited atonement." In fact, I think such a term puts unintentional dishonor upon the infinite value of the work of Christ. It is a great mistake to speak and write as though Christ Jesus endured so much suffering for so much sin and therefore that atonement was made only for the sins of the elect. There is such infinite value in His work that it would avail for all the sons of Adam's race to the end of time if they would but turn to God in repentance; and if all the sinners who ever lived in this world had all thus repented and turned to God, there would still be untouched riches of grace upon which a thousand such worlds as this could draw. In Hebrews 2:9 we read, "He . . . should taste death for every man," and there are many Scripture passages that show the unlimited character of His work.

90. What would you consider the most effective method of promoting a spirit of revival in the local field?

Get a few like-minded to meet for prayer. Seek to judge oneself in the light of the Word, thus leading to individual revival. Give the Word of God its place in the life. Preach the Word privately and publicly. Seek the lost. Do not wait for people to come to some meeting. Go after them and endeavor to win them for Christ where they are.

91. Is there any difference between the book of life and the Tomb's book of life?

Yes, the book of life is the book of the living. It is the record, too, of profession. From this book names may be blotted out. The Lamb's book of life is the record of the eternal purpose of God. Names inscribed there are written from the foundation of the world. In other words, one book speaks of responsibility, the other of pure grace.

92. In reading your "Holiness—the False and the True," which makes the matter plain, and is altogether satisfactory, I came across, nevertheless, a phrase on page 96 which reads as follows: "While Christ was here the Spirit was present in Him, but He did not then indwell believers."

I am aware that this is the position accepted as orthodox, and one which I also maintained until further study convinced me that we are incorrect in making that statement. May I suggest that all saints of both the former and the present age have been saved exactly alike, but through believing whatever revelation God has given up to that time, while in this age we have the fullness of revelation in Christ Jesus. If this be so, then all saints since Adam have been regenerated, but were not organized into the body of Christ until after the Resurrection. But if they were regenerated, then they were surely indwelt by the Holy Spirit, for what other than this IS regeneration?

It is perfectly true that in all dispensations salvation has been on the basis of pure grace through the atoning work of our Lord Jesus Christ. There is no difference whatever as to the standing of saints before God from Adam to the end of the millennium. Of every one it will be said at last, "They have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb" (Rev. 7:14). But the work of the Holy Spirit is an altogether different thing. He sustains a relation to saints in this dispensation which He did not sustain in any previous one. Our Lord's words make this very clear when, in speaking of the coming of the Comforter, He says, "He dwelleth with you, and shall be in you" (John 14:17). In all past dispensations the Holy Spirit was ever with the people of God. In this dispensation, He dwells in them. His indwelling is not at all the same thing as regeneration. Regeneration is the impartation of a new nature by the activity of the Spirit and the Word in the believer. Following this, the Holy Spirit Himself as a divine Person, comes to indwell the Christian's body. There is as much difference between regeneration by the Spirit and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit as there is between building a house and moving into it. The Holy Spirit does not dwell in anyone until he is regenerated, but He does in this age take up His abode in every regenerated person. "If any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

93. Please explain I Corinthians 9:27. Was Paul not afraid of becoming a castaway? If so. how does this agree with "once saved, always saved"?

A "castaway" is really one disapproved. Paul was speaking of service and reward—not of soul-salvation. See the author's booklets entitled The Eternal Security of the Believer and Salvation and Reward.

94. Why do you preach from the epistles of Peter, when he was a Jewish apostle and ignorant of grace?

The ignorance is not in Peter but in those who teach such a strange theory. Peter's first epistle is one of grace throughout. See 1:2; 4:10; 5:10,12. Note specially the reason given for writing his epistle, in verse 12 of chapter 5:

"Testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand."

In the second epistle, see 1:2 and 3:18. Note also his endorsement of Paul's letters written earlier than his own (II Pet. 3:15-16).

95. Will you please explain Acts 21:23-25? What was the vow the four men had taken? How could Paul purify himself with them? What is the meaning of "be at charges with them"?

The passage refers to a compromise suggested by James in order to clear Paul of the charge of forsaking Moses, even though he did not put the Gentiles back under the law.

The believing Jews at Jerusalem had never been clearly delivered from the law and were still ignorantly carrying out its principles. It was customary in that day when a man had fulfilled the vow of a Nazarite (see Numbers 6), for some well- to-do friend to pay for the sacrifice which he would offer on the day he shaved his head as an indication of the completion of his Naza-riteship. There were four men apparently in the Christian company who had taken Nazarite vows. These vows were now expiring. James suggested that if Paul would purify himself according to the law and pay for the sacrifices for these men and accompany them to the Temple when they were offered, it would give him a good standing with the Jews.

Paul, in his intense love for Israel, would actually have done this had not God Himself intervened by permitting his arrest.

Think what it would have meant for him who wrote the Epistle to the Galatians to have participated in such a thing. In order that his testimony might not be nullified, God intervened to save him from that which the love of his heart for his people would have led him to do.

96. Was the law for the Jews and not for us. so that we need not try to keep it, or is the law to be a guide for the children of God?

The law is the standard of righteousness for all men in the flesh. Christians are not under law, but under grace, because they have a far higher standard, namely, Christ Himself, who is now our life.

97. In Romans 3:30 why is one justified "by" faith and the other "through" faith?

The passage might be translated as follows so as to bring out the distinction in the apostle's mind: "It is the one God who will justify the circumcision out of faith and the uncircumcision by means of faith." The Jews sought to be justified out of or on the principle of works, but the apostle shows that this would not avail. His justification must be out of or on the principle of faith. The Gentile made no such pretension, but he who had nothing good to commend him to God, either from a natural or ritualistic standpoint, is justified through or by means of faith alone.

98. Are we to pray to God for forgiveness of our sins, or have all the sins we have committed and are about to commit been forgiven already through the death of our Lord and Saviour?

There are three aspects of forgiveness of sins in the Word of God. Eternal forgiveness is the portion of all who trust the Lord Jesus Christ. Restorative forgiveness is granted to all Christians who have failed, when they confess their sins.

Governmental forgiveness is sometimes granted when we humbly walk with God, accepting without question the temporal results of sin. For instance, here is a man who has ruined his health by the use of liquor. When he comes to Christ he is eternally forgiven; yet in God's government he still reaps what he sowed so far as his body is concerned. But if he goes on quietly with God and does not allow the old appetite to control him in any way, the day may come when the Lord will graciously forgive in His government, so that the man will be restored to perfect health.

99. What is meant by "many are called, but few are chosen" (Matt. 22:14)?

When our Lord tells us that "many are called, but few are chosen," He means that while the call goes out to the multitude, only those are chosen who definitely accept Christ.

100. Who are the "other sheep" of John 10:16?

The phrase "other sheep" here refers to the Gentiles, that is, to ourselves. The Lord came to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. They were the sheep in the Jewish fold, but He is looking forward to what will take place after the Cross and He says, "Other sheep I have . . . them also I must bring." That is, the Word of God was to go among the Gentiles and bring many from them to a saving knowledge of Christ and thus Jew and Gentile were to be united in one flock.

101. Is there any sin that God will not forgive if we come to Him in repentance and faith? I was guilty of a terrible sin many years ago. I have confessed it to the Lord and try to believe I am forgiven, but I think of it day and night and do not have any peace. Do you think I have committed the unpardonable sin?

There is no unpardonable sin in this age of grace except the final rejection of the Lord Jesus Christ. If you are trusting in Him, you may rest assured that His precious blood cleanses from every sin. He bore all your sins in His own body on the tree, even the sin that comes continually to your mind.

Seek to rest on His Word. He says, "Their sins and iniquities will I remember no more" (Heb. 8:12; 10:17). Since He has forgotten, why should you continue to dwell upon this thing that has caused you so much unhappiness? Faith is taking God at His Word. Meet the adversary with what God has said and do not allow your peace to be disturbed.

102. Please explain Matthew 12:32. Why is it forgivable to speak against the Son of Man?

Our Lord does not mean, of course, that it is allowable to speak against the Son of Man, but that in His infinite grace He will forgive, if they repent, no matter what evil things people may have said about Him in their unrepentant state. But if they speak against the Holy Spirit, that is, in the sense, of course, of utterly rejecting His testimony, there can be no forgiveness, for it is only through the Spirit's testimony that the Son of Man is made known.

103. What Scripture is there to prove that children who die before they reach the age of accountability go to heaven, and when do children reach the age of accountability?

Has Isaiah 7:15-16 any reference to this?

Our Lord Jesus tells us distinctly in Matthew 18:14 that "it is not the will of your Father which is in heaven that one of these little ones should perish." Children before reaching the age of accountability cannot resist the will of God as men do who refuse His grace. Therefore, we may be certain that all the little ones who die go to be with Christ. They are not saved because of innocency, for they are by nature "children of wrath even as others" are. But the propitiatory work of Christ avails for them and God in His sovereignty quickens them into newness of life. We have no means of knowing the exact time when children become directly responsible. It is well to teach them from their earliest days that salvation is only through faith in Christ for all who are old enough to believe in Him. The passage to which you refer concerning our Lord (Isa. 7:15,16) definitely shows that there a is a time when children do not know how to choose be-(/ tween good and evil. fv A"i,)

104. Are we to understand from Paul's answer \ ;J/ to the Philippian Jailer, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts 16:31) that If the head of the house has faith in Christ the salvation of all the other members is guaranteed?

Not at all. While it is perfectly true that a passage like this should be an incentive to earnest prayer on behalf of the entire household, the meaning clearly is just as though it said "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and in the same manner thine house." That is, all may be saved by believing. Paul was emphasizing the fact that God desired to save not only the jailer, but that His love went out to the entire household. This is ever true and should be a great encouragement to all of us who are in family relationships. We should think not only of our own salvation but, remembering that the same mercy that has been extended to us is offered to the household, we should both pray and labor in faith for the salvation of all the rest.

105. Please explain election. How may I know if I am of the elect?

It is impossible for man's finite mind to grasp this great subject. Scripture plainly teaches election based upon God's foreknowledge. It is just as plain in its declarations of man's free will. All men are invited to accept the salvation that God has provided in Jesus Christ. "Whosoever will" means just what it says. There were those to whom the Lord Jesus said, "Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life" (John 5:40).

Instead of worrying about the question of election, why not rest on the definite promises of God and thus be assured of eternal salvation through the finished work of Christ?

106. Did not Adam and Eve have eternal life before they sinned? Yet they lost it and became children of the Devil until they believed in the promises of a coming Saviour.

Adam and Eve simply had natural life before they sinned. That life would have continued here on earth indefinitely if failure had not come. They knew nothing of eternal life, which is the special blessing to those who put their trust in the Lord Jesus Christ.

107. Was Pentecost the former rain and is the present Pentecostal blessing the latter rain?

No. Pentecost was the coming of the Holy Spirit to abide with the Church forever. There is no present "Pentecostal blessing" other than the realized presence of the Holy Spirit.

108. Is it right for believers to speak of themselves as "saints"?

This is a Scriptural term. We are addressed as saints over and over again in the epistles. The word literally means "separated ones." All of God's children have been separated to Himself through the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ. Of course, it is just as true that we are sinners saved by grace. In fact, paradoxical as it may seem, it is absolutely true that saints are sinners. In other words, we are saints by the call of God, but all of us must acknowledge that as far as our own lives are concerned, often "in many things we all offend" (James 3:2, margin). We do not become saints through being saintly, but God constitutes us saints through the work of His Son, and then tells us to live in a saintly way.

109. Can a heathen who has never heard one spoken word of God read the Bible and be saved, or must he have man's explanation of it?

Certainly a heathen who has never heard one spoken word of God may be saved through reading the Bible.

Scripture says, "The entrance of thy words giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple" (Ps. 119:130). There have been many such instances in missionary records. One of the most outstanding is that of the conversion of the great Japanese evangelist Nee-shima, who found a Dutch Bible washed up on the shore of Japan, learned Dutch in order to read it and through it was converted. There are many, many other instances in which a small portion of the Word of God opened the heart to the Lord Jesus Christ.

110. When Christ told the rich young ruler that he could enter into life by keeping the commandments, was He not teaching salvation by law?

Nothing of the kind. The young man came to Christ on legal ground and put his question from that standpoint. The Lord answered him accordingly, and the young man claimed to be keeping the law in all points, and thus did not feel his need of a Saviour. Jesus then said to him, "Sell that thou hast, and give to the poor . . . and come and follow me" (Matt. 19:21). This answer was a double one. The first part of it should have shown the young man that he did not love his neighbor as himself; therefore he was already a lawbreaker. The second part stressed the fact that he must yield himself to Christ if he would have life eternal.

111. Is it possible for a person who has broken all the commandments to be saved?

Our Lord Jesus declared that all manner of sin should be forgiven except the sin against the Holy Spirit, which in this dispensation is the final rejection of Christ Himself as the Saviour. No matter what sins one has committed, if he turns to God in repentance, trusting the Lord Jesus for himself, His precious blood will blot out every stain.

112. Can you give even one passage that definitely teaches the eternal security of the believer? I am told it is impossible to find one.

What could be plainer than Romans 8:38 and 39? Is there anything not included in "life or death" or in "things present or things to come"? Yet nothing in either case can separate the believer from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

113. According to Ezekiel 18:24, it looks as though a believer can be lost if he turns from his righteousness. Is this true?

Ezekiel 18 has no reference to the question of salvation as understood in our dispensation. It has to do entirely with the government of God under law. The righteousness there referred to should not be confounded with that righteousness of God in which the believer now stands. If Ezekiel 18 had reference to eternal life, then that life would be obtained by right living, which of course is utterly opposed to the truth of the Gospel.

114. In John 10:27 to 29 the Lord Jesus soys, "I give unto [my sheep] eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." I believe this fully, but while no one else can pluck me out of Christ's hand, can I not take myself out if I should fall into sin and unbelief?

If it were possible to take yourself out of Christ's hand, what would the result be? Would you not necessarily perish? But Jesus says, "I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish." Therefore it is as impossible for a child of God to take himself out of the hand of Christ as it is for my child to make himself no longer such. He is born into my family and therefore he is always my child. We who are born of God are His children by eternal life, that is, a life that can never be forfeited.

115. Will any Christian who dies with unconfessed sin have an opportunity to make things right after death? Is the Judgment seat of Christ the time when all misunderstandings and discords among Christians will be made right?

J

It is questionable if any Christian ever died who did not have some unconfessed sin to his record. While sin might be confessed in a general way, yet who of us has ever definitely confessed all his sins? But the precious blood of Christ answers for every sin a believer has ever committed. At the judgment seat of Christ the Lord will consider the entire life since regeneration, giving His mind about everything, and the believer will then for the first time see each detail in the light of God's infinite holiness. Everything there will be dealt with so that the believer's failures will never be referred to again for all eternity.

116. If we do not bring the Gospel to the heathen, will they be lost?

The heathen are lost already. They are sinners. They have deliberately and wilfully sinned against what light they have, as is clearly set forth in the first chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, and the Gospel is the Message of salvation which God has commanded to be carried into all the world, that lost sinners may be saved. Our forefathers were all heathen once, but to these people the Message of Grace came, and as a result there are millions in the world today who are saved who otherwise would have been left in the darkness of paganism.

Our responsibility is just as great as the responsibility of earlier apostles of the Truth, to go into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature.

117. How did Apollos woier (I Cor. 3:6)?

The answer to your question is plainly given in Acts 18:24-28. There we learn that Apollos went from Ephesus, where he was brought to the knowledge of the truth, to Corinth and was corr,,nended to brethren there, where Paul had already been used of God to gather out a company for the Name of Jesus, and we read that Apollos "helped them much which had believed through grace." Paul sowed; he was the first preacher there; then Apollos came and watered by further ministry; and the Lord gave the increase.

118. In Revelation we read of the seven spirits of God. I do not understand this. I thought there was but one Spirit of God. Please explain.

There is, of course, but one Holy Spirit. Seven, however, is the number of spiritual or mystical completeness, and the figure, therefore, implies the fullness of the Holy Spirit, that is, the one Spirit in the sevenfold plenitude of His power. We have this clearly indicated in Isaiah 11:1-2. There we read of the Branch of the Lord, that is, the Messiah, upon whom shall rest "the spirit of the Lord . . . the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord."

119. In Luke 17:20,21 what is meant by the statement that the kingdom of God will come in without observation? Did the kingdom of God come when the Holy Ghost was given at Pentecost?

To your last question I should answer "No." The kingdom of God in its moral sense was already here when our Lord and His disciples were on earth. He was the King, and they constituted, if I may say so, His cabinet. Thus He could say, "The kingdom of God is among you" (margin). But as His authority was rejected, the kingdom of God was taken from Israel after the flesh and will be given eventually to regenerated Israel in a coming day. In the meantime wherever people are born of God and the authority of God is owned, the kingdom is set up in their hearts. It is in this sense that the Apostle Paul uses the term when he says, "The kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost" (Rom. 14:17).

120. What is meant by the high gate of Benjamin mentioned in Jeremiah 20:2?

It was evidently one of the gates of the Temple area, and, at the time referred to, a place where criminals were publicly exposed in the stocks.

121. Will you please explain to me the position of King Saul relative to the Holy Spirit; also that of Judas Iscariot.

In replying to your questions relative to Saul and Judas, I think both may be answered in the same way. The Holy Spirit, who is sovereign, often uses unsaved people to carry out the purpose of God. It is evident that He fell upon Saul and Judas, but in an outward way, fitting them for certain service.

This was also true of Balaam, wicked as he was. It is not in any sense the same thing as the indwelling or anointing of the Holy Spirit and does not touch the question of the security of the believer.

122. Please explain Deuteronomy 14:21. Why would God tell the people of Israel to give or sell to strangers what it would not be right to use themselves?

The people of Israel were under law in covenant with God. One provision of that law was that they were to eat nothing with blood. This, however, did not apply to the nations surrounding them. If these people had no such compunction and desired to use the flesh of creatures that had died without being properly bled, they, of course, were at liberty to do so and the people of Israel were free and had liberty to sell or give to them.

123. What position did Lot hold, according to Genesis 19:1, because of which he was sitting in the gate?

It is very evident from verse 9 that Lot had become a judge in Sodom. Perhaps he thought he could purify the city by going into politics, but learned, as many others have done under similar circumstances, that it was hopeless.

124. Why is it so hard sometimes to cash the Bible promises at the bank of heaven?

One reason is, we so often fail to meet the conditions upon which the promises of God are based. Take, for instance, John 15:7: "If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you."

This is not an unqualified promise. The only one who can expect an answer is the one who meets the conditions. And so again in Psalm 37:4: "Delight thyself also in the Lord; and he shall give thee the desires of thine heart." When we are really finding our delight in Him, our desires will be very different from what they are when He is not the great Lodestar of our hearts. See that you are right with God; otherwise you cannot pray aright.

125. Please explain Hebrews 10:32 and 35.

I think a careful reading of Hebrews 10 will show that the apostle is warning the professed Christians among the Hebrews to cling to Christ and the truth committed to them, lest they fall into apostasy. Of course, no real Christian would ever do this, for it would involve a complete denial of Christ, but, on the other hand, there was a danger even for real Christians, though they were genuine believers and had suffered greatly for the Name of the Lord Jesus. The danger was that they might become discouraged and lose heart and so sink back into a cold, lethargic state spiritually and thus run the risk of losing the reward which is promised to all those who live devoted Christian lives. We may all take this to heart.

126. To what do Paul's words, "Keep the ordinances, as I delivered them unto you," refer (I Cor. 11:2)?

Paul's words here possibly refer to baptism and the Lord's Supper, but not necessarily. Though both are clearly the mind of God for His people, yet the word rendered "ordinances" simply means oral teaching and would refer to what Paul had given them by word of mouth.

127. Will you please explain the meaning of I Corinthians 7:36?

There is considerable difference of opinion among expositors. The verse might be viewed in one of two ways. The word for "virgin" might be translated "virginity." Then the thought would be that if a man had determined to maintain his virginity, that is, never to marry, and yet afterwards he met someone to whom his affections went out and he had a great desire to marry her, he would not sin in so doing even though he had once vowed that he would never marry. Such vows are often taken by people without due consideration and God would not hold them responsible in such a case.

The other interpretation is that if a father had determined that he would keep his daughter, supporting her himself, without giving her in marriage, but afterwards it seemed evident that it would be for her happiness to be married to some suitable person, even though he had determined as aforesaid, he was perfectly free to give her in marriage to the man of her choice.

Either of these interpretations would be in full harmony with the Christian position.

128. Please explain II Timothy 1:3: "I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers with pure conscience."

I understand the Apostle Paul to mean that as a Christian he was serving the same God whom his forefathers served and was seeking to do this with a pure conscience.

129. What is meant by the "transitional period" of the Church of God?

While the term is not a Biblical one, it expresses a Scriptural thought if not pressed too far. It refers to the period between "the Day of Pentecost" and the revelation of the mystery of the Church as the body of Christ. This latter revelation was kept secret until it was made known to the Apostle Paul in order that the consciences of the people of Israel might be exercised in accordance with the known prophetic Scriptures.

130. After Jesus' Resurrection, was the kingdom again offered to Israel, and if they had accepted Christ as their Messiah would He have begun immediately to reign in Jerusalem?

No. Christ said before He went to the Cross, "Your house is left unto you desolate" (Matt. 23:38) thus setting Israel to one side until He should return the second time. In Acts 1:8 we have the divine program stated by our Lord Himself: "Ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." Luke gives us the record showing how the Gospel began in Jerusalem, extended out into Judea, on into Samaria, and then, through Paul's going to Rome, to the uttermost parts of the earth.

131. Is it true that you no longer believe what you wrote in your book on Colossians; namely, that the revelation of the mystery of the one body was given first to the Apostle Paul and was not known to others until he received it? I am told that in a recent book you contradict this and say that this mystery was revealed to others before Paul received it.

Your information is positively incorrect. We maintain exactly what we have held throughout the years. Paul alone was the servant of God to whom the truth of the one body was first made known. On the other hand, as pointed out in the author's book Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, the mystery that Jew and Gentile were alike saved by the same free grace was revealed to others before it was made known to Paul. The contradiction exists only in the minds of unspiritual and insincere critics.

132. With so many unsaved people still to be reached in America, why should money and workers be devoted to foreign missions?

Because Christ has commanded us to preach the Gospel to every creature. God did not wait until all in Judea were saved before sending the Gospel to Samaria and the Gentiles. Moreover, home work prospers more as foreign work is properly emphasized.

133. Will you kindly comment on Ecclesiastes 3:19- 22?

This passage gives us what Solomon said in his heart (see Ecclesiastes 3:18). It is not a divine revelation, though he was divinely inspired to record the thoughts of his heart. It would be a great mistake to found any doctrine on this statement. It is just such reasoning as the natural man who was looking under the sun would be inclined to follow.

134. The Apostle Paul tells us that we are complete in Christ (Col. 2:10). This being the case, why do we still observe the Christian ordinances?

The very fact that we are complete in Christ would lead us to be obedient to His Word. "Complete" is really a translation of a Greek word meaning "to be filled full." God fills our hearts with Christ that we may manifest Him by obedience.

135. How can one be sure of knowing God's will for his life? I am certain I have been called of God to preach, but I cannot get the money to go to a Bible institute or seminary and I cannot find any place where they are willing to let me preach without an education.

I remember hearing Dr. A. T. Robertson say that one of the most pathetic cases he knew was that of a man who felt called to preach and could not find anyone who felt called upon to listen to him. There is a great deal of nonsense taught about the call to preach. Often it is simply an inward urge expressive of one's own desires. When God calls a man to preach, He qualifies him, and whether educated or uneducated he will find his sphere of testimony. Scripture says, "A man's gift maketh room for him." It also says, "Whoso boasteth himself of a false gift is like clouds and wind without rain"

(Prov. 25:14). We have heard many of these windy, cloudy preachers, from whom we failed to get any refreshment whatever.

136. What is the meaning of Leviticus 18:21?

Leviticus 18:21 refers to the horrid custom of sacrificing the choicest of the children of the heathen to the great fire god, Molech. Molech was generally made in the form of a great brazen image, inside of which a tremendously hot fire was built, and infants were tossed upon his red-hot lap and there burned to death in order to propitiate him and secure rain, etc. For the people of Israel to have anything to do with this would be to profane the Name of the Lord their God.

137. Why did Moses command the children of Israel to borrow from their Egyptian neighbors what they never expected to pay back? It does not seem to me that this was ethical and I cannot understand its being in the Bible.

(Exodus 12:35.)

The difficulty is solely in the translation, not in the original text. The word translated "borrow" is the ordinary word for "ask" or "request." The people of Israel had served without pay for years. As they were about to leave Egypt, Moses directed them to ask of their neighbors the wherewithal to help them meet part of the expense of the journey. There was nothing unethical whatever about this.

138. Please explain Exodus 32:32. 33.

The reference is undoubtedly to Moses' readiness to lay down his life if God would spare the people. Death is the last act in God's government of His people in this world and God was about to destroy Israel because of their failures.

Moses simply offered to take their place. It has nothing to do with eternal life.

139. What is your explanation of I Timothy 2:12?

Will you kindly say what is the "official public meeting"? Is it the Lord's Day morning or breaking of bread or the month' y business meeting of the assembly?

In the Early Church, the one great official meeting was that held each first day for worship, ministry and the breaking of bread (Acts 20:7). This, I take it, is the "assembly"

referred to in I Corinthians 14. In this meeting women were forbidden the public platform.

140. In Matthew 24:14 we read that the Gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world and then shall the end come. Does this mean that everyone will have a chance to accept or reject Jesus before His triumphant return?

In other words, does it mean that Christian missionaries will preach to all the nations and peoples before our Lord's return?

This verse does not indicate that every individual will hear the Gospel before Jesus comes, but that the Gospel will be preached among all nations for a witness. This has virtually been fulfilled, though perhaps not completely.

141. Is there any reason why the Holy Ghost is mentioned specifically in Acts 5:3 as the one sinned against, whereas God is mentioned in Acts 5:4 as the one sinned against?

The two references given simply prove definitely the true deity of the Holy Ghost. He dwelt in the midst of the Church. The sin committed was committed against Him, therefore against God, because He is God as truly as the Father is God and the Son is God.

142. What is the meaning of the green tree and the dry, in Luke 23:31?

The reference is, of course, to Ezekiel 17:24 and 20:47. The green trees were those that had life. The dry trees were those that were dead spiritually. Christ Himself when He came was pre-eminently the green tree and yet what suffering He had to endure! In view of this, what must be the judgment that the dry trees, those who are dead and lifeless, will have to suffer when God arises to shake terribly the earth!

143. In Joshua 10:13 we read that Joshua commanded the sun to stand still until the Israelites had avenged themselves of their enemies. Astronomers tell us that the earth revolves upon its axis around the sun and that the sun is stationary. Is this a wrong translation of the Bible?

I accept the Scriptural statement in Joshua exactly as written, understanding that the Bible writers used language as we do. We speak of the sun as rising and setting; yet we know, of course, that it is the earth which revolves and not the sun. So I understand the sun standing still as a miracle of refraction whereby the rays of the sun were so refracted upon the earth as to extend the light period for a much longer time than was usual.

144. Will you kindly advise me how James 2:1 should be read in order to get the proper meaning? Would it be "My brethren, you have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ the Lord of glory with respect of persons"?

I am afraid your suggested translation of James 2:1 would scarcely stand. I think it is clear from the Greek text that the language is imperative rather than simply declarative.

J. N. Darby translates it: "My brethren, do not have the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, Lord of glory, with respect of persons."

Of course, one needs to read what follows to get the meaning of this verse. I take it that it is simply this: Do not in connection with your profession of faith in Christ make invidious distinctions among men, paying greater attention to the rich than to the poor, when all alike are precious to Him.

145. Please explain Psalm 85:10: "Mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other."

The verse has best been explained in the Cross of Christ where the divine mercy went out to mankind without setting aside divine truth. There the righteousness of God was fully maintained and peace made for guilty sinners.

146. What is meant by "vessels of wrath" and "vessels of mercy" in Romans 9:22 and 23?

The vessels of wrath are those who deliberately reject the grace of God and live in wilful disobedience. They thus become fitted to destruction. The vessels of mercy are those who turn to God in repentance and who in accordance with His foreknowledge have been predestinated to glory.

For a fuller exposition of this entire ninth chapter of Romans see the author's Lectures on the Epistle to the Romans.

147. What special significance is there in the fact as recorded in John 12 that certain Greeks desired to see Jesus?

It was an intimation that the time was drawing near when the Gentile world would receive the Gospel, after the crucifixion and Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ.

148. How could a follower of God be so cruel and heartless as David appears to have been in killing two hundred Philistines that he might get a reward (his future wife) from Saul? See I Samuel 18:27. This seems to be a marked contrast to a truly Christian attitude as indicated in Proverbs 25:21, and yet in spite of David's seeming cruelty, God is said to have blessed him.

In the first place, the Old Testament does not deal with Christianity at all, but there were children of God long before there were Christians. The disciples were first called Christians at Antioch. It has ever been the instinct of the new nature to forgive and bless, as indicated in Proverbs 25:21. On the other hand, God as the moral Governor of the universe had borne with the abominations of the Philistines and Canaanites until His holy soul could stand it no longer, and He commanded the people of Israel to exterminate them utterly.

It was perfectly righteous therefore for Saul and David to visit condign judgment upon this vile and shamelessly wicked people. While the circumstances are repugnant to every Spirit-born soul, and doubtless were to David himself, yet the judgment itself was in accord with God's command to Israel.

149. Kindly explain Romans 9:21.

The passage simply asserts God's absolute authority over His creatures.

150. Why does the Bible say that God visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the second and third generations? In view of this the fairness of God's judgment is being questioned.

If we realized the evil of sin as God does, we would raise no question as to this. Many men would plunge headlong into all kinds of sin if it were not for the evil consequences entailed upon them and upon their children. This is a divinely ordained law of retribution which has to be recognized whether people can explain it or not. Do not forget the other side of the same passage, "shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments" (Deut. 5:10).

151. Is it correct to say that God gave sanitary regulations to Israel?

Yes. The books of Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy have many such regulations. For instance, the frequent instructions for bathing after coming in contact with any defilement; the laws for regulating the behavior of the leper and detection of the disease; the care taken to distinguish clean and unclean beasts; the instruction as to the care of a new mother, etc., etc. All of these while having a spiritual and typical significance, were also sanitary regulations.

152. Will you please give an exposition and illustration of the unjust steward of Luke 16?

In regard to the unjust steward, I think the point is simply this: he used his present opportunities wisely from his own viewpoint in order to make provision for the future. He is not commended by the Lord. It is his lord, that is, the one who employed him, who while not endorsing his schemes yet could not but admire his resourcefulness. If we as Christians were half as much in earnest in doing the right thing as he was in doing the wrong, we would be heaping up treasure in view of the future.

153. What is the soul?

The Hebrew and Greek words translated "soul" are used in two very distinct senses, sometimes meaning the whole man, as so many "souls" in a given place, etc. "The soul that sinneth it shall die" (Ezek. 18:4). Otherwise the soul is the seat of man's emotional nature and of all his natural characteristics. In this way it is distinguished from the spirit which is the highest part of the man, that which gives him the ability to reason, thus distinguishing him from the lower animals who have instinct but not reason. The best book I know on this subject is F. W. Grant's Man and the Future State, published by Loizeaux Brothers, New York, N.Y.

154. Is there a difference between a burden and a cross?

I would say that a burden is a trial or a care that presses upon the heart, or it may refer to our personal responsibility. Where the burden is viewed as a care, we may cast it on Him "who careth for us," and He delights to be our Burden-Bearer. But when it is a question of responsibility, then everyone must bear his own burden. A cross, however, sets forth something altogether different. In our Lord's day, if a man were seen going along the road bearing a cross, it meant that he was going out to die, and as disciples of our blessed Lord we take our places as devoted to death for His sake, ready to suffer and endure whatever shame or persecution may come upon us as we seek to follow Him.

155. Are Gentiles under the new covenant, and, if so, when did they come under it?

No one is exactly said to be under the new covenant. The new covenant does not demand anything of men. It is the declaration of God's grace. For Israel it was a reiteration of the Abrahamic covenant, for they had broken down under the covenant of law. In the legal covenant there were two contracting parties and so Israel could be truly said to be under that covenant. They failed and therefore forfeited everything from a legal standpoint. But God is, in a coming day, going to confirm a new covenant with them, in which there will be but one contracting party, and that Himself.

When our Lord Jesus Christ died on the Cross He shed the blood of the new covenant, as indicated in the institution of the Lord's Supper. Gentiles receive the blessings purchased by the blood of the covenant, and inasmuch as we are blessed with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ, everything spiritual promised in the new covenant is now ours.

156. Was the sin of Cain and of Moses, when they committed murder, as great in the sight of God as it would be after the commandments were given to Moses?

The question is answered in Romans 5:13: "For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law." Read also Galatians 3:19. The verse states that the law "was added because of transgressions." Literally, it might be rendered, "It was added with a view to transgression." That is, the law gave to sin, which was always evil in the sight of God, the specific character of transgression. Before the giving of the law sin was simply the evidence of man's wilful nature, and death reigned because of it. But after the giving of the law it took on a new character; it was now positive violation of a command, therefore definite transgression.

157. What is the meaning of the parable of the householder and the laborers who received a penny a day?

Our Lord was seeking to impress upon His hearers the importance of heeding the call for service as soon as it was received. He rewards not simply according to the length of time we have served Him, but according to the earnest purpose of the heart. The first to hear the call and go to work were paid, according to agreement, a penny a day. The penny, or denarius, was a coin worth about an English shilling, but it had the purchasing power of much more than that and was the ordinary wage for a laborer. Those who came in later, but responded in each instance as soon as they heard the first call, were rewarded in exactly the same way as if they had been working all day. The lesson for us is this: we are not responsible for what we do not know, but when God has spoken to us, if there be immediate response, even as in the case of the dying thief, He rewards as if we had heard the call long before.

158. Does the Bible tell us what became of the ark of God?

So far as we have any means of knowing, the true original ark is not to be found anywhere today. It has never been known since the Jews were carried away to Babylon.

Tradition says that Jeremiah hid it in a cave in the Lebanon Mountains, but that is only tradition. According to the Word of God, in the millennial day the ark will not be mentioned or come into mind. The Ethiopians have said that the original ark was preserved in their country, and they doubtless have something made to look like it, but there is no proof that it is the ark from the Temple of Solomon.

159. Is there any Scriptural foundation for the teaching that the Lord Jesus Christ was afraid He might die in Gethsemane or be killed by Satan ere He arrived at Calvary?

There is not. On the contrary, our blessed Lord Himself declares, "No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself" (John 10:18). It was not possible for Satan or anyone else to kill Him before He voluntarily gave Himself up to the death of the Cross. The agony in Gethsemane was in contemplation of the awfulness of being made sin for us upon the Cross. The cup from which He shrank was not simply death, but the cup of judgment from God against sin which He was to drain to the dregs on our behalf. He could not have been the Holy One of Gqd had He not shrunk from this dreadful experience.

160. In speaking of the atonement of Christ is it correct to say that God died?

Scripture never puts it that way. It was the man Christ Jesus who gave Himself a ransom for all. Of course, He was both God and man in one person. Deity, as such, could not die. God became man in order that He might die for our sins. It would be right to say that He who is both God and man in one person died for us.

161. In Genesis 1:27 we read as follows: "So God created man in his own image." In Genesis 2:7 we read, "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground." How are we to understand these expressions "created man" and "formed man"?

Creation implies bringing into existence that which did not exist before. Three times in Genesis 1 we read that God created. In verse 1 we have the creation of the material universe, in verse 21 the creation of animal life, in verse 27 the creation of man involving a human spirit. The living did not evolve from the unliving and the spirit did not evolve from animal life. There is a distinct act of creation in each case. To form is to make from that which already existed; so God created man by bringing the human spirit into existence but He formed the body of man from that which already existed, the dust of the earth.

162. How has Genesis 49:10 had a literal fulfillment?

In the Revised Version, we read, "The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler's staff . . . until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the obedience of the peoples be."

That is, the tribal scepter of Judah and the exercise of authority would not pass away until the Prince of Peace Himself appeared. This was literally fulfilled. God preserved Judah in the land of Palestine with a certain amount of tribal authority until Prince Messiah came in grace and was rejected, after which the scepter departed and the Jews were scattered throughout the world.

163. In Matthew 16:28 we read this statement made by Jesus: "Some standing here . . . shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Who were these who would not die until our Saviour's return?

Our Lord's words as recorded in Matthew 16:28 were fulfilled on the Mount of Transfiguration. This the Apostle Peter makes very clear in the first chapter of his second epistle, when he shows that what they saw upon the mount was the power and coming of the Son of Man. In other words, it was given them to see the kingdom in embryo as it will be finally displayed in its fullness.

164. I have heard it taught recently that the king in the Song of Solomon is a type of the world seeking to lure the shepherdess from her shepherd lover. Is this true?

It is not necessary to suppose, as a great many have done of late, that the king and the shepherd are different persons. Rather, I believe a careful examina- tion of the book indicates that the story back of the Canticles is somewhat as follows:

Solomon had a vineyard in the hill country north of Jerusalem. He let it out to a family as keepers. This family apparently consisted of a widow with several sons and at least two daughters, the Shulamite, who is the heroine of the book, and her little sister. (See chapter 8.) The elder sister was the drudge of the family. Her brothers were angry with her and gave her a great deal of outside work to do. As a shepherdess, she had the care of the lambs and it was her duty to care for the vineyard, to set traps for the foxes, etc. A shepherd otherwise unknown, appeared to her and won her heart, and then disappeared with the promise that he would return and wed her. She went through a variety of experiences during the waiting days, eagerly watching for her beloved. One day a magnificent procession came along the country road, preceded by the royal outriders. The king himself in his beautiful palanquin stopped just opposite the vineyard, and his officers went over and summoned the shepherdess to come to him. In diffidence, she obeyed the summons, amazed that she should be called, only to find when she reached the king that he was the shepherd who had won her heart.

This is the story as I understand it, and the more carefully the little book is examined, the more perfectly this explanation fits. Of course, it is the story of the Word of God, for He who won our hearts, as the Good Shepherd, is coming again as the King to claim us for Himself.

165. Do you endorse Weymouth's translation of the New Testament in modern speech?

Of all the so-called modern speech translations Weymouth's is probably the best. The notes, however, are very faulty and there are places where the renderings seem designed specially to favor the annihilation theory. If you use Weymouth's translation, be sure to compare it carefully with an accredited translation.

166. Is repentance the first or the second step in salvation?

Repentance is not a "step" at all, yet there is no salvation without repentance. But repentance is a changed attitude on the part of man. This is what takes place when he believes the Word of Truth as to his lost condition and need of a Saviour. Thus faith and repentance are indissolubly linked together.

167. Kindly explain the following passages:

Hebrews 4:4-6, Psalm 95:11, and John 5:3.

In regard to Hebrews 4:4-6, the apostle is speaking of that rest which remains for the people of God; that is, the rest which will be ours at the end of the journey. In faith we can enter into this now and so enjoy a foretaste of what will be ours for eternity. One may easily come short of this through unbelief, but as we trust God and go on in faith we may be assured of heart rest now and eternal rest by-and-by. It is the wilderness that tests us.

The rest of which God spoke in Psalm 95:11, was not creation rest, as that had already been broken by man's sin. Neither was it rest in the land of Canaan, as Israel failed to find this because of their lack of faithfulness. But it is the eternal rest which will be ours if we are really overcomers by faith, and only those who truly believe God and are born again overcome.

I am not sure what your question is regarding John 5:3. The text is very plain and does not seem to me to need any explanation. The pool of Bethesda was evidently what is sometimes called an intermittent spring, but in this instance the bubbling was apparently by angelic agency and God had evidently granted special blessing in connection with this. I might point out, however, that verse 4 is not found in many ancient manuscripts; so there is a bare possibility that it was simply an idea entertained by some transcriber that an angel entered into the pool and troubled it.

168. I would appreciate your comment regarding Matthew 5:34-37 and James 5:12. On several recent occasions this portion of the Word has had application in my experience.

The passages to which you refer positively forbid the use of oaths in ordinary conversation or to bind bargains, etc. They do not have any reference to the taking of an oath in law, because our Lord Jesus Christ, when He was put on oath, answered Pilate, whereas He refused to do so until He was adjured, which means to put on oath (see Matt. 26:63).

169. What is meant by the doctrine of "laying on of hands" in Hebrews 6?

The expression "laying on of hands" in Hebrews 6:2 refers to the offerer in the Temple and Tabernacle service who laid his hands on the head of the sacrifice, thus identifying himself with his offering. This was the way God taught His people, before the perfect revelation of Christianity came, the truth of substitution. One of our hymns expresses the meaning very beautifully:

My faith would lay her hand On that blessed head of Thine; While like a penitent I stand And there confess my sin.

170. I have been reading the book of Ezekiel. There seems much more judgment than grace in it. I cannot understand how God can destroy people in the way Ezekiel says He does.

There is a line of truth running all through God's Word which has nothing whatever to do with the question of either the salvation or the eternal loss of the soul. We generally speak of it as the government of God. Ezekiel is distinctively the prophet who deals with that subject. He presents in the very beginning God upon His throne as the moral Governor of the universe. The great wheels of His chariot roll on like a mighty tank in the present war, crushing everything that opposes them. All puny man's efforts to defy God and turn Him aside from His purpose are in vain. We read concerning these wheels: "They turned not as they went." And yet there are wheels within wheels. In the midst of His judgments God is constantly manifesting His grace to men who repent. Where men or nations seek to walk in righteousness, God gives them blessing and prosperity. Where they turn from righteousness and revel in wickedness, the wheels of judgment crush them. Surely no thoughtful person would want it otherwise. What kind of God would He be who would complacently tolerate all sorts of iniquity? What kind of world would it be in which sin did not bring its own punishment? As we look back over the centuries we can see how true it is of nations as well as of individuals, that "whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Gal. 6:7).

But this does not mean that those who fall under the temporal judgments of God are necessarily lost eternally. Consider the antediluvian world. The world as a whole had become so corrupt that God could not tolerate it any longer. And yet, on the other hand, there was a righteous remnant in whom He found delight and who trusted in Him. Methuselah was one of these. Millions of children, who had not come to the years of accountability, died when the race was destroyed, with the exception of Noah and his family. But all these children, and everyone else who trusted in God, if there were such, or those who even at the very last moment turned to Him in repentance, will be in heaven forever. God's judgment is always tempered with mercy.

The important thing for us to see is that we are not competent to judge God, but we should bow reverently before Him, confessing that He, the Judge of all the earth, will do right, and that while His ways are past finding out, we can praise and adore Him for the riches of His grace that led Him to send His own beloved Son into the world, that we might live through Him.

I think perhaps the loveliest picture in the book of Ezekiel is that of the River of Life. Everything shall live wherever the river flows. That River of Life represents the Holy Spirit's testimony to God's delight in His beloved Son as revealed in the Gospel. Let us rejoice in it and not allow ourselves to be cast down because of other things which are beyond our comprehension.

171. Please explain the following: "Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram . . ." (Gen. 11:26). "Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran"

(Gen. 12:4). His father's age at that time was therefore 145 years. Terah's age at his death was 205 years (Gen. 11:32).

Therefore Terah lived 60 years after Abram departed out of Haran. But Acts 7:4 says, "When his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein ye now dwell." I do not doubt that these things can be harmonized, but so far I have not been able to do it or find anyone else who can.

In regard to your question, I think the whole difficulty arises from supposing that Terah was 70 years old when he begat Abram. This is not what Genesis 11:26 tells us.

But it tells us that Terah was 70 years of age before the three sons were born. Of course, they were not all born at the same time and Abram was not the oldest but the youngest of them.

We have no way of knowing exactly Terah's age when Abram was born. This is a difficulty that has faced chronologists all through the years and makes it absolutely impossible to give an authoritative chronology of those earlier years.

Then again, it is a great mistake, in my judgment, to depend on the numbers given in the books of Moses as translated in our English versions. Numbers, as you know, in the Hebrew, are expressed by letters and the slightest change of certain Hebrew characters changes the number completely. My own judgment is that the Greek translation of the Old Testament gives us the most reliable chronology. It adds approximately 500 years to the lives of the patriarchs before the Flood, making it a period of about 2,000 years from Adam to Noah. It adds many years to the lives of the patriarchs after the Flood, so that instead of 2,500 years from the Flood to Christ, we have about 4,000 years. The Jews used to have a saying, "Six thousand years and then the Messiah." According to the Septuagint chronology, Christ came at the expiration of about 6,000 years of human history, but they refused Him as Messiah. There is a serious possibility that certain Jewish teachers and scribes deliberately altered the dates in the copies of the Hebrew Bible which they had, so as to make it appear that only 4,000 years had elapsed, but the Septuagint or Greek translation was already widely circulated and that gives us what I believe to be the true chronology.

172. Is ordination necessary in order to preach the Gospel?

In Scripture we read of the ordination of elders to the oversight of the local churches, but we find no hint that there must be some such ceremonial setting apart before one can go forth to proclaim the glad tidings. Tradition has had much to do with the special importance given to ordination in certain circles. Dwight L. Moody never submitted to it. He was always what some would call a "layman." The same is true of Charles H. Spurgeon.

173. Was foot-washing as set forth in John 13:1-17 an ordinance?

It was not an ordinance, but a lesson as to the washing of water by the Word. Jesus' own words imply that there was something far deeper than that which was outward.

He said, "What I do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter."

174. Please explain the statement "More than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance" (Luke 15:7).

The ninety-nine in Luke 15:7 are those who imagine they have no need to repent; that is, they are the Pharisees of verse 1 as distinguished from the sinners.

175. What are we to understand by "fasting" in the Bible? Does it refer to doing without food or has it a wider significance?

There is no question but that the term "fasting" does refer at times to abstaining from food. Our Lord so fasted in the wilderness and there are many other instances, but I believe that this resulted from the intense spiritual exercise which occupied Christ and others at such times, so that they lost all concern for food. But Isaiah clearly shows us what true fasting is, in 58:1-7. It means to abstain from things that please the flesh and to devote oneself wholly to the glory of God and the blessing of others.

176. I do not understand the statement "Whose names are not written in the book of life . . . from the foundation of the world" (Rev. 13:8) nor Matthew 25:34: "Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world." Is this something different from that of which we read in Ephesians 1:4, "Chosen us in him [Christ] before the foundation of the world"?

The expression "from the foundation of the world"

refers to the earthly election. The other expression, "before the foundation of the world" has to do with the election of the heavenly people. Those whose names are written in the book of life from the foundation of the world will have their part in the millennial kingdom here on earth. The heavenly election will be with Christ in the bridal city of the New Jerusalem.

177. I heard a Catholic priest use John 20:23 in his talk on Confession, and I would like to have your interpretation of that passage.

There is not a hint in John 20:23 that the Lord was conferring any priestly power on anyone. All believers are priests in the New Testament dispensation. Christ alone is our great High Priest. The Lord has commissioned all His servants to go out into the entire world and preach the Gospel to every creature. As this Gospel is proclaimed, if men receive it we have authority to declare they have remission of sins. If they reject it, their sins are retained. This is plainly what our Lord was telling His disciples. You can see how Peter acted upon it when, in the household of Cornelius, he proclaimed remission of sins through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. On the other hand, again and again, when people had deliberately rejected the Word of God, the apostles declared they were given up to judgment.

178. Does life come before or after accepting Christ?

We read, "The entrance of thy words giveth Light"

(Ps. 119:130), and again, "The dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live" (John 5:25). Life is in the Word. While men are dead to God, they are not absolutely inert, but are responsible beings. When they hear the Word and receive it, it produces divine life.

179. What is the proof that the sons of God in Genesis 6 are angels, and how could an angel be married to someone on earth?

The questioner takes too much for granted.

Throughout all the Christian centuries, as well as during the preceding Jewish era, good men have differed as to who the sons of God of Genesis 6 really were. Probably the majority have held the view that they were the descendants of Seth, whereas the daughters of men were the daughters of Cain, and that the sin referred to there was the obliteration of the line of separation between the people of God and those of the world.

Others have held that the sons of God were angelic beings who left their first estate and, actuated by motives of hostility to their Creator, against whom they rebelled, came down to earth and took possession of the bodies of men, stirring them up to unlawful lusts in order that the holy seed might become denied and the possibility of the Messiah's coming through the human race might be hindered. In any case, it is not necessary to suppose that angels became men. But personally, I would earnestly urge young Christians to avoid occupying themselves with perplexities such as these, but rather to look for the great moral and spiritual lessons of the Word of God which will sanctify and bless. The apostle warns us against questions that only gender strifes.

180. Please tell me what or who is meant by "the sons of God," in lob 1:6.

As to the sons of God, in Job they are clearly angels.

Whether this is also the meaning in Genesis 6 has been a moot question throughout the centuries.

181. In what way are we to understand the statement that an evil spirit from the Lord came upon Saul when we know that God is altogether good? How could anything evil come from Him (I Sam. 18:10)?

There is a principle that runs all through Scripture which I believe makes this very clear. God gives people an opportunity to obey His voice. If they deliberately refuse obedience, in His righteous government He sometimes gives them up to strong delusion. You will see this principle set forth in II Thessalonians 2:11. In the case of Saul, as in that of Ahab (see II Chronicles 18: 18-22), God gave direct permission for evil spirits to take possession of the one and to deceive the latter through false prophets. Just as He hardened Pharaoh's heart when Pharaoh deliberately rejected His Word and as He permitted blindness in part to come upon Israel for their rejection of Christ, so He permitted the evil spirit to torment Saul because he had rejected the Word of God. The Christian poet Cowper has expressed this principle strikingly in the following lines:

Here the just law, the judgment of the skies;

He who hates truth will be the dupe of lies.

And he who will be cheated to the last,

Delusions strong as hell shall bind him fast. In the book of Job we read (chapters 1 and 2) of the sons of God who are angelic beings, presenting themselves before the Lord and Satan coming among them. And God gave Satan permission to test Job. The Devil could not have acted apart from this divine permission. Therefore it could be said that the Lord sent Satan against Job, because His permission is equivalent to His sending.

182. Did the spirit of Samuel actually return to give a message to Saul?

Many think that the woman was attempting to deceive Saul and that she described Samuel knowing who he really was, though she pretended at first not to know him.

According to this view, the entire scene would have been a deceit on her part. Personally, however, I cannot but believe from what occurred afterward that God actually permitted the spirit of Samuel to return to give a message to Saul.

"Tomorrow shalt thou and thy sons be with me" (I Sam. 28:19). The witch of Endor had no way of knowing that this would actually occur, but God seems to have sent the message directly through Samuel.

183. I tried to show a certain one that it is wrong, according to the Bible, to have one's fortune told by so-called fortunetellers. Am I justified in using the following Scriptures:

Leviticus 19:31: 20:6; Deuteronomy 18:9-12?

I think you were quite right in using the Scriptures as you did to show that it is not the will of God that we should attempt to peer into the future. The future is His and any attempt to unveil it, except as He Himself has done so in the prophetic Word, is contrary to His will.

184. Is there such a thing as demon-possession today, and if so, how can we diagnose it?

I have no doubt that there is such a thing as demon- possession, yet I would not advise anyone to attempt to diagnose any such cases, as our knowledge of the whole subject is too limited to admit of safely conducting such investigations. There is one thing of which you can be certain:

no Christian can ever be demon- possessed. The Holy Spirit of God who indwells each believer guards against anything of the kind. I do think, of course, that some real Christians give heed at times to demoniacal suggestions and so act in a very wrong way, but I think that Scripture denies that a Christian can be so possessed. "Greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world" (I John 4:4). As to the unsaved, even if one might think they were demon-possessed they need the same Saviour that anyone else needs. The line of demarcation between demon-possession and insanity is so close that very few can distinguish, and tremendous blunders have been made by inexperienced persons who pretended to possess ability to discern spirits, when in reality they had not such a gift.

I consider that the writings of Mrs. Penn-Lewis have done tremendous harm to many Christians in causing them to become occupied with this subject. God's Word says, "I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil" (Rom. 16:19).

185. What is the unpardonable sin? Where in the Bible is it found?

The only unpardonable sin today is the rejection of Christ (John 3:18,36).

The unpardonable sin of Israel at Christ's first coming was the rejection of the Spirit's witness to His Messiah-ship. See Mark 3:28-30. Note specially verse 30: "Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit."

186. Just what is meant by the unpardonable sin mentioned in Matthew 12:32?

The sin referred to in Matthew 12:32 was committed when one declared the work of the Holy Spirit to be the work of the Devil. Only in this way could the leaders of the people in Israel excuse themselves for rejecting the Lord Jesus Christ.

187. Some years ago when I was out of fellowship with God, I was guilty of misappropriating a large sum of money. I have repented of this, but I cannot get the assurance that God has forgiven me. I have tried to tell myself that it is all under the blood, but always my conscience seems to say that I ought to make restitution to the people I wronged. What does the Bible teach as to this?

Under law, God distinctly commanded that if anybody robbed another, he was not only to pay him back in full and bring a trespass offering to God, but he was to add the fifth part as interest when he returned the money to the one from whom he had taken it. We are told in the eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, verse 4, that the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit. A Christian is therefore not to take lower ground than one under law. To excuse oneself from making restitution on the ground that God has forgiven and the past is under the blood is to dishonor the righteous principles laid down in the Word. By all means, go to the one whom you have wronged and make every restitution in your power.

188. Is it necessary for a husband or wife who has been unfaithful to confess the sin to the other in order to receive forgiveness of God?

I answer this question with a good deal of hesitation. Where the sin is known or has been charged against one, it would be adding wickedness to wickedness to deny and try to cover it. But in a case where the sin is known only to God and the other guilty party, one should, I believe, weigh well the possible consequences of any further confession than to Himself. If there has been true repentance and definite purpose of heart to be faithful in days to come, I see nothing to be gained by possibly breaking the heart of a loved one through confessing a sin of which the other is not aware. I know of no definite Scripture to guide in this matter.

189. Do you think card-playing is really a sin? I love to play cards and cannot see that it hurts my soul.

I know of no Scripture passage that tells the believer not to play cards, but the Word of God distinctly warns against worldliness and surely card-playing is a worldly pastime. Who was ever brought nearer to Christ by time spent at the card table? If half the hours devoted to card-playing by professed Christians were spent in the study of the Word and the other half in definite, persevering prayer, how different the experiences of many would be.

190. There has always been a question in my mind as to just what "separation from the world" actually means. In other words, what worldly pleasures must a Christian deny himself in order to live as Christ would have him live?

Scripture warns us against worldliness in all its varied forms. It sums it all up in these words: "All that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world" (John 2:16).

I think that one who really desires to please the Lord Jesus Christ can readily determine whether anything that is suggested as an innocent pastime involves an appeal to either of these avenues to the soul. Pictures and plays that appeal to the lust of the flesh, scenes that arouse thoughts of sensuality through the eye, or those things that appeal to human pride and vain glory, are all typical of the world, and he who would grow in grace and in the knowledge of Christ must needs reject them. I believe that the more Christians seek their pleasures in Christian associations, the happier they will be.

191. In order to obey II Corinthians 6:14-18 is it necessary to leave every organized church or society?

The separation there inculcated is separation from the world and necessarily from all so-called churches and societies where the Word of God is denied and Christ is rejected.

192. What is meant by Christian stewardship?

It means that I am to hold everything I possess as a trust committed to me by the Lord to use as He directs. This does not necessarily imply scattering all one's possessions among those in difficult circumstances, for to many such, promiscuous giving of that type would be no real blessing, but rather a curse. But it does mean that the Christian is to recognize the Lordship of Christ and look to Him to guide in the proper disposal of all that He entrusts to him.

193. Why do you so frequently, when announcing the collection in the Moody Church, tell the unsaved that you do not ask anything from them? Do you not think it will do them good to give and may help to make them Christians?

The chief reason why such an announcement is made is this: I do not want people to get the idea that anything they give or do is acceptable to God while they are rejecting the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor do I want them to imagine that any such self-denial or contributions to the work of the Lord will help to make them Christians. The Scripture says, "They that are in the flesh cannot please God" (Rom. 8:8). The Gospel song is correct which says:

Till to Jesus' work you cling

By a simple faith, Doing is a deadly thing, Doing ends in death.

Then, in the second place, Scripture opposes our looking to the world for the support of the Lord's work. In a past dispensation, Abraham refused to take anything from the king of Sodom who represented the world of that day. Of the early witnesses to the Gospel in the Christian dispensation, we read in the third epistle of John, verse 7, "For his name's sake they went forth, taking nothing of the Gentiles." This is our warrant for looking to the Lord's people alone to support the Lord's work. We are ambassadors for Christ, sent by Him into a godless world to represent the high court of heaven. Fancy the British ambassador at Washington soliciting from the American people to sustain his embassy. The divine principle clearly is that the work of God in the world should be sustained by the loving gifts of those who are redeemed.

194. Would it have been necessary for Christ to come in the flesh in order to reveal God to man if man had not sinned?

Christ is the visible manifestation of God who dwells in the light unto which no man can approach. He is the image of the invisible God; Deity as such cannot be seen by created eyes. Therefore it was in the purpose of God from all eternity to manifest Himself in human form, and this was undoubtedly in view when man was so created.

195. Is Jesus Christ equal to God the Father according to both natures?

I think Scripture clearly answers the question you ask. As far as His deity is concerned, our Lord Jesus Christ is co-equal with the Father and the Spirit. He says, "I and my Father are one" (John 10:30), and we read that "all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father" (John 5:23).

But in becoming man, He graciously took a voluntary place of subordination and so as man on earth, He says, "My Father is greater than I" (John 14:28).

196. Is our Lord just as truly man today as He was when here on the earth?

Our Lord is just as truly man today as He was when here on earth. The plain declaration of Scripture is: "There is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (I Tim. 2:5). In becoming man, He did not assume a temporary condition. He united deity with humanity never to be separated again. His Resurrection body, of course, is not sustained by blood, as it is an incorruptible body, but it is truly flesh and bone.

197. Has Jesus been limited in His power in any way because He has a human body? I know He has a Resurrection body, but can He be everywhere present as He was before He became incarnate?

Our blessed Lord is God as well as man. Necessarily His body cannot be in two places at one time, but this does not affect His omnipresence as a Person of the Trinity. He has said to His disciples, "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the consummation of the age" (Matt. 28:20, margin).

198. Is it Scriptural to say that our Saviour was the eternal Word but that He became the Son only when He was born into this world?

It is not. Our Lord is spoken of as the Son in two ways. Five times He is called the Only Begotten. This speaks of what He is from all eternity. He is the eternal Son as truly as He is the eternal Word. There could not be an eternal Father without an eternal Son. The Church has from the beginning confessed faith in the Trinity: God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. He who was in this sense Son of the Father from the eternal ages, condescended in grace to be born into the world as man, taking humanity into relationship with Deity. To His virgin mother, the angel said, "That holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God" (Luke 1:35). In this sense He is the Son of God as man because He had no human father. Of course as to His Person, He remained the same as He had been from all eternity, only that henceforth there were two natures in the one Person. He is both God and man.

199. Do you think after reading Gal. 1:1, Eph. 1:20, I Peter 1:21, II Cor. 1:9, I Thess. 1:10 and I Tim. 6:13-16, that God the Father has not delegated immortality to any of the Godhead? That He only has immortality?

Immortality refers only to the body. The passage in First Timothy, if carefully read, will show clearly that it is our Lord Jesus Christ who only hath immortality. That is, the body He took was not naturally subject to death, and in that same body He now sits on the throne of God in heaven. The resurrection of the dead is attributed to the Three Persons of the Godhead. Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father (Rom. 6:4). He was quickened by the Spirit (I Peter 3:8), and He says, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up" (John 2:19). "I lay down my life, that I might take it again" (John 10:17).

200. In what way does the veil in the Temple represent the humanity of Christ?

I believe that inasmuch as the veil in the Temple or earlier, in the Tabernacle, signified the flesh, that is, the humanity of Christ, we may take each of the different colors as representing various lines of truth in connection with His human nature. The fine linen we know represents righteousness, for we are told that in Revelation 19. The blue undoubtedly speaks of His heavenly character; the purple of His royalty, and I take it the scarlet speaks of His suffering, for the word translated scarlet is really "worm splendor." The worm was the tola, a little insect something like the cochineal of Mexico. These little creatures were crushed in mortars and the blood of the tola was the scarlet dye. In Psalm 22:6 our Lord exclaims prophetically, "I am a worm [tola], and no man."

He took the very lowest place, the place of the worm, and was crushed in death, that we might be robed in splendor.

201. In Mark 13:32 we read, "But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father." Why does Matthew 24:36, in making the same statement, omit the words "neither the Son"? How do you conform this statement of the Son's not knowing the day and the hour with the fact that the Father and the Son are one, and therefore both know all and everything?

The explanation lies in the difference in character of the two Gospels mentioned. In Matthew, Christ is presented as the King. Addressing His loyal subjects, He tells them that no one knows the hour of His return. In Mark, He is presented as the Servant in humiliation and as man here on earth in the servant's place, He chose not to draw upon His omniscience as the eternal Son of God in order to give information not revealed to the servants of God as such. He was to this extent self-limited. It is difficult for us to understand so great a mystery, but we need to remember that no man knows the Son but the Father, and we are told in Scripture that as man, Jesus increased in wisdom and stature. In other words, He learned, He was taught of the Father as He grew from childhood to manhood, and as man He spoke only the words that the Father gave Him.

202. In connection with the lesson on the temptation of Jesus, the question arose, "Could Jesus have sinned?" What do you understand to be the truth regarding this problem?

The question here raised is by no means a new one.

It has been discussed pro and con for centuries. Yet it seems to me that the Word of God, which can rightly be our only guide, is very clear on this point. We read that "God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man" (Jas. 1:13). Our Lord Jesus Christ did not cease to be God when in grace He also became man. As man here on earth, He was the only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth. He was not two persons, but one. He laid aside the form of God and took upon Himself the form of a servant, but He who did this was the eternal Son. The idea that Christ's human nature might have sinned even though His divine nature could not have done so is thoroughly contrary to Scripture. The two natures belong to the one Person.

Nestorius was accused, falsely, I believe, of teaching that in Christ there are two persons, one human, the other divine.

This view was rightly rejected, though what Nestorius really meant, I am convinced, was that in Christ there are two natures in one Person and this is the truth of Scripture. This being so, of course, He could not have sinned. If anyone insists that He might have done so, at once the question is raised, "What, then, of the Incarnation?" Deity did not simply dwell in Him as the Holy Spirit dwells in us, but when we are told that God was in Christ, we must accept the explanation of John 1:14:

"The Word [became flesh] and [tabernacled] among us." If Christ could have sinned, His failure would be the failure of God manifest in flesh. The very thought of this is blasphemous.

No doubt the question then would arise, "If He could not sin, where was the virtue of His standing and in what sense could His temptation be real?" The answer clearly is this: the temptation was not intended to find out whether He could have sinned, but to prove that He was in very truth the sinless One. He is the exact expression of the divine character and He manifested this in the way He met Satan's suggestions.

203. Is it correct for us to say that God "punished"

Christ for our sins, in the light of the verse "The chastisement [punishment] of our [sins] was upon him"?

Personally, I do not use the term God punished Christ for our sins, though I do not think the expression itself is really wrong. I do say God judged Christ for them, which amounts to the same thing. But sometimes people attach a sinister meaning to the word "punishment" which conveys a wrong thought to their minds if that word is used of God's dealing with His blessed Son when He took our place on the Cross. Chastisement, doubtless, conveys the same thought as punishment, but people do not attach quite the same meaning to it, generally speaking.

204. In the temptation of our Lord in the wilderness, did Satan appear to Him in person or was the temptation a mental one?

We need to remember that our Lord was God as well as man and that the object of the temptation was to demonstrate His absolute sinlessness, and therefore His ability to be the great Sin-Bearer. The sin offering must be manifestly unblemished. Satan tempted Him only to be rebuffed on every count. To Christ, he was certainly visible, as would be the entire world of spirits, good or bad, for while truly man, He was just as truly God, and while the temptation was an attempt to appeal to His manhood, yet He was not two persons, but one, and therefore able immediately to detect the presence of the adversary even though he took the form of an angel of light.

205. Why is Joseph, the foster father of Jesus, called the son of Jacob in the genealogy in Matthew, and the son of Heli in the genealogy in Luke? Is not this a definite contradiction?

Look at the records again. Definitely Matthew tells us that Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary (Matt. 1:16).

But Luke says Jesus was supposed to be the son of Joseph, which was of Heli (Luke 3:23). Notice that the words "the son"

are italicized and are not in the original. Read it "son-in-law"

and everything is clear. According to the Jewish Talmud, Heli was the father of Mary, the mother of Jesus. By his marriage to her, Joseph became the son-in-law of Heli.

206. There are three Aramaic expressions which our Saviour ases in the Authorized Version: one on the Cross, Matt. 27:46; another, Mark 15:34; and still another, Mark 5:41.

Why is the Aramaic used in these passages and why are His words in this same language not found elsewhere?

Aramaic was undoubtedly the language that our Lord used when He was a child in Nazareth. On certain occasions He reverts to it and it is interpreted for us, because the Gospels were written in Greek.

207. On which point are all the prophets agreed in Holy Scripture (Luke 24:27)?

On the sufferings of Christ and the glories that shall follow (I Pet. 1:11).

208. Is Christ ever designated the High Priest except in the Epistle to the Hebrews?

The term as applied to Christ is confined to this one epistle which was specially given of God to open up the typical character of the Levitical economy.

209. Please explain Galatians 6:14.

The Cross, the symbol of shame, is to the believer the sign of fellowship with Christ in His rejection by the world.

210. Was Christ born on December 25? If not why do we keep Christmas?

It is impossible for any one to say just when our Lord Jesus was born into this world. The traditional date for Christmas rests upon an ancient heathen festival, and December 25, or a date approximate thereto, was celebrated by the Greeks as the birthday of Apollo. In the course of centuries, as paganism died out, before the advance of Gospel light, some of these old festivals were taken over into the diluted Christianity of the day, and as the centuries went on, they became strongly entrenched in the churches. Many scholars believe that Christ's birthday must have occurred some time between March and September or October, as it is said that during the winter months it would be unlikely that shepherds would be attending their flocks by night in the open air in Palestine.

If God wanted us to know Christ's exact birthday, He would have revealed it. But it was not His will that His Church should observe sacred days or festivals (see Galatians 4:9-11). This, of course, does not interfere with the recognition of the Christmas season as a time of kindly ministration to the needy, and for friendly gifts and greet- ings. But as a strictly religious festival, Christmas has no place whatever in New Testament Christianity. The very word "Christmas" indicates its papal origin. It is "Christ's-mass" and true Protestants do not believe in "masses" of any kind.

211. How is it known that A.D. does not begin the year that Christ was born?

This was simply a matter of miscalculation because certain facts were not available at the time the anno Domini calendar was adopted. Later information obtained from ancient historical sources proves that Christ's actual birth must have been some three and a half years earlier than the supposed date.

212. What is the cup to which Jesus refers in His prayer in Matthew 26:39?

Undoubtedly the cup concerning which our Lord prayed that if it were possible it might pass from Him was the cup of divine judgment against sin which He must drink if He would save our souls from endless death. In Psalm 75:8 we read: "For in the hand of the Lord there is a cup, and the wine is red; it is full of mixture; and he poureth out of the same: but the dregs thereof, all the wicked of the earth shall wring them out, and drink them." This cup was filled to the brim and pressed to the lips of our blessed Saviour, who although His holy spotless soul shrank from tasting its dreadful contents, went submissively to the Cross, saying, "The cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?" (John 18:11).

213. When Pilate asked, "What is truth?" why did not the Lord reveal it to him?

Pilate did not ask sincerely. Otherwise he would not so soon have changed the subject. The Lord Jesus Christ does not answer when He detects unreality.

214. On what day of the week was our Lord crucified?

As to the day on which our Lord was crucified, there has been for some years a diversity of opinion. Some insist that the mention of three days and three nights implies that the Lord must have been in the tomb for seventy-two hours.

On the other hand, Scripture says, "Today is the third day since these things were done" (Luke 24:21), which would imply that He was crucified on Friday and rose on Sunday. I suppose there will always be differences of opinion as to this.

215. Why do Matthew, Mark and John say both thieves reviled Christ, whereas Luke says only one did?

Both thieves reviled the Lord in the beginning, but as time went on, one of them realized the sin he was committing and that the Sufferer on the central cross was really the Messiah of Israel.

216. Is there not a contradiction between Mark 15:23 and John 19:30?

There is no contradiction between these two verses.

The two cups offered the Lord were different. The one mingled with myrrh was a stupefying draft which kindly people offered to those about to be crucified in order that they might not feel the pain so severely. This our Lord refused. But as He was about to yield His spirit to the Father, He cried, "I thirst," and accepted the vinegar, which was a different drink altogether.

217. How is it that in Luke's account of the Crucifixion the veil was spoken of as being rent before Christ's death, whereas in the other Gospels, Christ is said to have died before the veil of the Temple was rent? I heard one dear man of God say that Luke was quite impetuous and "he could not wait long enough for the death of Christ to get the veil rent." I am not entirely satisfied with that explanation, and perhaps you could give me some light on it.

It is a mistake to say that all the other Gos* pels mention the rending of the veil, as John omits it altogether because in His Gospel the glory is shining throughout. But in Matthew and Mark the records seem to imply the rending of the veil after the last utterance of our Lord and the dismissing of His spirit. Luke, on the other hand, mentions it before he speaks of the Saviour's last words. This does not necessarily contradict the other accounts. Luke seems to be summarizing the various events and lays special emphasis upon that which indicated the close of the old dispensation and the beginning of the new. We may be sure that each writer was guided by the Holy Spirit in his presentation of the facts, and to talk of Luke's impetuosity is sheer nonsense. When the darkness passed— indicating that the cup of wrath had been drained—all was morally ready for the rending of the veil. God could now come out to man, and man could go in to God.

218. Did Jesus die of a broken heart? Do you think the hymn "He Died of a Broken Heart for Me" is Scriptural?

Much depends upon what the writer of the hymn meant. While some very able teachers believe that God permitted cardiac rupture at the last moment, when Jesus uttered a great cry, to be the actual means of His death, others feel that this is not in keeping with what we are told by the Holy Spirit, who says that Jesus gave up the ghost, or, as it might be translated, dismissed His spirit. This does not seem to imply any sudden rupture of the heart. But if the writer was thinking only of the deep sorrow that Jesus experienced, the language of the hymn would be permissible, though it would be improved, in my judgment, by changing one word. It would be better if it read, "He Died With a Broken Heart," for in this sense His heart was broken before His death, as indicated in Psalm 69:20: "Reproach hath broken my heart; and I am full of heaviness."

The entire subject is a very sacred mystery and should be approached with the greatest reverence, lest one should seem to put forth his hand and touch the ark of God.

219. Mark tells us that there was one angel in the tomb and Luke says there were two men. Please explain.

There were two angels at the tomb, one of whom addressed the women.

220. God must have had preknowledge that man would sin before He made Adam. Why, therefore, did He not make Adam with a will power strong enough to overcome all temptation and thus save all the pain and misery caused on account of his sin in the Garden of Eden?

God did make Adam with a will power strong enough to overcome all temptation. There was no necessity for his falling, had he but looked to God for needed help and confided in Him instead of listening to the voice of his wife, who had herself listened to the voice of the Devil. We need to remember that the determination on the part of God to make an intelligent creature capable of giving Him voluntary love and obedience necessitated the creation of a being who could, if he would, refuse obedience and give God hatred instead of love. A being who was good because he had to be and loved God because he could not do anything else, would be a mere automaton. God has shown His power to make creatures who have to act according to undeviating law in the animal creation. But how much we would have lost if we were but specialized animals. Our obedience is not a forced obedience but it becomes the obedience of love when we learn to know Him, "whom to know is life eternal."

221. Did not God give Adam and Eve their sinful natures; otherwise how could they have been tempted?

Scripture plainly shows that when God created Adam and Eve, they were innocent creatures. He created them, we are told, in His own image, after His own likeness.

When they disobeyed God, they fell into a sinful condition and the race has partaken of this same character. Adam, we read, begat a son in his own image, after his own likeness. In Ecclesiastes 7:29 we read, "God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions." Our Lord Jesus Christ was absolutely sinless, yet He suffered being tempted.

Temptation is the effort of the enemy to turn the heart away from God. With Adam and Eve he succeeded. With Christ he did not.

222. Was love for Eve the cause of Adam's sin?

I consider the statement that Adam sinned because of his love for Eve to be pure speculation. Scripture does not so speak. We have the plain fact that Adam sinned, and that knowingly.

223. Why was Eve's sin so much greater in God's sight than Adam's sin? It must have been, according to Genesis 3:16.

Scripture nowhere intimates that Eve's sin was greater than Adam's. If you carefully read I Timothy 2:12-15 you will see that the woman's sin consisted in acting for herself, independently of her husband. She was created to be a helpmeet for Adam, and it was to him primarily that the command was given. Therefore, when the enemy made his proposition to her, she should have referred the matter to her husband. This she did not do, and so she was deceived. Adam wilfully entered into the same sin with her, however, and so both were involved in disobedience. The judgment of Genesis 3:16 implies God's condemnation upon the woman for not keeping her proper place in creation. But there is an equal or even greater judgment upon the man in Genesis 3:17-19. He must henceforth exercise his headship in sorrow and trouble.

Whatever theories people may have as to this, the fact remains that human experience throughout the centuries is in full accord with Genesis 3:16-19.

224. What is meant by "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth" (Gen. 1:28)?

The word translated "replenish" does not necessarily imply that there had been inhabitants living on the earth before Adam, as some teach, but it simply means to fill the earth, that is, with inhabitants. Our English word "replenish" suggests, I know, making up for what has already been taken away, but this is not necessarily the meaning of the Hebrew word in question. Personally, I do not see anything in Scripture to warrant the idea that the earth was populated by another race before God created Adam. Scripture says, "The first man Adam."

225. Was the serpent in the garden able to talk to Adam and Eve before Satan entered into it, and did it lose the power of speech afterwards?

Satan appeared to Eve as a brilliant creature — Nahash (the word in the original), meaning "the shining one."

He glided away abased to the dust when sentence was pronounced by God. There is no hint that ordinary serpents ever had the power of speech.

226. Where is Satan now? Is he in heaven?

In reply to your question I would say that when we speak of Satan as being in "heaven" or "in the heavens," we do not mean that he is in the uncreated heavens, the dwelling place of God, but he is in the lower heavens. He is called "the prince of the power of the air" (Eph. 2:2), and as the accuser of our brethren he still has access to the presence of God, as in the days of Job and as seen in the vision in Zechariah. After the Church shall be caught up to be with the Lord, Satan will be cast down to earth and no longer permitted to roam the heavens, and then into the bottomless pit, and eventually into the lake of fire.

227. How can Satan, who is altogether sinful, appear before God in heaven as the accuser of the brethren when God cannot look on man because of his sin until he trusts in Christ as his Saviour?

We are told that God is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, that is, He cannot look upon it as something to be condoned. This does not militate against the fact that "the eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good"

(Proverbs 15:3).

228. Can you give any Scripture reference which teaches that the Devil sends diseases?

Nowhere in the Word of God are we told that the Devil sends diseases or sickness directly. He smote Job with boils, but this was by divine permission. The Lord Jesus spoke of "this woman . . . whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen years" (Luke 13:16), but of course, this also was by divine permission. It is a favorite theory of those who hold extreme faith healing views that all sickness is of the Devil. But Scripture teaches the very opposite. The Lord Himself accepts full responsibility for permitting all such affliction to come upon the human race. It is, of course, a part of our sad heritage because of sin.

229. Do you believe that all the 120 saints spoke in different languages on the Day of Pentecost? I believe that many did, but many of them received other gifts, such as prophecy and interpretation, etc.

There is nothing in Scripture to intimate that the one outstanding evidence that one has received the Holy Spirit is the gift of tongues. That is simply one of the many gifts of the Holy Spirit, and, frankly, I have never found any evidence that anyone possessed that gift today. I would not go so far as to say that nobody has it, but I have never known of it. What some people call "tongues" is gibberish and is not the same as the Bible gift. The gift of tongues, as spoken of in this connection, was the ability to minister the Word of God in languages one had never learned. There is no evidence whatever that on the Day of Pentecost the 120 believers all spoke with tongues, but Scripture says, "Are not all these which speak Galilaeans?" (Acts 2:7). That is, they were the twelve apostles.

230. Did the gift of tongues on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and in the Apostolic Church (I Cor. 14)

consist of the gift of speaking actual foreign languages current in that day which had not been previously studied?

I believe that the speaking in tongues on the Day of Pentecost mentioned in Acts 2 and that referred to in I Corinthians 14, also in connection with Peter's visit to Cornelius, was the use of actual foreign languages given by the Spirit, apart from personal study or acquaintance with them. I do not see any other way of explaining Acts 2. The Scripture clearly says that the apostles spoke in these tongues. It was not that the miracle was wrought in the ears of the people who thought they heard them in their own language; and in I Corinthians 14 it is evident that definite languages were meant, otherwise it would be impossible for anyone to ask intelligently for an interpreter before he began to speak.

231. Does I Corinthians 14:18,19 mean that Paul spoke more foreign languages than the Corinthians, or does it mean that he had a greater portion of the gift of ecstatic utterances?

I do not believe that there was any place in the Apostolic Church for what some of the expositors call ecstatic utterances. I think that has always been a satanic imitation. I think Paul, as he went from country to country, was enabled by the power of God to speak to the people in their languages.

232. How does one reconcile I Corinthians 14: 14 and 14:4?

I Corinthians 14:14 and I Corinthians 14:4 simply mean, I believe, that if one had the gift of tongues, it was not necessary for him to use it unless there was an interpreter present. If the power of the Spirit brought things before him and he was very sure of it in some other language, he would have a certain satisfaction as he prayed in the Spirit and realized that God had given him this marvelous gift, but inasmuch as the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets, he d not need to exercise it unless an interpreter was present.

233. Is the "Tongues Movement" of God? If it is, I want all that God has for me, but I am afraid of this movement as it seems to lead to wild excesses and fanaticism.

While we frankly admit that there are many devoted and godly Christians who favor or are taken up by this movement, we cannot but feel that it is contrary to sound Scriptural teaching, inasmuch as it makes the gift of tongues the evidence that one has received the Holy Spirit whereas this was but one of the gifts given by the Spirit to those already baptized into the one body (see I Cor. 12 throughout).

It is always a mistake to be occupied with emotional experiences rather than with Christ Himself in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

234. Where did Cain get his wife?

There is no way of telling how many people were living in the world by the time that Cain and Abel had grown to manhood, nor do we know how old Cain and Abel were when they brought their offerings to God, but if you turn to Genesis 5:1-5 you will see that Adam had a very large family. Verse 4 says, "He begat sons and daughters," though only three are mentioned by name: Cain, Abel and Seth. There is, of course, no way of telling whether, in starting the history of the human race, Cain married a sister or a niece, but he would evidently have plenty of either from which to choose.

235. Was Abraham a Jew?

The term "Jew" is a contraction of "Judah," therefore there were no people definitely called Jews until the tribe of Judah came into existence. You will remember the order.

Abraham, who was a Gentile himself, was the father of Isaac, who was the father of Jacob, who was the father of Judah.

From Judah came the Jews.

236. Are the Jews and Hebrews the same people? If not, who was the first Hebrew?

They are now, but not necessarily so originally. The name "Hebrew" comes from "Heber." Heber was the grandfather of Abraham and those descended from him were called Hebrews, so that Abraham was a Hebrew, but as I have mentioned in answering question 235, he could not be called a Jew.

237. Who are the house of Judah and who are the house of Israel?

The house of Judah are the descendants or tribe of Judah. The house of Israel is a term used in two ways in Scripture. While the divided kingdom lasted, it referred to the tribes in the north who revolted under Jeroboam. Since the Captivity, the terms Israel and Jew have been used interchangeably for the entire race descended from Jacob.

238. Who was the Ethiopian woman that Moses married, as recorded in Numbers 12:1?

There is no other reference to this woman. Some have thought she was Zipporah, others that Zipporah had died and he had married a Cushite woman. The term "Ethiopian" is used here as a translation for a word that does not necessarily refer to a Negro. The Cushite people inhabited parts of Arabia as well as eastern Africa.

239. Is Hiram of I Kings 5:1 and I Kings 7:13 the same person?

Hiram, the widow's son, who was a Jew on his mother's side and a Gentile on his father's, is not to be confounded with King Hiram, the ruler of Tyre. The widow's son was evidently a master architect and directed the construction of the Temple.

240. Who is "the prince of the kingdom of Persia"

mentioned in Daniel 10:13?

He was the evil angel who tried to keep the King of Persia from fulfilling the will of God in regard to Israel.

241. Why is it that the thirty-seventh chapter of Isaiah and II Kings 19 are alike? Were they written at the same time?

They were undoubtedly written by the same person.

Evidently Isaiah himself compiled that part of II Kings which gives the history of Hezekiah and other rulers in the days of his ministry. It is therefore quite in keeping that the Spirit of God should have led him to transfer a portion of his own book on the Kings to his prophecy.

242. Is the book of Esther really inspired? It does not have the Name of God in it and I heard a minister say it is merely a piece of Jewish folklore.

Esther has a very special place in the canon. It does not contain the Name of God because it is the book of Providence; but the hand of God is seen throughout. It was included in the Old Testament in the time of our Lord, who declared of the entire volume, "The scripture cannot be broken." See Notes on the Book of Esther by the author.

243. Do you believe the Old Testament is for our learning?

Read Romans 15:4 and I Corinthians 10:11. It is impossible to understand the New Testament if one ignores the study of the former revelation.

The New is in the Old concealed;

The Old is by the New revealed.

244. Can the book of Revelation be fully understood?

The question is ambiguous. No one yet has fully sounded the depths of any book of the Bible. It is like its Author—infinite. But the book of Revelation, like all other Scripture, was given for us to read and for our profit. We understand it as we study it under the Holy Spirit's guidance.

245. In Matthew 10, Mark 3 and Luke 6 we have three lists of the twelve whom Jesus chose. Matthew mentions one Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus. Mark refers to him simply as Thaddaeus, but when we turn to Luke we do not find his name there, but instead the name of Judas, the brother of James. Neither Matthew nor Mark mention Judas, the brother of James. Please explain this discrepancy.

Judas, Lebbaeus and Thaddaeus are three names for the same person. It was customary for Hebrews, as it is for ourselves, to have several names. Sometimes one was used, and sometimes another.

246. Where do we find the reference to James and Jude as the Lord's brothers?

James is called the Lord's brother by the Apostle Paul in the Epistle to the Galatians and Jude calls himself the brother of James. We learn from the Gospels that when our Lord was here on earth that "neither did his brethren believe in him" (John 7:5). The fact that they believed in Him when they wrote these epistles proves clearly that they knew Him in Resurrection, and they both speak of Him as Lord.

247. Was Luke a Jew or a Gentile?

The question you ask is not easily answered. There is nothing in Scripture that tells us definitely whether he was by birth a Jew or a Gentile. His name, of course, is Greek, but that would not prove that he was born of Gentile parents, as many Jews took Greek names or were given Greek names by their parents; for instance, Philip and Stephen, of whom we read in the book of Acts. Both their names are Greek, but they were Jews. Luke's intimate knowledge of all Jewish customs, etc., would seem to argue that he was probably a Jew of the dispersion. On the other hand, he may have been a Gentile proselyte to Judaism, who afterwards became a Christian. I do not know on what authority it could be said definitely that he was of Jewish ancestry. If he was not a Jew, he is the one Bible author, as far as I know, who did not belong to the chosen race.

248. Will you recommend a good book for Bible study for a small group who wish to meet for that purpose?

I think many have received great help from a study of the little book Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth by Dr. C. I.

Scofield. In some instances Bible classes have used a book of mine called Sailing with Paul. There is also an excellent book by Norman Camp, entitled Thinking with God.

249. Can you tell me of a good Church history book that also shows the distinct periods as indicated in the second and third chapters of Revelation?

One of the best Church history books I know of is that by Andrew Miller. It consists of three volumes.

250. Were Matthew the publican and Simon the Canaanite Gentiles?

Matthew the publican and Simon the Canaanite were both Galilean Jews. A publican was a Jew who served the Roman Government as a tax collector. Simon the Canaanite is elsewhere called Simon the Zealot. The Zealots were a nationalist party among the Jews whose aim carried out secretly was to make Canaan the land of the people of Canaan, that is, of the Jews and not the Romans. In some respects they could be likened to the Ku Klux Klan of our day, a secret society which emphasized nationalism. Acts 2 tells us that when Peter stood up with the eleven, which, of course, included Matthew and Simon, the people said, "Are not all these which speak Galilaeans?" That was true.

Part II: Prophetic and Eschatological

251. Are the Old Testament redeemed ones the bride of Christ, the same as those saved by the blood?

All believers from the beginning to the end of time are saved by the blood. There never has been any other way of salvation. God had in mind the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus before the world came into existence. But the bride of the Lamb, or the bride of Christ, as you put it, consists, I believe, of those who form the Church of this dispensation. Old Testament saints are, like John the Baptist, the friends of the Bridegroom. They will be the guests at the Marriage Supper of the Lamb (Rev. 19:9). The bride is not "called" as a guest; she is His wife. It is sometimes objected that the term "bride of Christ" is not actually found in Scripture, but it is not necessarily an unscriptural term, because in Ephesians 5:32, in setting forth the marriage relation the apostle says, "This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church."

In that passage he clearly indicates that the Church is the bride of Christ as Eve was the bride of Adam.

252. Please explain whether Luke 17:22-37 refers to the Rapture or to Christ's coming in judgment.

I think the context makes it clear that the reference is not to the Rapture but to the Lord's return to the earth to set up His kingdom. At that time one will be taken away by judgment and the other left to enjoy the land.

253. Please explain Matthew 27:51-53. What became of those saints who were raised from the dead at Christ's Resurrection?

As the Scripture does not tell us what became of those saints, I have no way of knowing. Christ is called "the firstfruits of them that slept" (I Cor. 15:20), and the first resurrection as such is still in the future, according to Revelation 20 and other passages. It is called elsewhere the "resurrection of the just" and is in two parts. The Church and Old Testament saints will be raised at the Rapture before the Great Tribulation and those who are put to death under the beast and the Antichrist during that time of trouble will be raised at the end of it. These two events complete the first resurrection.

254. Will the new bodies of the saints have blood?

The resurrection body will be material but not corruptible. The life of the flesh is in the blood. Our Lord shed His blood upon the Cross and Scripture never intimates His taking it again. The resurrection body will be like His, bloodless, because it will not be necessary for the repair of waste as under present conditions.

255. Why do you place the ascension of the Gentile Church before the resurrection of the dead? I Thessalonians 4:15 tells us: "We which are alive and remain . . . shall not prevent them which are asleep." etc., the dead being Jews and the Church, Gentiles.

There is no such thing as a Gentile Church. The Church is the body of Christ composed of those who by nature were Jews or Gentiles as the case might be. But in the new creation, there is neither Jew nor Gentile but all are one in Christ Jesus. At the coming of the Lord for the Church, those who have died in Christ will be raised first and then the living will be changed, and they will be caught up together to meet the Lord in the air. Old Testament saints will also be raised at this time because they, too, are in Christ.

256. Please explain Matthew 25 in reference to the ten virgins. Whom do they represent?

The ten virgins in Matthew 25 undoubtedly represent the whole company of those who profess to be the people of God. The wise who have the oil, which is typical of the Holy Spirit, are the saved. The unwise who have no oil are simply false professors.

257. In Revelation 13:15 we read that the beast out of the earth had power to give life to the image so that it could talk. I thought God alone could give life.

The word translated "life" is really breath. Only God has the power to communicate life.

258. What event is referred to in Matthew 24, verses 40 and 41? Do they refer to the Rapture of the Church before the Great Tribulation?

Primarily, the verses have no reference to the Rapture whatsoever, a subject that is not treated in the Synoptic Gospels. The passage will have its fulfillment in the Day of the Lord, when one will be taken away by judgment and the other left to enjoy the millennial kingdom. It is, of course, quite possible to apply the verses in the opposite way, and gather from them that one will be caught up to meet the Lord and the other left for judgment. But this is simply an application and not an interpretation.

259. What do you understand to be the interpretation of the "three unclean spirits" of Revelation 16:13, 14?

The three unclean spirits speak, I believe, of satanic energy arousing the nations to the last great conflict. They are demon powers stirring the nations by bombastic oratory. The frog is the figure of the blatant demagogue.

260. Does Scripture tell us how God will take care of babies at the Rapture of the saints?

I do not know of any definite Scripture passage which answers this question unless we consider the attitude of our Lord toward children when Israel came out of Egypt. For instance, the little ones were all taken out with their parents, and were all sheltered beneath the blood. All passed with their parents through the Red Sea. In the New Testament our Lord declares, "It is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish" (Matt. 18:14), and He shows that God our Father has a special care over infants, who are protected by the sheltering blood of Christ until they come to the age of accountability, when they must decide for themselves. Thus it would be proper to speak of the children as belonging to Christ even though they are born with a sinful nature. The apostle when telling us who will participate in the first resurrection and the Rapture says, "They that are Christ's at his coming" (I Cor. 15:23). This would seem to include the children but is, of course, only inferential.

261. Why do we put the ascension of the Gentile Church before the Tribulation? Our Lords puts it immediately after the Tribulation. We read in Scripture: "Send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet," etc. See Matthew 24:29-31 and Mark 13:24-27. In I Corinthians 15:52 we read, "The trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised . . . we shall be changed." Is our Lord's prophecy void?

In the prophecies quoted from Matthew and Mark our Lord made no reference whatever to the Rapture mentioned in I Thessalonians 4:16 or I Corinthians 15:52. He was speaking of the Second Coming of Christ to reign on the earth. There is no mention of resurrection at that time. He sends His angels with a great sound of a trumpet to gather together His elect, that is, the outcasts of Israel who will be restored and form the nucleus of the coming kingdom. This is evidently the same as the last trumpet in Revelation 10:7. The trumpet of I Corinthians is the same as that of I Thessalonians 4 and is the trump of God, not the trumpet of an angel. There is no confusion whatever if we distinguish between things that differ.

It is not Scriptural to speak of "the Gentile Church." See answer to question 255.

262. Why do we put the Rapture prior to the Devil's being cast out of heavep?

Because the Devil is not cast out of heaven until the Church, represented by the twenty-four elders, is already in heaven. Daniel's last week does not begin to run until after the Church has been caught up. Satan will be cast down to earth in the midst of the week, that is, after the first three and a half years.

263. We read in the Gospels, Matthew 24 and Mark 13, that Christ will appear in the clouds after the ending of all turmoil and upheavals. Revelation 16:15 reads, "Behold, I come as a thief," etc. Is this verse misplaced?

As in the above questions, the Rapture and the revelation are thoroughly confused. The Church will not be here on the earth during the Great Tribulation. There will be saints here but they will be the remnant of Israel at the close of their testing, and Christ will descend to take the kingdom on the earth. This is very different from His coming to the air to take His Church to be with Himself.

264. How do you distinguish the work of God in this age and in the age to come?

God is now gathering out a bride for His Son. In the coming age, the entire world will be brought into subjection to the Son.

265. In relation to John 3:13. would it be proper to speak of Moses and Elijah as men in the glory? Do they have spiritual bodies now like Christ's?

Both appeared with Christ in glorified bodies on the Mount of Transfiguration. We have no further light on the subject.

266. Will Christ literally come in the clouds of heaven?

His Second Coming will be as literal as His first (Acts 1:11).

267. How can the Church be the bride of Christ and yet be called the "new man" in Ephesians?

Israel was called the wife of Jehovah, and yet in another passage of Scripture God says, "Israel is my son"

(Exod. 4:22). "I . . . have called my son out of Egypt" (Hosea 11:1).

Remember the terms are figurative. Looked at from one standpoint the Church is the bride, from another the body of Christ, or again from a different standpoint, the Church is viewed as a house, a temple, again as a flock of sheep, and elsewhere as branches of a vine. There is no confusion whatever if the figures are kept distinct.

268. Does Scripture teach a partial Rapture?

Scripture gives no countenance whatever, in my judgment, to the view of a partial Rapture. Two passages absolutely deny such a thought, namely, I Thessalonians 4:17:

"We which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them" and I Corinthians 15:23: "They that are Christ's at his coming." Passages that are often quoted for the contrary view have no bearing upon it whatever. Hebrews 9:28 simply has to do with our Great High Priest's reappearance from the heavenly sanctuary. He has gone in, having made atonement.

We look for Him to come out. This is true of all believers.

In Philippians 3:10-14, the apostle is simply telling us that he does not dread or shrink from any circumstances for he knows that all lead on to the first resurrection. What he really says, as any student of the original knows, is: "If by any means I might attain unto the out resurrection from among the dead." This is his objective. He had counted everything loss for Christ. He was pressing on. He had only one object in view, namely, to be with Christ at the out resurrection. Whether he attained that through natural death or martyrdom was of no concern to him, and the same should be true of every one of us.

269. The Old Testament speaks of Israel as the wife of Jehovah. How, then, can the Church be the bride of Christ?

Just as London can be the capital of Great Britain and Washington the capital of the United States. The two Testaments deal with altogether different groups. Israel is the wife of Jehovah now divorced, but to be recognized again in the millennium.

Writing to the Church in Corinth, Paul says, "I have espoused you ... as a chaste virgin to Christ" (II Cor. 11:12), and in Ephesians 5 he says that the marriage relationship is a great mystery, but he adds, "I speak concerning Christ and the church" (vs. 32). If we remember that the terms are simply figurative, there need be no difficulty nor confusion.

270. Is the Church to become the bride of Christ?

According to Ephesians 5, the marriage relationship pictures the relationship between Christ and the Church. After referring to the union of Adam and Eve, the apostle says, "This is a great mystery: but I speak as concerning Christ and the church." See the previous question and answer.

271. Does the Bible teach that when the wicked dead are raised after Christ returns for the Church, they will be given another chance to accept Him?

*n

The Bible does not teach anywhere that when the Lord Jesus returns again the wicked will be raised and given another chance for salvation. This is one of the false teachings of the followers of Judge Rutherford and others who have turned away from the truth of God.

272. If they are not a part of the bride, what relation will Old Testament saints have to Him after the Rapture?

While the Old Testament saints are not a part of the bride, they will be as another has aptly put it, "on the burgess roll of the New Jerusalem," and will be a part of the armies of heaven who follow our Lord throughout the ages to come.

273. If the Church is to be the bride of Christ, how can we explain Revelation 19:7: "His wife hath made herself ready"? Does that involve good works and imply a certain circle of Christian believers?

All Christians comprise the bride but all must be manifested at the judgment seat of Christ. The Marriage Supper of the Lamb takes place after this manifestation when every believer will be rewarded according to the deeds done in the body. Of that time, we read, "Then shall every man have praise of God." It is important to remember that "he that doeth righteousness is righteous"; and the white robes are "the righteousnesses of the saints." No one, regardless of his profession, who does not practice righteousness is really a Christian. It is important to distinguish between the rignteousness which God imputes to all who believe and this practical righteousness in which we are responsible to walk.

274. Did our Lord ever refer to or teach the Rapture of the Church during His ministry on earth, except possibly in John 14:1-4? Do not the various Scripture passages in which He speaks of the coming of the Son of Man have to do with His coming to set up the kingdom?

It seems perfectly clear from Scripture that the truth of the Rapture was a special revelation given to the Apostle Paul. He says in I Corinthians 15:51: "Behold, I shew you a mystery"; that is, "I am going to tell you something that has hitherto been kept secret." In I Thessalonians 4 he unfolds this secret more fully but in such a way as to make it clear that it was a special revelation to himself. In John 14 our Lord refers to it but gives no information as to how it will be brought about. All this was still secret and was among the many things the Holy Spirit was to reveal, which the disciples were not yet in a position to apprehend. In the Synoptic Gospels all the passages relating to the coming of the Son of Man have reference to His return to set up His kingdom and the saints who are waiting on earth to greet Him are the Tribulation saints, namely, the remnant of Israel and some among the Gentiles who will be awakened through their testimony. The failure to apprehend this important distinction has led many into what is commonly called Post-Tribulationism. Failing to see that the Great Tribulation is the time of Jacob's trouble, they read the Church into the passages which have no reference to it whatsoever.

Robert A. Laidlaw has written a very helpful booklet on this subject. It is entitled Will the Church Go Through the Great Tribulation?

275. Can it be that the bride of Christ is a remnant of His own people Israel?

The remnant who are being called out during the present dispensation will, of course, form part of the bride, for the bridal company consists of converted Jews and Gentiles who have been baptized into one body by the Spirit. See Ephesians 3:6. Notice that the Gentiles are fellow heirs and of the same body, that is, the body which, of course, in the beginning consisted only of a Jewish remnant. That the body and bride are different figures for the Church is perfectly evident from a careful study of Ephesians 5.

276. Can you give even one proof text that the Church will escape the Great Tribulation?

Yes. Read carefully Revelation 3:10.

277. I have been told that I Corinthians 15. from verse 51 to the end, does not refer to the same event as that recorded in I Thessalonians 4, verse 13 to the end, but that in I Corinthians we have the resurrection of the saints which will take place some time before the Rapture of the living believers, as Christ was raised from the dead forty days before He ascended. Is this the teaching of Scripture?

I have no hesitancy in saying that the two passages mentioned above refer to exactly the same event. There is no hint anywhere that the resurrection of saints will take place before the Rapture. In I Corinthians 15 we are told: "This corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality," and this in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye. "This mortal" refers, of course, to the living; "this corruptible," to the dead. Believers who are living in their mortal bodies at that moment will be changed into immortality. Those who have died will be raised in incorruption. This is exactly the same thing as predicted in the other passage. "The dead in Christ shall rise first: then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air." The first resurrection and the Rapture are not separated even by a moment.

278. Does Isaiah 26:20-21 refer to Christ's coming for His Church before the Tribulation?

There is no reference in the Old Testament to the coming of the Lord for His Church. That was part of the mystery hitherto unrevealed, which was made known to the Apostle Paul. Although it is referred to by the Lord Jesus in John 14, He gave no definite instruction concerning it. Isaiah 26:20-21 refers to the Lord's care of the remnant of Israel in the day when the beast and Antichrist will seek to destroy all in the world who are of God. This will be in the time of the Great Tribulation, between the Rapture and the appearing.

279. Will those who have heard the Gospel but have neither accepted nor rejected it have a chance to accept the Gospel of the kingdom after the Rapture, like the Jews and those who never heard the Gospel during this age?

This is a matter on which we do not dare to speculate. We are told very distinctly in II Thessalonians 2:10- 11 that those who received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved, will be given up to strong delusion in the day of the Great Tribulation. As to the rest, we have to leave them with God.

280. Do you believe that Enoch and Elijah will actually come back during the Great Tribulation and become the two witnesses in Revelation 11:3? God said that all men must die; these two men have not died.

I have no hesitation in saying that I do not for one moment believe that Scripture teaches definitely that Enoch and Elijah will return to earth during the Great Tribulation and become the two witnesses in Revelation. Just as the twenty- four elders in heaven symbolize the entire priestly company of believers after they are caught up, so I believe the two witnesses symbolize the witnessing remnant of Israel in Jerusalem in the last days.

It is not true that God has said all must die. No such statement appears in His Word. Men assume this through a careless reading of, "It is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment" (Heb. 9:27). That is, of course, God's general appointment, but the apostle distinctly says, "We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed" (I Cor. 15:51). In Old Testament times God took two men to heaven without dying.

Soon He will take millions that way. Possibly we may be among them.

281. You say that you do not believe that Scripture teaches definitely that Enoch and Elijah will return to earth during the Great Tribulation and become the two witnesses mentioned in Revelation. If you believe they simply symbolize the witnessing remnant, do you believe the witnessing remnant are going to be able to have power to call down fire from heaven, shut heaven so that it will not rain, etc.? Will this witnessing remnant be killed and all their dead bodies left in the street of the great city three days and a half, and then shall this whole company rise and stand upon their feet and then be translated alive into heaven?

Where God has not spoken, I do not dare to speculate. Nowhere in the Word of God is it intimated that Enoch or Moses will ever come back to bear witness on earth and be slain. There is a prophecy that Elijah the prophet will return, but our Lord Jesus Christ made it very plain that that does not mean the exact personality, when He said to His disciples concerning John the Baptist, "If ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come" (Matt. 11:14). Evidently the prophecy refers to an Elijahlike character of ministry. On the other hand, Scripture very definitely declares in Daniel 12:3,10 that the wise among the people shall understand in the last days and shall instruct many; which means, of course, that there will be a remnant in Israel who will be given divine wisdom and will instruct others. Scripture also says that this remnant will be bitterly persecuted. In reading the book of Revelation we need to remember that our Lord has told us distinctly in the opening verse, "He sent and signified [these things] by his angel unto his servant John." The word "signified"

literally means "to make known by symbols." Therefore, I take it, the symbols in the book of Revelation have their explanation elsewhere in the Word, as I have tried clearly to explain in my own book on the Apocalypse. I have no difficulty whatever in seeing in the two witnesses, two being the number of testimony, a symbol of the witnessing remnant in Jerusalem in the days of the Antichrist. Neither have I any difficulty in believing that after they are put to death they will be raised from the dead and caught up to heaven. On the other hand, I do not dare to say that this resurrection will be literal, for we know very definitely that there is another resurrection in the same book of Revelation which is not literal, the resurrection of the Roman beast from the bottomless pit. It is, of course, the imperial power of Rome restored by satanic agency and not by any individual brought up from the dead.

I believe there is increasing danger of taking for granted weird, imaginary conceptions that have no actual foundation in the Word of God, but simply come from the imagination of prophecy mongers, who are anxious to attract a certain class who seem to live upon weird interpretations of Scripture. We need to be very sober indeed in studying and applying the prophetic Word. To study prophecy is important: to attempt to prophesy is verj foolish.

282. Is the destruction of the wicked a pre- or post-millennium event?

In regard to the destruction of the wicked, I would say that it is important to distinguish between those who will be destroyed by the brightness of Christ's appearing when He comes to set up His kingdom, and the judgment of the wicked dead at the Great White Throne. Between the two events, we have the thousand-year millennial reign. The Rapture as such is never mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels, so is not in view in Matthew 13:30. This was a special revelation to the Apostle Paul. The gathering of the righteous in Matthew 13:30 refers to the righteous who will be living on the earth when the Lord descends to take the kingdom. These, the wheat, will enter into the kingdom, while the tares, the ungodly, will be destroyed. Outside of Christendom will, of course, be vast millions of people who have never heard of nor rejected the Gospel. From them comes the great multitude of Revelation 7:9 who in that day will be brought to know the saving value of the blood of Christ.

283. Do you believe the so-called Anglo-Israel teaching to be Scriptural? If not, why not?

I do not believe that this system has a "leg to stand on" when judged in the light of Holy Scripture. It is a tissue of myths, questionable genealogies and un-historic deductions and perversions of the prophetic Word.

My main reasons for rejecting it may be given briefly as follows:

1. It makes a distinction between Israel and Judah which the Scriptures do not sustain. As long as the two kingdoms existed side by side in the land the term "Judah" or "Jew"

referred to the southern people and Israel to the ten tribes in the north. After the dispersion among the Gentiles, this distinction no longer held good in the prophetic world. "Jew," "Judah" and "Israel" are used over and over again interchangeably.

2. According to the teaching of Anglo-Israelism, God's great work during this dispensation is with Israel, which those who hold this view identify with the British Empire, the United States, and Gothic and Scandinavian peoples. This is absolutely contrary to Scripture. God is now taking out from among the Gentiles a people to His Name and the children of Israel still abide as Hosea 3:4 predicted: "For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod [or priesthood], and without teraphim [or household gods]." This is to be their condition until the restoration under King Messiah, as verse 5 shows.

3. This system maintains that the throne of David is the throne of the King of England. He is supposedly a lineal descendant of Zedekiah through his mythical daughter named Tea Tephi, who was supposed to be Jeremiah's ward and was taken by him according to the legend, to Ireland, where she was united in marriage to the "Knight of the Scarlet Thread," who was supposed to be a lineal descendant of that Zerah of whom we read in Genesis 38:27-30. Even if this weird yarn were true, it would not establish the title of anyone to sit upon the throne of David, and that for three very good reasons.

1. God declared that no descendant of Jeconiah should sit upon the throne of David (Jeremiah 22:30). Therefore we find in the New Testament that Christ, the true heir to David's throne, came not through Jeconiah, but through another line as given in Luke 3.

2. Zedekiah was not the true king of Judah. He was a puppet king set up by Nebuchadnezzar, and is not recognized in the genealogy of our Lord as given in Matthew 1:11.

3. The royal line of descent does not come through the mother, but the father in the Hebrew regime. Therefore it was impossible for the daughter of Zedekiah to convey the throne rights to her child.

4. According to Anglo-Israelism, Great Britain is Ephraim and the United States is Manasseh, yet the two peoples are linguistically and racially one. How, then, can such a distinction be maintained? The Puritan fathers would leave the shores of Europe as Ephraimites and become Manassites by landing in the United States! Could absurdity go further?

5. It is not true that the sword "Saxon" means "Isaac's son," or that the word "British" means "the man of the covenant."

These are but fanciful interpretations unsustained by sober linguists.

6. It is unthinkable that the Israelites so utterly forgot the religion of their fathers as to have no knowledge whatever of the Jehovah of Israel upon their landing in Britain. Yet the ancient Britishers were absolute idolaters and bereft of any knowledge of the true God.

7. Whereas other peoples found in parts of Asia where the ten tribes were scattered observe to this day the rite of circumcision, this rite never had any place among the early Britishers.

8. It is not Scriptural to speak of the ten tribes as "lost." That is a mere fiction. According to the later chapters of Chronicles and Kings and the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, many of the ten tribes were associated with the Jews who returned to Jerusalem after the Babylonian and Assyrian captivities.

9. Israel's conversion and recognition by God comes after the Second Coming of Christ, not before.

10. During the present dispensation, national distinctions are all done away in Christ, where there is neither Jew nor Gentile, bond nor free, but all are one in Him.

Anglo-Israelism tends to bolster up national pride and is thoroughly repugnant to the principles of New Testament Christianity.

284. What and where is the "prison" mentioned in Matthew 5:25,26, Luke 12:58,59 and I Peter 3:18-20?

The prison mentioned in Matthew 5:25,26 is an illustration, and pictures, of course, that eternal prison out of which no one will ever be delivered. Luke 12:58, 59 refers to the same thing. I Peter 3:18-20 tells us that our Lord preached by the Holy Spirit to the antediluvians through Noah. They rejected the testimony and are therefore now in prison, that is, in Hades, awaiting the final day of judgment.

285. Does Nahum 2:3, 4 refer to automobiles?

The entire passage refers to the destruction of Nineveh. There were no automobiles in those days.

286. Who are the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation 7 and 14?

These are all of Israel constituting the remnant who will turn to the Lord when the veil is taken away from their hearts after the Church has been caught up to be with the Lord. They will be preserved throughout the Great Tribulation in order that they may share the coming kingdom on the earth with the Lord Jesus.

For a fuller discussion of all these questions, the reader is referred to the writer's volumes Lectures on the Book of Daniel and Lectures on the Book of Revelation.

287. I would appreciate it so much if you would explain about John the Baptist in the reference to Elias in Matthew 11:14 and John 1:21.

I would say that the Lord's own words, "If ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come," make it clear that He did not mean that John was actually Elijah. This, of course, John denied. But John did come in the spirit and power of Elijah; that is, his message was of the same type: it was a call to repentance and to return to the Lord.

288. Is there anything in the Scriptures that would lead one to teach that out of the tribe of Dan the Antichrist will come?

This was a common belief in the early days of the Church and many hold it still. It is based primarily on Jacob's words in Genesis 49:17: "Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward." Immediately following this, in verse 18, we have the cry of the afflicted remnant: "I have waited for thy salvation, O Lord." Moreover, we find this striking fact in the book of Judges: it was the tribe of Dan that first established idolatry in Israel as a tribal affair. Some have drawn from this the conclusion that the last form of idolatry will come out of the same tribe, but this, of course, is simply speculation.

289. Does the expression "new heaven and new earth" imply that the heavenly inheritance of believers is to be upon a renewed earth?

Quite the contrary. It shows us that the heavenly saints will have their inheritance in the new heaven, which will be entirely purged from the presence of Satan and all his evil hosts; whereas earthly saints will go from millennial blessedness into the new earth. The two are intimately connected but are never confounded.

290. When Christ comes back again, will He bring with Him the kingdom of God or the kingdom of heaven?

r

I understand the term "kingdom of God" to be used in two senses in Scripture. It covers the divine authority over the entire universe at any and all times, but it also refers to the displayed kingdom which Christ will bring in when He comes again. Mark and Luke use it very frequently in this way. Matthew alone uses the term, "the kingdom of heaven," and that in two ways also. Mystically it covers the entire sphere of profession during the time that the King is absent, as in the parables of the kingdom of heaven. But when our Lord returns, heaven's authority will be established over all the earth and that will be the displayed kingdom of heaven, which is in two parts: the kingdom of the Father, including the resurrected and changed saints, and the kingdom of the Son of Man, those who are here on earth.

291. Is there a passage which shows that the tribe of Dan will govern at any time?

The prophecy of Jacob in Genesis 49:16 says: "Dan shall judge his people, as one of the tribes of Israel"; and in Ezekiel 48:1, we learn that in the millennium, Dan will have an inheritance with the rest of the tribes in the northern part of the land.

292. Will people who reject the Gospel now be saved during the Great Tribulation?

I think II Thessalonians 2 makes it perfectly clear that they will not. On the other hand, of course, there are many people among the various Gentile nations who have never definitely rejected the Gospel, and Revelation 7 tells of a great multitude out of all kindreds and tongues and peoples and nations who will come up out of the Great Tribulation, who have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb. They will have their part in the earthly kingdom.

293. How near are we to the fulfillment of Revelation 3:10?

Revelation 3:10 is a definite promise given to the Church and will be fulfilled by the Lord's returning in the air and taking us away before the time of trial comes. I think people generally forget that the time of the Great Tribulation is not merely a time of bloody warfare, pestilence, famine, etc., but the time when the wrath of God will be poured out on the earth, and "God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ" (I Thess. 5:9). So we are waiting for Him as our Deliverer from the wrath to come.

294. Do you think the end of the times of the Gentiles began in 1914 with the World War?

No, there is no evidence of anything of the kind.

There has been much of idle speculation regarding this, but the times of the Gentiles cannot end until Jerusalem and the land of Palestine are completely freed from Gentile domination and the King reigns in Zion. Some have been misled by the term, "trodden down," and have supposed that when Turkish rule ended, Jerusalem was no longer trodden down of the Gentiles. But although the original word there used comes from a root meaning "to tread under foot," it actually has the thought of subjection and Jerusalem is still in subjection to the Gentiles and will be until the end of the Great Tribulation, the time of Jacob's trouble, which will not begin until after the Church has been caught up to be with the Lord.

Personally, I utterly repudiate every system of "date setting."

All that have been worked out in the past have been proved false and we may be absolutely certain that all present systems will be proved untrue as time goes on. Let us never forget the words of the Lord Jesus spoken in resurrection to His inquiring disciples: "It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power." Some dear brethren imagine it is for them to know, but the plain testimony of the Lord avers the contrary.

295. Do you consider the present return of the Jews to Palestine the actual fulfillment of prophecy? Do not the prophets predict their return to God and recognition of their Messiah at the same time as their return to the land?

Careful reference to many prophetic Scripture passages, particularly to such passages as Ezekiel 36, will reveal that the prediction of the return of a vast number of the people to the land indicates that they will go back before the regeneration of the nation. Notice that the early verses of this chapter, for instance, show that the land is to be reinhabited, the waste places built up, the mountains reforested, orchards and vineyards planted, and that a general condition of prosperity will prevail. Later will occur the turning to God when the Spirit shall be poured out upon them from on high. This, of course, we know from other Scripture passages, will be coincident with the return of the Lord Jesus Christ, so that we may feel assured that the present movement is in exact accord with the predicted Word, though not yet the complete fulfillment. Our hearts should become solemn as we see these things coming to pass and know that the return of our Lord cannot be far away. Since the above was written, Israel has become a nation in the land of Palestine but we need to remember it is there only by favor of the Gentile powers to whom they still have to look for help and protection.

296. What part will the United States play on the great and final arena of nations in the last days, and where in the Bible do you find references to our nation?

In my opinion, Scripture is silent as to the United States and whatever part it will have in the coming day, except that when the beast arises, that is, the head of the revived Roman Empire, he will hold sway over the nations that once formed that Empire, and Scripture says that he will trample the residue with his feet (Dan. 7:7), which implies, I take it, that other nations which sprang out of these will have to be more or less subject to him and act with him. The reason the United States or the American continent as a whole is not mentioned in prophecy, I presume, is because this Western land had nothing to do with the people of Israel in the beginning. The nations that had to do with Israel formed the prophetic earth.

297. Do you believe Daniel's Seventieth Week has begun?

Daniel's Seventieth Week cannot begin until after the Church has been raptured and God once more recognizes Israel as His testimony in the earth. Even then it will not begin until the covenant is made between the head of the revived Roman Empire and the religious head of the Jewish state, which may be sometime after the Rapture. Consequently, we are not in that period at all. The Rapture must precede it because the Church is a heavenly people. We have nothing to do with the working out of these earthly affairs.

298. When will Armageddon take place?

We have no way of knowing when the present age of grace will come to an end with the rapture of the Church, after which the events depicted in Revelation 4 to 19 will take place.

Armageddon will be the consummation of the Great Tribulation just before the appearing of the Lord Jesus Christ to set up the kingdom predicted by the prophets.

299. Will you please show me how to reconcile Zechariah 1:-B. 17 and Zechariah 2:12 with Jeremiah 23:40?

In the passages in Zechariah which you mention, God is promising the eventual restoration of Jerusalem when His people will be restored to Himself: in Jeremiah He is pronouncing a judgment upon the false prophets of that day who were misleading the people. As a result of their false teaching the city was to be destroyed and they themselves were to be brought into everlasting reproach and perpetual shame. There is really no contradiction whatever between the two classes of passages.

300. Does Zechariah 8:10 refer to conditions just before the Second Coming of Christ?

I think a careful reading of Zechariah will show that verse 10 has no reference primarily to the last days as such. It refers rather to the conditions prevailing in Israel as recorded in the first part of the book of Ezra. Notice that verse 9 is definitely related to the prophecy of Haggai. He and Zechariah encouraged the people to go on building the Temple even after the letter had come from Persia commanding the work to cease. The people of Israel had been falsely represented by their foes as rebuilding the city and the wall, and it was this that the Persian king said must stop at that time. When the people began again to carry out the work the Lord had commanded, blessing came, but before those days there was no hire for man or beast, etc. This is just one of the examples which proves the value of Peter's warning that no prophecy of the Scripture is of its own interpretation. In other words, you cannot lift j verse out of its own connection and give it some specific interpretation to which the context does not apply.

That conditions similar to those described in Zechariah 8 may prevail in the time of the end is very evident from other Scripture passages, but I am afraid that people often misuse some of those verses in a way that causes some to become excited rather than to wait quietly for the Lord to come in His own time.

301. Is the beast in Daniel 7:23-25 the same as that spoken of in Revelation 13:1-8 or 11-18?

The beast of Revelation 13:1-8 is identical with the Little Horn on the head of the fourth beast of Daniel 7. He will be the last blasphemous head of Gentile supremacy. The two- horned beast of Revelation 13:11-18 is the Antichrist, the religious head of the Jewish nation in the last days. Neither of these evil personalities will be manifested until after the Church has been caught up to be with the Lord.

302. I would like to have an explanation of Daniel 12:7.

I believe the seventh verse of Daniel 12 refers to the period of the Great Tribulation; the time, times, and half a time equal three and one-half years, elsewhere designated as forty- two months, or 1,260 days, the time of Jacob's trouble, when the remnant of Israel will be in great affliction in the days of the Antichrist, after the Rapture of the Church and preceding the coming of the Son of Man to set up His kingdom on the earth.

303. Do you believe that the nation spoken of in the eighteenth chapter of Isaiah is the United States?

While some very earnest Bible students are fully convinced that such is the case, I would not dare venture to affirm this definitely. In some respects it seems to me the passage might apply rather to Great Britain than to the United States as such, or perhaps to Great Britain and her colonies and this great nation which came from it. The prophet evidently has in view a great maritime people befriending the Jew and helping to carry the remnant back to the land of Palestine in the last days. In regard to unfulfilled prophecy, where there is no definite explanation of the passage given in the context or elsewhere in the Word, it seems wisest not to be dogmatic.

304. In the great prophecy of the Seventy Weeks of Daniel, just what events are we to understand took place during the first period, that is, the seven weeks which we understand to be forty-nine years?

Scripture makes it plain that it was during this time that the wall of Jerusalem was rebuilt and the city itself made habitable once more. While we do not get any direct information telling us that it took exactly forty-nine years for the rehabilitation of Jerusalem, yet the prophecy itself makes it evident that this is a fact.

305. Will there be another great persecution?

There may be outbursts of persecution for Christians at any time; but there will be a definite persecution of the remnant of Israel under the Antichrist, in the coming Great Tribulation referred to in Revelation 13:15-18.

306. Does Revelation 14:1-4 refer to lews or Gentiles and is the defilement physical or spiritual?

The 144,000 mentioned in chapters 7 and 14 of Revelation are the remnant of Israel who will be preserved alive in spite of the Antichrist's opposition, and stand with the Lamb on Mount Zion when He descends to take the kingdom.

They will be kept from defiling alliances in the last days.

307. What countries will form the revived Roman Empire?

I do not like to be too dogmatic in regard to unfulfilled prophecy, but I take it that the countries surrounding the Mediterranean Sea, where Rome once held sway, will, in all likelihood, be the countries which will form the revived empire. Probably Great Britain will also be included.

308. What is your explanation of Isaiah 31:5? Was that prophecy fulfilled in the capture of Jerusalem by General Allenby?

We are particularly warned in Peter's epistle that no prophecy of the Scriptures is of its own interpretation, or as rendered in our version, "private interpretation." All must be taken in connection with the context and the general prophetic scheme unfolded in the Word of God. While Isaiah 31:5 might very well be applied to the capture of Jerusalem by General Allenby and to his airplanes flying over the city, yet the context makes it very evident that its complete fulfillment will be in a later day when all nations will be gathered about Jeru- salem for battle and the Lord will come with all His saints to deliver the city according to Zechariah 14.

309. Do you think we are now living in the last half of the Seventieth Week of Daniel, that is, in the time of the Great Tribulation, and that the Lord will descend to set up His kingdom at the end of this period, as so many teach?

Such speculations are utterly unscriptural and exceedingly foolish. We have nothing to do with the times and seasons, which are linked entirely with God's dealings with the people of Israel. During all the present dispensations these times and seasons are in abeyance. God will not begin to count prophetic time again until after the Church has been caught up to be with the Lord. Sometime after that a covenant will be made between the head of the coming great world empire and the returned Jews in Palestine. From the time that the covenant is made until the close of the Great Tribulation will be exactly one week of years, that is, seven years. People who speak of our being in the Great Tribulation at the present time show utter ignorance of what is meant by that term. It is not merely a time of great distress and suffering on the earth, but it is characterized throughout by wrath. During the first three and one-half years the wrath of the Lamb will be poured out upon the world. In the last three and one-half years the vials of the wrath of God will be emptied upon apostate Christendom and apostate Judaism, and at the same time the wrath of Satan will be vented against the people of God, who will be on earth at that time, not members of the Church, but the remnant of Israel, and some other people spared from among the Gentiles, in view of the coming kingdom. We look for the Lord Jesus as our Deliverer from the wrath to come.

310. Are we living in the last days of this world's history?

No. We are undoubtedly living in the last days of the Church dispensation. The world will not end until after the millennium.

311. Do we have any Scriptural reason for believing that the city of Babylon shall be rebuilt before the Lord's return to reign?

Many eminent Bible students so believe, but our judgment is that the Babylon of the Apocalypse is a religious and commercial system which is to be destroyed immediately before the Lord sets up His kingdom. We believe that literal Babylon has fallen, never to rise again. Read carefully Jeremiah 50 and 51.

312. Please explain Malachi 4:5.

Our Lord showed that John the Baptist came in the spirit and power of Elijah and if the people of his day had received him, he would have fulfilled this prophecy.

Undoubtedly, then, in the same way, after the Church has gone, in the days of the Great Tribulation, another Elijahlike testimony will be raised up, possibly through the two witnesses mentioned in Revelation 11. It does not necessarily follow that Elijah himself will actually return, though some think this is the meaning of the passage, and I would not dare to say it is not. But our Saviour's words certainly give reason to believe that this need not necessarily be a personal appearing of Elijah.

313. Is it true that the Greek word "aion" never means endless but refers to an age?

The ablest Greek scholars declare there is no other word in the Greek language for eternity but aion. It is so used in the classics. For a full discussion of this see Facts and Theories as to a Future State, by F. W. Grant, published by Loizeaux Bros., New York.

314. To what period of time does Jeremiah 25:29- 38 refer?

The passage refers to the time of the end and is a direct prophecy of the conditions that will prevail in the land of Palestine at the close of the Great Tribulation. It synchronizes with the great supper of God depicted in Revelation 19:17.

315. Was President Roosevelt's plan to take control of all the gold of America a fulfillment of prophecy?

Prophecy has to do with Israel and the earth, and has little to say concerning the present "dispensation of the mystery." It is a mistake to try to fit every economic measure into a prophetic mold.

316. What is the early and latter rain of Hosea 6:3 and Joel 2:23?

The passages refer to the return of normal rain conditions to Palestine as Christ's advent draws nigh.

317. I read in a tract that all the feasts in the Old Testament were types of things to come and that their antitypes occurred on the same day as the type, and that all have been fulfilled except the Feast of Trumpets, which will have its antitype in the Second Coming of Christ for the Church, when the trump of the Lord will summon the dead from the tombs and the living will be changed. Would this mean that the Lord must come for the Church on the day of the Feast of Trumpets some year?

The Feast of Trumpets is a Jewish type. It sets forth not the coming of the Lord for the Church, a mystery never revealed in Old Testament times, but His sending forth His angels with the sound of a great trump to gather the outcasts of Israel when He comes as Son of Man to set up His kingdom on the earth. Immediately following that will be the true Day of Atonement for Israel, when they will look upon Him whom they have pierced and recognize Him as their Saviour. This will be followed by the Feast of Tabernacles of the glorious millennial age. There is no intimation in Scripture as to when the Rapture is to take place. We are to look for it momentarily.

318. From a human standpoint, does it not look as though the return of Christ is evidently far in the future since so few lews are now in Palestine?

At the time that this question was propounded there were only about 600,000 Jews in Palestine, but in the years that have elapsed since, many thousands more have returned to that land and are now recognized as the nation of Israel. The fact that they are returning annually in great numbers surely suggests the near return of our blessed Lord."

319. Where in prophecy do we read of the United States? Is it the two-horned beast of Revelation 13?

The second beast of Revelation 13:11 is the Antichrist, in my judgment. I know of no direct prophecy referring to the United States. Possibly Isaiah 18 might be so applied.

320. What will bring the nations to Jerusalem and culminate in Armageddon?

Unquestionably national greed and jealousy. The various nations will be eager to wrest Palestine from the Jews in the latter day. Inasmuch as the Jewish state at that time will have entered into an alliance with the revived Roman Empire, this will throw the nations of the East and the West into fearful conflict.

321. Who is the woman clothed with the sun as described in Revelation 12 of whom it is written: "And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" (verse 17)?

The sun-clothed woman is Israel as seen in the counsels of God, of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came. This symbol does not represent the Church or any part of it, as some have supposed. The Church did not give birth to Christ, but it is Israel who is His mother after the flesh. "Her seed" is the faithful remnant who in the days of the Great Tribulation, after the Rapture of the Church, will keep the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus, and thus be exposed to the persecutions of the beast and the Antichrist.

322. What is meant in Revelation 14:4 by the statement that the 144,000 "were not defiled with women"?

The remnant of Israel will be a company walking in holy separation from the apostate systems represented by evil women in the last days.

323. What will write in our foreheads the Name of the Father, which Christians should have in order to be one of the 144,000 as described in Revelations 14?

In the first place there is no such book in the Bible as "Revelations." The last book of the New Testament is "The Revelation of Jesus Christ." It is one complete unveiling, as the word translated "revelation" really means. In the second place, the 144,000 are not Christians. They are the remnant of Israel who will be regenerated in the days of the Great Tribulation.

The Spirit of God acting from heaven will give them the knowledge of the Father after the Church is gone.

324. Who has the right to eat of the tree of life and the right to enter the Holy City?

The answer is clearly given in the Revised Version, which is based on the best manuscript authority. "Blessed are they that wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may enter in through the gates into the city"

(Rev. 22:14). In other words, all who are washed from their sins by the precious blood of Christ have title to the tree of life and the Holy City.

325. What is the mark of the beast and the number 666?

It is idle to speculate as to these. Until the beast actually arises, none can tell with certainty.

326. Are the 144,000 of Revelation 7:3-4 sealed for martyrdom or for divine protection from the wrath of the beast?

Undoubtedly for the latter reason. In my judgment the same company appears again in Revelation 14, at the close of the Great Tribulation with the Lamb on Mt. Zion. They are the remnant of Israel preserved through all the horrors of the Great Tribulation to enter into the coming kingdom as the firstfruits unto God and the Lamb.

327. Explain the words "Messiah shall be cut off" in Daniel 9:26.

The passage refers to the crucifixion of our Lord which took place at the expiration of sixty-nine prophetical weeks of years following the commandment to restore and build Jerusalem, recorded in Nehemiah 2.

328. Are the beast and the Antichrist the same? \ ANSWER: No. The beast will be the civil head of the revived Roman Empire. The Antichrist will be an apostate Jew accepted by the Jews and apostate Christendom as the promised Messiah.

329. In Revelation 5:11, according to the Authorized, Revised and German translations, the "thousands of thousands" are angels. But in an interlinear version I read this: "And I saw, and I heard [the] voice of many angels around the throne and of the living creatures and of the elders and thousands of thousands," etc. Would this imply that these thousands were redeemed ones instead of angels? The "and"

("kai") seems to say so.

The kai might just as well be rendered "even," in which case it makes it clear that the indefinite number refers to angels.

330. Will the millennium be spent in heaven or on earth, and where and when will Jesus begin the interrupted reign of His ancestor David?

Christ is never said to reign in heaven. He will reign on earth. The millennial kingdom therefore will be here after Christ returns.

331. What is the millennium?

The reign of Christ over the earth in righteousness for a thousand glorious years.

332. Do you understand the Scriptures to teach that the saints who are caught up to be with the Lord and the Saviour Himself are coming back to live on the earth during the millennium, that is, to dwell in houses here and to take up earth life again?

There is a great deal of misapprehension in regard to the millennial kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ. This kingdom will be in two parts. The resurrected and changed saints will have material bodies of flesh and bone like the Resurrection body of our Saviour. This body is not sustained by food and is not subject to earthly limitations. It is incorruptible. There is no Scripture that indicates that these will return to live on the earth for the thousand years. Their home will be the heavenly Jerusalem above, in the kingdom of the Father, the throne city, from which they will reign with the Lord over the redeemed universe. On the other hand, those who are living on the earth when our Lord comes will be divided into two classes. The incorrigibly wicked will be destroyed; others will be given an opportunity to accept and obey the righteous King, our Lord Jesus Christ. These will enter into the kingdom of the Son of Man, over which Christ will reign until He delivers it up to the Father. Heavenly saints will be visible to earthly saints, as will our blessed Lord. Their relationship to the earthly saints will be very much the same as that of angels to men in the patriarchal age. The heavenly saints will ascend and descend at the will of the Lord to administer the affairs of the kingdom on earth.

333. Will all peoples and nations who are living on the earth when Christ returns to this earth to reign, participate in the millennial kingdom?

No; there will be what has been called the "warrior"

judgment, when He descends and those taken in red-handed opposition to God and His Christ will be destroyed by the brightness of His appearing. Then there will be the "sessional"

judgment, as depicted in Matthew 25, as a result of which many will go away into everlasting punishment. The others will remain to participate in kingdom blessings.

334. Do all sinners go to the same place?

All sinners go to the same place, but there are different degrees of punishment according to the measure of light and wickedness.

335. When will the prophecy of Ezekiel 47:11 be fulfilled?

The entire passage applies to the beginning of the millennial reign of Christ.

336. Will anyone be saved who is raised in the second resurrection, or are they all the wicked dead? What about those who die during the millennium?

According to Isaiah 65:20-23, the righteous will evidently live throughout the millennial or kingdom age. "But the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed." That is, death will be the direct result only of wilful sin. Those who die will be raised at the resurrection of judgment, depicted in Revelation 20:11-15. It seems reasonable, therefore, to believe that all who participate in the second resurrection will be among the lost.

337. When Christ and His saints return to earth in their glorified bodies, will there be selling and buying of food as in the present dispensation?

In regard to your question, I would say that we must distinguish, as we think of the millennial reign of Christ, between the heavenly saints, who will be in glorified bodies, and the earthly saints, who will be living here in the world in their natural bodies. These, of course, will exercise all their ordinary physical functions. With the heavenly saints it will be altogether different.

338. Who ore the people who will listen to Satan when he comes up out of the bottomless pit and will join in the last great rebellion against Christ and His saints?

Throughout all the millennial reign of Christ it will be just as necessary as it is now for people to be regenerated, but as the centuries go on, there will be those who will yield only "feigned obedience" unto Christ. As long as there is no open outbreak of sin they will be permitted to live on the earth. These are the ones who will listen to the voice of the Tempter when he is permitted to test mankind for the last time. They will be destroyed by fire from heaven at the end of the world.

339. After the destruction of the earth with fire from heaven, will the earthly kingdom continue as an earthly kingdom composed of saved Jews and Gentiles, or will we all be one group, a heavenly host with earthly and heavenly privileges?

The mediatorial kingdom continues only until Christ has subdued all things to Himself. Then He hands back the kingdom to the Father, that God—Father, Son and Holy Spirit— may be all in all. Christ's personal receivership will then have ended, if I may so put it. Then throughout eternity, heavenly conditions will prevail on the new earth, where those will dwell whose inheritance was earthly, whereas those who have a heavenly inheritance will be in the New Jerusalem above.

340. Are entire nations to enter into life eternal and other entire nations to go into everlasting punishment?

How can nations any more than individuals be saved and enter into life eternal on a basis of their works alone, as Matthew 25:31-46 indicates?

It often seems to me that the judgment of the nations is quite misunderstood by some pre-millennial teachers. The idea that nations as such are to be judged simply as to how they have treated the Jew throughout the centuries, that some nations are to go into life eternal and other nations into eternal punishment is absurd on the face of it. The word "nations" is exactly the same as the word "Gentiles." Our Lord told His apostles to go and disciple the nations, that is, to teach the Gentiles. Paul said he was a teacher of the Gentiles or the nations. We are today carrying the Gospel to the nations.

Now the nations, that is, the Gentiles, who are living on the earth when the Lord Jesus Christ returns will be judged and dealt with according to their relationship to Him. Where there is real faith it will be manifested by the treatment they have given to His brethren. That is, I take it, the remnant of Israel who will bear witness during the Tribulation. Those who have shown grace and kindness because they have believed the message, will enter into life eternal here on earth in the millennium and eventually in the eternal state, whereas those who have refused the message and repudiated the messengers themselves, showing that they have no faith, will be destroyed and go into everlasting punishment.

341. Does Matthew 25:40 refer to Jew or Gentile?

The entire passage from verse 31 to 46 refers to the pre-millennial judgment of the living nations when the Son of Man comes in person to set up His kingdom. The sheep are children of God from among the Gentile nations who manifest real faith by their attitude toward the "brethren" of the Lord, who are the remnant of Israel in the Tribulation days. The goats are those who persecuted or were indifferent to the suffering remnant—unsaved Gentiles who are to be destroyed in judgment ere the kingdom is established.

342. What is the meaning of this passage: "No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation"?

The exact translation of the passage in II Peter 1:20 is this, "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of its own interpretation," that is, no prophecy can be understood correctly if taken away from its context and apart from the general prophetic teaching of the Word of God. All prophecy is one whole coming from the same divine mind.

343. Where will the judgment about which we read in Revelation 20:11, be held when the earth and the heavens flee away?

It is the last great assize and will be set up in space.

The heaven referred to is, of course, the created heaven, not the dwelling place of God.

344. Are believers who have died, in heaven before the general resurrection?

Scripture knows nothing of "the general resurrection." It clearly teaches that there are two resurrections, one to life and one to judgment. Believers who die are "with Christ" while their bodies sleep in the grave until the first resurrection. Paul speaks of "the whole family in heaven and earth" (Eph. 3:15). This could not be true if those who have passed away are in an unconscious sleep. They are in heaven, the abode of departed saints.

345. What is the meaning of the term "many mansions"?

The term "mansions" in John 14:2 is exactly the same as the term "abode" in the latter part of the chapter. So it might be rendered, "In my Father's house are many abodes, or abiding places." That is, there is room in the Father's house for all, but the Lord, since the work of the Cross, has prepared a special place for those who now trust His grace; that is, a place inside the rent veil.

346. Please explain the Greek word "parousia."

Parousia means "coming" or "presence." It is applied to both aspects of our Lord's return.

347. Explain the expression "Anathema Maranatha" found in I Corinthians 16:22.

Anathema is Greek and means "accursed" or "devoted to judgment." Maranatha is Aramaic and means "Our Lord cometh."

348. What is the new covenant, Hebrews 8:10.

where it is written, "I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts"?

It is the covenant that God will make with Israel and Judah in the last days. Neither the old nor the new covenants are made with the Church. It is to Israel that the covenants pertain (Romans 9:4). The Church, however, comes under the blessings of the new covenant, sealed by the blood of Christ;

pure grace, saving and regenerating all who trust in Christ Jesus.

349. How can Genesis 5:24, Hebrews 11:5 and II Kings 2:11 agree with our Lord's words in John 3:13?

There is no discrepancy between the passages you mention and John 3:13. Enoch and Elijah were caught up to heaven, but our Lord ascended, that is, He went up in His own power. While the expression "He was taken up" is used in Acts 1, this does not militate against the fact that again and again He is said to have ascended. This was not true of Enoch or Elijah.

350. Are we to understand that the wicked will be tormented eternally in literal fire and brimstone?

Probably the best answer to this questioa is that the fire of hell will be as literal as the gold and pearls of the New Jerusalem, but all of these are symbolic expressions, designed to impress us, on the one hand, with the awfulness of eternal separation from God, and, on the other, the blessedness of our eternal home in His presence.

351. What are the prayers of the saints, referred to in Hebrews 12:23 and Revelation 5:8?

Hebrews 12:23 does not refer to the prayers of saints. It speaks of "the spirits of just men made perfect." These are Old Testament saints, who were not perfected until the death of Christ on the Cross. Revelation 5:8 refers to the prayers of saints on earth during the Great Tribulation, which will be presented before God by the risen Christ in heaven.

352. Kindly explain Isaiah 55:12 where we read, "All the trees of the field shall clap their hands."

This statement is poetically descriptive of creation's joy in the day of the coming kingdom.

353. What is the meaning of the white stone in Revelation 2:17?

Among the ancients, voting was very frequently carried out by casting stones into an urn. A black stone was a vote against a candidate; a white stone was for him. Our blessed Lord gives the white stone to all who believe in Him. In other words, He owns them as His elect.

354. How would you explain the notable omission of prophetic messages that marks the period of Solomon?

Prophecy is for a day of declension. It was after things went wrong that God gave prophetic ministry.

355. Do you believe that the wicked will be punished eternally in literal fire?

I fear that often behind this question is the hope that in some way God will be better than His Word and that it will be more tolerable for the wicked than the Scriptures seem to imply. The punishment of the finally impenitent is likened in Scripture to fire, to imprisonment, to outer darkness, to wandering stars and to severe beating. All of these figures are intended by the Lord to make us realize that "it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." If fire is but a symbol, remember that the reality will be far worse than any symbol could possibly be. If any unsaved reader is reading these lines, let me beseech him to flee at once to Christ for refuge and thus never have to learn by actual experience the real meaning of hell fire.

356. Are there different degrees of punishment in hell?

It seems perfectly plain from Scripture that there are. Each one will be judged according to his works. Had men believed in Christ they would not have to face this judgment, but since they refused Him, they will have to be judged each one individually for" the deeds done in the body. God will mete out to every impenitent soul judgment in accordance with the measure of light enjoyed here on earth, and the opportunities neglected. Some will be beaten with many stripes, others with few, but all alike will be cast into outer darkness.

In Job 34:10-12 we read: "Therefore hearken unto me, ye men of understanding: far be it from God, that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that he should commit iniquity. For the work of a man shall he render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways. Yea, surely God will not do wickedly, neither will the Almighty pervert judgment."

357. Does a dead person see and know what is going on about his body before burial?

The dead, that is, dead bodies, do not know anything. But the spirit is absent from the body and is either present with the Lord, if saved, or in Hades (see Luke 16)

awaiting the day of judgment if unsaved.

We are not told to what extent, if any, the departed are aware of earthly conditions. That is one of "the secret things" which belong to God alone (Deut. 29:29).

358. If the Holy Spirit goes up with the saints at the Rapture, how can anyone be saved during the Great Tribulation apart from His work?

Just as people were saved in past centuries and before Pentecost. The Spirit of God is omnipresent and He is ever free to work upon the hearts and consciences of men. At Pentecost He came in a special way to dwell in the bodies of believers, thus forming the Church. He abides with them forever. Therefore when the Church is caught up, He goes up with the Church in that sense. This does not, of course, in the slightest degree change His omnipresence. Throughout the Great Tribulation He will be just as free to work upon the hearts of men as in the past ages. At the beginning of the millennial kingdom He will come the second time, and will be poured out in world-wide blessing upon all flesh when the nations turn to the Lord.

359. I am rejoicing in the truth that, according to the final revelation given to the Apostle Paul, salvation is wholly by grace, and God. therefore, will eventually reconcile all men and demons to Himself, according to Colos-sicnis 1:20.

Why do you not proclaim this precious truth?

Because it is not truth but a specious lie of the Devil, designed to lull men to sleep in their sins, until they awake in an eternal hell. The reconciliation mentioned in Colossians 1:20 does not include "all men and demons," but all things in earth and in heaven. This will be fulfilled in the "new heavens and . . . new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness." But even then the ungodly will "have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." This is neither reconciliation nor annihilation. Death is separation from God. This will be eternal. While salvation is by grace, it is only grace to repentant, believing sinners. It is soul- murder to teach the theory you propound.

360. What will be the plan of salvation for people left on earth after the Rapture and during the Tribulation period, and what will be the plan of salvation during the earthly reign of our precious Lord?

The answer is perfectly clear from Scripture. All men in every dispensation are saved by grace. There are different ways by which men manifest their faith in submission to the Lord. In the Tribulation period they wash their robes and make them white in the blood of the Lamb through faith in the coming Saviour. During the millennium all shall know Him, from the least to the greatest. It will be the age of sight, not faith, but will involve personal submission of heart to Himself. There will be those who will yield feigned obedience and so will not be saved. No one will be saved by obedience, but obedience will be the proof of heart submission to Christ.

361. What will take place at the Marriage Feast?

There are three such feasts contemplated in Scripture:

1. The Gospel Feast, to which all are invited, is likened to "a marriage which a king made for his son." Men come to this feast who are unreal, and refuse to don the wedding garment. When the King comes in to see the guests, such are cast out.

2. The Marriage Feast, when Israel, Jehovah's divorced wife, will be brought back to her rightful husband. That will be celebrated in Palestine at the Lord's return.

3. The Marriage Supper of the Lamb in heaven, when the bride of the Lamb, the Church, will be openly presented to her Bridegroom and enter into the fullness of His joy. The guests there will be saints of other ages, called to the supper, to join in the gladness of the Lamb and His wife.

362. What is the Gospel of the kingdom, and when is it to be preached?

The Gospel of the kingdom is one phase of that one Gospel which is God's message concerning His blessed Son. It is a mistake, I think, to speak as though there were two Gospels, the Gospel of the kingdom and the Gospel of the grace of God. As you read through the Synoptic Gospels you will see that the truth of Christ's deity, His death and Resurrection were proclaimed even by John the Baptist, who bore witness that Jesus was the Son of God, and declared, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John 1:29). Then the Saviour Himself told His disciples of the redemption He had come to bring. All this was included in the Gospel of the kingdom; but the special emphasis was upon His coming to reign. Before He went away He told His disciples, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature" (Mark 16:15). This involves preaching that Christ is Lord of all, and this is the Gospel of the kingdom. But it also involves telling of the grace of God to sinners through the Saviour's death and Resurrection, and this is the Gospel of the grace of God.

During all this age we are responsible to proclaim the Gospel in its fullness. Then after the Church is taken up, God will call out a Jewish remnant to whom the truth will be revealed and they will instruct many in righteousness (see Daniel 12). They will continue the proclamation concerning the coming King.

This will continue during the period of the Tribulation and will find its culmination in the return of the Lord in power and glory to establish His kingdom over all the earth.