Below are questions and my answers concerning the New Testament Scriptures: explanations of the meanings of various passages or contemplation on various events portrayed in the New Testament. For questions and answers on the Old Testament, please go here. The decisions between what go here and what are placed on the page of questions and answers on doctrines might be considered arbitrary by many; I have attempted in many ways to determine the spirit in which the question was asked, as a general question about the meaning of a Scripture versus a question on the nature of particular doctrines.
Q: The term, "in Christ," is used how many times in the New Testament?
A: From a search of the ESV, it would seem that the phrase is used 89 times in the New Testament.
Q: My pastor says that Jesus was around 4 to 5 years old when Herod sent his men to kill the children. I have never been able to find any thing to support that age. Could you help me?
A: Based on the revelation of Scripture and what we can know from historical accounts, the age of 4 to 5 is extremely unlikely. It is far more likely that Jesus was less than 2, probably only a few months old, when Herod ordered his men to kill the children of Bethlehem.
We can know this for two reasons:
- Matthew 2:16:
Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the Wise-men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the male children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the borders thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had exactly learned of the Wise-men.
We see that Herod's order was to kill all the children aged two and under, having ascertained that from the Magi as the timeframe in which Jesus was born.
- Historical accounts. From Josephus and other historians, we gain the understanding that Herod the Great, who is manifestly under discussion, died around the year 4 BCE. After Herod's death, the rule of Judea was first given to Archelaus (cf. Matthew 2:22), and later to a series of Roman procurators (of whom Pontius Pilate was one); only after the death of Jesus did another Herod rule in Jerusalem. Since the birth of Jesus is believed to have been somewhere between 6 BCE to 2 BCE, with 4 BCE being the most likely, He was probably only a couple months old when Herod's order was made.
Q: What does the following mean:
"Blessed is the pure in heart, for they shall see God", (Matthew 5:8)?
A: Matthew 5:8 is part of the preaching of Jesus commonly called "The Sermon on the Mount," and is part of the beginning of that preaching, commonly called the "Beatitudes," since Jesus blesses various downtrodden and humbled people in Matthew 5:3-11:
"Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called sons of God. Blessed are they that have been persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye when men shall reproach you, and persecute you, and say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake."
The specific blessing you refer to in verse 8 is directed toward the pure in heart, a group far smaller than those who would desire to appear pure but truly act unrighteously. The pure in heart are those who are not only pure on the outside but are internally pure-- they in both thought and deed do the good God wants for mankind. Their blessing is to "see God." Does this mean that they will literally and physically see God while in a mortal form with their eyeballs? Surely not, for John says that no man has ever seen God in John 1:18. To "see God" can be interpreted in two ways: it either refers to the ability to go to Heaven and be a part of God's spiritual kingdom there and see Him spiritually face to face in the end, or it can refer in a metaphorical sense to be found pleasing to God and therefore the recipient of His great blessings, or both: those who are pure in heart will share in the blessings of God's favor while doing His work on earth, and will be rewarded in Heaven by seeing God and being with Him in spiritual unity.
Q: In Matthew 5:18, it reads:
"For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled."
Is this saying that till heaven and earth pass away not one bit of the law will be changed till it is all fulfilled? Is heaven and earth passing away conditional as well as fulfillment in order for "one jot or one tittle" to pass from the law?
A: Matthew 5:17-18:
"Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Until heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, until all things be accomplished."
Jesus uses two layers of temporally conditional statements:
- One jot or tittle will not pass away from the law until heaven and earth pass away.
- One jot or tittle will not pass away from the law until all things are accomplished.
Jesus came to fulfill-- when He fulfills the Law, it passes away (cf. Colossians 2:14-17, Hebrews 8:1-13). Yet before it was fulfilled by Him, it would require the destruction of heaven and earth for the minutest portion of the law to be altered. Therefore, the answer to your first question would be "yes." In regards to the second question, however, the answer is "no," since the law was changed once it was fulfilled.
Q: How do you interpret Matthew 5:33-37 and James 5:12? Is the Bible saying that we should not say, "I swear it..." but rather just say "yes" and stick to our word? Is it bad to say "I swear"?
A: Let us examine Matthew 5:33-37 and James 5:12:
"Again, ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, 'Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:'
but I say unto you, swear not at all; neither by the heaven, for it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of his feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, for thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your speech be, 'Yea, yea; Nay, nay:'
and whatsoever is more than these is of the evil one."
But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by the heaven, nor by the earth, nor by any other oath: but let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay; that ye fall not under judgment.
The meaning of these verses seems apparent: we ought not swear by anything, lest we fall under judgment, and our word (our "yes" and our "no") is to be sufficient. As Christians, we should not need to swear, since by our confession of Christ it ought to be recognized by all that we are not liars and we always speak the truth.
It would be good for us to cease any form of swearing, and allow our yes be yes and our no, no. I can understand, especially in terms of obeying civil authorities in a court of law, that in some instances it is profitable to swear so as to not cause offense (allowing us to obey the civil authorities). It is also understandable, however, if one determines that there is never an opportunity where a Christian should swear and lives his life under that conviction.
Q: What is the connection between Jairus' daughter and the woman who had bled for 12 years?
A: The narrative including these two events may be found in Mark 5:21-43:
And when Jesus had crossed again in the boat to the other side, a great crowd gathered about him, and he was beside the sea. Then came one of the rulers of the synagogue, Jairus by name, and seeing him, he fell at his feet and implored him earnestly, saying,
"My little daughter is at the point of death. Come and lay your hands on her, so that she may be made well and live."
And he went with him. And a great crowd followed him and thronged about him. And there was a woman who had had a discharge of blood for twelve years, and who had suffered much under many physicians, and had spent all that she had, and was no better but rather grew worse. She had heard the reports about Jesus and came up behind him in the crowd and touched his garment.
For she said, "If I touch even his garments, I will be made well."
And immediately the flow of blood dried up, and she felt in her body that she was healed of her disease. And Jesus, perceiving in himself that power had gone out from him, immediately turned about in the crowd and said,
"Who touched my garments?"
And his disciples said to him, "You see the crowd pressing around you, and yet you say, 'Who touched me?'"
And he looked around to see who had done it. But the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came in fear and trembling and fell down before him and told him the whole truth.
And he said to her, "Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace, and be healed of your disease."
While he was still speaking, there came from the ruler's house some who said,
"Your daughter is dead. Why trouble the Teacher any further?"
But overhearing what they said, Jesus said to the ruler of the synagogue,
"Do not fear, only believe."
And he allowed no one to follow him except Peter and James and John the brother of James. They came to the house of the ruler of the synagogue, and Jesus saw a commotion, people weeping and wailing loudly. And when he had entered, he said to them,
"Why are you making a commotion and weeping? The child is not dead but sleeping."
And they laughed at him. But he put them all outside and took the child's father and mother and those who were with him and went in where the child was. Taking her by the hand he said to her,
"Talitha cumi,"
which means, "Little girl, I say to you, arise."
And immediately the girl got up and began walking (for she was twelve years of age), and they were immediately overcome with amazement. And he strictly charged them that no one should know this, and told them to give her something to eat.
The connection between these two events is strictly temporal, representing two miracles performed by Jesus on the western side of the Sea of Galilee (since He had crossed over from the Decapolis as seen in verse 20). Jairus saw Jesus and begged Him to save his daughter, and while they traveled to the house, a great crowd grew around Jesus. The woman with the discharge of blood was a part of this crowd, and she reached out and touched Jesus, which prompted Him to inquire as to who did it. She came out and confessed, and He blessed her, and He continued on His way to Jairus' house where He resurrected the his daughter. Both people were inhabitants of the same house and both were benefitted from Jesus on the same day, but beyond that no connection is stated.
Q: Explain Matthew 10:34-39 to me. Is Jesus saying that the Lord will allow these things to happen?
A: Matthew 10:34:39:
"Think not that I came to send peace on the earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law: and a man's foes shall be they of his own household. He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that doth not take his cross and follow after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it; and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it."
In this passage, Jesus is commissioning His twelve disciples as they are about to go out and engage in their own ministries (cf. Matthew 10:1-6). Part of His message to His disciples is the natural division that comes in a family if one person obeys the Gospel while others remain in unbelief.
We should not interpret this passage so as to make Jesus say that no matter what, family divisions will take place in every family. Jesus is referring to families where some believe yet not everyone (compare Luke 12:52), and that if the believers are taking the stand they ought to take-- that Jesus is more important than family-- that division and hostility will result. The message of Jesus Christ-- nay, in truth, the rejection of that message by some-- will cause division even in the tightest bonds of the day: the family. And that will be a major test of faith, for one must choose Jesus over his or her family, and that is not an easy choice to make.
Does the Lord "allow" these things? It is probably better to say that what Jesus says in Matthew 10:34-39 is a statement exhibiting reality: if one is a Christian, and one's family is not, if you are making your stand as you ought, odds are that it will cause division, friction, or hostility in some form.
Q: Matthew 11:15 compares to what other Bible verse?
A: Matthew 11:15:
"He that hath ears to hear, let him hear."
This phrase is also used by Jesus verbatim in Luke 8:8 and Luke 14:35, and He uses it to emphasize the lesson He desires His audience to learn.
The concept of hearing, both literally hearing sounds and also the process of understanding and obeying, is a constant concept throughout the Scriptures, with Isaiah 6:9-10 probably the best example of such:
And he said, "Go, and tell this people,
'Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not.'
Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they sea with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn again, and be healed."
Q: What is the unpardonable sin?
A:The "unpardonable sin" is mentioned in Matthew 12:31-32:
"Therefore I say unto you, Every sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men; but the blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever shall speak against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in that which is to come."
What is blasphemy against the Spirit? The rejection of the message of Christ (cf. John 14), otherwise known as the Gospel. If this is rejected, one cannot live a life pleasing to God; hence, that sin is unforgivable, since there is no desire on the part of the one rejecting to be forgiven.
Q: I would like to know if Lazarus and the rich man is used as an example or a story about what happens to us when we die. I still don't understand how we take this story in Luke and base where we spend eternity if we aren't Christians.
A: Let us examine this story in Luke 16:19-31:
"Now there was a certain rich man, and he was clothed in purple and fine linen, faring sumptuously every day: and a certain beggar named Lazarus was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table; yea, even the dogs come and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and that he was carried away by the angels into Abraham's bosom: and the rich man also died, and was buried. And in Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
And he cried and said, 'Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame.'
But Abraham said, 'Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things: but now here he is comforted and thou art in anguish. And besides all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed, that they that would pass from hence to you may not be able, and that none may cross over from thence to us.'
And he said, 'I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house; for I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torment.'
But Abraham saith, 'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.'
And he said, 'Nay, father Abraham: but if one go to them from the dead, they will repent.'
And he said unto him, 'If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, if one rise from the dead.'"
There is great contention over the nature of this story-- whether it reflects a true story or is simply a parable of Jesus-- but for the purposes of your question we can set this aside and attempt to understand the nature of Jesus' instruction.
There is also, unfortunately, contention over exactly what happens when we die. We of course are well-aware that after the Judgment the redeemed will go to Heaven while the condemned go to Hell (Matthew 35:31-46); what happens before the Judgment, however, is less clear. It seems apparent from this narrative and others (Luke 23:43, Acts 2:27) that souls go to Hades/Sheol (the Greek and Hebrew terms for the place), and it would appear that this location is divided between those who are blessed and those who are condemned.
This story in and of itself does not "fix" where non-Christians will spend eternity; this passage in conjunction with passages like Matthew 25:31-46, 2 Thessalonians 1:6-9, Matthew 8:11-12, Matthew 13:42, etc., demonstrate that those who do not know God or obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ will suffer eternal torment apart from the presence of God, as was the fate of the rich man in the story of Lazarus.
Q: What is meant by, "upon this rock I will build My church?"
A: I believe you are referring to the statement made in Matthew 16:18 within the narrative of Matthew 16:13-19:
Now when Jesus came into the parts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, "Who do men say that the Son of man is?"
And they said, "Some say John the Baptist; some, Elijah; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets."
He saith unto them, "But who say ye that I am?"
And Simon Peter answered and said, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
And Jesus answered and said unto him, "Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Those in the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox organizations would tell you that Peter is the rock under discussion; this, however, is not true nor possible according to the text, and I would direct you to A Study of Denominations: Roman Catholicism, I: Authority for the evidence of this.
The "Rock" that Jesus refers to is no one but Himself, for we are told the following in 1 Corinthians 3:10-11:
According to the grace of God which was given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder I laid a foundation; and another buildeth thereon. But let each man take heed how he buildeth thereon. For other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
Jesus Christ is the foundation of the church, and in this matter we should not forget His parable in Matthew 7:24-27:
"Every one therefore that heareth these words of mine, and doeth them, shall be likened unto a wise man, who built his house upon the rock: and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and if fell not: for it was founded upon the rock. And every one that heareth these words of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand: and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and smote upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall thereof."
The rock, as we can see, is the strong foundation for the house that will not fall. Jesus Christ is most assuredly the rock that the church is built on.
Q: How long did Lazarus live and how old was he after he arose from the dead?
A: The account of Lazarus, his death, and Jesus bringing him back from the dead may be found in John 11. We are not given any information concerning his age at the time of his death/return, nor are we ever told when he did actually perish again.
Any form of answer would be purely speculative, and while perhaps many have hazarded some guesses, there is no way that we can know with the information we currently have.
Q: I have read somewhere in the Bible that when we come before the Lord we should wear our best clothes. Could you find the Scripture for me?
A: The closest thing I can think of is a parable of Jesus in Matthew 22:8-14:
"Then saith he to his servants, 'The wedding is ready, but they that were bidden were not worthy. Go ye therefore unto the partings of the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage feast.'
And those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was filled with guests. But when the king came in to behold the guests, he saw there a man who had not on a wedding-garment: and he saith unto him,
'Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding-garment?'
And he was speechless.
Then the king said to the servants, 'Bind him hand and foot, and cast him out into the outer darkness; there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.'
For many are called, but few chosen."
The point of this parable, however, is not to speak about clothing per se: in the ancient world, each person invited to a wedding would be given a wedding garment, and so to be in a wedding and not wearing a wedding garment was to show that you had intentionally and willfully rejected the gift of the host. This is why the man without the garment was cast out-- not because he did not have the garment, but because he rejected the gift of his host.
In terms of wearing our best clothing when assembling, such represents a tradition more than anything else; the Scriptures do not establish that such is required.
Q: In Matthew 24 it sounds like Jesus is talking about the end of time, but he says to his apostles that it would happen in their generation. And what is he talking about in verses 40 and 41 (one will be taken and the other left)?
A: There is much confusion about what Jesus says in Matthew 24, and it's precisely for the reason you indicate: most people think that He is talking about the "end of time."
He is talking about an end of an age, but it's not THE end of the world-- He is describing the destruction of Jerusalem and the definitive end of the covenant between God and Israel in Matthew 24:1-36, as is made clear by comparing Mark 13 and Luke 21. This occurred 40 years after His death and resurrection-- happening in their generation, just as Jesus said it would.
"Then shall two men be in the field; one is taken, and one is left: two women shall be grinding at the mill; one is taken, and one is left" (Matthew 24:40-41).
This part of the discussion could have reference to the destruction of Jerusalem, to the end of time, or perhaps a bit of both. Regardless, Jesus is not saying that one person will be "raptured" and another will not be. He is referencing the immediacy of the events, that they will come suddenly, and that much of what will be done will be arbitrary. Some will survive, and others will not, and there will be no inherent rhyme or reason for it.
Q: Please distinguish between "remission of sin" and "forgiveness of sin".
A: The concepts are rather similar. Remission is a release, and "forgiveness" is one of its definitions. Forgiveness is pardon, and "remission" is one of its definitions. That which is remitted is forgiven, and that which is forgiven is remitted.
And he took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, "Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins" (Matthew 26:27-28 ASV).
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, saying, "Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins" (Matthew 26:27-28 ESV).
The same verse, two different translations, both terms used. Therefore, one cannot truly distinguish between the two.
Q: When did Jesus institute the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist?
A: The Bible does not use the language of "the sacrament of the holy eucharist". We do read about His final supper, which is commonly called the communion (1 Corinthians 10:16-17) or the Lord's Supper (1 Corinthians 11:20), in Matthew 26:26-29, Mark 14:22-25, and Luke 22:19-20:
And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake it; and he gave to the disciples, and said, "Take, eat; this is my body."
And he took a cup, and gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, "Drink ye all of it; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto remission of sins. But I say unto you, I shall not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."
And as they were eating, he took bread, and when he had blessed, he brake it, and gave to them, and said, "Take ye: this is my body."
And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave to them: and they all drank of it. And he said unto them, "This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. Verily I say unto you, I shall no more drink of the fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God."
And he took bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and gave to them, saying, "This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me."
And the cup in like manner after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, even that which is poured out for you."
This is generally believed to be the Thursday evening during the Passover/Feast of the Unleavened Bread, ca. 30 CE.
Q: What is the explanation of Jesus' statement, "I shall no more drink of the fruit of the vine"?
A: We read of such in the Gospels, like in Matthew 26:29:
"But I say unto you, I shall not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom."
Jesus is most likely referring to His impending death and resurrection, indicating the time when He would again eat and drink with His disciples.
Q: What is Paradise? Why did Jesus say to the thief on the cross, "today you will be with me in Paradise"?
A: Paradise would seem to be the place for the righteous/redeemed who await the final salvation to be revealed on the Judgment Day; that would be why Jesus indicated that He would see the thief that day in Paradise-- that was going to be their destination after death.
Q: Who were the 2 men that hung next to Jesus during the crucifixion?
A: They were apparently two robbers, as seen in Matthew 27:38:
Then are there crucified with him two robbers, one on the right hand and one on the left.
Nothing more is known about them.
Q: What are the commissions of the Gospel and where can they be found?
A: 1. The commissioning of the twelve (Matthew 10).
2. The commissioning of the seventy (Luke 10:1-16).
3. The preparation of the Twelve (John 13-17).
4. The Great Commission (Matthew 28:18-20).
Q: What color or race was Jesus and His disciples?
A: From the accounts we have in the Scriptures, it is evident that Jesus and His Apostles are Hebrews, whose ethnicity is Semitic. Their coloration was most probably a light brown, not nearly as white as Europeans, but still not as brown as the Egyptians. We can be sure that Jesus was certainly not white and blue-eyed as He is often portrayed, nor is He of African descent, either.
Q: The Madonna and Jesus as seen in many churches in the world (e.g., Rome, Italy) would seem to show them as black. WHy then do many Christians say that Jesus was white?
Is there any evidence in the Bible that Jesus was black or was of African descent?
Was Jesus black?
A: All of the pictures and displays that you have ever seen represent later attempts of portraying Jesus and other figures in art. None of them necessarily bear any resemblance to Jesus of Nazareth.
Jesus of Nazareth was a Palestinian Jew of the first century CE; therefore, He was neither white or black, but Middle Eastern. He would have likely been olive-skinned.
Q: I have been told that Hebrews 1:1-2 proves that in this present Christian dispensation, God no longer communicates to people in any other way except through the Bible, but what about when Jesus spoke to Saul on the road to Damascus? Wasn't that during the Christian dispensation?
A: Hebrews 1:1-2 says the following:
God, having of old time spoken unto the fathers in the prophets by divers portions and in divers manners, hath at the end of these days spoken unto us in his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, through whom also he made the worlds.
These verses establish that we are in the "last days" and that God now communicates through His Son. These verses themselves do not establish that God speaks to us only through His Word; this information we find in 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 and 2 Timothy 3:16-17:
Love never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall be done away; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall be done away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect is come, that which is in part shall be done away.
Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness. That the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work.
We see here that God's inspired word equips the man of God for "every" good work; it stands to reason, therefore, that no good deed can be done that is outside the revelations of God to man. In 1 Corinthians 13 Paul establishes that when the "perfect--" understood to be the completion of the revelations of God by the end of the first century-- came, that the gifts of speaking in tongues, prophecy, and inspired knowledge would cease. These things have come to pass and it is for this reason that we learn of God through His Word and not through a prophet or some inspired person.
When Saul saw Jesus on the road to Damascus, these revelations had barely begun. There is no contradiction: Paul was one through whom the revelation of the will of God was made, and when that process of revelation had ceased, so did inspiration.
Q: Why don't angels interact with people today like they did with Peter in Acts 12? That happened during the present Christian dispensation, didn't it?
A: It is important to note in the New Testament that the Apostles were given gifts that were promised to no one else.
Jesus promised His twelve disciples the following in John 14:26:
"But the Comforter, even the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you."
This promise He made to no other; only the Apostles-- Paul included-- were given the remembrance of the things Jesus did on earth. Peter had a mission from God and his circumstances in Acts 12 required the direct assistance of an angel of God.
The first century was an amazing time that saw inspired men preaching and teaching, but Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 has told us that when the revelations of God to man regarding His will through His Son Jesus Christ were fulfilled, this inspiration and direct contact would cease. We see that this occurred with the Revelation to John and therefore this period ended around the first century CE. While we may pray to the Lord and He may send His angels to perform His will on earth, we should not expect to see any physical, explicit evidence of these things.
I would also be wary of using terms like "Christian dispensation," which are not exactly used in the New Testament. While we are currently living under the covenant of Christ and therefore in His Kingdom, we must remember that these are the "end times" of Hebrews 1:1-2 and that our Lord could return at any time.
Q: Is there a passage in the Bible that speaks to the fact that all people who are born have within them a knowledge of Jesus Christ--even if they are born into nonbelievers? I can't seem to put my hands on that passage.
A: The closest I could find is Hebrews 8:11, a quotation from Jeremiah 31:33:
"And they shall not teach every man his fellow-citizen, And every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: For all shall know me, From the least to the greatest of them."
This verse seems to speak more about the existence of God, that the proofs of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus would be so powerful that no one would need to inquire as to the existence of God.
In a similar idea, Paul says that all people have seen the work of God and therefore are without excuse in Romans 1:18-21:
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hinder the truth in unrighteousness; because that which is known of God is manifest in them; for God manifested it unto them. For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse: because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened.
Q: In Acts 8, Philip was baptizing the eunuch in verse 39. The Spirit of the Lord "caught Philip away". Was Philip transported to Azotus in the blink of an eye, so to speak?
A: The Scriptures do not reveal precisely how Philip is transported by the Spirit, or how long it took, but it would make sense that it would be quite fast.
Q: Did Paul receive the Baptism of the Holy Spirit?
A: The Scriptures do not tell us exactly how Paul received the Holy Spirit. Perhaps he received it by the hands of Ananias according to the authority given to him by Christ in Acts 9:10-12:
Now there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and the Lord said unto him in a vision, "Ananias."
And he said, "Behold, I am here, Lord."
And the Lord said unto him, "Arise, and go to the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for one named Saul, a man of Tarsus: for behold, he prayeth; and he hath seen a man named Ananias coming in, and laying his hands on him, that he might receive his sight."
It is also possible that he received the Holy Spirit through the hands of the Apostles in Jerusalem or perhaps did receive it in some miraculous form not mentioned in the Scriptures. The New Testament never refers to his reception of the Holy Spirit as having been baptized in the Holy Spirit, and there are no indications against the idea that he received it through the laying on of hands.
Q: Who was eaten by worms?
A: We are told that Herod Agrippa-- the grandson of Herod the Great, the son of Aristobulus-- died in this way in Acts 12:21-23:
And upon a set day Herod arrayed himself in royal apparel, and sat on the throne, and made an oration unto them. And the people shouted, saying, "The voice of a god, and not of a man."
And immediately an angel of the Lord smote him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost.
Q: Romans 13, talking about government, says that all authority comes from God. And that rulers are not a cause for fear of good behavior but for evil. It is a fact that throughout history and present times governing authorities have ruled against Christians obeying God. The passage seems to assume that rulers' laws are always in tune with God's laws, but we know this is not true. How do we account for this? And how do we account for the fact that many rulers and governments do evil things, but the Bible says that all authority comes from God?
A: Perhaps the difficulty here is about the assumption of the text: that rulers' laws are always in tune with God's laws. Paul seems to be establishing that government is not just some human invention, but represents God's expectation for the organization of humans in the world. If one looks at the general laws of all nations throughout time, consistent patterns emerge. Overall, murder is not approved. Neither is stealing or lying. While different cultures have defined sexual deviance in many ways, almost every society has established certain guidelines of conduct in that regard.
What this shows is that government is there for the benefit of people, and the benefit of Christians also. Sure, there may be times when a given government abuses its power; in those circumstances, "we must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29). On the whole, government is there to preserve justice and peace, and such is God's intent.
Q: In 1 Corinthians 9:27, what did Paul mean when he said the following?
I myself should become disqualified.
A: 1 Corinthians 9:24-27:
Know ye not that they that run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? Even so run; that ye may attain. And every man that striveth in the games exerciseth self-control in all things. Now they do it to receive a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. I therefore so run, as not uncertainly; so fight I, as not beating the air: but I buffet my body, and bring it into bondage: lest by any means, after that I have preached to others, I myself should be rejected.
Paul's point is very clear: he himself must continue to run the race, for if he does not constantly buffet his body, bringing it into bondage, he has the possibility of being rejected-- disqualified-- because he did not continually follow after God. Even Paul himself could have incurred condemnation if he did not continue to obey God, even after he preached to others. Few fates are more lamentable than those who, despite preaching to others and leading them to salvation in Christ, are themselves lost because of sin.
Q:What church worshiped on the first day of the week and brought offerings for the suffering saints in Judea?
A: From the message of the Scriptures, it appears that more than one church worshipped on the first day of the week and brought offerings for the saints in Judea.
We are told the following in 1 Corinthians 16:1-5:
Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I gave order to the churches of Galatia, so also do ye. Upon the first day of the week let each one of you lay by him in store, as he may prosper, that no collections be made when I come. And when I arrive, whomsoever ye shall approve, them will I send with letters to carry your bounty unto Jerusalem: and if it be meet for me to go also, they shall go with me. But I will come unto you, when I shall have passed through Macedonia; for I pass through Macedonia.
We see from these verses that the church in Corinth was commanded to do what was already commanded to be done in the churches of Galatia.
Paul mentions in this passage that he would first pass through Macedonia; we are given further information in 2 Corinthians 9:1-5:
For as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous for me to write to you: for I know your readiness, of which I glory on your behalf to them of Macedonia, that Achaia hath been prepared for a year past; and your zeal hath stirred up very many of them. But I have sent the brethren, that our glorying on your behalf may not be made void in this respect; that, even as I said, ye may be prepared: lest by any means, if there come with me any of Macedonia and find you unprepared, we (that we say not, ye) should be put to shame in this confidence. I thought it necessary therefore to entreat the brethren, that they would go before unto you, and make up beforehand your aforepromised bounty, that the same might be ready as a matter of bounty, and not of extortion.
This "ministering" is referring to the aid about to be collected for the church in Judea; thus, we see here that the churches of Achaia and Macedonia were also involved with giving.
We also have another church so involved in the account in Acts 11:27-30:
Now in these days there came down prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch. And there stood up one of them named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be a great famine over all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius. And the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren that dwelt in Judea: which also they did, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and Saul.
Therefore, from these three passages, we may conclude that at least the churches of Galatia, the churches of Achaia, the churches of Macedonia, and the church in Antioch collected aid for the church in Judea by collections made on the first day of the week. There also may have been many others not spoken of in the Scriptures.
Q: When should a Christian disobey the civil government?
A: We are told the following in Romans 13:1:
Let every soul be in subjection to the higher powers: for there is no power but of God; and the powers that be are ordained of God.
Jesus also said the following in Matthew 22:21:
Then saith he unto them, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."
We must always recognize that God's power is higher than the power of the civil goverment. Therefore, the only time that we have the right to disobey the civil government is when that government forbids us from personally performing any commandment that has been given to us by God.
Q: Where is the bible verse which says God will not give us more than we can handle in life?
A: If your question refers to temptations we may face, the verse you refer to is 1 Corinthians 10:13:
There hath no temptation taken you but such as man can bear: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation make also the way of escape, that ye may be able to endure it.
If your question refers to things Christians need to subsist, then the verses you seek are probably Matthew 6:31-34:
"Be not therefore anxious, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed? For after all these things do the Gentiles seek; for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. But seek ye first his kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Be not therefore anxious for the morrow: for the morrow will be anxious for itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof."
Q: What is the "baptism for the dead" as in 1 Corinthians 15:29?
A: There is much confusion over this verse.
Paul says in 1 Corinthians 15:29:
Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?
His language in this passage is very curious, and that is the way we can possibly decode this passage. The letter to the Corinthians, even in the fifteenth chapter, is very personal, for Paul is addressing the Corinthians, desiring that they understand the need for the crucifixion of Christ. We are told the following in the twelfth verse of this chapter:
Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?
We can see from this verse that there is division in Corinth over the resurrection of the dead; some believe it exists, others do not. It is perhaps this group, the ones who do not believe that the resurrection exists, that may be the ones baptizing "for the dead."
We do know, however, that it is not the main body of Christians in Corinth, for examine verse 30:
Why are we also in danger every hour?
Paul says that "they" baptize for the dead, yet "we" are in danger every hour. If Paul were discussing a teaching within the doctrine of Christ, would he not say that "we" baptize for the dead? Yet he does no such thing!
In the end, Paul never gives an endorsement of the practice of "baptizing for the dead," whatever that may be, since he speaks of its participants in the third person plural and does not include it in Christian doctrine with the more personal first or second person (I/you or we/you).
Q: What are the differences among the gifts of God in Ephesians 4:11?
A: As it is written,
And he gave some to be apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers (Ephesians 4:11).
While it is true that God has "given" these to the church, it is not as if these are "gifts" per se. They simply represent different persons with different responsibilities within God's church.
The "apostles" could refer to anyone being sent to proclaim God's message but has in mind particularly the Twelve along with Paul, those to whom God gave a particular measure of the Spirit to reveal God's truths to mankind (Matthew 16:18, Matthew 18:18, Acts 1:4-5, Acts 2:1-12, etc.). We have no indication from the New Testament that their authority was passed down or handed over to anyone.
"Prophets" refer to persons who have received a measure of the Holy Spirit to sometimes predict future events (cf. Acts 11:27-28) but more often to encourage and strengthen disciples with God's message (cf. Acts 15:32; cf. 1 Corinthians 14). We gain the impression that in New Testament times, the prophets encouraged and built up the congregations with messages akin to the role of evangelists preaching today. Nevertheless, when the New Testament was fully revealed and the partial revelation was no longer necessary, the gift of prophecy ceased among the saints (1 Corinthians 13:8-10).
"Evangelists" refer to persons who went about preaching the Word of God. The verb used in the New Testament often translated as "to preach the Gospel" or "to preach the Good News" is the same word which is transliterated in noun form as "evangelist". Philip in Acts 8 is the example of an evangelist: going about, preaching the Word, baptizing those who believe.
"Pastors" are also called "elders," "bishops," "presbyters," and "shepherds" in the New Testament. Acts 20:28 and 1 Peter 5:1-4 demonstrate that all these terms refer to the same office. When a church was established, men who met certain qualifications were installed as shepherds to oversee and direct a given local church (Acts 14:23, 1 Timothy 3:1-8, Titus 1:5-7). There were a plurality of such men over a given local congregation (Philippians 1:1).
"Teachers" simply refers to those who instruct others in the faith. Saul and Barnabas are so considered in the church in Antioch (Acts 13:1). James provides some warning for such persons (James 3:1-2). The New Testament does not reveal that this was a specific office; we can assume safely that those who would instruct were persons in some way learned, knowing God's will either by study or revelation.
A person can hold many such positions: Paul can be considered a prophet, a teacher, and an apostle (Acts 13:1, Acts 14:4). Peter was both an apostle and an elder/pastor (cf. 1 Peter 5:1). While there are no apostles or prophets living today (although their messages still speak to us in God's Word), men can be evangelists, pastors/elders, and teachers today, and there are some men who are all three or two of the three.
Q: What does "speech seasoned with salt" in Colossians 4:6 mean?
Thank you for your good question. Here is the whole verse you are referring to:
Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person.
The specific command which Paul is giving to the Colossians is for their speech to be always with "grace," which holds the idea of patience, love, and kindness. He uses the metaphor of "seasoned with salt" to help illustrate what he means. This is the same type of metaphor used in Matthew 5:13:
"You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men."
In both uses of the metaphor of salt, the authors refer to its prized nature as a way of seasoning food. Think for yourself: would french fries taste any good without quality salt? How bland would meats and other foods would taste if you had no salt to season them with! If you are the "salt of the world," you will be distinct, and necessary for your qualities.
However, with Paul's usage of the metaphor, I believe he is aiming more at the differing uses of salt as a seasoner when we see the end of the passage (so that you will know how to respond to each person). You will use much different quantities of salt if you marinate meat, for example, as opposed to baking cookies. Cookies would not taste very good if you used too much salt, while meat would be extremely bland without much salt. Therefore, our words should always be distinct, loving, and kind, yet there will be variance in exactly how much we will say about what issues with different people. I am sure that you will talk differently about religious issues with one who knows his Bible well versus one who has never read it. In the end, Paul is advising us to speak as we ought, showing the love of Christ, and to speak to each person as he or she has need.
Q: May I please ask if it pleases you or anybody around your congregation what does "speak evil of nobody" in Titus 3:2 mean? Does that not seem to contradict what Jesus did in Matthew 23 and what Paul told Titus of the Cretans...that they were lazy, gluttonous, etc? And what Paul told the fellow in Acts 13.."you son of the devil?"
A: Our understanding of Titus 3:2 must be centered around the word for "evil."
The term is the Greek term blasphemeo, the term from which we derive the English "blaspheme."
Strong's tells us this much: We can derive the following truths from these definitions: to "speak evil of" in Titus 3:2 refers to a person speaking with someone with harsh words, insults, and derogatory comments and delivered spitefully. Paul in Titus 1:12 is actually quoting the words of the Cretan Epimenides about the nature of the Cretans and agrees with the commentary; this is Paul's judgment, not given spitefully or in order to vilify the Cretans, but given in a spirit of desiring correction. Jesus in Matthew 23 chastises the Pharisees for their sins against the Law; He did not speak with a vile and spiteful attitude but spoke the truth in proper judgment. We also have to remember that Jesus and Paul both had authority of judgment and clarity of understanding far beyond our own and could make accurate judgments about character and speak about it in a way that would not lead to sin. In the end, I would say the difference is the way that the rebuke is spoken, both in means and in what is said, and the attitude that goes along with the statement of the rebuke. I will not charge Jesus or Paul with speaking impiously, but I do recognize that a Christian can fall into the temptation to speak impiously when his emotion of anger controls him during conversation. Q: Where can I find the different images Paul uses to describe the church? A: The best way if you wanted to explore for yourself all the images of the church would be to use a concordance or the search portion of a Bible software program and look up "church," then make a listing of all the images seen, and then look up each image in turn to see if other images are added. Then I would skim through Paul's letters and see what I could find. Here's a list of what I could find: You could perhaps find some more. Q: In the New Testaments, "prophets" are mentioned 144 times. 123 times it refers to prophets in the Old Testament, but does not refer to Old Testament prophets 21 times. What prophet or prophets are they referring to? A: Prophets were not simply part of the old covenant. During the first century, God inspired certain Christians to exhort and encourage their fellow brethren through prophecies coming directly from Him. Such people include some of the Corinthian Christians (1 Corinthians 14), Philip's daughters (Acts 21:9), and Judas and Silas (Acts 15:32). This particular gift of the Spirit ceased at the completion of the revelation (1 Corinthians 13:8-10), and hence why it is here no longer. Q: Where and when was Paul's last sermon preached? A: The last extant sermon presented in the Bible from Paul is in Caesarea before King Agrippa and the Roman procurator Festus in Acts 26. Acts 28:30-31 speaks of Paul's activities in Rome for two years: It is likely that Paul left Rome and traveled to other cities, possibly Spain, possibly Corinth, after the events recorded in Acts 28. Paul's second letter to Timothy is probably his last letter, and we perhaps can presume that his last sermon was shortly before or after the writing of that letter, ca. 65 CE. Q: What does "be a doer of the word" mean? I don't fully understand it. I understand where it tells us to love one another, to forgive one another, etc., but I know there must be a deeper meaning than just the few things like that. Please explain further. A: A text that explains well the idea of being a "doer" of the Word is James 1:22-25: James is explaining to us in these verses that we should not just be hearers of the Word but also doers of the Word. The religion of Christ is nothing if it is not practiced; Jesus condemned the Pharisees for this very thing in Matthew 23:1-4: The consequence of being a "hearer only" is compared to a man who looks at himself in a mirror, sees himself, and then walks away, forgetting what kind of person he is: in other words, someone who is deluded about himself, thinking he is holy and pious when he really is a hypocrite. In the end, a "doer" of the Word is going to be a person who strives diligently to obey God in every respect, one who works righteousness. He will be a person who loves God and his neighbor, who will forgive others as he has been forgiven, one who will readily assist those in need as he was assisted in his time of need. No one will need to ever wonder what kind of person he will be, for it will be evident to all that he is a righteous man and one who fears God. Q: What is the difference between hymns and spiritual songs? A: We learn of the need to sing hymns and spiritual songs from Ephesians 5:19: Now, as to the difference between "hymns" and "spiritual songs," well, we don't really know. In Greek, "hymns" is humnos (we get our English word from the Greek), and can refer to a song of praise to a hero or to a sacred song. "Spiritual song" is, in Greek, pneumatikos ode (we get our English word "ode" from the latter), referring to a "spiritual ode" or "spiritual song." The distinction may be in the type of song sung (praise or instruction) or the structure of the song. In the end, however, we do not really know. Q: I have always heard it said that if you commit a sin in public, that is a sin that everyone is aware of, you must confess that sin before the brethren. Is there an example of this in the Bible? A: The Scriptures concerning that which you ask may be found in James 5:16 and 2 Corinthians 2:6-9, 7:9: The last two Scriptures relate to the situation first seen in 1 Corinthians 5, where a man had his father's wife and the congregation took no action against him. It is inferred, and reasonably so, that this man performed some act of public penitence for his sin. Is this to say that one who has sinned publically must confess his sins before all? Not necessarily. The percieved need of public confession is to confirm to all that the blemish that spotted the church because of that one has now been removed. This much should at least be made known to all, that the blemish has been removed. The only form of confession that is mandated in the Bible is found in 1 John 1:9: Only God can remove sin from a man, so in the end it is only critical that God hears your confession. This is not to deny James 5:16, for it is certainly good for men to confess their sins to one another so that all may be encouraged and that all may be released from the snares of the devil. This type of penitence is not to be mandated by the church but should be strictly voluntary in nature-- otherwise how effective is the penitence if it is forced? Q: Who are the "strangers" whom Peter is referring to in 1 Peter 1:1? To whom he is writing this epistle? Was he referring to Jewish Christians or to both Jewish and Gentile Christians alike who were scattered? A: 1 Peter 5:1 in the ASV, ESV, and the NIV: As we can see, the more "interpretive" NIV translation identifies the recipients as "God's elect". The original does present some possible ambiguity since Peter uses the terminology of "dispersion" and "exiles", language most commonly associated with the Jews. Nevertheless, the context demonstrates that he is writing to Christians. The context is not firm as to whether he writes exclusively to Jewish Christians or to Gentile Christians also; while the language in verse 1 evokes Israel, Jesus and the Apostles are known for using the language of Israel to refer to the new community of God's people as a whole. The use of "Gentiles" in the book (cf. 2:12, etc.) need not refer to all Gentiles, simply those who are
outside the faith. Considering Peter's view of the church as established in Acts 11 and 15, it is best to believe that his audience represents all the Christians, who are indeed God's elect exiles, who live in parts of modern Turkey. Q: What does he mean by "elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father" in 1 Peter 1:2? Does this prove the doctrine of predestination? Could you put some light on this verse and not just on the issue of predestination but also on sanctification and obedience? A: 1 Peter 5:2: Such is how the ASV presents it; the KJV takes "elect" from the thought process earlier and places it here. Such is textually unwarranted; Peter is writing to the "elect exiles...according to the foreknowledge of God the Father". Regardless, Peter's terminology is important-- it is not by the "predestination" of God as much as the "foreknowledge" of God. God knew before what His plan would be in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:11). It is not a
stretch, and this passage perhaps provides credence, to establish that God knew before what would happen that which would occur also with those who would obey God. Foreknowledge does not require predestination: one may be able to see in advance where the path will take a given person, but such does not mean that the person chooses that path for that person. The same is true with us and God. It is God's desire for all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4). As Peter will establish later, it is by obedience that has led to the purification of one's soul (1 Peter 1:22). God, therefore, knew in advance who would be His "elect exiles". Such does not mean, however, that He specifically chose some to be saved and some to be condemned in advance. In this verse Peter provides parallel thoughts involving each of the members of the Godhead: foreknowledge : God the Father :: sanctification : Spirit :: obedience and sprinking of blood : Jesus Christ. God knew beforehand the plan and our place within it, as spoken of above; as in 2 Thessalonians 2:13, the Spirit has a role in our sanctification, or "setting apart" in holiness. This is partly through the study of the Word and diligent
application of it (2 Timothy 2:15; cf. Hebrews 5:14), but may also point to another role of the Spirit (cf. Romans 8). This all leads to obedience to Jesus Christ, who is the authority and to whom we ought to submit (Matthew 28:18, Romans 1:5); likewise, His blood allows for our cleansing (Matthew 26:28; baptism as act of petition for cleansing, Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:21). Such demonstrates the presence of each aspect of the Godhead and their
involvement in the life of the Christian. Q: I understand that the great apostle was referring to the new birth when he said the words, "begotten us again" in 1 Peter 1:3. And I understand that this new birth is by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. My question is this: Did not the followers of Christ experience the new birth when he was still with them on earth before he died and resurrected? When he told Nicodemus to be born again did he not mean that he could be born
again at that very instant? A: 1 Peter 1:3: It is indeed the "new birth" under discussion. The example of Jesus with Nicodemus involves many questions since the Kingdom was not yet present; perhaps it is possible to have the rebirth with the baptisms being done while Jesus lived (John 4:1-2). Nevertheless, Romans 6:3-7 makes it very clear regarding the new birth for the Christian: Baptism is the point at which this transformation is complete; it assumes previous hearing, belief, confession, and repentance (cf. Romans 10:17, Acts 16:31, Romans 10:9-10, Acts 2:38), but baptism is the symbolic burial that leads to walking "in newness of life". Baptism here is also tied very specifically to the resurrection (as it is in 1 Peter 3:21). Therefore, yes; the Christian can have the rebirth in an instant. Q: Does 1 Peter 1:4 support the doctrine of eternal security? A: 1 Peter 1:4: This verse flows from the previous verse, and is designed to be a message of hope and encouragement. Notice that it is the "inheritance" that is incorruptible, undefiled, not fading, and reserved. As we will see in 1 Peter 1:5, Peter very much has in mind two levels of salvation: there is what could be termed "initial salvation", which is represented by the "new birth" in verse 3. On the other hand, there is the "salvation on the last day" seen in verses 5 and 9. While we may have salvation now, there is a sense in which we await our salvation-- the final deliverance. The Scriptures make it very clear that initial salvation does not require that one will be saved on the last day (Matthew 7:21-23, Matthew 25:14-30,
Hebrews 3:12-14, Hebrews 6:4-6, Hebrews 10:26-31, 2 Peter 2:20-22). As in the parable of the prodigal son, a child of God can "squander" their inheritance by their disobedience (cf. Luke 15). Therefore, no, this verse does not support the doctrine of "eternal security". This fact should not undermine, however, the message of encouragement and hope that Peter intends for the believer. While some may take the verse to extremes, such should not taint the verse for us! While we suffer from all kinds of decay and defilement on earth, we trust that our
eternal inheritance suffers no such thing, and is waiting for us! Q: Does 1 Peter 1:5 say that faith alone is what is needed for one to be saved and to be kept saved? What is this salvation which is "ready to be revealed in the last time"? A: 1 Peter 1:5: A particular difficulty that many Protestants seem to have over the generations is the predilection to add the idea of "alone" or "only" to many a verse where the author says no such thing nor necessarily implies it. 1 Peter 1:5 has nothing within it showing that "faith alone" is "needed" for anything. Peter is continuing his thoughts as established earlier: as the inheritance is being kept, God also protects those who are His. The guarding is "through faith," saying nothing about salvation per se, but that faith will be the operative agent in the life of the Christian (cf. Hebrews 11:6). "Faith alone" is an odd concept; the only time the Scriptures mention such a thing are in a highly disapproving context (James 2:24). "Faith alone" has saved no one; it is dead. Faith, by necessity, must be an obedient faith, a belief system vitalized through devotion of oneself to God (cf. Romans 1:5, Romans 12:1-2, James 2:14-26). The protection is to guide us until we have run the race (cf. 1 Corinthians 9:24-27), striving toward the salvation that will be revealed at the return of the Lord (cf. Matthew 25:31-46, Acts 17:30-31, 1 Thessalonians 4:14-18, Hebrews 9:27-28, the "final salvation" of which we have spoken earlier. Q: What is the significance of the seven angels in the book of Revelation? Who are they? What are their purposes? What if any is the symbolism associated with these angels? Do they represent the seven churches, plagues, bowls, vials, trumpets, or possibly the 7 attributes of the Holy Spirit? A: We hear of these angels in Revelation 8:1-2: Some desire to associate these seven angels with the seven spirits of Revelation 1:4: ....although there is no evidence linking the two with any certainty. It is difficult to discern as to whether there is any significance to the presence of seven angels. Seven, of course, is a number of perfection, and therefore is often and intentionally used throughout the book of Revelation. In the vision, the angels in sum represent the seventh seal opened by the Lamb, and each brings forth some form of misery upon the earth. The angels seem to represent the vehicle by which these things take place, and do not seem to have any more significance than that. Q: In Revelation chapter 10 and verse 4, why would God on one hand reveal this vision to John to pass on to the churches, but then on the other hand tell him to withhold part of the vision? A: Revelation 10:4: And you spoke of the command in Revelation 1:19: Whatever answer I can give you will be simple speculation; I feel compelled to admit this up front. I would say, however, that Jesus commands John to provide to the churches the things that he has seen and heard, but that certain details Jesus has determined, for whatever reason, are not necessary or are not profitable for the record that would go to the churches. It perhaps might be something that John would understand in the context of the vision that could perhaps either grieve the church or perhaps would lead to misinterpretation. Simply put: we can speculate, but we cannot know. I can say, however, that Jesus is not being inconsistent with this thing: it very well might be that while the majority of the things John saw and heard are profitable for the churches, certain events or details are not. Q: In Revelation chapter 10 and verse 4, why didn't he simply not have the 7 churches speak? A: Although I am not exactly sure where you're going with this question, I will assume in my answer that you are asking why John could not have written the words to the churches alone and not to anyone else. I would remind us that the Revelation given to John, while made specifically for the seven churches of Asia, is designed to profit the whole church. Every Christian in every age ought to receive hope and encouragement from the Revelation to John, and therefore everything written in the account is designed for that purpose. Whatever the seven churches saw is what we are supposed to see. Q: In Revelation chapter 10 and verse 7, what is the mystery of God that will be accomplished just as He announced to His servants the prophets? A: Revelation 10:5-7: I suppose one's interpretation of Revelation in general will by in large form the opinion that you will have regarding this verse. I will hazard, however, that the good tidings declared to the prophets would be a direct reference to the promises of the prophets to Israel of the preaching of the Gospel and the establishment of the Kingdom in all places, that the Messiah rules and that Israel-- the church-- is His Kingdom manifested on Earth. It could also ostensibly refer to the destruction of Jerusalem and the demonstration of the validity of the new covenant under Christ alone, and it can certainly also be understood as referring to the Judgment Day when those redeemed in Christ will accept their heavenly abode. I tend to lean toward the first interpretation-- that the Kingdom of God is at hand-- but could easily understand the idea that it refers to the Judgment Day. It depends on exactly which "good tidings" spoken by the prophets that the angel refers to. Q: In Revelation chapter 10 and verses 9 & 10, what did God mean when He said, "take it and eat it, it will turn your stomach sour, but in your mouth it will be as sweet as honey?" Q: In Revelation chapter 10 and verse 10, the Scripture says, "I ate it and it tasted as sweet as honey in my mouth but when I had eaten it, my stomach turned sour." Why is this? A: Perhaps the easiest way to interpret this statement is to see how the sign of the eating of a scroll is used in Old Testament prophecy. Ezekiel 3:1-5: We can see in the passage above that God illustrates to Ezekiel the "sweetness" of the words he is to use to speak to Israel, a nation speaking a familiar language that will hear the prophecies of God. The message contained is sweet to the ears. Since honey is a sign of sweetness, and we see that the message in Revelation goes from sweet to bitter, this is a sign that some message goes from sweet to bitter-- pleasing to the ears to very hard to hear. This can refer to the previous judgments in comparison to the judgments to come, or it can refer to how one "digests" the message: it begins smoothly and sweetly but once contemplated upon becomes bitter and harsh. Q: Revelation chapter 10: what is the overall message of this chapter? A: In the context of the vision, chapter 10 is an intermediary chapter, separating the six trumpet sounds from the visions of the prophets on Earth, the birth of the Christ versus the approach of Satan, and the emergence of the beast. It is an explanatory chapter, showing us within the vision that the final Judgment is about to begin and the message of the prophets is about to be fulfilled. The consumption of the book and its effects is another transition piece, a demonstration to John that, as verse 11 says, he must again prophecy over the powers of the Earth, and that the message, perhaps once sweet, is now very bitter. Q: What do you believe is Satan's motive in carrying us all into eternal
damnation with himself? A: You ask a very valid question. Many individuals have written countless
works attempting to understand why Satan would attack us. The Scriptures,
however, do not give us an explanation as to why Satan attempts to ensnare
us into sin. In 1 John 3:8, John tells us that Satan has "sinned from the
beginning," in John 8:44, that he is the "father of lies." He is our
"Adversary" in 1 Peter 5:7, and he is seen in the Revelation as mustering
his army of minions against Christ, only to be utterly defeated. His motive seems to be that he wishes to entrap souls to do his bidding so
that he may attempt to conquer those in the righteousness of God. As the
"father of lies," he is opposed to the truth, and will fight it at all cost,
so that he and his lies may prevail. Satan is affected by the desire for
power and control, much like humans are. This is why, in my opinion, he
wishes to bring us all down to hell with him. Q: Why was Satan thrown out of Heaven? A: We have never been told exactly why Satan was thrown out of Heaven.
The closest evidence the Scriptures give is found in 2 Peter 2:4: From this we can tell that somehow in some way Satan sinned. Popular
mythology, including Jewish tradition that was later accepted by
Christianity, believes that Satan rebelled and attempted to overthrow God,
and for this reason Satan was cast out. While completely possible, this is
not the definitive relation of the events, and we cannot make a judgment
about it since the evidence is not present in the Scriptures. Q: What does it mean to be holy in the Bible? A: The word "holy" in the New Testament is a translation of the Greek work
hagnos, defined by Thayer as the following:
This definition of "holy" ought to be sufficient for our purposes. To be
holy is to be pure, unspotted: free from sin. This command is given in Romans 12:1 and Ephesians 1:4: It is stated about the Christian in 1 Corinthians 3:17 and Colossians 3:12: And finally, Peter establishes clearly why we are to be holy in 1 Peter
1:13-16: We must be holy because it is a mark of the Christian, one who has turned
away from sin and leads a life pleasing to God. Q: Does it say in the Holy Bible to pray for the souls of the dead? A: The New Testament does not command us to pray for the souls of the dead, but we certainly have the example of Peter with the dead woman Tabitha in Joppa in Acts 9:40: Our prayers should be that God accepts the soul of his or her servant, if he or she was the servant of God, and trust that whatever God determines is right and good and holy. He, not ourselves, is the judge (James 4:12). Q: What are the seven spirits of God? A: The "seven spirits of God," a phrase found in Revelation 1:4, 3:1, 4:5, and 5:6, are believed by many to be seven angels that minister at God's throne, and others view it in terms of the Holy Spirit. Both interpretations have their difficulties. Q: Are there animals in Heaven? Please include Scripture in your answer. A: While there are animal-like creatures portrayed in visions of Heaven in Ezekiel and Revelation, the Bible gives no indication that animals will or will not actually be in Heaven. Do you have a question or comment about anything you have read here? Please feel free to contact me through the form below. Please click here to return to the Bible Questions and Answers main page. Thanks!
1) to speak reproachfully, rail at, revile, calumniate, blaspheme
2) to be evil spoken of, reviled, railed atFrom G989; to vilify; specifically to speak impiously: - (speak) blaspheme (-er, -mously, -my), defame, rail on, revile, speak evil.
And he abode two whole years in his own hired dwelling, and received all that went in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness, none forbidding him.
But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deluding your own selves. For if any one is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a mirror: for he beholdeth himself, and goeth away, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. But he that looketh into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and so continueth, being not a hearer that forgetteth but a doer that worketh, this man shall be blessed in his doing.
Then spake Jesus to the multitudes and to his disciples, saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses seat: all things therefore whatsoever they bid you, these do and observe: but do not ye after their works; for they say, and do not. Yea, they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger."
speaking one to another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and
making melody with your heart to the Lord;
Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another so that you may be healed. The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.
Sufficient for such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by the majority, so that on the contrary you should rather forgive and comfort him, otherwise such a one might be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow. Wherefore I urge you to reaffirm your love for him. For to this end also I wrote, so that I might put you to the test, whether you are obedient in all things.
I now rejoice, not that you were made sorrowful, but that you were made sorrowful to the point of repentance; for you were made sorrowful according to the will of God, so that you might not suffer loss in anything through us.
If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the elect who are sojourners of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia.
according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the
Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to
you and peace be multiplied.
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to his
great mercy begat us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.
Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him through baptism unto death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life. For if we have become united with him in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection; knowing this, that our old man was crucified with him, that the body of sin might be done away, that so we should no longer be in bondage to sin; for he that hath died is justified from sin.
unto an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away,
reserved in heaven for you.
who by the power of God are guarded through faith unto a salvation ready to
be revealed in the last time.
And when he opened the seventh seal, there followed a silence in heaven about the space of half an hour. And I saw the seven angels that stand before God; and there were given unto them seven trumpets.
John to the seven churches that are in Asia: Grace to you and peace, from him who is and who was and who is to come; and from the seven Spirits that are before his throne.
And when the seven thunders uttered their voices, I was about to write: and I heard a voice from heaven saying, "Seal up the things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not."
"Write therefore the things which thou sawest, and the things which are, and the things which shall come to pass hereafter."
And the angel that I saw standing upon the sea and upon the earth lifted up his right hand to heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created the heaven and the things that are therein, and the earth and the things that are therein, and the sea and the things that are therein, that there shall be delay no longer: but in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he is about to sound, then is finished they mystery of God, according to the good tidings which he declared to his servants the prophets.
And He said unto me, "Son of man, eat that which thou findest; eat this roll, and go, speak unto the house of Israel."
So I opened my mouth, and He caused me to eat the roll.
And He said unto me, "Son of man, cause thy belly to eat, and fill thy bowels with this roll that I give thee."
Then did I eat it; and it was in my mouth as honey for sweetness.
And He said unto me, "Son of man, go, get thee unto the house of Israel, and speak with My words unto them. For thou art not sent to a people of a strange speech and of a hard language, but to the house of Israel."
For if God spared not angels when they sinned, but cast them down to hell, and committed them to pits of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment.
1) exciting reverence, venerable, sacred
2) pure
2a) pure from carnality, chaste, modest
2b) pure from every fault, immaculate
2c) cleanI beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual
service.
Even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blemish before Him in love.
If any man destroyeth the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, and such are ye.
Put on therefore, as God's elect, holy and beloved, a heart of compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, longsuffering.
Wherefore girding up the loins of your mind, be sober and set your hope perfectly on the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of
Jesus Christ; as children of obedience, not fashioning yourselves according
to your former lusts in the time of your ignorance: but like as He who
called you is holy, be ye yourselves also holy in all manner of living;
because it is written, "Ye shall be holy; for I am holy."
But Peter put them all forth, and kneeled down and prayed; and turning to the body, he said, "Tabitha, arise."
And she opened her eyes; and when she saw Peter, she sat up.
Response/Feedback