|
|
Bible FAQs
Death
Much has
been written as to what occurs upon the death of a Christian.
The information varies from one going to a Paradise such as
Abraham’s bosom to one entering the sleep of time until the
judgement day or even the beginning of tribulation. Can
you help me find scripture which speaks to this issue? Within
six months my wife and I experienced the loss of both our mothers. We are
middle aged and these deaths are a part of life. We do however
often find what appears to be disparity in the next phase.
Thank you for your question. I know that this is a
very personal issue for you. I too am middle-aged, and I have
lost both parents and a sister. As a result, I have probably
had many of the same questions that you have. In searching
the Scriptures for exactly what happens when a believer dies, I
see distinct differences in the Old and New Testaments as a
result of the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus
Christ.
I believe that when the Old Testament saints encountered
death, their souls were not taken directly to heaven, as is now the case with New Testament believers. Instead, the Old
Testament believers were taken to a place called paradise (Luke 23:43,
1 Corinthians 12:3-4, Revelation 2:3-7), or
Abraham’s bosom (Luke 16:3-23). Then, upon the event of
Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection, these Old Testament saints were resurrected (Matthew 27:3-52). Today, now that Christ's
resurrection has already occurred, when Christians die, we are taken directly
to heaven. The strongest argument I find for this is 2
Corinthians 5:3-8, which says, “We are confident, I say, and
would prefer to be away from the body and at home with the Lord.” This
seems to say that for we believers of this age, being in this current body is mutually exclusive from being in the presence of God
in heaven. So, at the point of death, we're no longer in the
body, but with the Lord.
Incidentally, in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, Luke
16:3-23 refers to a place called Hades, which is where the
rich man was. This seems to be the opposite of the place
of paradise where Lazarus was. This would imply that, in
Old Testament times, those who died were taken to one of these
temporary chambers, awaiting their transaction either from
paradise to heaven or from Hades to Hell. This probably
also explains the origination of the Catholic doctrine of
purgatory, which would equate to Hades in this case.
You may also be interested in my article at
Matthew 27:52. It
is also related to your question in that it examines the mystery in
Matthew 27:52-53 where saints arose from their graves and
appeared to many in the holy city.
As a side note, I remember having another question when I
lost loved ones. I wondered whether or not they could look down
upon me from heaven. I found my own personal resolution for this
in Revelation 21:3-4, which says, He will wipe every tear from
their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain,
for the old order of things has passed away. Although this
is specifically referring to the New Jerusalem on the new earth,
I believe that this lack of mourning and crying is now what
heaven is like as well, since the new earth has not yet come. As
a result, I believe that our loved ones in heaven do not look
down upon us in this life because they could not look from their vantage point upon their loved ones in a sinful world without shedding tears.
As I wrote this, I prayed that you will find the answers to
your questions, and that your grief will bring you peace and comfort.
Thanks,
Owen
Thank you
for your thorough and insightful analysis of the scriptures surrounding
the afterlife. While my question was certainly offered from a personal perspective,
I asked the question as it relates also to my work. My wife and I are
clinical social workers work primarily with first responders from the NYPD and the
FDNY. My wife does much the
area of grief and trauma. Many of my first
responders to the World Trade Center are now contracting
illnesses which often times result in fatal
outcomes. Faced with their own mortality they search their faith for their beliefs
in what will happen next. Fear and grief overwhelm them and they look for desperate
reassurance that there will be a paradise awaiting those who believe. I will
certainly place your information in my grief
library. I often reflect upon how a few
minutes of time devoted to questions such as the one I posed to you can
actually have such long lasting impact and provide such comfort for those in despair.
Death and the Soul
I would like to know where in
the Bible that talks about the state of soul after the
soul leaves the body. Like the Catholics believing in
purgatory, what do Christians believe in?
Thank you for your question about the state of the soul after
death. I believe that our definitive passage on this is the story of the rich
man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31. When the rich man died, he went to
a place called "Hades" (verse 23), which was a place of torments. When
Lazarus died, he went to a place called "Abraham's bosom," which Bible scholars have associated with the word "paradise."
When people died in Old Testament times (including the times referenced
in the Gospels), their bodies went into a grave, but apparently there was a temporary holding place for their souls. The Bible uses a term called
hell, such as in Matthew 5:22, but the terminology is slightly different than
what we normally use. Hell is the lake of fire where all unbelievers will
spend eternity (Revelation 20:14-15). Apparently, however, the temporary
holding place (sometimes called Sheol, or Purgatory) had a compartment for
separate compartments for believers and unbelievers. (This is where the Catholics (mistakenly) built their doctrine of purgatory.) Unbelievers spent this period in the part called torments (Luke 16:23), while believers spent
this time in a place called paradise (Luke 23:43).
However, with the resurrection of Jesus (the first resurrection), these
Old Testament believers were transferred from paradise to Heaven. This is apparently what was going on in Matthew 7:53, which is a very difficult passage.
Now, for us, it's completely different. Since the resurrection of
Christ has already occurred, and He has ascended to Heaven, when believers die
today, our bodies go to a grave, and our spirits go straight to Heaven (2 Corinthians 5:1-8) to be with Christ.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Thank you very much!
Our loved ones in heaven
I have
been asked recently and have also wondered myself if we will know our loved
ones in heaven. Also are there any scriptures to support the answer.
It is hard to imagine that the loving relationships we have had with
families here on earth will be gone when we get to heaven. I know that we
will be so blessed to see the Lord and all that heaven has to offer,
but do not want to think this earth will be the end of our knowledge of our
loved ones. Thank you for your answer to this important question.
Thank you for your question. The Bible is not definitive about what our relationships with others will be like in heaven. The best
passage that we have on this is probably Matthew 22:23-33 where Christ is answering a question from the Pharisees concerning the afterlife for
a woman who had multiple husbands on earth. In verse 30, Jesus says, "For in
the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven." This implies that people in heaven will
know each other, but they won't have the same relationships, such as marriage.
I believe that our existence in heaven will be overpowered by God's
glory (Revelation 4:9-11). We will be so awe-struck by being in the
very presence of God, that we will somehow not even be too concerned with others.
Thanks,
Owen
Greeting in Heaven
Who will be there to greet us when we get to heaven?
Thank you for your question. The Bible doesn't mention anyone
welcoming us into heaven other than Jesus Christ (2 Peter 1:11).
However, perhaps your question relates to several others that I have received
lately about what heaven will be like. Readers often ask whether or
not we will know each other in heaven, and specifically whether or not we
will still be married to our earthly spouses.
The Bible is not definitive about what our relationships with
others will be like in heaven. The best passage that we have on this
is probably Matthew 22:23-33 where Christ is answering a question from
the Pharisees concerning the afterlife for a woman who had multiple
husbands on earth. In verse 30, Jesus says, "For in the resurrection
they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in
heaven." This implies that people in heaven will know each other, but
they won't have the same relationships, such as marriage.
I believe that our existence in heaven will be overpowered by
God's glory Revelation 4:9-11). We will be so awe-struck by being
in the very presence of God, that we will somehow not even be too concerned
with others.
Thanks,
Owen
Marriage in Heaven
In heaven will my wife and I still be married?
Thank you for your question. The Bible is not definitive
about what our relationships with others will be like in heaven. The best
passage that we have on this is probably Matthew 22:23-33 where Christ is answering a
question from the Pharisees concerning the afterlife for a woman who had multiple husbands on earth. In verse 30, Jesus says, "For in
the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven." This implies that people in heaven will
know each other, but they won't have the same relationships, such as marriage.
I believe that our existence in heaven will be overpowered by God's
glory (Revelation 4:9-11). We will be so awe-struck by being in the
very presence of God, that we will somehow not even be too concerned with others.
Thanks,
Owen
Children in Heaven
Will there be children in heaven?
Thank you for your question. I believe that there is one
specific and very definitive passage that indicates that there are children
in heaven. In 2 Samuel 12:22-23, King David had been mourning
the death of his newborn son. He said, "While the child was still alive, I
fasted and wept. I thought, 'Who knows? The LORD may be
gracious to me and let the child live.' But now that he is dead, why should I go
on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he
will not return to me."
When David says, "... I will go to him ...," he is referring to
the event of his own death (as a believer) at some point in the
future. When he dies, he will immediately be in God's presence in Heaven,
so this must be where his son already is.
We can also infer from this that when a believer dies, he will be
able to see all other believers (who have died) in heaven, including
those who died as infants, and those who died in old age. However,
it's difficult for us to imagine the concept of age in heaven, since it's
an eternal state that is not bound by space or time.
I hope this makes sense. If not, please let me know.
Thanks,
Owen
Heaven
Are there any babies or old people in Heaven, and if not where are the scriptures
to back it up? I asked this in my Church, but no scriptures were given to back up what they told me.
Thank you for your question. Yes, this theological issue has
been debated for centuries. Some point to scriptures like Romans
5:12 which tells us that every person is born with imputed sin in his flesh;
and, John 3:16, Galatians 2:16, and Ephesians 2:8-9 which tell us that
we must each accept Jesus Christ through faith in order to receive
eternal life. Although these scriptures teach us necessary truths,
the Scriptures also seem to teach us about a special grace that God
extends to infants and others that have not yet reached an age or stage
of accountability. Fortunately, I believe that there is one
specific and very definitive passage about this.
In 2 Samuel 12:22-23, King David had been mourning the death of
his newborn son. He said, "While the child was still alive, I
fasted and wept. I thought, 'Who knows? The LORD may be
gracious to me and let the child live.' But now that he is dead, why should I go on
fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not
return to me."
When David says, "... I will go to him ...," he is referring to
the event of his own death (as a believer) at some point in the
future. When he dies, he will immediately be in God's presence in Heaven,
so this must be where his son already is.
We can also infer from this that when a believer dies, he will be
able to see all other believers (who have died) in heaven, including
those who died as infants, and those who died in old age. However,
it's difficult for us to imagine the concept of age in heaven, since it's
an eternal state that is not bound to space or time.
I hope this makes sense. If not, please let me
know. .
Love in Christ,
Owen
The Soul of a Child
Is there
any scripture in the bible that can be used to comfort a parent who has
lost their child shortly after birth? Not just relating to comfort, but the Childs soul?
Thank you for your question. Yes, I believe that there is one
specific and very definitive passage that could help to assure a grieving parent about the loss of a
child. In 2 Samuel 12:22-23, King David had been mourning the dearth of his newborn
son. He said, "While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, 'Who
knows? The LORD may be gracious to me and let the child live.' But now that he is dead, why
should I go on fasting? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not
return to me." When David says, "... I will go to him ...," he is referring to the
event of his own death (as a believer) at some point in the future. When he dies, he
will immediately be in God's presence in Heaven, so this must be where his son already is.
We can also infer from this that when a believer dies, he will be able
to see all other believers (who have died) in heaven, including those who died as
infants, and those who died in old age. However, it's difficult for us to imagine the
concept of age in heaven, since it's an eternal state that is not bound by space or time.
I hope this makes sense. If not, please let me know. Love in Christ, Owen
Do animals go to heaven?
Thank you for your question. No, animals do not go to heaven. Humans are
intelligent creatures with a soul and a spirit, while animals are not.
Thanks,
Owen
Heaven
Will we know one another in heaven?
Thank you for your
question. The Bible is not definitive about what our relationships with others will be like in heaven. The best
passage that we have on this is probably Matthew 22:23-33 where Christ is answering a
question from the Pharisees concerning the afterlife for a woman who had multiple husbands on earth. In verse 30, Jesus says, "For in
the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven." This implies that people in heaven will
know each other, but they won't have the same relationships, such as marriage.
I believe that our existence in heaven will be overpowered by God's
glory (Revelation 4:9-11). We will be so awe-struck by being in the
very presence of God, that we will somehow not even be too concerned with others.
Love in Christ,
Owen
Judgment
I know the Bible says we will all be judged. And I know the Bible
says Jesus has wiped away all our sins. (For Christians).
My question then is if Jesus has wiped away all our sins, what
will Christians stand in judgment for on judgment day?
Thank you for your question. I've included an excerpt from
my True Christianity link
below, and I think this should answer your question.
Thanks,
Owen
Judgment
A discussion of the doctrine
of the judgment of God requires an understanding of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross for the
sins of all men (John 3:16, Hebrews 12:2). All of our sins are
forgiven via this single sacrifice (Hebrews 7:27), and we'll never be judged for
the individual sins that we commit. In eternity, our sins are
forgiven and forgotten by God. Jesus supplied our eternal sacrifice, and
through confession (1 John 1:9), we can have God's temporal forgiveness in
this life. If so, then what judgment does 1 Peter 1:17
address? "Since you call on a Father who judges each man's work impartially, live your
lives as strangers here in reverent fear." Furthermore, Romans 2:6
says that God will judge every man according to his deeds. Indeed, all
men will be judged, but there are two specific categories of judgment based
upon the determining factor of believing in Jesus Christ as personal savior. Remember that upon accepting
Christ as savior, God imputes the righteousness of Jesus Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit to
each believer. Without this divine power, man can do no good
(Romans 3:10, 12, Psalms 53:3). He may do some humanly good deeds, which
have as their source the flesh, but unless the Holy Spirit indwells a person
and God sees that person through the righteousness of His son, he
can't perform any divinely good works. In the first category of
judgment then, believers will be judged at the Judgment Seat of Christ
(2 Corinthians 5:10), and in the second category, unbelievers will
be judged at the Great White Throne of God (Revelation 20:11-15).
The Judgment Seat of Christ
The judgment of all believers will occur at the Judgment Seat of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:10, Romans 14:10), but the Bible doesn't
clearly specify when this judgment will occur. I tend to side with
those who believe that our day of judgment will occur after the rapture and
during the tribulation period, but it's probably a moot point since time
can't be set in an eternal state. Nevertheless, we're assured of
both the rapture and this judgment which introduce what the Bible calls ". .
. the day of the Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 1:8), and we're
charged to be prepared for it and remain blameless in this life until that day. In 1 Corinthians 3:12-15, we
see that in that day, ". . . his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to
light." Christ will test the quality of our works with fire, which will burn
up the wood, hay, and straw, but leave the pure gold, silver, and
precious stones. God will repay us for our deeds in the body,
according to what we've done, whether good or bad (2 Corinthians 5:10). Christ
will reveal whether our good works were only humanly good works produced
by the flesh like the wood, hay, and straw similar to that of
"good" unbelievers, or whether our good works came from the divine power of
the Holy Spirit in the form of gold, silver, and precious stones. For the divine good works that
survive the test of fire, Jesus will credit our account (Philippians 4:17). For our human good
works, we'll suffer loss of rewards, but we'll keep our eternal life (1
Corinthians 3:15). We're promised that God will repay us for our service
to Him (Ephesians 6:8), and we'll receive ". . . an inheritance from the
Lord as a reward" (Colossians 3:24).
Rewards
We're not told the details of
these rewards, but any reward from God must be wonderful and worthy of our service. Our rewards
may be personal commendations from Jesus, "Well done, good and
faithful servant" (Matthew 25:21, 23). They may be in the form of
crowns (1 Corinthians 9:25, Revelation 3:11). In 1 Peter 5:4, a special
"crown of glory" is specified for leaders who serve well. In 2 Timothy
4:8, we see a crown of righteousness for those who live Godly lives and long
for Christ's return. James 1:12 references a crown of life for
those who persevered by God's grace, while under trial for their faith.
Philippians 4:1 speaks of a crown of joy for those who stand firm
in their service to God. Our rewards may be positions
of authority or leadership as we reign with Christ (2 Timothy 2:12, Revelation 20:6, 22:5). By 1
Corinthians 6:3, we'll even be given authority to judge the angels. No
matter what our rewards are, Christians in this life must have faith that God
will make all our service to Him worthwhile. We should understand
that the name of the game after salvation while we remain on the earth is
service to God and rewards from Jesus Christ Works
This system of judgment and rewards for Christians in return for divinely good works doesn't at first sound like a grace system, does
it? However, God established this system of works within
His all-encompassing system of Grace, similar to the way he had a system
of works to govern the daily lives of the Jews in the Old
Testament, although the two are completely mutually exclusive. When not
properly oriented toward God's grace and sovereignty, a Christian can feel
guilty for trying to earn eternal rewards. Of course our works
should be motivated from our love for Christ, but Matthew 6:19-20 says not to
seek earthly treasures (coveting), but to seek heavenly treasures
(rewards) with fervor.
The Great White Throne
The judgment of unbelievers will occur after the Millennium as all unbelievers stand before the Great White Throne of God
(Revelation 20:11). God will judge all their deeds (Romans 2:6) and find
that they're all lacking the righteousness of Jesus Christ (Romans 3:22),
and God will cast them all into the lake of fire forever (Revelation
20:15). The Bible doesn't specify how the judgment of their
individual human good works will affect their eternal doom in the lake of
fire. Perhaps there will be degrees of punishment in hell, although we can't
perceive a punishment worse than hell itself. Romans 1:18-27 tells us that
they deserve their punishment, and they have no excuse for their
unbelief, since God has revealed Himself to all men.
Conclusions
We'll all face God's judgment, whether we're believers or unbelievers. Believers will be rewarded for their divinely good
works, and they'll spend eternity in paradise, either as wealthy recipients
of many rewards, or as paupers in comparison to what they could have
had. At the Great White Throne of God, unbelievers will be found to lack
the righteousness of Jesus Christ, and they'll be sentenced to the lake
of fire forever. Our concern in this life is that of pleasing
God as Christians through our faith, our obedience, and our earning of
heavenly rewards.
Killing during war
Hi Owen,
My stepfather is now in his early 80s. He has served in both
WWII and the Korean War. During
the Korean War, he was in a rice patty where a young Korean boy
suddenly popped up in front of him. In a
split-second, he had to decide... kill a young boy or be killed. He shot.
To this day, he cannot forgive himself for this in particular above all
of the other horrors or war that he has seen and experienced. And, he
does not feel that he is worthy of forgiveness by God and Christ
for this act.
Are there
any Scriptures that you can point to help him gain any sense of
peace and comfort?
Thank you.
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for the delay in my reply.
Many people have misunderstood the Bible
on the subject of killing, often because of an incorrect translation in the old King James
Version of the Bible. The sixth commandment, in Exodus 20:13, does
not actually say, "Thou shalt not kill" as translated in the old King
James. A more accurate translation is provided in many of the modern versions, such
as the NIV, which says, "You shall not murder." The Bible
forbids the act of murder, which means the unjustified taking of a person's
life (including suicide, abortion, and euthanasia), but it doesn't forbid
all killing. In fact, it is sometimes very adamant that killing
is the right thing to do, but it must be justified in God's eyes.
The Bible tells us quite clearly that
killing is not only justified in warfare, but it's also necessary. It offers many examples
where God commands His people to kill their enemy aggressors in
warfare. In Genesis 10 through 12 (specifically 10:5 and 11:9), God created
the institution of nations, and determined that people would be
divided according to national entities. God condemned aggression from
one nation against another, and he sanctioned warfare as a means
of protection from aggressors. The Old Testament is filled with
commands from God to Moses, Joshua, David, and many others, to kill their
enemy aggressors. Deuteronomy 20:1 says, "When you go to war
against your enemies and see horses and chariots and an army greater than yours,
do not be afraid of them, because the LORD your God, who brought you up
out of Egypt, will be with you."
Sometimes God even commanded the
unmerciful annihilation of evil nations. Deuteronomy 2:33-34 says, "The LORD our God delivered him
over to us and we struck him down, together with his sons and his whole
army. At that time we took all his towns and completely destroyed
them--men, women and children. We left no survivors."
In your stepfather's experience in
Korea, the nations of North Korea and China were the aggressors. They invaded South Korea
which was our ally, so we helped them in their defense against those
aggressors. Your stepfather explicitly obeyed the Scripture above that says,
"... do not be afraid of them, ..." He had been trained to obey
orders, and that he did. He bravely fulfilled his duty in killing the
aggressors, even when he had some moral questions about it.
Remember also that our armed forces work
as a team in defeating our enemies. Consider a particular service man whose sole
responsibility was to load the proper coordinates for a 90MM anti-aircraft
cannon, perhaps under a cloudy nighttime sky. After the coordinates
were loaded, another man positioned and aimed the gun. Another man
loaded a mortar shell, and yet another man fired the weapon. If the
artillery (hopefully) hit its target aircraft, it likely killed all of the
enemy onboard. In many cases, none of these men even saw the far
away explosion, but each was (proudly) a part of the killing of the
enemy. The unfortunate thing in your stepfather's incident is that it
took place in such close physical proximity to the aggressor. Even
if this is a recurring nightmare for him, he should be proud of the part
he played in defense of freedom. In fact, the enemy soldier that
he killed may have been destined to kill him, or another American soldier, if
he had not done the right thing as he did.
Your story reminded me of the movie,
Saving Private Ryan. I love the scene with the American sniper, whose job it was to hide,
take careful aim with his rifle, and kill German soldiers. Each
time, just before pulling the trigger, he would quote a Scripture from the
Bible. In other words, He was demonstrating his obedience to God and to
his commanding officers by killing the enemy. Such a man, so
learned in the Scriptures, probably also said a prayer for his enemies (Matthew
5:44), while he also thanked God for the opportunity for obedience to
Him.
Now, regarding forgiveness, Acts 13:38
says, 93Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of
sins is proclaimed to you." Forgiveness of sin is a matter of
believing in Christ. If your stepfather is a believer (John 3:16), then,
like the rest of us believers, he can simply claim his eternal
forgiveness (Romans 4:7), and use the technique of confession (1 John 1:9)
to receive temporal forgiveness. However, regarding his specific
actions during war, I believe that there is no need for forgiveness in
this situation. His was not an act of sin, but of
obedience.
For more information on this, please see
my article at Killing.
Please be sure to thank your stepfather
for the freedom that he provided to me for his faithful service in fulfilling the
(sometimes awful) call of duty from God and from our country, in not just one,
but two wars. I was never in the military, and, much less, never
in his shoes. Because of this, I truly believe that I'll never be
half the man he is. My simple and easy duty is to simply admire and thank
him, and it's my privilege to do so.
BTW, would you allow me to post your
question on my website?
Thanks,
Owen
Thanks for your thoughtful response Owen.
Yes you may post to the website.
I think the primary struggle is looking the young boy in the face and needing
to decide will it be him or me? Shoot a young boy or be killed. Should he have let the young boy live?
Blessings,
Thank you for your reply. I certainly have an appreciation
for the fact your stepfather is haunted by that moment when he had to look the
young boy in the face and decide what to do. I may not have
addressed this issue directly enough. I have never had such a difficult
decision, but I'll try to better explain my view from a biblical and moral perspective.
During those wars, and in all of our wars since then, our enemies
have often been terrorists who have been willing to sacrifice the lives
of their own women and children by using them as decoys, traps,
human shields, and suicide bombers. They quickly learned that
American soldiers have compassion for innocent women and
children. Unfortunately, our soldiers also quickly learned that they had to
be cautious and untrusting in all engagements with enemy
civilians. Too often an American soldier came to the aid of such a child only
to discover that it was a trap to set off an explosion and kill as
many Americans as possible.
Your stepfather suddenly faced a situation where he had to make
a split-second decision, and his instincts and military training
kicked in. Yes, if he had more time, he might have made a different
decision. However, he didn't have more time. Our enemies intentionally
try to cause our soldiers to hesitate by exploiting their compassion
and sensitivity as weaknesses. There have been many similar
situations where American soldiers tried to help an innocent child, then
the slightest move by the child set off an explosion, or a trigger from
a nearby enemy sniper. For all your stepfather knew, he was
saving American lives by sacrificing the life of a child.
I know it had to be terrible for your stepfather to look the young
boy in the face and decide whether to shoot him or be killed. I
still adamantly believe that your stepfather did the right thing.
I believe that this is obvious by the mere fact that this was the decision
at hand--to shoot or be killed. In such (horrendous) moments of
battle, our soldiers are taught to do the right thing. They must
shoot. They would not further our cause to allow themselves to be killed in such
a situation. They are still needed for future battles, and to
return home safely.
Note that this does not excuse the war-time murder of civilians such
as what some American soldiers did during the My Lai Massacre during
the Vietnam War. Killing the enemy in warfare is justified, but
intentional murder is an unjustified sin. Unfortunately, sometimes this
is a fine line, requiring an instant decision by our soldiers. War is
an ugly, but necessary, thing, and part of the ugliness is having to make
quick life-threatening decisions.
So, should your stepfather have let the young boy live? I
don't believe so. He demonstrated strength during wartime, making
some quick decisions and acting on those decisions. If his training,
battle conditions, and momentary decision-making were similar to what
I described, then he can take solace in the Scriptures that I
have offered. If, for some reason, a sin was committed, then he
simply needs to take solace in confession to God (1 John 1:9), as the rest of us
do, in order to receive temporal forgiveness.
I hope this helps. Please feel free to reply again if I can
be of any further assistance. Meanwhile, I am praying for your
stepfather's peace and comfort in God (Philippians 4:7).
Thanks,
Owen
Our Purpose
I researched the 'first cause' by Thomas Aquinas, and found it to
be wanting of a very important nature, purpose. We are
all taught that God created us for only one purpose............to
worship him....to do his bidding and his will......and
if we don't we get punished for all
eternity. God is a dictator.........not a loving
creator. Because even though we have free will, God doesn't say that's O.K. He says that
if we don't do conduct our behavior according to his will, we will be punished. The bible
also says that God loves us more than our parents do. That is not
true. If we go against our parents’ wishes. They do
not punish us for all eternity. Good parents tell their children
that they should do as their hearts tell them to. That is
real love. Everything that God created, he created for a purpose. Yet
what purpose did God have before he created the angels?
Thank you for your question. My perspective is somewhat
different than yours, but I hope that I can shed some light on these issues, and
maybe learn from each other.
I believe that our purpose is to glorify God. We are a part
of His Creation, so everything we do must please Him and bring Him
glory--our obedience, our trust, our conduct, etc. (Romans 15:6, 2
Corinthians 5:9). Please see my article on
Pleasing God.
We all have the sinful nature of the flesh. We each have
sinned, both by committing personal sins and by the imputation of sin from
Adam (Romans 5:14-10):
Imputation.
Yet, since God cannot coexist with sin, there's nothing that we can
do to deserve eternal life in God's presence, so we have a
dilemma. Only God can do anything about this, and He would have been
perfectly justified to let us all die in our sins and to separate Himself from
us for all of eternity. However, in His love, He instituted a
system of grace to solve this problem for us. All we have to do is to
believe and trust Him for eternal salvation (John 3:16).
If God is a dictator, then He is a benevolent one. I must
simply disagree with you because I believe that God is a loving creator (1
John 4:8, 16). Yes, we have free will, but it is a limited free
will (Predestination).
God loves us so much that it is only by His plan of grace that there is
a solution to our problem. Ephesians 2:4-6 says, "But God,
being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when
we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ
(by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated
us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus."
God does indeed love us more than our parents love us. He
loved us so much that He sacrificed His own son Jesus Christ for us (John
3:16, Romans 5:5), so that all we have to do is to believe Him for our
eternal salvation. (Who among us would be willing to sacrifice our
own child for others?) God imputes all of our sin onto Jesus Christ who
died for our sins and was resurrected for our eternal life. Christ
took the punishment for our sin, if we only believe in Him, so God can now
look at each of us believers as being sinless.
Again I disagree where you said, "Good parents tell their children
that they should do as their hearts tell them to." Good parents
tell their children that they should glorify and obey God; and, that until
they're old enough to thoroughly understand this, they should obey
their parents.
Unfortunately, the Bible does not tell us about God's purpose before
He created the angels. Remember that God is an eternal being, so
He is not limited by words such as "before" and "after." Eternity
transcends time and space, so these are not boundaries for God, although we (in
our physical being) cannot fully understand these concepts. We
can simply be assured that since God created everything, then the purpose
of everything (including us and the angels) has always been to glorify
Him, and this will always be so.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Casting your pearls before swine
What is meant by the phrase, “neither cast ye your pearls before swine?”
Thank you for your question about Matthew 7:6. The dogs and
swine in this verse symbolize those people who have rejected the gospel
message. So, Christ is saying that it is futile to continue to present the
truth to those who have already refused what they have heard. A
person cannot appreciate new truth until he has responded to the truth which has already received.
Thanks,
Owen
Gluttony
Where in the book of Matthew does it tell who was called a glutton and a wine guzzler?
Where in the book of I Timothy does it tell who Paul recommend a little wine for his infirmities?
Thank you for your questions.
1) Matthew 11:18-19 says, "For John came neither eating nor
drinking, and they say, 'He has a demon.' The Son of Man came eating
and drinking, and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard, a friend
of tax collectors and sinners.' But wisdom is proved right by her
deeds."
2) 1 Timothy 5:23 says, "Stop drinking only water, and use a little
wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses."
There are two other related scriptures as well:
Proverbs 31:6-7 is directed toward the distraught: "Give beer to
those who are perishing, wine to those who are in anguish; let them drink
and forget their poverty and remember their misery no more."
In 1 Corinthians 11:22, Paul tells the believers at Corinth that if
they choose to drink, they should do it at home rather than at a
church service, implying that this would be acceptable.
Thanks,
Owen
Daniel
Was Daniel made a eunuch when he was taken as a teenage boy and is that found in scripture?
Thank you for your question. We do not know for sure whether
or not Daniel was made a eunuch, and there is much debate about this
topic among theologians. The only indication that we have for this
is in Daniel 1:3, where Daniel and the other captives were put under
the authority of Ashpenaz, "master of the eunuchs." My opinion is
that Daniel was not necessarily made a eunuch just because he was
placed under the authority of the "master of the eunuchs," and the
Scriptures certainly do not tell us that he was. However, I do not
believe that the answer to this question has much consequence for us, and it
doesn't have much bearing on how we read the book of Daniel.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Money Management
Can you tell me where I can fine in the Bible not to squander your
money or budget your household?
Thank you for your question. The best passage I can think of
for money management is 1 Timothy 3:4:5, which says, "... not a lover
of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children
obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect."
Although this is reference to pastors and deacons, the same principles apply to all
Christians. For additional passages, please see my article on
Money.
Thanks, Owen Hi Owen,
Thanks for your response it was very helpful keep up the good work. Thanks
153 Fish
In John 21:11 there is an exact count of 153 large fish. In
the context, what is the significance of this number and why did John mention
it? What does Luke 15 have to do with it?
Thank you for your question. The Bible is not definitive
about the significance of the exact number of 153 fish mentioned in John
21:11. I personally believe that John mentioned it simply because it was
factual (and a very large number), and I see no correlation with Luke
15. However, others do place particular significance upon this number, and
I will summarize some of their observations below.
Those who have associated special meaning to the number 153
usually based their analysis upon the significance of the number 3, noting
the three members of the Trinity, the three days from Christ's death on
the cross until His resurrection, etc. Then they discovered that
when the digits of 153 are added together (1 + 5 + 3), the sum is 9, or 3 x
3.
153 is also what was called a "triangular" number in ancient
times. They formed shapes or patterns by arranging dots to represent
numbers. In order to be a triangular number, the pattern of dots had to form
a triangle with the same number of dots on each side of the
triangle. The number 3 would be the first triangular number: 2 dots below 1
dot. Add another row of 3 dots below the 2 dots and you have the next
triangular number 6. The number 153 is the sixteenth triangular
number. It would have 17 dots on each side of the triangle. In other words, 1
+ 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 + 7 + 8 + 9 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 + 14 + 15 + 16 + 17 = 153.
So, the number 153 can be expressed as a triangle which, obviously,
has 3 sides and is therefore closely associated with the number 3.
Also, if you sum the cube of the digits in 153, you get 153:
(1 X 1 X 1) + (5 X 5 X 5) + (3 X 3 X 3) 3D 1 + 125 + 27 = 153.
There are supposedly only about four known numbers in which the sum of the cube
of the digits of that number will yield the original number.
Also, of these, the number 153 is the only one divisible by 3.
Again, although I am fascinated with the mathematics, I'm not
convinced that the exact number of 153 fish is of particular significance.
Thanks,
Owen
Jesus' Ascension
Where in the Bible is there information on why Jesus waiting 40 days from death to ascension?
Thank you for your question. Unfortunately, there is no
direct information in the Bible that tells us why Jesus waited 40 days
before His ascension. There have always been various opinions
among theologians about this. Among these various opinions, 40 is sometimes seen as:
- The number of waiting
- The number of preparation
- The number of testing
- The number for transition, or transformation.
- The number of a generation (40 years)
Since the Bible doesn't specify the reason that Jesus waited 40 days before His ascension, I see no reason to try to explain it.
I'm sorry that I can't be of more help on this.
Thanks,
Owen
Mormonism
My boss, who is
LDS, and I have frequent discussions about Biblical matters.
I was saved by God's grace out of Mormonism so we've had some very
interesting conversations (to say the least).
Today, my boss asked me this question: "Luke is quite
emphatic that Stephen saw God with Jesus. If God is without substance, what
did Stephen see?"
Then, he followed with this statement: "Further, if Stephen
didn't see God with Jesus, then Luke's account is incorrect. Luke
is advocating false doctrine, and the Bible is far from inerrant. I
would presume that Luke was sincere in his belief that Stephen saw God."
I know in Whom I believe and I trust the Bible completely.
However, my boss is a retired attorney and he asks questions and make
statements like the above for which I'm unable to give a succinct reply. I'm
just not able to put what I believe into words of explanation.
Can you, PLEASE, help me with a reply that will make sense to my employer?
Thank you for your question. I believe that one of the
best translations to study for this passage is the New American
Standard, which describes what Stephen saw as:
"... the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God." (Acts 7:55b)
An even more accurate translation is: "... the glory of God,
even Jesus standing at the right hand of God."
Yes, Stephen was given the unique privilege of seeing God.
However, technically, this passage does not say that he "saw God;" i.e.,
it doesn't say that he saw God, the Father (the first person of
the Godhead). It says that he saw "the glory of God," and he saw
this glory of God through Jesus Christ. In other words, by seeing Jesus
Christ, he saw the glory of God, because Jesus is God; i.e., He is the
second person of the Godhead (although your Mormon friends may have
trouble with this interpretation).
Your boss's assumption, "... if God is without substance..." may
need closer examination as well. John 4:24 does indeed say that,
"God is spirit." If this does mean that God is without substance,
then the above explanation still holds, since Stephen saw "the glory of
God." Still, we must be careful with this assumption. For example,
Jesus is God, and Jesus has a body, so technically, God (i.e., Jesus, the
second person of the Godhead) does indeed have a body (even if God the
Father, the first person of the Godhead) does not have a body. Even
by this, the above explanation still stands.
Furthermore, we must be careful with any assumptions of what it is
like to see things in eternity. In our mortal bodies, we simply
cannot understand the eternal things of God which are beyond time and
space. Perhaps it was difficult for Luke to describe exactly what Stephen
saw. Luke, in his physical body, may not have understood the things
that Stephen saw in his unique opportunity, just before death (i.e.,
entering into the very presence of God).
Still, with any of these reasonable explanations, it is still a
fact that Luke is not advocating false doctrine, and that the Bible (in
its original manuscripts) is indeed inerrant. God, for whatever
reason, has given you the challenge of defending your faith to a Mormon who
is intelligent and articulate, and an experienced debater--one who
is probably capable of twisting his opponents words and thoughts for
the purpose of confusion. I can only encourage you in this
awesome task.
Thanks,
Owen
Jesus' Age
How old was Jesus when the wise men found Him?
Thank you for your question. The Bible doesn't explicitly
tell us how old Jesus was when the wise men found him. However, we can
estimate his age by studying the text in Matthew 2.
The wise men arrived in Jerusalem (and saw Herod) after Jesus was
born (Matthew 2:1). When the wise men finally found Jesus, he was
in a house--no longer in the manger at the inn where he was born
(Matthew 2:11). It was about this time that Herod ordered that all
male children, two years old and under, in Bethlehem were to be
killed (Matthew 2:16). So, we can estimate that the wise men had
arrived to see Jesus somewhere between one and two years after His birth.
One year may be a better estimate because of the wise men's travel time.
Thanks,
Owen
Beatitudes
How many times in the bible are beatitudes mentioned? I know of Matthew, Luke and Revelation.
Thank you for your question. There are no other places where
the specific beatitudes of Jesus are referenced in the Bible. However,
technically speaking, I have found 41 Scriptures that convey a beatitude; i.e., in
the sense of a pronouncement of a happy, fortunate, or blissful blessing,
and I've included them below.
Thanks,
Owen
Deuteronomy 33:29 - Blessed are you, Israel! Who is like you, a people saved by the LORD?
He is your shield and helper and your glorious sword. Your enemies will cower
before you, and you will tread on their heights."
Psalm 2:12 - Kiss his son, or he will be angry and your way will lead to your destruction, for his wrath can flare up in a moment. Blessed are all
who take refuge in him.
Psalm 41:1 - Blessed are those who have regard for the weak; the LORD delivers them
in times of trouble.
Psalm 65:4 - Blessed are those you choose and bring near to live in your courts! We
are filled with the good things of your house, of your holy temple.
Psalm 84:4 - Blessed are those who dwell in your house; they are ever praising you.
Psalm 84:5 - Blessed are those whose strength is in you, whose hearts are set on pilgrimage.
Psalm 89:15 - Blessed are those who have learned to acclaim you, who walk in the
light of your presence, LORD.
Psalm 106:3 - Blessed are those who act justly, who always do what is right.
Psalm 112:1 - Praise the LORD. Blessed are those who fear the LORD, who find great delight in his commands.
Psalm 119:1 - Aleph Blessed are those whose ways are blameless, who walk according to the law of the LORD.
Psalm 119:2 - Blessed are those who keep his statutes and seek him with all their heart-
Psalm 128:1 - A song of ascents. Blessed are all who fear the LORD, who walk in obedience to him.
Psalm 146:5 - Blessed are those whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the LORD their God.
Proverbs 3:13 - Blessed are those who find wisdom, those who gain understanding,
Proverbs 8:32 - Now then, my children, listen to me; blessed are those who keep my ways.
Proverbs 8:34 - Blessed are those who listen to me, watching daily at my doors, waiting at my doorway.
Proverbs 20:7 - The righteous lead blameless lives; blessed are their children after them.
Isaiah 30:18 - Yet the LORD longs to be gracious to you; therefore he will rise up to
show you compassion. For the LORD is a God of justice. Blessed are all who wait for him!
Matthew 5:3 - Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:4 - Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
Matthew 5:5 - Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Matthew 5:6 - Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
Matthew 5:7 - Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Matthew 5:8 - Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Matthew 5:9 - Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.
Matthew 5:10 - Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Matthew 5:11 - Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.
Matthew 13:16 - But blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.
Matthew 16:17 - Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not
revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven."
Luke 1:42 - In a loud voice she exclaimed: "Blessed are you among women, and
blessed is the child you will bear!
Luke 6:20 - Looking at his disciples, he said: "Blessed are you who are poor, for
yours is the kingdom of God.
Luke 6:21 - Blessed are you who hunger now, for you will be satisfied. Blessed are
you who weep now, for you will laugh.
Luke 6:22 - Blessed are you when people hate you, when they exclude you and insult
you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man.
Luke 10:23 - Then he turned to his disciples and said privately, "Blessed are the
eyes that see what you see.
Luke 23:29 - For the time will come when you will say, 'Blessed are the childless
women, the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!'
John 20:29 - Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed;
blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
Romans 4:7 - "Blessed are those whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered.
Revelation - 1:3 Blessed is the one who reads aloud the words of this prophecy, and
blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.
Revelation - 14:13 Then I heard a voice from heaven say, "Write this: Blessed are the dead
who die in the Lord from now on." "Yes," says the Spirit, "they will rest
from their labor, for their deeds will follow them."
Revelation - 19:9 Then the angel said to me, "Write this: Blessed are those who are
invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!" And he added, "These are the true words of God."
Revelation - 22:14 "Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right
to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city.
Bible Chapters
HOW MANY CHAPTERS IN ENTIRE BIBLE?
Thank you for your question. There are 1,189 chapters in the Bible: 929 in the Old Testament, and 260 in the New Testament.
Thanks,
Owen
The Cross
Is there somewhere in the bible that talks about the two
aspects of crosses....meaning the crucifixion side and the symbolic religious side?
I mean on one hand crosses have been used for killing people in
past history. On the other hand they were (and are) used as a positive
symbol for loving God.
There seems to be some disconnect there in my mind about that.
Does the bible address that issue anywhere?
Or what do you think about that?
You have asked some interesting questions on the subject of
the cross--the physical aspect vs. the spiritual aspect of the
Crucifixion. Unfortunately (as with so many things that we wish the Bible
talked about more), I don't know of any specific Scripture passages that
talk about this. However, I believe that we can still construct a
Biblical answer to your question by tying some verses together.
However, first of all, I think it's important to note that the
people living throughout the Roman Empire during the time of Christ were
well aware of the violent nature of crucifixion. Rome was a
powerful world empire, and it used its power to strike fear in the hearts of
its adversaries. Rome's enemies lived in fear of its military
power, and its domestic enemies (lawbreakers) lived in fear of
crucifixion. Crucifixion was quite common, and Rome proudly displayed the crosses
and the broken bodies on them. The idea was that a would-be
criminal would think twice before breaking the law if he thought he would end up
like that--usually suffering a very slow death over a period of many
days, where the cause of death was often dehydration, exhaustion, and /
or asphyxiation. The victims were in agony, but not only because
of the nails in their hands and feet. The nature of crucifixion also
made it difficult for them to breathe. They would hang loosely from
their arms for a while, trying to rest their muscles, but causing
respiratory distress from the pressure on their rib cage. Then they would
muster enough strength to push up with their legs, and take a few
relatively clear breaths, until the strength in their legs would give out
again. As a result, if the soldiers (and the authorities) took pity
upon someone who was crucified, they could break his legs, as this
would actually hasten their death.
Incidentally, Christ's death was relatively quick, and unusual
for crucifixion. The soldiers were ordered to break His legs in
order to hasten His death (in response to the plea of the Jews that He should
not have to hang on the cross throughout the Sabbath Day--John
19:31). However, when they came to break His legs, He was already
dead. So, part of the miracle of the Cross is that Christ actually bled to
death, due to the wounds in His hands and feet (from the nails), His
skull (from the crown of thorns), and His side (from the spear).
This is why, in Christendom, the blood of Christ is sacred--the very means by
which the only sinless man was sacrificed for those who choose to believe
in the gospel message. Leviticus 17:11 says, "For the life of a
creature is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement
for yourselves on the altar; it is the blood that makes atonement for
one's life."
Now back to the Biblical answer to your question, I believe that
the following Scriptures apply:
- Acts 2:23 notes that Christ was "... nailed to a cross by the hands
of godless men and put Him to death." This confirms what history
tells us about how gruesome death by crucifixion was.
- Galatians 3:13 says that, "Christ redeemed us from the curse of
the Law, having become a curse for us-for it is written, "CURSED
IS EVERYONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE." This teaches that the perfect
Christ became a curse when our sins were placed upon Him.
- Colossians 1:20 says that Christ "... made peace through the blood
of His cross." Our reconciliation (for our sins) with God was
made possible only through Christ's blood on the cross.
- Hebrews 12:2 notes that Christ "... endured the cross, despising
the shame." Everyone understood that crucifixion was quite
something to endure. More importantly, Christ overcame the shame of the
cross through His resurrection."
- 1 Peter 2:24 says that Christ "... bore our sins in His body on
the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to
righteousness." This is one of many scriptures explaining that, upon believing this
gospel message, we believers know that Christ died for our sins, and we
will live with Him in eternity (John 3:16-18).
So, I can understand why you might feel a disconnect between the
killing aspect of crucifixion and how we use it in our faith as a symbol
for God's love. However, I believe that this disconnect can
really be interpreted as a connection--between Christ's great sacrifice and how
it provided salvation for us when we had otherwise had nothing worthy
to offer God.
One other thing comes to mind: I was taught (as a Protestant)
to believe that the display of a cross in our day was acceptable as long
as it was only a cross; i.e., not a cross with Christ's body on it, as
seen throughout Roman Catholic churches. We were told that, since
Christ had defeated the cross through His resurrection, then we should think of
the cross as "the empty cross which could no longer hold Him," instead
of the cross that held His dead or dying body. Well, I'm no
longer as adamant about this as I used to be. Although it's my
preference to display an empty cross (like on Karen's "wall of crosses" in
our kitchen), I can also understand why one would also want to remember
the cross as it still held Christ's body, re-enforcing the idea of His
great sacrifice.
Sorry, I got a bit long winded there. I truly get excited
when I think about Christ's death on the cross for sinners such as myself.
Thanks,
Owen
Drinking
Where in the bible does it say not to drink alcohol in the bible?
Thank you for your question. It's an interesting question. I've addressed it in my article
entitled Is Drinking a Sin?, and here are the highlights:
There are three passages in the Bible that suggest abstinence from
all alcoholic beverages. The first is in Proverbs 31:4-5 where "kings"
are forbidden to drink because their judgment would be impaired. In
those days of monarchies, kings were the ultimate court judges, like
one-man supreme courts. The Bible said that they shouldn't drink because of
the important decisions they were expected to make. In the same way,
who among us today is not responsible for decision-making to some
degree, and unsure when he might have to make a decision?
The second reference suggesting abstinence is 1 Peter 4:7 which tells
us that, since the end is near, we should stay sober and clear-minded
so that we can pray. How many drinks does it take to distort
one's thinking? Isn't the mind-altering effect of alcohol one of the
major motivations for most drinking?
The third reference is Romans 14:21 where we are charged not to drink
if it offends someone else or bruises their spiritual confidence. Even if
a Christian has personally searched the Scriptures and decided that he
is not violating God's Word by drinking, he may still choose to abstain
to keep a fellow Christian from stumbling; who may not have the same
level of understanding. This is where one must be accountable for what
he believes and how he interprets scripture. This is one reason why
daily Bible study is so important.
Furthermore, the Bible explicitly forbids drunkenness in Ephesians
5:18 and 1 Corinthians 6:10.
However, on the other hand, Jesus partook of wine (Luke 22:20), and
He even miraculously turned water into wine (John 2:1-11). We
also know that Jesus never sinned, so how could it be wrong to drink?
One could argue that none of the above passages explicitly says that
Christians must not drink. In fact, some passages even appear to be imperatives
to indulge. Consider the following examples:
Proverbs 31:6-7 is directed toward the distraught: "Give beer to
those who are perishing, wine to those who are in anguish; let them drink
and forget their poverty and remember their misery no more."
1 Timothy 5:23 is a comment by Paul to Timothy: "Stop drinking
only water, and use a little wine because of your stomach and your
frequent illnesses."
In 1 Corinthians 11:22, Paul tells the believers at Corinth that if
they choose to drink, they should do it at home rather than at a
church service, implying that this would be acceptable.
Conclusions
Of the six passages referenced above, the former three lean
toward abstinence, especially for leaders, and the latter three lean
toward indulgence, especially for the distraught. Either way, drunkenness
is forbidden. If you're a Christian drinker, you probably
emphasize Proverbs 31:6-7 and 1 Timothy 5:23. If you're a Christian abstainer,
you probably prefer Proverbs 31:4-5 and 1 Peter 4:7.
The deciding factors, however, are the mind-altering effects and
the long-term health risks of alcohol (Romans 12:1). If one drinks
in moderation without altering his thinking capability to the extent
that it affects his decision making, and his drinking doesn't present
a long-term health risk in his particular case, then he has not
violated the Scriptures. If he experiences mind-altering effects when he
drinks, so that his decision making rationale is impaired, he has
violated Scripture.
Regardless, we are each accountable for ourselves. In general,
a person's drinking is between him and God. Of course, there can
be extenuating circumstances when intervention is required and / or if
that person is doing harm to others. However, in most cases, it is
nobody else's business unless that person seek help (1 Timothy 4:11). To
be sure, there are many who place too much emphasis on this issue
simply because they're not minding their own business. Too often, the
pious abstainer may be displeasing to God by his Pharisaical pride than
the indulger is by his drinking.
Thanks,
Owen
God Hardening the Egyptians' Hearts
I have questions on Exodus 14:17.
Exodus 14: 15-18 (New American Standard Bible)
15 Then the LORD said to Moses, "Why are you crying out to
Me? Tell the sons of Israel to go forward. 16 As for you, lift up your
staff and stretch out your hand over the sea and divide it, and the sons
of Israel shall go through the midst of the sea on dry land. 17 As
for Me, behold, I will harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that
they will go in after them; and I will be honored through Pharaoh and all
his army, through his chariots and his horsemen. 18 Then the Egyptians
will know that I am the LORD, when I am honored through Pharaoh, through his chariots
and his horsemen."
My questions are on Exodus 14:17. Why God wanted to harden the hearts of the Egyptians so that they
will go in after the Israelites and ended up being drown? Why there was
no mercy at all for the Egyptians? Why it was necessary to take this
type of measure in order to show the Egyptians that who the Lord is?
Thank you for your question.
I believe that it was necessary for God to take the drastic step
of drowning the Egyptian army in order to show the Egyptians that He
was the Lord. God had already demonstrated His might power in the
ten plagues, and Pharaoh and the Egyptian people still didn't
believe. Perhaps after the spectacular display of drowning the army, some
people were then compelled to believe.
Regarding your question about mercy, I would simply cite Exodus
33:19 which says, "And the LORD said, I will cause all my goodness to pass
in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the LORD, in your presence.
I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion
on whom I will have compassion.'"
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
OwenThe Gender of Angels
I have a
question for you about angels. I did some searches on your site and
others, but it seems there are differing opinions about the topic.
1.
There are no "new" angels, correct? The ones that exist now were all here
before man, correct?
2.
Even though the bible doesn't name any female angels directly, is there anything
that says there are absolutely no such thing as female angels? Can
we or should we even think of angels in terms of male and female in the same
ways we think of male and female humans?
The
Internet is full of conflicting opinions on this. It seems
that certain bible passages can lead some to believe one way and others
lead in another direction (like a lot of them I guess).
Unfortunately, the Bible shares very little information about
the gender of angels (or much information at all about angels), so, in
my view, we can't be too definitive on this subject. Some
people with other views use extra-biblical sources, but I usually stick with only what
the Bible says about these controversial issues.
One of the most definitive passages that we have is Genesis
6:1-4, although it doesn't specifically use the term
"angel." It describes the type of wickedness in the world that caused God to send the
great flood in Noah's day:
"1 Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face
of the land, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw
that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for
themselves, whomever they chose. 3 Then the LORD said, 93My
Spirit shall not strive with man forever, because he also is flesh; nevertheless his days
shall be one hundred and twenty years. The Nephilim were on the
earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the
daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who
were of old, men of renown."
This is a controversial passage because of the varying
opinions about "the sons of God." Some believe that this is a reference
to the two lines of Adam and Eve's family; i.e., the sons of Seth, as opposed to
the sons of Cain. However, others believe that this is a
reference to angels. I usually decide such issues using a very straightforward
reading of the text. Since the "sons of God" are contrasted with
the "daughters of men," I believe that the "sons of God" were angels.
Furthermore, it follows that their offspring were somewhat abnormal; i.e., the Nephilim,
described in Numbers 13:33 as giants who inhabited Canaan. So, I
believe that this passage indicates that angels, like humans, can be either men
or women. Even further, the angels and humans were able to produce
offspring together, although God may have since put a stop to this.
Now, oddly enough, we have no passages showing that angels
can cohabit with other angels to reproduce offspring. Instead,
all we have is the above (sort of weird) variation where angels and humans were
able to produce some sort of mixed offspring. BTW, Hebrews
13:2 supports the idea that angels can sometimes take the form of humans, when it
says that some people have shown hospitality to angels without even knowing
it, by showing hospitality to strangers.
We also have Matthew 22:30, which says, "At the resurrection
people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the
angels in heaven." This passage is usually used to show that,
in eternity in heaven, we will not be married to our spouses as we are
now. However, it also says that this arrangement will make us "like the angels" in that
respect; i.e., no marriages. So, as of Matthew's writing of his
gospel, it appears that, although the angels do not marry, they do have gender, or
else the whole subject of marriage among angels would have been a moot point.
So, specifically, I would answer your questions like this:
1. You are correct; there are no new angels.
Angels, like humans, are created beings. It appears that the angels were
created first, because of the information we have about Satan (an angel) being cast out
of heaven, along with one-third of the angels (demons), to wander on the
earth, before the creation of man (Isaiah 14:12).
2. No, there's nothing that says that there are no such
things as female angels. According to the passages above, we can
indeed think of angels in terms of being either male or female, similar to
humans. However, I'm not aware of any impact (neither positive nor negative) that this
would have upon any other aspects of the theology of my belief system.
If you're interested, I would recommend *Systematic Theology*
by Lewis Sperry Chafer, where he has some 120 pages on Angelology.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
OwenDavid's Census
In 2
Samuel 24:1 the bible says that God made David want to count the
people but in 1 Chronicles 21:1 it says it was Satan so why the huge
confusion and why were the people killed and nothing happened to David
even though it was his sin?
You cited 2 Samuel 24:1 where God made David want to take a census
of the people, and you noted that 1 Chronicles 21:1 says that it was
Satan who induced David to count the people. You asked about this
confusion, and why the people were killed while David escaped punishment for
his sin.
This is a difficult question because it appears to be one of those
rare places where the copies and translations may not been
accurately preserved throughout the centuries. However, I believe that
we can figure out what the original manuscripts said. As you noted,
1 Chronicles 21:1 reveals that it was actually Satan (not God) who rose
up against Israel and incited David to take the census. God
apparently allowed Satan to tempt David into this sin for the purpose of
punishing the people. So, David committed a personal sin when he
conducted the census. This was wrong because it was done in pride and
self-glory, so that David could be proud about being the leader of so many
people. However, God's overall purpose here was to punish the people, which
He did by taking many lives. However, David was only the tool
that He used for this overall purpose.
God's Wrath upon the Evil on the Earth
Genesis
6-7 God sees the evil on the earth (However it seems the central
cause of this is that the "Sons of God" had kids with the "Daughters
of man" (which sounds an awful like angels sleeping with humans.)
God decides that the earth is evil, has Noah build an ark,
and then God kills everyone on earth with a painful death of drowning
(that would include children.) Also aside from the fact that this story
is completely ridiculous; so much so that it's laughable; it is a completely
evil act on the part of God AND it never mentions in Genesis 6 or 7
that the people of the earth had a choice to enter the ark (something
I bet you didn't know).
Also, Genesis 12: God sends a plague on the house of pharaoh because
the pharaoh believed Abraham's lie.
Yes, in Noah's day there was much evil on the earth, including
the physical union of the "Sons of God" and the "Daughters of
man." God's wrath against this evil was revealed by the worldwide flood, saving
only Noah and his family. In fact, we know from Romans 5 that sin
entered the world through Adam, and everyone since then has been guilty
of sin--both imputed sin and personal sins. So, even Noah and
his family were guilty (Romans 3:23, 6:23), and it was only God's gift of his
grace (John 3:16) to Noah and his family that kept mankind from
being completed wiped out. The fact that the people (including
children) suffered a painful death is reflective of the fact everyone is
guilty and deserving of hell. In fact, if I shared your skepticism,
I would be more disturbed by the prospect of living forever in hell separated
from God than I would be by that of a painful (but relatively quick)
death.
I simply don't share your view that the story of Noah and the ark
is ridiculous and laughable. Rather than an evil act by God, I
see it as an act of grace that He saved anybody, and this is also how I
view salvation through the saving blood of Christ on the cross.
You made a valid point that we're not told whether or not the people
of the earth had a choice to enter the ark. Regardless, however,
God chose to establish His covenant with Noah, and God's will and decisions
are sovereign.
You also cited Genesis 12 where God punished the house of
Pharaoh because of Abraham's sin. To me, this just shows how the
devastating effects of sin can spread to others, again remembering that nobody
is innocent (free from sin).
Polygamy
Verses that give specific instructions on how to conduct a
marriage with
multiple wives:
Exodus 21:10
Deuteronomy 21:15
Verses that seem to imply polygamy is okay:
Genesis 4:19
Genesis 16:1-4
Genesis 25:6
Genesis 26:34
Genesis 28:9
Genesis 31:17
Genesis 32:22
Judges 8:30
1 Samuel 1:1-2
2 Sam. 12:7-8
1 Kg. 11:2-3
1 Chr. 4:5
2 Chr. 11:21
2 Chr. 13:21
2 Chr. 24:3
You cited many verses that seem to imply that polygamy is condoned
by God, and some that even give specific instructions on how to conduct
a polygamous marriage. Believe it or not, I find it difficult
to refute your point on this matter. While most theologians would use
Ephesians 5 as a proof passage for monogamous marriages, I find that the use of
the word "wives" allows for some ambiguity even in that passage.
Slavery
Here are a few things the bible has to say about slavery:
It's OK with God if you slowly beat your slaves to death. After
all, they are your money.
And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he
die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. Notwithstanding, if he continue
a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money. Ex. 21:20-21
It's okay to beat your slaves; even if they die you won't be
punished, just as long as they survive a day or two after the beating (see Ex. 21:20-21).
But avoid excessive damage to their eyes or teeth. Otherwise
you may have to set them free. Oh well, it's a heck of a lot better
than what would happen to you if you did it to a non-slave.
(See verses 21:24-25)
And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his
maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye's sake. And if
he smite out his manservant's tooth, or his maidservant's tooth; he shall let him
go free for his tooth's sake. Ex. 21:26-27
This is another difficult subject, but my view on slavery is that it
is wrong today, and it was wrong in Paul's day, and he knew it, of
course. We should only be enslaved to the righteousness of Christ (Romans
6:19). In 1 Corinthians 7:21, Paul says, "Were you a slave when you
were called? Don't let it trouble you--although if you can gain your
freedom, do so." Paul is saying that he knows slavery is an unjust evil.
However, as in dealing with Onesimus in Philemon, Paul recognizes a
more explicit biblical principle. Slavery was in common acceptance by
the Roman government under which Paul lived. In Romans 13:1-7, we
are explicitly commanded to obey our government. Unjustly freeing a
slave was against Roman law, so Paul sided with the governing authorities.
Perhaps the closest analogy today is abortion. Since our
government condones abortion, are we entitled to stop paying our taxes?
Romans 13:1-7 says no, since God has put that government in place for a
reason, and we are explicitly commanded to obey it and pay our taxes.
Of course there are some limits at which peaceful civil disobedience is in
order. For details on this, please see the article "What is the Role of Government" on the main web page.
The question then arises about passages such as Colossians 3:18-4:1
and Ephesians 6:5-9 regarding slaves submitting to their masters, as
to whether or not these scriptures are still relevant today.
They are indeed still relevant, but in a different context. First of
all, this sounds to me like an employer/employee relationship.
Secondly, if we should someday find ourselves enslaved (through a rebellion against
the government, martial law, etc.), then these would be directly relevant to us.
The Death of David's Infant Son
There's a
story in the Bible where God kills David's son to punish him in a
slow 7-day death despite David's pleading with the Lord.
God, in His sovereign judgment, chose to punish David for his
sin, similar to the way he punished people in Noah's or Abraham's time
as noted above. Also, I believe that it's significant that He
chose not to kill David, but spared him, again, in His grace. Titus 2
According
to Titus 2, women who are not obedient to their husbands have blasphemed the word of the Lord.
Yes, the Bible does instruct wives to be subject to their
husbands. Note also, however, that it also commands both husbands and wives to submit to each other (Ephesians 5:21).
Leviticus 24
In Leviticus 24 a kid is stoned to death for having blasphemed the name of the Lord.
Verse 11 says that the son of an Israelite woman blasphemed the
Name with a curse. God's judgment of stoning is a warning and a
symbol of the eternal death to be suffered by unbelievers.
Exodus 10
In Exodus
10, God hardens pharaohs heart so that Pharaoh will not let the
Israelites go, that way God can "show these signs before him"
In other words, God doesn't let Pharaoh let the Israelites go so that
he can show off how powerful he is by plaguing all the Egyptians
including killing all the first born which would include many babies.
You say that God wanted to "show off" his powers through the
plagues. I again say that all men are guilty while God is sovereign and just
(Job 37-41). Exodus 4:24
In Exodus
4:24, God comes and is about to kill Moses' son, but Moses' wife
saves him by quickly chopping off his foreskin with a stone, causing
God to decide not to kill him. So, if you have foreskin, God wants you to die!
I think that you may be missing the context of this story.
Apparently, God had previously commanded Moses to circumcise his son.
Moses sinned by not obeying God in this matter. Then, later, as God was
about to kill the son because of Moses' sin, Moses' wife stepped in
and circumcised the son, and this satisfied God's wrath.
1 Samuel 15:3
In 1 Samuel 15:3 God commands the Israelites to kill children and little
babies:
Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare
them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
Yes, God's judgment against the sinful Amalekites was quite
harsh. His purpose in completely wiping them out was so that none would be left
to even recollect their sinful forefathers.
"Follow Me"
How many
times does Jesus say "Follow Him" in the New Testament?
Thank you for your question. If I understood your question
correctly, you asked how many times Jesus told others to follow himself.
I would say six times, in the following passages:
Matthew 4:19; Matthew 8:22; Matthew 9:9; Matthew 10:38; Matthew 16:24; and, Matthew 19:21
Some of these same accounts are repeated in the other gospels. Seed / Money
Hi, I've
heard in church as [seed] being compared to money but is there
anywhere in the Bible where Jesus referred to seed meaning
sowing money? If not why is it taught that way? (Mark 4:14, Luke 8:11)
Thank you for your question. No, I don't know of any place in
the Bible where Jesus used "seed" to symbolize money. When he was
talking about money, he specifically used monetary amounts (Matthew 25:14-30,
Luke 19:11-27). I cannot say why some churches would teach it
otherwise, unless they're just campaigning for more giving to the church.The Need to Pray
I heard a
Pastor say if you are filled with the Holy Spirit you do not need to pray
and ask God to lead and guide you because that is the Holy Spirits job. My
question is - Is this statement correct? What does God's Word say? I know
David prayed and asked God to lead and guide him but the argument could
be well that is old testament but then I read in the new testament the Lord himself said we
ought to pray "Lead us not into temptation" Thank you for your help.
Thank you for your question. The Bible (including the New Testament)
definitely tells us that we need to pray. For example, Philippians 4:6-7 says, "Do not be
anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition,
with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God,
which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your
minds in Christ Jesus."
The pastor that you mentioned probably created this doctrine through a
misinterpretation of Romans 8:26-27, which says, "In the same way, the
Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the
Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. And he who
searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit
intercedes for God's people in accordance with the will of God."
This indicates that the Holy Spirit will intercede for us when
necessary, but we're still commanded to pray. A Secret Rapture
I have been hearing quite a bit the last few years that the concept
of a "secret rapture" was invented in the 1830's by a man named John
Nelson Darby, and that this was unheard of for two thousand years.
These rapture-deniers are saying that the Rapture was never taught in the all the prior
history of Christianity and one cannot find any source of the Church
fathers believing in such a thing. Can you please give me your opinion on this subject? I
believe the Rapture to be plainly taught by Paul, but I concede that I do not
know if the Rapture was believed by Christians before the 1800's.
Thank you very much for your time and God bless your solid ministry.
Thank you for your question. The doctrine of the rapture is a
much debated topic among theologians. Briefly, here are the basic
views:
1) I agree with the premillennialists and dispensationalists that
the rapture of the church is a real event, and that it is
imminent. I believe that the apostles taught it this way. The rapture is
the next biblical event that will occur on earth, signifying the end of
the church age. After the rapture, there will be seven years of
tribulation on the earth, and this period is the final seven years of the age of
the Jews. Then, this period will be followed by 1,000 years of
the kingdom--God's kingdom on earth, with Christ as the ruler of the
world. Then a new earth will be established for eternity.
2) The amillennialists believe that the rapture is just
simultaneous with the end of the world. They believe that the kingdom is
not an earthly one. Without an earthly kingdom, there can be no
tribulation period preceding it. Without a tribulation period, there can
be no rapture preceding it. They believe that the church always
taught this until the 19th century.
For more information, you might like to read my article about
The Four Opposing Views of the End Times.
Or, click on the "Search this site" on my home page, and search
for "rapture." The Synoptic Gospels
Could you
please help us to answer one of the question below? We often take help
from your website in the area of Bible study.
Could you
please defend the consistency of the synoptic gospels, including a defense
against those who would point to various seemingly inconsistencies.
Please give some examples of these in your explanation.
Thank you for your question. I have found the synoptic
gospels to be 99.9% consistent in our modern day translations, and I believe that they were
100% consistent in the original manuscripts. For me, this is
amazing consistency, which, rather than dissuading me with a few possible, discrepancies, only strengthens my faith in the canon of
Scriptures. The beauty of having the synoptic gospels is that this more completely
paints the picture of Jesus for us, through the various viewpoints and writing styles of different men,
while the question of writing style one of the most subjective criterion for canonicity. For example, Mark's writing style manifests
itself in somewhat short and choppy sentences, and lacking some elaboration as found in
Matthew and Luke. I personally prefer this concise writing style,
while others prefer the more expressive styles.
I offer the following two examples of what seem to some as discrepancies across the synoptic gospels:
1) Matthew 10:9-10, and Mark 6:8, and Luke 9:3:
It sounds like Matthew and Luke are saying that Christ told the
disciples not to take a staff and sandals, but Mark says they can.
Probable solution: Reading closely, Matthew 10:9-10 says, "... take no
bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals, or a staff; ..." Luke 9:3
says, "Take nothing for the journey--no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra tunic." While Mark 6:8 says, "Take nothing for the journey except
a staff--no bread, no bag, no money in your belts. Wear sandals but not an extra tunic." Again, the only apparent discrepancies here concern the
staff and the sandals. The Matthew passage could be interpreted to mean that
no extra tunic, extra sandals or extra staff are to be taken. This would
imply that it is permissible to take a staff and to wear sandals, as the Mark passages says, but it would not be permissible to take an extra staff
or an extra pair of sandals. Since the passage in Luke does not reference
sandals at all, the only remaining discrepancy is that Luke sounds pretty
adamant about not taking a staff. I would just have to chalk this one up as a transcription error made by some scribe by misapplying the appropriate grammatical rules of the Greek language concerning items in a list. I
feel certain that the original manuscripts agreed.
2) Matthew 20:29-34, Mark 10:46-52, and Luke 18:35-43:
The passage in Matthew says that two blind men were healed, while Mark
and Luke say that one blind man was healed (and Mark calls him Bartimaeus.)
Possible solution: These could be referring to two different events.
Probable solution: I lean on my analytical / mathematical argument. I believe that two blind men were healed, but Mark and Luke are only documenting one. Mark and Luke do not say that ONLY one blind man was healed, so (mathematically speaking) if two were healed, then it is also true that one was healed, so there is no contradiction. It is just that Matthew tells us more about the event. So, this doesn't appear to be a
valid discrepancy.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
OwenThe Watchers
Who/what are the "watchers" that reside on the tops of hills?
Here's an explanation from Barnes Notes on the Bible:
"This language is taken from the custom of placing watchmen on the
walls of a city, or on elevated towers, who could see if an enemy
approached, and who of course would be the first to discern a messenger at
a distance who was coming to announce good news. The idea is, that
there would be as great joy at the announcement of the return of the
exiles, as if they who were stationed on the wall should see the
long-expected herald on the distant hills, coming to announce that they were about
to return, and that the city and temple were about to be rebuilt. It
was originally applicable to the return from Babylon. But it contains
also the general truth that they who are appointed to watch over Zion and
its interests, will rejoice at all the tokens of God's favor to his
people, and especially when he comes to bless them after long times of
darkness, depression, and calamity. It is by no means, therefore, departing
from the spirit of this passage, to apply it to the joy of the ministers
of religion in the visits of divine mercy to a church and people.
'Shall lift up the voice.' That is, with rejoicing."
Thanks,
OwenTelevision Evangelists
Please
tell me if it is scriptural that the Christian TV stations advertise
anointing oil made up to biblical standards, as we are told in the
scriptures not to copy this formula? Then they offer
this for a free offering of an amount of money!
Thank you for your question. No, I don't believe it is
scriptural for Christian TV stations to sell anointing oil. Unfortunately,
there are many in that industry who have forsaken the true gospel message
and prioritized money over their true calling to ministry (Luke
16:13).
Thanks,
Owen
Banquets
How many
banquets are there in the book of Esther?
Thank you for your question. I see the following six banquets
in the book of Esther: 1) 1:3 - Xerxes - For his nobles and officials 2) 1:5 - Xerxes - For all the people in Susa 3) 1:9 - Vashti - For the women in the palace 4) 2:18 - Xerxes - Esther's banquet, for all the nobles and officials 5) 5:4-5 - Esther - For Haman 6) 5:8 - 7:8 - Esther - For Xerxes and Haman
Thanks,
Owen The Book of
life
Dear
Owen, We are having a discussion in our Sunday school class,
of course with many different opinions. Can our names be taken off the
book of life, if so what would be the reasons? Myself, I believe if we are truly
saved it cannot. What I mean by that is that I feel that some
ask forgiveness through emotions and are not truly saved. One must know that they are
truly saved and walk in a new light and not have to feel
saved all the time by an up feeling. What are some scriptures I can read on this subject? Thank you so much.
Thank you for your question. You are correct that a
believer's name cannot be removed from the book of life. Revelation 3:5 says,
"The one who is victorious will, like them, be dressed in white. I will
never blot out the name of that person from the book of life, but
will acknowledge that name before my Father and his angels."
The judgment from the book of life applies only to
unbelievers. Revelation 20:15 says, "Anyone whose name was not found written in
the book of life was thrown into the lake of fire."
Revelation 21 speaks of the "Holy City, the new Jerusalem" (verse
2), and the believers who will inhabit it. Verse 27 says,
"Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful
or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's book
of life."
Psalms 69:28 does suggest that it's possible for a name to be
blotted out of the book of life: "May they be blotted out of the book
of life and not be listed with the righteous." In this context, it
could be that the book of life originally contained the names of everyone,
and the names of the unbelievers were blotted out.
Throughout the Scriptures, believers are called "children of
God" (Philippians 2:14). This fitting analogy suggests the type
of relationship that Christians have with God the Father. We are
His children--his sons and daughters. Furthermore, just as we are
naturally born as a product of our human parents, we are spiritually born as
a product of God the Father and His grace. In both cases, the
birth establishes a relationship which can never be altered. One cannot undo
a physical birth, so neither can he undo a spiritual birth. I
can't decide that I no longer want my parents to be my parents; and, as
a father myself, I cannot decide that I no longer want my children to be
y children. The eternal security of the believer is thus
demonstrated by this analogy of children.
I hope this helps.
Mephibosheth
What boy stayed in God's House for 6 years to avoid being murdered?
Thank you for your question. I believe you're referring to
Mephibosheth, in 2 Samuel 9. King David protected him when most of his family
was killed.
Thanks,
Owen
Castle
In Acts 21:34 they speak of a castle... can we know where this castle is?
Thank you for your question. The word "castle" in the King
James Version is actually better translated by the word "barracks" in the
New American Standard version. This was a military fortress,
instead of a castle. We don't know exactly where it was located, and the
remains of it are gone (unless archaeology makes some new discoveries).
Thanks,
Owen CHRIST''S SECOND COMING
Is the time of the rapture considered Christ's second coming, or is His reign
during the millennium the second coming.
Thank you for your question. Christ's Second Advent will occur at the beginning
of his 1000-year reign on the earth. Here's the chronology:
- The rapture of the church - The seven-year tribulation period - The Second
Coming of Christ - Christ's 1000-year reign on the earth - Final judgment - The new heaven and the new earth
For more details, please see my article on Bible Prophecy.
Thanks,
Owen Christian Responsibility in our Country
I have
read what you had to say about:
The Role of Government;
How Can We Please God?;
The Problems with Voting; and, What Does the Bible Say about Humility?
I am working on a topic for discussion that addresses what our role
as Christians are according to God. Now I know there are many but it seems
that they boil down to live right and share the gospel. Now my question
revolves around where we are as a country and how we are moving
more and more away from Christian values in this country. The country as a
whole seems to be moving in the direction of thinking of Christians as bigots
and a negative to be a Christian. Now I know that we have the "Great
Commission" to go out and share the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Is it the complete
plan of the Lord to gain ground by just individual conversion, and one
by one quietly winning the majority or winning the battle against evil or
sin? This country is or was a country based on Christian values and we used
to have the majority to keep the decency to a degree but little by little
we are losing the battle and control of the country. Do we have any other
responsibility other than living right and sharing the Gospel? Thanks
for your writings and for your consideration of this question that has
really been on my heart and mind in a big way lately. I feel like we should
do more than most of my Christian brothers and sisters do but I wonder if
I am wrong and all I should be concerned about is living right,
voting and quietly sharing the gospel. So, again I ask: "Do we have any responsibility
other than living right and sharing the Gospel?"
Thank you for your question.
I agree that we are supposed to live right and share the
gospel. I further believe that our sole purpose is to glorify God, and I agree
that this includes living right and sharing the gospel. Now, "living
right" includes a lot of things, as outlined in the epistles. We
glorify God by pleasing Him through right living, and this includes sharing God's
grace, being faithful in Bible study and prayer, giving to the needy, etc.
Please see my e-Book entitled True Christianity.
This covers the doctrines of the epistles, and it offers my views on what I
believe "right living" to be.
Thanks,
Owen
I
appreciate your response but I know what right living involves I just summed it
up with living right to shorten my email and to get to the main
question which I did not see a clear answer to. Can you answer the question
more directly?
You asked, "Do we have any responsibility other than living right and sharing the Gospel?" If "living right" includes glorifying
God, then I believe that this is correct. If we believe and share the
gospel, and live the Christian life, this will bring the maximum amount of glory to
God, so this is the extent of our responsibilities in this life.
So, the
way you understand the scripture we are to quietly go about our God Glorifying
lives and share the gospel and not fight to keep biblical principles
as a guide for our country? I know that we can't win the day without
God but do we do nothing while the country goes down the toilet other
than these things we have spoken of or do we do these things plus other
things?
No, you have misunderstood what I said. Yes, we are to
quietly go about our God-glorifying lives sharing the gospel. However, I do not
agree with the rest of your statement, "and not fight to keep biblical principles as a
guide for our country." I said that we could bring the
maximum amount of glory to God if we believe and share the gospel, and live the Christian
life. I also indicated that the (God-glorifying) Christian
life ("living right") includes a lot of things, and I referred you to my free e-Book entitled
True Christianity because it
covers the doctrines of the epistles. It offers my views on what I
believe "right living" to be; i.e., understanding and sharing grace and faith,
pleasing God, being faithful in Bible study and prayer, giving to the needy,
etc. Have you read this e-Book to help you answer your questions?
You also asked, "...do we do nothing while the country goes down the
toilet other than these things we have spoken of or do we do these things plus
other things?" If you are asking what our responsibilities
are in the political arena, I believe that I have already covered these as well,
in my articles on government and voting, which you indicated that you had
already read. We should vote, we should support God-fearing Christian
candidates, and we should support the Christian principles upon which the
Constitution and the Declaration of Independence were founded. For
example, concerning social issues, we should not tolerate abortion, and we should insist on
our right to arm ourselves.
If you're asking about civil disobedience, I believe that those
believers who feel led to do so should participate in orderly and non-violent
civil disobedience, bearing in mind God's instructions about this in Romans 13:1-7: "1 Let everyone be subject to the governing
authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities
that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels
against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those
who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers hold no terror for
those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from
fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be
commended. 4 For the one in authority is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They
are God's servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5
Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only
because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience. 6
This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their
full time to governing. 7 Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe
taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if
honor, then honor."
Thanks,
OwenChristian /
Hindu Marriage
I am a
Hindu, whereas my girlfriend is a Christian. We have been in love for
2yrs--love, I mean to say, without any bad intentions or
desire (no lust). I just love her as a whole and like to share everything
with her, care for her and make her happy.
The
question is, is there anything mentioned in the bible like No Love
Before marriage? Moreover like you can't marry a
Hindu?
There are things like family situations and all to be faced. But I want to know what the bible says.
Thank you for your question. If I understand your question
directly, you are asking what the Bible says about a Hindu marrying a
Christian. The only passage that I know of that may be applicable is 1
Corinthians 7:10-16, although it is speaking to those who are already
married. This passage reads as follows:
"10 To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A
wife must not separate from her husband. 11 But if she does, she must
remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must
not divorce his wife.
"12 To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a
wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must
not divorce her. 13 And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer
and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. 14 For
the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and
the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing
husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are
holy.
"15 But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or
the sister is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live
in peace. 16 How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband?
Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?"
The words in verses 12-16 seem to indicate that there is some
obvious tension when a believer (Christian) marries an unbeliever (such as
a Hindu). Otherwise, this passage would not have had to qualify
the command against divorce in verses 10-11. In other words,
verse 15 seems to be saying that divorce is wrong, but if one spouse is an
unbeliever, then it may be permissible. This would seem to serve as a
warning about believers marrying unbelievers.
Old-school biblical scholars might also cite Leviticus 19:19 which
says, "'Keep my decrees. "'Do not mate different kinds of animals. "'Do
not plant your field with two kinds of seed. "'Do not wear clothing woven
of two kinds of material." However, I'm not sure that we can
apply this to the marriage of a believer and an unbeliever.
I wasn't sure if you had an additional question about "no love
before marriage." If so, perhaps verses 36-38 of this same chapter
are applicable.
I would also suggest that you read a few articles on my website so
that you fully understand what Christians believe:
Evangelicals
Love and Marriage
Heaven
Please let me know if I did not understand your questions correctly.
Thanks,
Owen
Cremation
What does the bible say about cremation?
Thank you for your question. The Bible is silent concerning
cremation. However, from a Biblical standpoint, I am comfortable with
it. I don't see any Biblical principal that it violates, and it seems to be
very practical.
Thanks,
Owen The Dake Bible
Hello, I
recently took a look at a Dake version of the bible. This is the
Version that has the scripture in the center of the bible, with
the notes along both sides. I began looking at Genesis and was shocked
at what I was seeing contained within the notes. All other bibles I
have looked at tell us about the Flood involving Noah and the ark. I found
the Dake Bible speaking of Lucifer's flood which is apparently a time when
God flooded the earth prior to the flood of Noah, in which
all evil was purged from the earth. Has anyone else viewed this bible and would you
consider it to be a good study resource? And secondly is this true?
I think you'll want to be careful with the Dake bible. The
notes in it are just personal commentary, rather than Biblically-based.
He has some unorthodox views on many things, including the gap theory,
adoption, and the Trinity. No, I don't agree with his notes
about the flood.
Incidentally, I believe that the New American Standard Bible is the
most accurate version, while the New International Version is a close
second, and perhaps easier to understand. I would stay away from the
Dake bible.
Thanks,
Owen David and Saul
Did Saul
know that David had been appointed by God to be his successor?
Thank you for your question. Yes, Saul knew that David had
been anointed as King. 1 Samuel 28:17 told Saul, "The LORD has torn the
kingdom out of your hands and given it to one of your neighbors-to David."
Thanks,
OwenDealing With our Corrupt Government
To what extend am I &/or others supposed to warn others of
the collapsing economy & the fascist dictatorship which is right around
the corner waiting for the right time to come out to "Help" Americans with
a new currency...which will be due to the crooks behind our government
causing the problem to which they will offer solutions to in the form of electronic
money! I thought we are supposed to fight evil dictatorships & get prepared by storing up food, etc.!
Thank you for your question. I think that it's our Christian
duty to warn others about impending economic and political collapse
(especially in times like these of excessive debt and spending), similar to the
way we're supposed to witness to others for Christ (Matthew
28:19-20). This is certainly what the apostle John did in the book of
Revelation. I think that a website or blog on this would be a good idea.
Thanks,
Owen
The Quotes of Jesus
Did Jesus quote from every book in the Old Testament except for Esther?
Thanks for your question. I haven't had time to fully
research this, but here's what I've found so far: Jesus quoted from 24 different
Old Testament books. The New Testament as a whole quotes from 34 books of
the Old Testament Books. These 5 books are never quoted in the New Testament: Ezra,
Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Solomon.
Thanks,
Owen
Paul's Bible Study
Did Paul study before he began to preach?
Thank you for your question.
I believe that Galatians 1:17-18 implies that Paul meditated upon God's
Word for three years after becoming a Christian, before he tried to tell
anyone about what he had learned. This passage says, "I did not go
up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went into Arabia.
Later I returned to Damascus. Then after three years, I went up to
Jerusalem to get acquainted with Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days. I
saw none of the other apostles-only James, the Lord's brother."
So, I would argue that, immediately after becoming a believer, Paul
spent three years in the desert of Arabia and Damascus learning God's Word. Perhaps God even taught him directly, similar to His being in the
Garden of Eden with Adam and Eve before the fall into sin.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen Divorce and Remarriage
Hello, I
am in a bit of a dilemma. My ex-husband and I separated 2 years ago
under the most horrific conditions imaginable. Both of us
were very young when we married and had been together for 25 years. A
little background on the marriage itself is it was a rocky rollercoaster. My ex-husband
had many sexual encounters outside the marriage, drugs, abusive,
yet, there were sporadic periods of time our marriage was
good. However, we were not spiritually equal at all times. There were divisions
in the home regarding worship, morals, child raising, etc... In order
to shorten the question, we were ultimately separated due to his
infidelity and abuse once again. He tossed me, our children
(grown) and the dog out of our home. The woman of which he was cheating with moved
into my home within 2 weeks and has since married this woman
of which he had the affair. Due to a family crisis, we have reunited in communication
and are strongly attracted to each other and our emotions run deep.
We both feel in our hearts that we still love each other very much and
it is as if we are still husband and wife. Yet, for myself, I struggle
with the fact that he is a married man now, although it is to the woman
that broke up our home, is it wrong to have a relationship with the
man that I feel is still my husband? What does the Bible say about
this and how would the Lord view this union? I am terribly confused
and vulnerable, but want to do the right thing. I appreciate your
sincere response.
Thank you,
Thank you for your question. I don't believe there are any
Scriptures which directly address your particular situation. I know that
this a very personal issue, and I'll simply try to respond from a
biblical perspective.
God's commandment against adultery in the Old Testament (Exodus
20:14) is still valid in the New Covenant and confirmed in the New
Testament (James 2:11, 2 Peter 2:14). Your husband's adultery and
re-marriage terminated your marriage to him, even though his was a sinful
act. As a result, his new marriage to his new wife is now subjected to those
same commandments of God concerning marriage.
You asked, "... is it wrong to have a relationship with the man that
I feel is still my husband?" Since you said, "it is as if we
are still husband and wife," I assume that your use of the term
"relationship" here refers to one of dating and perhaps marriage, rather than just
a friendship. If he were to divorce his new wife and marry you
again, he would be committing adultery again (Luke 16:18), and the Bible
obviously does not condone this. Otherwise, we could justify almost
any sin--ignoring God's commands, thinking perhaps that we could
always "reverse" a sin in the future; i.e.., two "wrongs" don't make a
"right." Furthermore, if he is willing to commit adultery a second time,
one would have to suspect that he would be likely to commit adultery
again in the future, with you once again being the victim of his
sin. From a practical perspective, once that trust is lost, it's nearly
impossible to regain it. Even if you are a very forgiving person,
sometimes a sin is somehow easier to repeat each time it's committed, especially if
it appears to have no consequences.
I know this may not be the answer that you wanted to hear.
Perhaps a Christian counselor would be better able to advise you.
Thanks,
OwenDivorce / Church
One
person fornicates & another divorces. Both repented & became Christians
through the blood of Christ Jesus. Could either become qualified
to serve in the church since both have assumed the sexual duties as
if both were married? Same act, different title. Your opinion.
Let me clarify my previous message, please.
This is about two men that never knew each other. One man has fornicated
while in the service & college, while the other man is
forced into divorce by his adulterous wife, even though he tried to save
the marriage. Each man repented & each became Christians through the
blood of Christ Jesus. Should the past fornicator or the divorced man become disqualified
to serve in the church? Both have performed the same sexual acts
(where two are joined as one). Aren't they the same act with different
titles? Another question. If a virgin man marries for life, I understand
that he can serve in the church. However, if a fornicator, turned
Christian & marries for life, can he serve in the church? If
he can, shouldn't the divorced man, under the above circumstances, be
able to, also? Your opinion.
Thank you for your question. The simple answer is that both
of the men you described are qualified to serve in the church, since the
only qualification is to be a believer. In fact, according to 1
Corinthians 12, not only are both of these men (and all other believers)
qualified, but it is absolutely essentially that they do serve in the
church. They each have spiritual gifts, and they are each part of a body.
Without serving with their spiritual gifts, the church will be left lacking
in some aspect.
Now, I realize that many people have more in depth questions
about specific leadership positions and offices in the church. For
example, 1 Timothy 3:1-14 gives us additional qualifications for church
leaders, such as pastors and deacons. Such leaders are required to be
men who manage their family well. In particular, I adhere to the
NASB translation of verse 12 which says they must be "... husbands of
only one wife." The question then arises whether or not this means
"only one wife at time; e.g., whether or not divorced men are
disqualified. Different churches interpret this in different ways, but I believe
that the biblical definition of divorce must be considered here, according
to Luke 16:18 and 1 Corinthians 7:12-16. If a man has had a
biblical divorce (due to adultery or abandonment), then he is no longer
married to her. So, if he remarries, he is qualified for these
positions of church leadership because he is indeed the husband of only one
wife. (Please see my related blog
at
Is Adultery Always Either the Cause or the Effect of Divorce).
BTW, it doesn't matter if someone thinks that these
additional qualifications are unfair. Just as with spiritual gifts, we
are each qualified for some things but not for others. If a person
doesn't have the gift of pastor-teacher, he shouldn't be a pastor.
Likewise, if he doesn't manage his family well, he shouldn't be a pastor. In
both cases, we have a clear directive from God's Word.
You also asked, "Both have performed the same sexual acts (where two
are joined as one). Aren't they the same act with different
titles?" The nature of the sexual act doesn't have anything to do with
this. Within marriage, a particular sexual act is a good thing. However,
in an adulterous situation, that same sexual act is a bad thing.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Demons / Names
Do demons have names?
Thank you for your question. Yes, we do have Biblical
verification that demons have names. In Mark 5:9, a demon tells Jesus, "My name
is Legion..." I don't know of any other proof passages for this, but it does make
sense to me that demons (and angels) would need names as a method of identification, just like us.
Thanks,
Owen
The Writing on Jesus' Thigh
Do you think the scripture in Rev 19:15 that talks about the writing on Jesus
Thigh that says King of Kings and Lord of Lords will be an actual
tattoo or will it be imprinted or what? We were wondering about it.
Thanks.
Thank you for your question. Revelation 19:11-16 speaks about
the visible coming of Christ, as He appears as the heavenly Warrior
to defeat and judge the beast and the false prophet.
Specifically, verse 16 says, "On his robe and on his thigh he has this name
written: KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS."
In order to answer your question, I think that we have to cite
the following scriptures about tattoos and the sanctity of the human
body:
"Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on
yourselves. I am the LORD." Leviticus 19:28
"Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments
of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have
been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him
as instruments of righteousness." Romans 6:13
"I put this in human terms because you are weak in your natural
selves. Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to
impurity and to ever-increasing wickedness, so now offer them in slavery
to righteousness leading to holiness." Romans 6:19
"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who
is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your
own;" 1 Corinthians 6:19
Since Revelation 19:16 is a description of the sinless Christ,
these names on his robe and his thigh are not tattoos. We can
assume that the name will be imprinted on His robe. Perhaps the name on His
"thigh" is also imprinted on a robe or other garment.
Thanks,
Owen
Dreams
What does
the Bible say about people coming to you in dreams. I know God sent this
person?
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for the delay in my reply.
It's difficult to answer your question about dreams in a definitive
way, but I'll try.
Although there are many occurrences of people having prophetic visions
and dreams in the Bible, I don't necessarily think that we should expect
similar occurrences today. In biblical times, they had no completed
canon of Scriptures from God, so God often used visions and dreams as a means of
communication. However, today we do have the complete written
Word of God, so God now communicates to us through the Bible.
I too have had unusual dreams that have caused me to wonder if God was trying to tell me something, by my experience tells me that this has
never happened in my case. I've also dreamed about people who I
haven't thought about in years, but again, I've always come to the conclusion that this
is just a phenomenon of our natural dreams, and there was nothing
supernatural at work in them. Still, I would have trouble arguing with
someone who claimed such a supernatural experience.
I'm sorry that I can't be more definitive.
Thanks,
Owen
Eli
Who was the person that fell backward from a wall, breaking his neck and died?
I believe that you're thinking of Eli: When he mentioned the ark of God, Eli fell backward off his chair by
the side of the gate. His neck was broken and he died, for he was an
old man, and he was heavy. He had led Israel forty years. 1 Samuel 4:18
Fertile Crescent
Where in the bible can I find reference to the Fertile Crescent?
Thank you for your question. The term "Fertile Crescent" is
not found in the Bible. This is a term coined by scientists, and it refers
to an area in the Middle East where the land is moist and fertile, in contrast to the
arid desert conditions in much of the rest of the Middle East.
Parts of countries like Israel and Iraq are part of the Fertile Crescent.
However, the Bible does make note of this fertile land, especially in reference to Moses leading his people into Israel. For
example, Nehemiah 9:35 says, "Even while they were in their kingdom, enjoying your great
goodness to them in the spacious and fertile land you gave
them..." Numbers 13:27 refers to Israel as the land flowing with milk and honey.
Thanks,
Owen
Ghost, Spirit, Soul
It is
written in the gospels that John the Baptist saw the Spirit descend
from Heaven like a dove and abode upon Jesus. What is the Spirit?
Is Spirit another name for the Holy Ghost the fragmented
Godhead Christians believe God is? If it is, there is a serious problem with the
scriptures.
Thank you for your question. The word "spirit" is used in two
different ways in the Bible. In many places, it is synonymous with "the
Holy Spirit," the third member of the Trinity of the Godhead, as
you indicated. In many other places, it is referring to the
internal living human spirit inside each believer. Because of the fall in the
Garden of Eden, each of us is born without a living human spirit (Jude 19,
1 Corinthians. 2:14), but God bestows it upon us when we become
believers (Ephesians 2:1).
We can think of it this way: We are made up of body, soul,
and spirit. It is intuitive to each of us what our body is. Our soul is
made up of our mind, our will, and our emotions. Our spirit is distinct
from the soul (Hebrews 4:12), and it is for communication with God (Genesis
2:7). Our spirit stores Bible doctrine; i.e., teachings from the
Bible are stored in the soul, and, for believers, the Holy Spirit then moves
this doctrine to the spirit (Job 32:8, Romans 8:16), where it can be
utilized and optimized (John 14:26, 1 Corinthians 9-16, 1 John 2:27).
Thanks,
Owen God's Omniscience
It is
written that God is all knowing. Can this possibly be true? Does God
know his own future? What becomes of further interest in the concept of an all-knowing God is that God
must therefore know the consequences that follow on from any action he
might initiate. **He would therefore realize that his flooding of a
sinful world (Noah's Flood) would actually achieve nothing at all. The world is
still most violent and sinful! *
Regards
Thank you for your question. Yes, I believe that it is
true that God is all-knowing. The Bible relates God's omniscience to His
omnipresence (Psalm 139). It has been said that omniscience is the
omnipresence of cognition (Jeremiah 23:23). God's omniscience is related to
His eternity; i.e., in His eternity, His knowledge is not subject to the limitations
of time and space (Isaiah 43:8-12).
So, back to the question, "Does God know his own future?" There
is no "future" in eternity, at least not as we understand this word because
there is no time in eternity. This is one of the great mysteries of
the Bible; i.e., how "events" in eternity sort of all happen at the same
"time." As you can see, our limited understanding of eternity even prevents us from being able to adequately articulate it with words like "events" and "time." So, there is no real way for us to express your
question since we are indeed limited to a world of space and time. Suffice it
to say that God is, in fact, all-knowing based upon the scripture passages noted above.
However, I believe that there is a more technical answer to your
question, although it may answer a more subtle question than what you
asked. God's omniscience also, of course, extends to all of His own creation,
including people, time, and space (Psalms 33:15; 97:9; 139:13; Isaiah
29:15). His all-comprehensive purpose forms the basis of His knowledge, not only of eternity, but also of all events; i.e., time, future, etc. (Isaiah 41:22-27; Amos 3:7). So, yes, even in our limited world of
time and space, God certainly does know His own future. Although, His
understanding of these things in our world does not begin to represent His all-knowing omniscience of the things of eternity.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
OwenThe Ten Commandments
Were God's Ten Commandments know before Mt. Sinai?
Did the great forefathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, keep ALL of God's Ten
Commandment Law? Was God's Sabbath instituted at Creation?
Thank you for your question. Although God's Ten Commandments
were not recorded on the stone tablets until the time of Moses, the
preceding forefathers of the faith were aware of God's laws of morality;
i.e., they didn't have the Ten Commandments in written form, but they did
know God's moral code which included the Ten Commandments. They
knew the intent of the law if not the letter of the law. This is
because of God's fellowship with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.
Before the fall, God had fellowship with Adam and Eve, and He taught them His
moral code. After the fall, this moral code was passed down through
the generations through verbal instruction, so that people like
Noah, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob knew it, even though it may not have
been written down.
No, the forefathers of the faith did not keep all of these moral
codes (Romans 3:23).
Yes, the Sabbath was instituted during Creation when God rested from
His creation on the Sabbath Day.
Thanks,
Owen
Tongues
I am looking for someone to show me just ONE place in the bible
where speaking in tongues is/was anything other than speaking a human language?
Thank you for your question. I believe that all occurrences
of speaking in tongues in the Bible were, in fact, human languages. It is
obvious from Acts 2 and 1 Corinthians 14 that the tongues of the New
Testament were actual foreign languages which were understood by others--not
just gibberish.
Thanks,
OwenHananiah
Is the
Hananiah in the book of Jeremiah the same Hananiah in the book of Daniel
(also known as Shadrach)?
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for my delayed response.
No, the Hananiah in the book of Jeremiah is not the same man as
the Hananiah in the book of Daniel. The Hananiah in the book of
Jeremiah was a false prophet, and the book of Jeremiah was written (about
events when occurred) between 566 B.C. and 524 B.C. The Hananiah in
the book of Daniel was a godly man, and the book of Daniel was written
(about events which occurred) between 524 B.C. and 454 B.C. Also,
the Hananiah in the book of Daniel was a young man, so he couldn't have been the
same man as in the book of Jeremiah.
Thanks,
Owen
Hebrews
Hebrews
states that when man turns from God it is very difficult to return to
God.
God does not strive with man always also comes to mind. It is my feeling
that any
time you go to God he will accept you. Some say that God does
not give second chances.
How do you interpret this?
Thank you for your question. I believe that the answers to
your questions are centered around some key terms that you used:
- Indeed, it is difficult to return to God, but not
impossible. Our sin hardens our hearts, but whenever we choose, we can return to
God. He always accepts us, and it always pleases Him to do so, even in
our sinful flesh.
- Although God does not strive with man always, man can stop
striving with God. If our hearts remain hardened from sin, and we
never stop striving with God, then He will not continue always to strive with
us. However, if we make the slightest effort to turn from sin, then He
is always there to forgive us and encourage us.
- I agree with you, in that any time we go to God, He will accept
us. God does indeed give us second chances. The best example of
this is that we were all separated from God by the acts of Adam and Eve in
the Garden of Eden. Yet, God implemented a plan of grace, and we
could think of this as a "second chance." In fact, He gives us
third chances, fourth chances, etc. I often see this in my own life, and I'm
so grateful for this. I often continue to fail Him, yet Christ
covered all of my failures (eternally) on the cross; and, when I confess (1
John 1:9), God forgives me in this temporal world.
Thanks,
Owen
Giving in Abundance
Hello
sir, compliments of the season and the Grace of our Lord,
Jesus Christ. Please would you help me find places in the Scriptures where
the people were asked to bring an offering, and then gave more than enough
to the extent that they were asked to stop?
Thank you for your question. I am unable to find any
occurrence in the Bible where the people brought such abundant offerings that they
were asked to stop. The best example that I can find of the
liberality of an offering is in 1 Chronicles 29:6-9:
6 Then the leaders of families, the officers of the tribes of
Israel, the commanders of thousands and commanders of hundreds, and
the officials in charge of the king's work gave willingly. 7 They
gave toward the work on the temple of God five thousand talents and
ten thousand darics of gold, ten thousand talents of silver,
eighteen thousand talents of bronze and a hundred thousand talents] of iron.
8 Anyone who had precious stones gave them to the treasury of the
temple of the LORD in the custody of Jehiel the Gershonite. 9 The
people rejoiced at the willing response of their leaders, for they had
given freely and wholeheartedly to the LORD. David the king also rejoiced greatly.
Thanks,
Owen
Praise / Worship / Fire
Sir,
Greetings in the name of our Lord, Jesus Christ. Please is
there any scripture in the bible that compares or refers to praise or
worship as fire? Thank you.
The only Scripture I can find on this is related to pagan
worship. Deuteronomy 12:31 says, "You must not worship the LORD your God in
their way, because in worshiping their gods, they do all kinds of
detestable things the LORD hates. They even burn their sons and daughters in
the fire as sacrifices to their gods."
Thanks,
OwenMarriage Proposal without Prayer
I am 22 years old boy from India. I was born to godly
parents. I do have faith in Christ. Now I am about to finish my
MBA. I need the proper answer to my question. When I was 19, I
fell in love with one girl. She is also a believer of Christ. But before I
proposed to that girl, I did not pray to god. I have known her
and her family since my childhood days. I know everything about their
family because they are also church workers. Nowadays I am feeling that
perhaps what I did was wrong. At that time I didn't have much understanding
about god's principles on marriage. Only after reading your article did I come
to understand what I should do. Now tell me brother, what shall I do for
God's will in my life? Should I have to leave that girl or
what shall I do? I cannot leave that girl because I know that we are in
love without any bad intention. And I know that she will fulfill more or
less every condition you have rendered in that article, for I know that
she is a prayerful girl. If I leave her, both of us will not be happy because
we have discussed and planned about our marriage life in
these last three years of time. But if I have to leave that girl for
God's sake, then let me obey for his command. Please help me make decision
in this circumstance. Hoping for a quick reply.
Thank you for your question.
Although you are the one that must make this decision, I believe
that God has led you to this girl. If I understand correctly, the
only thing that could possibly be questioned about this is that you did not
pray before proposing marriage. However, we all make mistakes, and
God is faithful and just to forgive (1 John 1:9). I am confident
that God has now made this right, and you now have a better understanding of
God's principles. We all continue learning more about God's truths
throughout our lifetimes. You and this girl love each other, and she is
a Godly and prayerful woman from a Godly family. I pray that you will
have a wonderful life together. Just always remember to treat each
other with agape love throughout your marriage.
Thanks,
OwenSexual Demons
Are there such things as sexual demons?
The best resource I've found on this is at Moral Frailty Demons.
Hope / Prayer
What is
the difference between hope and prayer?
Thank you for your question.
For believers, prayer is our act of worship when we bring our
adoration, confession, thanksgiving, and requests to God. Hope is our
assurance of eternal life, and that God will take care of us in this
life. Acts 8:28 says, "And we know that in all things God works for the good
of those who love him, who have been called according to his
purpose." Therefore, even when our prayers don't seem to be answered as we
would like, we can be sure that God has answered (in the big scheme of
things, and according to His purpose and glory), and that we will spend
eternity with Him.
Love in Christ,
OwenForgiveness / Abortion
I am a sinner, will god ever forgive me? I don't
know where to begin and ask god for forgiveness and I'm not sure whether
to ask for forgiveness or not, I am a lost soul, the holy spirit has left me,
I pray but it seems like my prayer doesn't go anywhere and that god doesn't
hear me nor my prayer. I had an abortion.
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for the delay in my reply.
Yes, God will forgive you. You need only to confess your sin to him as indicated in 1 John 1:9.
We become Christians by believing in Jesus Christ as Savior, knowing
that His death on the cross saved us from all sin (Romans 3:23, Romans 6:23,
John 3:16). God then forgives us in our ETERNAL state.
Then, in our daily walk as Christians, when we continue to sin, we confess those sins to God,
and he forgives us in our TEMPORAL state.
I too have felt like you do from time to time. I continue to
sin, and I know that I have failed God. I also sometimes feel like God
is not hearing my prayers. However, His word teaches that we simply need to
confess our sins. He forgives us and we can start anew. He
forgives and FORGETS those sins that we have confessed, and we don't ever need to confess that
occurrence of that sin again. No matter what we have done, we
simply confess it to God. We then know that He has forgiven us, and
since He will never look back upon that sin again, neither should we. I
sometimes even pray that God will help me to forget things, and I believe that He does.
Once we become Christians, the Holy Spirit never leaves us, although we
can still feel a loneliness due to our sin. The Bible teaches the
doctrine of eternal security. In Philippians 2:14, the reference to
becoming "children of God" suggests the type of relationship that Christians have with
God. They are His children--his sons and daughters. Furthermore, just as we
are naturally born as a product of our human fathers, we are spiritually
born as a product of God the Father and His grace. In both cases, the birth
establishes a relationship which can never be altered. One cannot undo
a physical birth, so neither can he undo a spiritual birth. The eternal
security of the believer is thus demonstrated by this analogy of
children. Furthermore, Hebrews 13:5 says, "... Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you."
Thanks,
Owen2 Samuel 24
I'm confused about 2 Samuel 24. I'm
reading 2 Samuel 24 and I hope you can help me with this, as I'm a bit
confused. In 24:1, the Lord tells David to Go, number Israel
and Judah. But after having done what he was told to do, David feels he
has sinned (24:10). What confuses me is that David
did what the Lord told him to do and then feels he has sinned for doing what? I
hope you'll help me on this. Thank you.
Thanks for your question. This is a difficult one because it
appears to be one of those rare places where the copies and translations have
not been accurately preserved throughout the centuries. However,
I believe that we can figure out what the original manuscripts said by examining
a parallel passage.
In 1 Chronicles 21:1, we see that it was actually Satan (not God)
who rose up against Israel and incited David to take the census.
God probably allowed Satan to tempt David into this sin for the purpose
of punishing the people. So, David committed a personal sin when
he conducted the census. It was wrong because it was done in
pride and self-glory, so that David could be proud about being the leader of
so many people.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
OwenPaul's Thorn in the Flesh - 2 Corinthians 12
What was
Paul's thorn in the flesh, and did Satan have play a role in this?
Thank you for your question. We cannot be too definitive
about what Paul's thorn in the flesh was. Some of the various views of bible
scholars include the following:
- Temptations from Satan - Paul's opposition from his adversaries - Some intense bodily
pain - Some recurring physical affliction, such as eye trouble
(ophthalmia--Acts 13:9, 23:1, Galatians 4:14-15, 6:11), epilepsy, or malaria
What we do know is that it was a tool of Satan, it was painful, and it
was accompanied by shame and/or embarrassment.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Infant baptism
I have
encountered a church who teaches infant baptism. They
claim that God gives the gift of faith" (Ephesians 2:8) to a baby at
baptism. Thus, the baby is saved. What can I say to them?
Thank you for your question. I have a couple of articles on
my website that might help:
- Infant Baptism
- Baptism
- Water Baptism
Thanks,
OwenCross-Gender
Clothing
Is it a
sin for a man to wear female under garments?
Thank you for your question. Based upon Deuteronomy 22:5 I'd
have to say yes: "A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man
wear women's clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does
this."
Thanks,
Owen
Lust
Is lust a good feeling or a right thing for a Christian?
Thank you for your question.
In the proper context, lust is both a good feeling and a right thing
for a Christian. In the context of marriage, and in the time
leading toward marriage, it is both. You can view my article
on Love, Marriage, and Sex.
Thanks,
Owen Jacob's Name
Change
When did Jacob's name change? Was it before or after he went to meet his brother?
Thank you for your question.
Jacob's name was changed to Israel while he was on his journey to
meet his brother Esau, and just after he "wrestled" with God.
Genesis 32:28 says, "Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you
have struggled with God and with humans and have overcome."
Thanks,
Owen
Jacob
Who was the women that Jacob loved?
Thank you for your question.
Genesis 29:18 tells us, "Jacob was in love with Rachel..." He
first married Rachel's sister, Leah, but he later married his true love, Rachel.
Thanks,
OwenJehovah's
Witnesses
Dear Sir,
I was looking at your web site regarding different religions and
I happened upon the link for Jehovah's Witnesses. I have to say that
some of your information is on point but some is incorrect. I was raised as
a Jehovah's Witness until age 19, and I know that they do not believe
that the world will end in 7,000 years. They staunchly believe that no one knows but
Jehovah the day for the end of the world. I believe it is in the 24th
chapter of Matthew where Jesus tells his disciples that
during the last days the times will be like Noah - men marrying and women
given in marriage and suddenly the day of destruction be instantly upon them.
I have to say that I am not a Jehovah’s Witnesses because I
do not believe in many of their philosophies but I do strongly believe that Jesus is
God's son and that Jehovah is God. I think it is in Proverbs chapter 8
that it says that Jesus was God's master worker and first creation.
Also, Colossians 1:15-16 describe Jesus as the first born of all
creation. In addition, throughout the Gospel, specifically in Matthew,
Jesus always gives credit to the father and tells his
disciples and others to do the same. Psalms 83:18, and Exodus 6:3 says that
God's name is Jehovah. Also, Jesus stated in Matthew that the greatest commandment
is to love Jehovah your God with your whole heart, mind, soul, and
strength; the second greatest is to love your neighbor as yourself.
I know that sometimes the Bible can seem to be open to multiple
interpretations, but the overwhelming evidence seems to me
that Jehovah is God and that Jesus is his first creation. I’m not trying
to upset you or insult you, but when I saw the 7,000 year thing, I had to speak up.
I guess we will all find out in the end who had the correct interpretation.
I hope I did not mess up your day.
Thank you for your comments. No, you didn't upset me or
insult me, or mess up my day. I always welcome comments and questions from
readers. I always learn from what others have to say, and I appreciate
your feedback. I posted your comments (anonymously) at the end of my article on Jehovah's Witnesses.
Thanks,
OwenJeremiah / Methuselah
Do you
know how the prophet, Jeremiah, died! I thought he
was put in log and the log was sawed in two - is this correct or do
you know of another prophet who died like this?
Also can
you tell me where I can get info about Methuselah, the man who
lived to a greater age and any other man recorded in history?
Thank you for your questions. Unfortunately, there's not
much definitive information about Jeremiah's death, or about Methusaleh.
Jeremiah's death is not mentioned in the Bible, and other sources
offer only conflicting information. The story about the log is
likely to be a myth, and I don't know of any other prophet who died like this either.
Methusaleh is mentioned only briefly in the Bible. Other
books that mention him briefly are the Book of Enoch and the Book of Jubilees.
Thanks,
OwenJesus and hell (Hades)
When
Jesus died on the cross and descended into hell (Hades), was
He still suffering while there or did the suffering end when "it is finished"?
1 Peter 3:18-20 says He went and made proclamation to the spirits
in prison, was He still in a state of suffering?
Thank you for your question. I found it quite
challenging. It prompted me to do further study of 1 Peter 3:18-20, as well as related
passages Ephesians 4:8-10, Acts 2:25-35, and Matthew 12:40, and
various commentaries. As a result, I am not sure that we can be
completely definitive in answering your question about when Christ's
suffering ended. However, I do think that the best clue we have is
actually in 1 Peter 3:19, which says, "After being made alive, he went and
made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits." Christ's death
occurred while He was still on the cross, and He was still dead when he was slain in
the tomb. So, the period of time that we're talking about is
between that point and the point of His resurrection. Verse 19 above says
that He proclaimed to the imprisoned spirits (in Hades), "after being
made alive..." So, He was "made alive" before He descended into
Hades. Therefore, I believe that it's reasonable for us to assume that
His suffering ended at the point of His death on the cross, and that He
no longer suffered after His resurrection. In other words, I
believe the chronology would look like this:
- Suffering on the cross - Death - suffering ended - Lain in the tomb - Resurrection (a glorified body) - Descent into Hades - Ascent into Heaven
Thanks,
Owen
Jesus's Siblings
Did
Christ have any actual brothers or sisters? James is sometimes referred
to as His half-brother. What and where are the facts?
Thank you for your question. There is no agreement among
Bible scholars on this. Some claim that the Bible teaches that Mary (Christ's
mother) gave birth to no other children, based upon the fact that the Bible doesn't
tell us about her giving birth to others. However, I believe that
this is a weak argument.
Others cite those like James, claiming that he was a half-brother to
Christ, since he was the son of Mary (Christ's mother) and Joseph.
This is what I tend to believe, although it's difficult to prove, because names like "Mary," "Joseph," and "James" are such common names.
Thanks,
Owen Jewish "food guidelines"
Hello,
I am a Christian "messianic"/ "Hebrew roots" type of guy. I
am curious about how you can use Peter's vision to say that all food is clean and
ok to eat even when YHVH told us that certain things are
not food -- such as pork. Can you biblically explain this to me? Thank you, shalom!
Thank you for your question, and I'm sorry for the delay in my reply.
Yes, I believe that Peter's vision in Acts 10 was even more startling
to him than it is to you and me. When God said, "Get up Peter,
kill and eat" even the unclean animals, Peter's Jewish heritage immediately
made him kick back against this idea. His trained conscience would
have never let him eat what was prohibited by the Levitical law.
However, the whole point of this vision was to illustrate the new
covenant. Christ had fulfilled the law, even the strict Jewish ceremonial
laws, and Peter needed a very graphic illustration in order to re-train
his mind (Romans 12:1-2) through a transition from law to grace
(Romans 6:14).
While still under the law, Christ had commissioned the disciples not
to go to Gentiles, but to go to the lost sheep of Israel (Matthew
10:5-6). However, now, under grace, he was being told to go to the Gentiles,
as Christ commanded in the Great commission (Matthew 28:19-20).
On the cross, Christ had broken down the wall (Ephesians 2:14-18) between
Jews and Gentiles.
Now, this passage uses symbolism to illustrate the transition from
law to grace. However, it does not invalidate the truths buried
in the Mosaic Law. Remember that Christ fulfilled the law, but he
did not invalidate it. The physical truths of the law are just as
alive as they ever were. I believe that we would do ourselves a favor by
continuing to adhere, in a physical way, to the dietary laws of the Old
Testament. For more information on this, please see my article entitled Pork.
Thanks,
Owen
Judges 5:23
I find
the following a puzzle "Curse Meroz, says the Angel of the Lord, curse bitterly its
inhabitants, because they came not to the help of the Lord, to help the Lord against the
mighty" Judges.5:23.
Thank you for your question. In Judges 5:23, a blessing and a curse are contrasted. We
must just assume that Meroz received the curse because of failing some
previous obligation--probably a failure to assist the Nation of Israel in
a battle or war against a strong enemy nation.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Kingdom
When it
talks of a Worldly or a Heavenly kingdom - what is kingdom?
Thank you for your question. It's a tough one, because there
are many different views of what the "kingdom" means in the
scriptures. I adhere to a dispensational view, which is best described by Lewis
Sperry Chafer, as follows:
1) The Kingdom of God - All intelligence creatures in heaven or on
earth who are willingly subject to God.
2) The Kingdom of Heaven - Any sort of empire that God may have on
earth at a given time:
- Theocratic - Such as the nation of Israel had in Old Testament times - Covenanted - This then became the nation hope of Israel. - Predicted - Bible prophecy anticipates a glorious kingdom for
Israel on the earth. - Announced - The ministries of John the Baptist, Christ, and
the Apostles announced the kingdom for the nation of Israel, but it
was rejected. - Postponed - As a result, the earthly kingdom was postponed
until Christ returns (Second Advent). - Mystery - The present state of Christendom are a mystery form of
the kingdom (Matthew 13:11). - Realized - The kingdom of heaven will finally come to
realization during the end times, at the time of the millennium--the 1000 year
reign of Christ on the earth.
Thanks,
OwenKissing after Marriage
Is it
wrong for you to kiss someone after marriage--like your pastor kissing
your wife on the lips in front of you? Please let me know. I
am bothered by this. I don't feel that it is right. Is it?
Thank you for your question.
Yes, I believe that it is wrong for a pastor to kiss your wife on
the lips. It is likely that if the pastor were confronted on
this, he would claim that his action was completely platonic. However, he
should be aware that some people see this a sexual advance, and he should
protect his reputation by making sure that no such situations arise,
especially in his place of leadership.
Thanks,
OwenMark and Luke
I never really thought about this before,
but who were Mark and Luke since they weren't one of the disciples?
Thank you for your question.
Mark's full name was John Mark (Acts 12:12). His Christian
life was influenced by his mother, Mary, as well as by his cousin, Barnabas,
who took him with Paul on Paul's first missionary journey (Acts
13:5). Halfway through this journey, Mark return home (Acts 13:13).
His departure caused Paul to not want to take him on his second
missionary trip, and this cause Paul and Barnabas to part company (Acts
15:39). Instead, Barnabas set sail with Mark for the island of
Cyprus. In later years however, Paul also commended Mark's efforts in the ministry
(2 Timothy 4:11).
Luke was a doctor, and one of Paul's closest companions and
fellow laborers (Colossians 4:14, Philemon 24, and 2 Timothy 4:11).
Luke is also widely believed to be the author of the book of Acts as
well.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
OwenMarriage
My question is to the ordination of marriage: Does God ordain every marriage?
Thank you for your question. God ordains a marriage that is
within the confines of His institution of marriage as He defined in His
Word. Genesis 2:24 says that "... a man leaves his father and mother and
is united to his wife, and they become one flesh." Ephesians
5:21-33 goes on to say that the husband and wife submit themselves to one
another; they're faithful to one another; and the husband loves his wife just
as Christ loved the church. For more information on love and
marriage, please see my article entitled Love, Marriage, and Sex.
Thanks,
Owen
Marriage
I am a 39
year old woman that have been married close to 20 years. I am no longer
attracted sexually to my husband and haven't been in 10 years. I have been
very much faithful thru this time. However I will be 40 in a couple
months and I don't want to do another 20, because of the issue he has
sexually. What do I do?
Thank you for your question. I know that this is a very
personal and trying issue for you, and I'll simply try to answer it from a biblical perspective.
Here are some Scriptures that seem to offer very straightforward answers to your question:
- 1 Corinthians 7:39 says, "A woman is bound to her husband as long as
he lives."
- 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 says, "To the married I give this command (not
I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But
if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife."
- In Luke 16:18, Christ said "Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery, and the man who marries a divorced woman commits adultery." Since Exodus 20:14 tells us that adultery
is a sin, then it follows that the marriage of a divorced woman causes adultery,
so this is wrong.
Also, it is true that the only valid biblical reasons for divorce are adultery and abandonment, and here are the scriptures supporting this:
- Matthew 5:32 "But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, makes her the victim of adultery, and anyone who marries a divorced woman commits adultery."
- 1 Corinthians 7:13-16 says, "... if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him... But if the unbeliever leaves, let it be so. The brother or the sister is not bound in such circumstances." I know that this probably isn't the answer you want to hear, but the Scriptures indicate that it would be wrong to leave your husband,
despite his shortcomings which include neither adultery nor abandonment.
Thanks,
OwenMatthew 4 - Temptation of Christ
'And the Spirit led Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil'
Matthew 4. Owen, this seems a very strange thing to do?
Thank you for your question. Yes, this does seem somewhat strange.
These temptations were a necessary part of Christ's earthly
ministry. They constituted an attack by Satan against Jesus' human nature--temptations that would have overcome any normal man.
However, Jesus was no ordinary man. As the virgin-born God-man, His
divine nature could not sin (1 Samuel 15:29), and this held his human nature
in check. This does not mean that the impeccability of Christ
denies the reality of Satan's temptations. Satan's rebellion against God
has already been defeated in Christ's atonement, but his rebellion is
still real, even though the outcome of God's victory is certain.
The same is true for the temptation of Christ. The temptations were real,
although the outcome was certain. In a demonstration of spirit and
power, Jesus overcame the tempter, showing that He is the One who enables us
to overcome temptation as well.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Five-Fold Ministry
Dear Owen, re.
the so called 'fivefold ministry' Eph. 4:7, 15 some Bibles refer to, verse 11, a
man has the gift (N.T.), others refer a gift to a man (NKJV), and men teach that
only certain people have received the gifts. But in verse 7, it is given “to
each one of us” and in verse 11 we are divided by the word “some”.
If my understanding is correct, where did laity and clergy come from?
Ephesians 4:7 teaches that each of us was given grace (and spiritual
gifts), but 1 Corinthians 12 teaches that there are a "variety of gifts" (verse
4), and we each have different gifts. Within this variety of
gifts, there are the gifts that you mentioned in Ephesians 4:11. We sometimes
refer to those with these gifts as members of the "clergy," and those with other gifts
as members of the "laity." However, no matter which spiritual
gifts we have (and no matter how men might categorize us), we are expected to use our
spiritual gifts for the glory of God.
Also, 1 Corinthians 12:29 says, "...All are not apostles, are they? All
are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? ..."
This is confirmation that we don't each have all of these gifts. In
addition, there are special requirements for those who have some of these "clergy"
gifts, such as the requirements for a pastor in 1 Timothy 3:1-7.
I hope that I have answered your question. If not, please
reply.
Thanks,
OwenSpiritual Gifts
Dear
Owen, Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. I
received your answer on the term laity and clergy, and I belief that we
all should have a full measure of understanding on how the gifts work (1Cor
2:12). Especially in these days where some people believe and teach that some
gifts are no longer, or have ceased functioning in Church. If we look
without ignorance at what is going on in Church today, I ask myself two questions:
(1) Did the Holy Ghost really ceased distributing some gifts? (1Cor
12:11); and, (2) Is it a demonic doctrine (1 Tim 4:1). I
personally believe every gift is still very much available. The Word of God is
clear. We shall neither add nor remove anything to or from his Word (Rev. 22:18). And strangely the only
place where these certain gifts have ceased, is among those who are called
the "laity" which I refer as the fellowship which include leadership which
include (Eph. 5:21). However the gifts of the "clergy" seems to be much
available no wander everybody wants a position a place where only the minority
get to exercise their gifts. In these last days the armies of
this world is 100 times better equipped than they were 2000 years ago. The
Church is much more better equipped than the former (Hag. 2:9).I strongly belief the term and
exercise of laity and clergy should be abolished from Church
for it is the reason why millions of people are sitting in the order of tombstones in the
Catholic church and the same can be seen not only in the Protestant, but
almost in every contemporary church. I belief the term laity and clergy is the
order of the Catholic Church meeting that contradict the Biblical order of
Church meetings (1Cor. 14:26). Well Owen, this is how I see
and if you think I need correction you are welcome. Someone ask me what day is
the Sabbath and should we observe it? Hope to hear from you soon, slalom.
Yes, you make a strong point that all spiritual gifts are still functional in the church. I do now allow for this
possibility, although I can see how it can be argued both ways. The main
point I was trying to make in my article on spiritual gifts was that there are many
sensational television evangelists that do not truly possess the gift
of healing and miracles. However, I do believe that some people
may truly have these gifts today.
Re. the terms "clergy" and "laity": Again, I tend to agree
with you, that this may be a distinction that we need not make, especially in the way
that the Catholic Church does. We are all expected to use the
gifts that God gave us.
Re. the Sabbath Day: Please see my article entitled Sabbath.
Thanks,
OwenNames for Jesus
Jesus
is English for "Iesus" (Greek). Joshua is English for Yeshua
(Hebrew). Everywhere I've looked on-line everyone says that
Jesus and Yeshua are the same name. How can this be???
Thank you for your question. This is a bit confusing, and it
gets somewhat technical. "Yeshua" is the contracted form of the
Hebrew name "Yehoshua." Both are used in the Old Testament, and the
English spelling for both is "Joshua." The specific use for this name
in the Old Testament was for the man who succeeded Moses--not specifically
for the Messiah, because the Old Testament does not refer to the Messiah
by this name. Now, in about 200 B.C., the Old Testament was
translated from Hebrew to Greek in a work known as the Septuagint, for the
benefit of those Jews who spoke Greek. So, we can learn a lot from
the way the Hebrew words were translated into Greek at that time.
In the Septuagint, in Numbers 13;16, the Hebrew name "Yehoshua"
was transliterated into the Greek name "Iesou;" i.e., another form
of "Iesous," with a different case ending because of the way it's used
in the Greek grammar. (Note that "transliteration" just means
changing each letter in the Hebrew name Yeshua into Greek, letter by
letter, since names often cannot be specifically "translated.") In
Nehemiah 8:17, the Hebrew name "Yeshua" was also transliterated into the
Greek name "Iesou."
Since "Iesous" is the exact English transliteration of the Greek
name "Iesou," we can conclude that the Greek name "Iesous" equates to
the Hebrew name "Yeshua," and its English spelling is "Jesus."
Furthermore, the name "Joshua" is the English form of the Hebrew word "Yeshua,"
and the name "Jesus" is the English form of the Greek word "Iesous." So,
the names "Joshua" and "Jesus" are essentially the same. It could
be said that each one is an English pronunciations for the name of the Lord;
one from the Hebrew and one from the Greek.
Thanks,
OwenGod's Name
What is God's name?
Exodus 6:3 tells us that God's name is "the LORD" (NIV), or "Jehovah" (KJV), and in the Hebrew this is "El-Shaddai."
Thanks,
OwenNoah's Son Ham
Is there reference in the bible of Noah's curse on Ham and turning him black?
Thank you for your question. The Bible does not specifically
refer to Ham being turned black as a result of Noah's curse. Although the
Bible is not definitive on this question, some Bible scholars have come to this conclusion, and I'll address their lines of reasoning below.
The relevant passage is Genesis 9:18-27 which reads as follows:
"18 The sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem, Ham and Japheth. (Ham was the father of Canaan.) 19 These were the three sons of Noah,
and from them came the people who were scattered over the whole earth. 20
Noah a man of the soil, proceeded to plant a vineyard. 21 When he drank some
of its wine, he became drunk and lay uncovered inside his tent. 22 Ham, the father of Canaan, saw his father naked and told his two brothers
outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment and laid it across their
shoulders; then they walked in backward and covered their father's naked body.
Their faces were turned the other way so that they would not see their father naked. 24 When Noah awoke from his wine and found out what his youngest son had done to him, 25 he said, 'Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers.' 26 He also said, 'Praise be to the LORD, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem. 27 May God
extend Japheth's territory; may Japheth live in the tents of Shem, and may
Canaan be the slave of Japheth.'"
The key phrases for this discussion are "may Canaan be the slave of
Shem" (verse 26), and "may Canaan be the slave of Japheth" in verse 27.
Historians have reasoned that as the descendants of Noah's three sons relocated and separated (verse 19), they re-populated the world as follows:
- Shem - The Middle East nations - Ham - The continent of Africa - Japheth - The European and other western nations
So, it seems to make sense that the descendants of Ham may have re-populated the African nations, and, of course, these nations are predominantly black.
Those who believe that Noah's curse turned Ham's skin black will quickly point out that Ham was Canaan's father (verses 18 & 22), so
they stretch this curse to include Ham as well as Canaan. However, Ham had
other sons as well, including Cush, Egypt and Put (Genesis 10:6).
Nevertheless, it does make some sense that dark-skinned people could have come from
Canaan. On the other hand, it might make more sense if dark-skinned people came from the other sons: Cush (modern day Sudan and other African
nations), Egypt (obviously, modern day Egypt), and Put (modern day Libya).
However, one caveat to this logic is that the land of Canaan is in the Middle East--not Africa. So, since Noah's curse was
specifically placed upon Canaan, and perhaps not on Cush, Egypt, and Put, then all of this seems somewhat reversed. In addition, there has been much
scientific study as to what changes the pigmentation (color) of skin over the
course of many generations. Many scientists believe that, in
general, skin color is darker for those living closer to the equator, and lighter for those living farther from the equator.
So, this could also explain the black skin of the African people.
There is one more thing to consider here. Noah's curse
specifically mentioned Canaan as being the slave of Shem and the slave of
Japheth. Over the centuries, it does indeed appear that the descendants of Ham (again, dark-skinned people of Africa, although not necessarily of Canaan) were
in many cases the slaves of the descendants of Japheth (the western nations).
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
OwenNoah / The Flood
After the flood was the earth populated by relatives?
Thank you for your question.
Yes, after the flood the world was re-populated from the eight people
who survived the flood: Noah, his wife, and his three sons and
their wives. This is similar to the way the world was initially populated after
creation, with Adam and Eve and their children.
Thanks,
Owen
The Poor
Oppression of the poor and
someone trying to change themselves and no help.
Here is
Stumbling blocks to the poor. And some fulfilling of scriptures
but judging the poor wrongfully.
In the past I have applied to many jobs--denied--so be it.
Proverbs 22:16
He who oppresses the poor to increase his wealth and he who
gives gifts to the rich, both come to poverty.
Here is this being filled in US in my personal experience.
Tried to go for different trade in school and denied by physiologist and
highly educated scholars. That get paid to deny someone a means of trade to
get out of the government programs. With their IQ test. Get
big bucks for this.
Proverbs 21:13
If the man shuts his ears to the cry of the poor. He will cry out
and not be answered.
Another filled in my personal life.
Go to all different jobs and turned away. No hire because
of stumbling blocks and obstacles.
Need high school diploma along with PhD or bachelor or
certificates--among much demand of technology and big education. Judged because
of speech impairment and no teeth for beauty. If I went around
the neighborhood and truly do what is, in the Old Testament I would be chased away.
I mean go and offer to the rich neighbor to do their mowing
or plowing snow for money to help me the poor. They turn you away.
Roman 14:13
Let us not their forth judge one another anymore: but judge this
that no man put a stumbling block to fall in the brethren way.
To set obstacles that cause us to trip in trying to find our job
to make money to live without the government.
I am very not happy of this conditions and I find no cooperation
in the US. I also find we get punished for trying to get off the
system and penalized. People that have jobs are braggers and like to
call us freeloaders and employers that choose who they hire and will not hire some poor
people. Where does this oppression belong too?
I find you are making comments to the poor. So, let me cry unto you
for a job that could pay my way and sky rocket rent, heat, and food.
Lev. 25:39-40
39 And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be
sold unto thee; thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant:
40 But as an hired servant, and as a sojourner, he shall be with
thee, and shall serve thee unto the year of jubilee:
In the modern day it is applying for jobs at stores or corporation,
or restaurants or whatever it is.
They don't have on job training as much as they use too. They
have set all kinds of demands to get a job to qualify and no one wants to give
another person a chance without a big education among experiences.
So, I say just like the prophet said they are turning to poor
from their right. Then blaming us for the nation’s
problems. Some of us are crying of bondage and oppression. God does open the ears of the
one being oppressed.
My idea is that rents are way too high even for the working
middle class. My idea is to that housing should rent to buy the house and
they would not have to keep paying every month. I find that not right
that the government has to pay our rent. If they did not I would be
living on the streets. I do have Jesus Christ living in me. I
find cities are exploiting the poor by their new inspections every year to make themselves
jobs. Help with ideas of getting out of this mess
of oppression and them exploiting rental clients to expand government power and hold
us more in bondage.
Thank you for your insights. Please give me feedback on how I
could get a living going to flee out of this trap of poverty I did not
ask for.
If people are going to call us free loader they need to help us out
of this bondage instead of finding fault.
Take action to help and serve. There is some that are not
happy in this life style. US is not what it was based on and things are
upside down.
Thank you for your e-mail. My heart breaks because of your struggles.
First of all, please be assured that I am praying for you. I
may not be able to do much, but I can pray. I am not an employer who is
able to offer you a job, but I can pray.
Where are you located? Perhaps I can keep an ear out to help
you find a job.
God loves us, and he will provide for all of us, including the
poor (Psalm 68:10, Luke 6:20). Be diligent in prayer. He
hears and answers our prayers (John 9:31, 1 John 5:14-15).
"The Spirit Himself testifies with our spirit that we are children
of God, and if children, heirs also, heirs of God and fellow heirs
with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him so that we may also be
glorified with Him. For I consider that the sufferings of this present
time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that is to be revealed to
us. For the anxious longing of the creation waits eagerly for the
revealing of the sons of God. Romans 8:16-19
Love in Christ,
Owen
Dear Owen,
Thank you
for your email back. Thank you also to help pray for
me. I hope you see the oppression that is happening to the poor. There are
many making harsh comments about us
and some are drinking and drugging. But not all.
It really hurts me to see others held back too. Please let me
know if you see the same problem.
But this is only my case and it happens to other
people. I live in >Massachusetts,
Hyannis, which is Cape Cod. The rent is almost $800.00 a
month. So, for me to rid of
housing I need to make at least 1600 a month. I have been
praying on this. We need God's
kingdom here. Then we will all have our own
tree and own land to have our own house. Plus peace and walk
God's way which his laws on base of LOVE. Please cry out for the poor of the
oppression and exploiting
the poor. Love to talk with you on the phone if that is possible. Thank you
for your openness on the subject and understanding. I hope I was not to
bold. But I get sick of people saying we are bum, lazy,
dumb, fools, freeloaders, and drug attics or drunks when
I one don't and I know some others
that don't drink and drug. If they want to make these
comments they need to help the oppressed
and fight to help the poor get out of the trap of poverty.
This includes big businesses.
God makes rich, and makes poor. I hope this shed
light on the problems that >we
face. There is more than one side of a story.
Other Religions
Are we to respect other religions?
Thank you for your question. When the Bible commands us to
love others, this includes loving those who believe differently than we
do. I tend to view these people as potential believers that simply haven't yet
been convicted of the truth by the Holy Spirit. So, our love and
respect for them is a witness of the truth of Christianity. Also, this is
why it's so great to live in a free country where we have freedom of religion.
Thanks,
OwenParadise vs. Heaven
According to the bible what is the difference between paradise and heaven?
The reason that I ask this is because Jesus told the thief on the cross
that today they would be together in paradise. Why did he
not say heaven? A Mormon friend of mine tells me it is a place in
heaven that is nice but it is not with God. Thus, there are different
levels in heaven, and only the very righteous get to be close to God? I
always assumed that Jesus was talking about heaven but it does say paradise,
so is that another place beside heaven? Did Jesus not go right to
heaven but to this paradise until he was resurrected? I'm having more and more questions?
Thank you for your question. Yes, the use of the word
"paradise" in the Bible can be confusing. I believe that our definitive passage
on this is the story of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31.
When the rich man died, he went to a place called "Hades" (verse
23), which was a place of torments. When Lazarus died, he went to
a place called "Abraham's bosom," which Bible scholars have associated
with paradise.
Apparently, when people died in Old Testament times (including the
times referenced in the Gospels), their bodies went into a grave,
but apparently there was a temporary holding place for their souls.
The Bible uses a term called hell, such as in Matthew 5:22, but
the terminology is slightly different than what we normally use. Hell is
the lake of fire where all unbelievers will spend eternity
(Revelation 20:14-15). Apparently, however, the temporary holding place
(sometimes called Sheol, or Purgatory) had a compartment for separate
compartments for believers and unbelievers. (This is where the Catholics
(mistakenly) built their doctrine of purgatory.) Unbelievers spent this period in
the part called torments (Luke 16:23), while believers spent this time in
a place called paradise (Luke 23:43).
However, with the resurrection of Jesus (the first resurrection),
these Old Testament believers were transferred from paradise to Heaven.
This is apparently what was going on in Matthew 7:53, which is a
very difficult passage.
Now, for us, it's completely different. Since the resurrection of
Christ has already occurred, and He has ascended to Heaven, when believers
die today, our bodies go to a grave, and our spirits go straight to
Heaven (2 Corinthians 5:1-8) to be with Christ.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
OwenThe Mark of the Beast
Does the
new chip implant meet the description in The Holy Bible as the mark
of the beast?
Thank you for your question. Yes, I believe it's possible
that chip implants could be used as the mark of the beast. However, I
don't think that we can be too adamant about these things until the end times
are upon us, and even then it might not be really obvious. A lot
of people have given similar credence to things such as bar codes, credit
cards, and RFID codes (readers, wallets, etc.).
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
I keep
hearing this chip will be required by March, 2013. I am so concerned
because I am a mother of 5 small children. I know without this chip my
husband and I cannot take care of our children. I guess what I am really
trying to ask is will we know or are we doomed to either eternal damnation, or watching our own children die of
starvation? Maybe a better way of wording this is should a Christian allow this chip?
After reading further about this, my current feeling is that I would
not allow the chip implant--neither in myself nor in my children.
It just seems too much like the mark of the beast. If it does get to
the point where we cannot carry on commerce without this implant, then I
believe it would be best to simply die the death of a Christian
martyr.
Thanks,
OwenPriests
Who was ordained along with the priest in Exodus 28-29?
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for my delay in
responding. I'm sorry, but I may not fully understand your question. In
my view, Exodus 28-29 simply gives us God's commands for the priests (i.e., Aaron and
his sons) and their garments. If this doesn't answer your
question, could you please clarify what you're asking?
Thanks,
Owen
The Earth
Does the Bible Imply That the Earth is Flat?
Ezekiel 7:2 and Revelation 7:1 reference "the four corners of the
earth." Similarly, Isaiah 11:12 references "the four quarters of the earth." The Oxford
English Dictionary defines "corner" to mean "An extremity or end of the earth; a region, quarter;
a direction or quarter from which the wind blows." The word "corner" comes from a
Latin root "cornu," meaning "horn," as seen in words such as "cornet," "corn," and
"cornucopia." So, the four corners of the earth can be interpreted as referring to the four cardinal
directions--north, south, east and west. In addition, the "four corners of the earth" can
also be interpreted as four "horns" of the earth. One obvious example of such a "horn" is
Cape Horn, the southernmost tip of South America. So, the usage of the phrase "four
corners of the earth" does not necessarily signify a flat, rectangular earth.
Also, in general, one
must be aware of the poetic language and symbolism often used in the Bible, especially in the poetic books like Psalm, and the prophetic
books like Revelation. Incidentally, to me, one of the stronger verses arguing for a flat
earth is Job 38:13, which says, "that it might take the earth by the edges." My only
explanation here is the use of poetic language; i.e., a circular view of the earth from
heaven cannot be argued here, since a circle has no edges.
On the other hand, there
are many verses in the Bible that do indeed agree with what we know about science, so far. In fact, these even make the words of
the Bible more powerful, when we realize that the Biblical writers stated scientific truths thousands
of years before astronomy, geology, or archeology confirmed them. Please
consider the following:
- The Bible does, in
fact, teach the concept of a round or spherical earth. Isaiah
40:22 says, "He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people
are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them
out like a tent to live in." The fact that this verse speaks of the "circle of the earth" can mean
one of three things: 1) The earth is not a flat square but a flat circle. If that is true then
what of the four corners of the earth? A flat circle has no corners. 2) The earth is
shaped in a way that is spherical but has a square cross-section somewhere, at the equator, for
example. 3) The earth is spherical in shape. This last option is further
strengthened by observing the reference to the inhabitants as grasshoppers, implying a perspective from on
high, particularly, the outermost heaven. This verse serves only to strengthen my
faith, as it reveals God's omniscience, in His knowledge that the earth was round, a fact that was
not discovered by man for thousands of years.
- Proverbs 8:27 says,
"When he prepared the heavens, I was there: when he set a compass upon the face of the depth..." The word "compass" can mean a
circular enclosure or a spherical envelope. Since the verse speaks of an extended area, the spherical
enclosure for "compass" is a better interpretation than a circular enclosure.
- Luke 17:31-36 says, "In that day_, he which shall be upon the house
top, and his stuff in the house, let him not come down to take it away: and he that is in the
field, let him likewise not turn back .... I tell you, in that night_ there shall be
two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.... Two men shall be in
the field; the one shall be taken, and the other left." In regard to the shape
of the earth, these verses speak of day (verse 31) and night (verse 34) as occurring
simultaneously. The activities are listed in the context of that global event, the rapture, which Paul
describes as occurring in the "twinkling of an eye" (I Corinthians 15:52). The simplest
explanation for this simultaneous daylight and night is that the earth is spherical in shape.
- Acts 1:8 says, "Jesus gives His commission to His disciples to be
witnesses "unto the uttermost part_ of the earth." Note here that the word "part"
is singular. A flat earth with four corners would be indicated by the plural "uttermost
parts." However, a spherical earth would have only one uttermost part, its opposite side.
So, the Bible does not necessarily teach that the earth is flat.
The Ends of the Earth
What are The Ends of the Earth?
Psalm 135:7, Job 37:3, and Daniel 4:11 reference "the ends of the
earth." The above dictionary definition also explains the "ends of the
earth." Another way of saying the "ends of the earth" is to refer to the "extremities of the
earth." In this case, as is also the case for the four corners of the earth, the word "earth"
refers to the land mass, country, or continents, as opposed to the globe (Exodus
10:12-15). Since the word "earth" can be used as synonymous with "land," the "ends of the earth" thus
refer to the points of land most distant from some central point. For the Bible,
this central point is the land of Israel. On a globe, a great circle passing through Jerusalem
and the north and south poles very nearly cuts the Pacific Ocean in half and leaves four continental
"corners" or "ends," namely the Chukchi Peninsula of the Soviet Union (opposite the Bering
Straits of Alaska), Alaska, the southeastern tip of Australia, and Cape Horn of South
America. These four geographical locations can account for the four corners of the
earth. Alternatively, since there was probably a land-link between Siberia and Alaska at the time
the Bible was written, the four corners of the earth could be Norway, Newfoundland, Cape Horn
and the Cape of Good Hope.
Viewing the Earth
Can the Whole Earth Be Viewed From a Mountain Top?
Mt 4:8 says, "Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and
showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor." This passage implies neither a flat earth nor a mountain large enough
to oversee the earth. Even on a flat earth, a high mountain would be a very poor place to
observe the kingdoms of the world "in their glory." Furthermore, if Matthew was
implying that a mountain existed from which all the world was visible, then obviously, the mountain
would be visible from all parts of the world. It is invalid to suggest that Matthew believed that
such a mountain existed. Incidentally, the mountain in question was probably
Mt. Quarantania, and it commands an incredible view of the Jordan Valley, which may be used in
this passage to symbolize "all the kingdoms of the world."
The Earth's Foundation
What are The Foundations of the Earth?
Psalm 18:15 and Psalm 104:4 reference "the foundations of the
earth." Many verses state that God laid the foundations of the earth, but each
verse adds a little to that simple fact. Psalm 102:25 tells us that God laid the
foundations "of old," and Hebrews 1:10 echoes the thought that God laid the foundations of the earth "in
the beginning." Job 38:4 simply states that God laid the foundations of the earth, but Job
38:6 indicates that the foundations are themselves fastened upon something else.
Hebrews 1:3 names this "something else" as the Lord Jesus Christ who "upholds all things by
the word of his power." Proverbs 8:29 tells us that the earth's foundations were
appointed. Proverbs 3:19 indicates that the earth was founded by wisdom while Jeremiah 31:37 indicates
that the foundations are not searchable. Micah 6:2 tells us that they are strong; so
strong that the earth should never be removed (Psalm 104:5).
So, the foundations
themselves are fastened upon Christ, the sustainer of the
universe. Also, these foundations are located somewhere under the earth, and they
are not searchable (Jeremiah 31:37). Science would certainly agree that these
foundations are not searchable. Whenever there is an earthquake, shock waves are propagated throughout
the interior of the earth. But there is one area which the waves fail to
penetrate. That area is the earth's core, the very central part or "foundation" of the earth.
Until recently seismologists assumed that the center of the earth was composed of molten
iron. Scientists now believe that the core may be rocky. No one knows for
certain. Man's concept of the outer layers of the earth's crust has significantly changed in recent years.
How much more so will his ideas of the earth's interior change in the future?
A Circular Earth
Does the Bible Imply That the Earth is Circular?
Isaiah 40:22 says that God "sits enthroned above the circle of the
earth..." If you or I were sitting above the earth and looking down upon it, it certainly
would appear to be circular, just as astronauts have viewed it from space. i.e.,
From afar, a three-dimensional sphere has a two-dimensional circular appearance until one gets close
enough to have some depth perception. So, "circular" does not deny
"spherical." Genesis 1:18 says that God made the sun and the moon "to govern the day
and the night, and to separate light from darkness." I see no contradiction of this
passage with what science now knows.
Job 1:7 says that Satan was "roaming throughout the earth, going back
and forth on it.” Again, I see nothing here that contradicts science.
Certainly, I can walk "back and forth" in my office, but this suggests no implication as to the shape of the
earth.
The Sky
Is the Sky a Solid Vault?
Job 37:18 speaks of God
"spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze." Incidentally, Genesis 1:17 also refers to "the vault of the
sky." A vault can be defined as an arched structure forming a ceiling or roof
over a wholly or partially enclosed construction. I believe that this is an
apt description of the sky forming an arch above the earth.
Concerning being "hard as a mirror," this passage reminds me of my
first job as a software engineer, and my training in celestial mechanics. I helped
program the onboard computers for the first Space Shuttle mission in 1981. My programs included
flight control during all three phases of the mission: ascent (liftoff), orbit, and
descent (re-entry). The re-entry into the atmosphere comes to mind here. When re-entering the
atmosphere from space, the attitude and acceleration of the Shuttle must be precise; otherwise,
the Shuttle could literally "bounce" off the atmosphere (or it could burn up).
In this respect, this barrier between our atmosphere and space could indeed be described as being
"hard as a mirror." Perhaps the Bible was speaking of truths not discovered by science for
another 4,000 years or so.
Also, by definition, the sky is indeed a vault. Genesis 1:8
says, "God called the vault 'sky.'"
Achieving the Sky
Can the Sky Be Achieved?
Genesis 11:4-6 says, "Then they said, 'Come, let us build ourselves a
city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves;
otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.' But the LORD
came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. The LORD said, 'If as one
people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be
impossible for them.'"
I'm not sure what your
question is with this verse, but I'll attempt an answer. What
the people said here is of no consequence. Their vain and failed
attempt to build a tower that reached to the heavens doesn't matter. The only universal
truth we can discern from this passage is what God said. God did not really address whether
or not the sky can be achieved.
Technically, what God said was that as long as all people spoke the
same language, then nothing they do will be impossible for them. As a result, in
verses 7 through 9, he confused their language and scattered them according to their various
languages. So, today, the "nothing will be impossible" clause does not apply to us, because we
are no longer united by a common language. (Alejandro, this seems to be an apt
illustration here, just as you and I do not speak the same language.) However, the Bible is clear
that only God is omnipotent, and man, in his sinful nature, is quite helpless in many
respects. So, it has never been "possible" for man to do anything and everything, even before his language was confused.
However, yes, in terms of
airplanes and space travel, the sky can be "achieved," with limitations.
Waters above the Sky
Are There Waters Above the Sky?
Genesis 7:11 says that in the time of the flood, "... the floodgates of the heavens were opened."
2 Corinthians 12:2 speaks of the "third heaven." This implies
that there are three heavens, and these appear to be: 1) The first heaven; the atmosphere
of the earth, including the air immediately above out heads; 2) Beyond that, the second heaven, outer
space; 3) Beyond that, the first heaven, where God abides. Genesis 7:11 can is
easily explained in that the "heavens" there refer to the "first heaven," the atmosphere including
clouds and weather patterns from which we receive our rains.
Psalm 148:4 refers to the
"waters" above the skies. Psalm 104:2-3 says that God
"stretches out the heavens like a tent and lays the beams of his upper chambers on
their waters." I cannot explain this, other than to say that perhaps there are indeed
waters above the sky, perhaps even in the third heaven. Certainly, science has not
disproved this.
The Abyss
Are There Waters Beyond the Abyss?
Exodus 20:4 says, “You shall not make for yourself an image
in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below." This
could easily be explained by seas and oceans; i.e., waters below the "surface" of the
earth. Again, science cannot prove that waters do not exist even further within the earth's
interior. Psalm 136:6 says that God "spread out the earth upon the
waters..." Psalm 24:2 says that God founded the earth "on the seas and established it on the waters."
It would appear that this
is explained by Genesis 1:2, "Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was
hovering over the waters." Apparently, during His act of creation, God first
created the waters. Then later, he created the "land" ("earth") and the sky. Verses 6-7 say,
"And God said, 'Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.' So
God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so."
Gravity
Does the Bible Defy the Natural Law of Gravity (Miracles)?
According to the Bible, the orbits of the earth and moon can be stopped
(Joshua 10: 12-13). This seems to completely ignore the Copernican Revolution (1543),
Kepler's Laws (1609), the observations that the Earth moves by Galileo (1632), and the Law of Universal Gravitation Newton (1687).
You have asked about a
very interesting event in Joshua 10:12-13 when the sun and the moon stopped their orbits. This was a miracle. Please
allow me to explain. God is more powerful than the laws of nature. In fact, He
created all of the laws of the universe. As the creator, His creation belongs to Him, and he can do with it as He pleases.
On a limited number of
occasions, He has chosen to intervene in our world by performing Miracles; i.e., overruling the laws of nature. Please
consider the following miracles in addition to the one you have already cited:
- 2 Chronicles 20:11 records a miracle where God reversed the orbit of
the earth around the sun when he made the sundial back up ten steps. - In 2 Kings 6:6, Elisha made an iron axe head float on water.
- Jesus performed many miracles, such as restoring sight to the blind
and restoring speech to the mute (Matthew 12:22), and calming a raging sea (Matthew 8:26),
which had to disrupt the current weather patterns at the time. We must understand that God performs miracles for a specific purpose
that He has in mind--not simply for the amusement of us who cannot similarly deny the laws of
nature. When God stopped the orbits of the sun and the moon, this was done in order to
prove that God was fighting for Israel (Joshua 10:14). When He made the sundial
back up ten steps, this was done in order to prove that Isaiah was a true prophet, speaking with
the authority of God.
Similarly, when the
axe head floated, this proved that Elisha was a true prophet from
God. Obviously, the miracles that Jesus performed proved that He is the
Messiah, the very Son of God. Now, it would be a very weak argument for a skeptic to point to these
miracles in trying to prove that the Bible contains errors. On the other hand, for
believers, these miracles serve to increase our faith--not to plant doubts in our minds.
In fact, miracles could be another answer for some of the other
questions that you have asked: i.e., the process of photosynthesis before the sun was created;
the violation of the laws of thermodynamics, etc.
Photosynthesis
Does the Bible Contradict Photosynthesis, Newton, and Snell?
According to Genesis, Yahweh created the 1st light (Gen 1, 3), plants
the day 3 (Gen 1.11 to 13), the sun, moon and stars on day 4 (Gen 1 14-19), and the rainbow as
a sign of covenant with Noah after the Flood (Genesis 9, 9-17). Does this not
contradict the law of Snell (1621), the decomposition of light (Newton, 1671) and
Photosynthesis?
You asked about a possible contradiction where God created plants on
the third day, but he didn't create the sun (required for photosynthesis) until the fourth
day. We are not given the answer to this in the Bible, but I see a variety of
possibilities:
- The Bible says that God created light on the first day, although He
didn't create the sun until the fourth day. However, it doesn't explain what this
light was on the first day. Perhaps it was simply the light of Jesus Christ illuminating the
universe, or perhaps it was yet another source of light. Whatever it was, maybe it served
(perhaps temporarily) in place of the sun in the photosynthesis process.
- Maybe we can view the Bible’s first reference to light as
being a general reference, while the following verses give a more detailed explanation of the source of
the light (the sun). In other words, perhaps the sun was actually created on the first day,
but it is not named as the sun until the fourth day.
- The requirement of sunlight in the photosynthesis process is based
upon how science currently understands this process. Perhaps the problem is
our lack of understanding, and someday science will discover the (possibly simple) answer to this
question. For example, perhaps there are, in fact, other alternative sources of energy (in
place of sunlight) for the photosynthesis process, but our knowledge of science is still too
limited to understand this.
- There is much debate on the use of the word "day" in Genesis
1. Some Bible scholars believe that it was a 24-hour day as we know it today, but others
believe it was a longer amount of time. Perhaps this was simply a 24-hour day, so the
plants were created only 24 hours before the sun was created, and the plants (and the entire
ecosystem) were able to survive temporarily for those 24 hours without the photosynthesis
process as we know it today (especially in a perfect ecosystem). In this scenario, maybe
for a short time period: photoautotrophs survived without creating their own food; they were not
using carbon dioxide, converting it into organic compounds such as sugars; they were not
releasing oxygen for aerobic life; and, there was some other source of energy for nearly all
life on earth.
- Expanding upon the above theory, perhaps the plants were initially
created as seedlings, even buried underground, and able to do without the photosynthesis
process for those 24 hours before they emerged from the ground. You also asked about possible contradictions between the Biblical
account and the law of Snell and the decomposition of light (Newton). In particular,
you asked about the rainbow as a sign of the covenant with Noah after the flood. However,
the flood occurred some 1,600 years after creation. Because of this, I do not see a
possible contradiction similar to that with the process of photosynthesis (where the order of creation within
the first six days was a factor). Also, we cannot definitively say when and how the
properties of light were created; i.e., decomposition, reflection, refraction, etc.
- Or, maybe they just survived for a day without sunlight.
The Laws of Thermodynamics
Does the Bible Violate the
1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics?
Is the
sudden creation of the Stars, Plants, Animals, the Man from the dust of
the earth (Genesis 2:7, Ecclesiastes 12:7) and the woman from the rib of it (Genesis
2:21), violate the 1st and 2nd Law of Thermodynamics?.
I don't think that we can answer your question with certainty; i.e.,
whether or not the biblical account of creation violates the first and second laws of
thermodynamics. In simplistic terms, these laws of thermodynamics state that the total
amount of energy and matter in the universe is constant, so matter cannot be created or
destroyed, which would seemingly conflict with the biblical account of creation (the creation
of matter). However, I can offer some suggestions that might reconcile this aspect of
biblical truth with science.
- It could be that the current laws of the universe were not always in
effect. Before creation, perhaps other laws were in effect. Then the
universe was created, along with a constant amount of energy and matter, as well as even the laws of
thermodynamics. In this respect, yes, creation would have indeed violated the laws of
thermodynamics because these laws did not exist at the time.
- It could be that the (man-made) laws of thermodynamics are simply
incorrect. In this respect, yes, creation would have indeed violated the laws of
thermodynamics because these laws are invalid.
- The second law of thermodynamics implies that both energy and matter
in the universe are becoming less useful as time goes on, and that perfect order in the
Universe occurred the instant after the Big Bang when energy and matter and all of the forces
of the Universe were unified. Perhaps God used the Big Bang in His creation, and
(in agreement with the Biblical account) the world was in a perfect state when Adam and Eve were
created in the Garden of Eden. Furthermore, it was sin that put in place the
degradation that we now see. In this respect, creation does not violate the laws of
thermodynamics. Does 1 Kings 7:23 Make an Error in the Calculation of Pi? 1 Kings 7:23 says, "He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape,
measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits
to measure around it."
The key to finding the answer to this question is the phrase, "and five
cubits high." The object being described is a cylinder--not a circle. Think of
it as a three-dimensional object, like a drinking glass--not just a two-dimensional object like a
circle drawn on a piece of paper. The diameter of the mouth of this "drinking
glass" is ten cubits, but the drinking glass is five cubits tall. So, to measure around the
outside of it, we would add ten (across the top), five cubits (down one side), ten cubits (across
the bottom), and five cubits (up the other side), for a total of thirty cubits.
Rabbits
Does the Bible indicate that the rabbit chews the cud?
Leviticus 11:6 says, "The rabbit, though it chews the cud, does not have a divided hoof; it is unclean for you."
I cannot be very definitive in answering this question.
Perhaps the "hare" in this verse was an animal that is now extinct but was alive at the time of
Moses. Also, it appears that Aristotle commented on a similar animal that did chew the cud, namely a
"coagulum" or "runnet" in its stomach, "...all that have many bellies have what is
called a coagulum or runnet, and of them that have but one belly, the hare. So,
perhaps although this is now extinct, it was also still alive at the time of Aristotle.
Bats
Does the Bible Refer to the Bat as a Bird?
Leviticus 11:13 says, “These are the birds you are to
regard as unclean and not eat because they are unclean: the eagle, the vulture, the black vulture ... 19 the
stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe and the bat.”
I can be quite definitive on this question, as well as the one below,
because they both have to do with the translation from Hebrew to English. The Hebrew
word for "birds" in the text is "oph". Better translations would be "flying creatures" or
"winged creatures."
Insects
Does the Bible Say That Insects Have Four Legs?
Leviticus 11:20 “‘All flying insects that walk on
all fours are to be regarded as unclean by you. 21 There are, however, some flying insects that walk on all fours
that you may eat: those that have jointed legs for hopping on the ground. 22 Of these you
may eat any kind of locust, katydid, cricket or grasshopper. 23 But all other flying
insects that have four legs you are to regard as unclean.
The Hebrew word in the text is "sherets." Better translations
would be "swarmers," or "swarming things," "creeping things," or "teeming things."
This cannot necessarily be expected to match up exactly with what modern science calls
"insects." In fact, perhaps the miscommunication comes from errors in the way that modern science has
classified the animals, not in the Scriptures.
Also, consider Gill on this subject: "most creeping things
that fly have six feet, as the locusts themselves, reckoning their leaping legs into the number;
though it may be observed, that those creatures that have six feet have but four equal ones, on
which they walk or creep; and the two foremost, which are longer, are as hands to them to
wipe their eyes with, and protect them from anything that may fall into them and hurt them;
they not being able to see clearly because of the hardness of their eyes, as Aristotle
observes, and particularly it may be remarked of the fly, as it is by Lucian, that though it has six
feet it only goes on four, using the other two foremost as hands; and therefore you may see
it walking on four feet, with something eatable in its hands, lifting them up on high,
just after the manner of men."
The Creation of Man What scientific model
explains the transformation from the dust of the earth into cells, tissues,
organs, apparatuses and systems of a whole man?
Genesis 2:7 says, "Then the LORD God formed a man from the dust of the
ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living
being." I know of no scientific model that explains the transformation of dust
into a human being. I also know of no scientific model that explains many of the other
wonders of creation. It has taken thousands of years for archaeology, geology, and astronomy to
even observe these wonders, and sometimes man has constructed a theory for their origin,
and sometimes it hasn't. While God is omniscient, science is still in its
infancy, but man is learning more and more each day. Perhaps one day science will discover the
answer behind the transformation of dust into a human, but perhaps such things will
remain hidden until eternity.
Why Does God Allow Congenital Diseases?
If we
believe that the (Ps 139:13-16) is true, then why do we have inherited
diseases? The issue is omnipotence and omniscience of Jehovah. If he knows that a
person and / or animal will be born with a congenital disease, why not stop him if he can do
so? Psalm 139:13-16 says, "For you created my inmost being; you knit me together
in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works
are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made
in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw
my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be."
Sickness and disease are a result of sin. Instead of obeying God, and living forever
without toil, struggle, sickness, and death, Adam chose to disobey
God. When he sinned in the Garden of Eden, he brought death upon himself, and all mankind (Genesis 2:17,
Genesis 3). He would now be subject to toil and struggle, aging, sickness, and death
(Genesis 3:17-19). God is indeed omnipotent, and he is just. If He had decided
to let man die in his sin, with no hope of redemption, justice would have been served, as there would
have been no payment for man's sins. However, He put into place a plan of grace by
which man can be redeemed through the blood of Christ on the cross (John 3:16).
Believers will indeed live forever with God in eternity. However, meanwhile, we still have to
finish this life in a sinful world, subject to sickness and disease.
Speaking Donkey
How Could a Donkey Speak?
The speaking donkey was a miracle, and there are three such instances
in the Bible where an animal spoke. In Genesis 3:1, a serpent spoke; in Numbers
22:28-30, a donkey spoke; and, in Revelation 8:13, an eagle spoke. As in the case of all
miracle, each one was for a specific purpose.
The Serpent
Did the Serpent Previously Stand Upright?
In Genesis 3:14, the fall into sin reached well beyond the man and
woman. Man was appointed to rule over God's creation, and the animals suffered along with man
through the Edenic Curse (Jeremiah 12:4, Romans 8:20). Before the curse, the serpent
had apparently been capable of standing upright. However, the serpent was cursed above all
other animals. As a result of man's sin, the serpent would be cursed to crawl upon his belly
forever. However, it is also possible that the language of this verse is
symbolic, and it merely indicates the humiliation of the serpent, once exalted as the most
subtle animal, to a position in which it was reduced to slithering through the
grass. I think you would be interested in my article entitled
Bible Discrepancies.
Garden of Eden
How Did the Ecosystem Survive in the Garden of Eden?
Question: The Bible describes both man and animals being
created as vegetarians (Gen. 1:29-30), and there was no death or suffering in the original
creation. How an ecosystem can survive with only herbivores? Wouldn't plants have had to
die? How did animals that were "created herbivores" become carnivores with the entry of sin into the
world?
This is a difficult question, and I do not think that the Bible provides definitive answers, but I'll offer my viewpoint.
We do not know how an ecosystem could survive with only
herbivores. However, I believe that "no death" did not apply to all living things. It did not
apply to plants, as they provided the nourishment for the herbivores. So, if herbivores at
plants, the plants certainly died. "No death" applied only to creatures with a soul, and perhaps only to
man. I do believe that all animals were herbivores at the time; i.e., there were no
carnivores. I also believe that many animals became carnivores after the fall, such as the
lion. An alternative view on this is that man may not have needed to eat at all. Genesis 2:16
indicates that man was allowed to eat, but perhaps he did not have to eat. I cite this as
being the case with Jesus in His glorified body in Luke 24:42.
Animals
How Does Sin Apply to Animals?
Question: Are carnivores (such as lions) more sinful than
herbivores (such as sheep), according to Scriptures such as Genesis 3:17-21, Romans 5:12, and 1 Corinthians 15:21-22)?
We cannot apply the Scriptures you cited to animals. These Scriptures apply only
to man. The concept of sin does not apply to the other animals; i.e., a lion is
not committing sin by killing and eating its prey.
Striped Sheep
How Can We Reconcile the
Striped Sheep in Genesis 30:37-39 with Mendelian Genetics and Molecular Genetics?
To me, this is one of the most mysterious stories in the
Bible. I have studied this passage frequently, but I have never been able to explain it. I can
only make a few comments:
- The technique of using
the fresh-cut branches may have just been an ancient custom, hoping that the power of imagination would somehow influence breeding and
genetic characteristics. It may have had nothing to do with the outcome. Laws of
genetics would have been operable in Jacob's improvement processes whether he was aware of them or
not. Perhaps the branches should be discounted as a contributing factor. Certainly, the
markings on the goats and sheep were genetically influenced via dominant and recessive traits, etc.
- There are indications in the narrative that Jacob knew the science of
selective breeding. Perhaps the peeled branches were just a clever trick to hide Jacob's
breeding secrets from others.
- This might have been a miracle, especially in light of Genesis
31:12.
Faith amidst Questions
How Can We Have Faith in God
and the Bible When We Have So, Many Questions About Reconciling Science to the Bible?
In the first 37 chapters of Job, Job asked many questions. In
chapters 38 through 41, God answers Job's questions with questions. For
example: Job 38:2: Who is this that obscures my plans with words without
knowledge? 3 Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me. 4
Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation? Tell me, if you
understand. 5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across it? 6
On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone— 7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels shouted for joy? 8 Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth
from the womb, 9 when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness, 10 when I fixed
limits for it and set its doors and bars in place, 11 when I said, "‘This far you
may come and no farther; here is where your proud waves halt?" 12 Have you ever given orders
to the morning, or shown the dawn its place?
He goes on like this for five chapters, then we finally see Job's reply
in chapter 42: 1 Then Job replied to the LORD: 2 “I know that you
can do all things; no purpose of yours can be thwarted. 3 You asked, "Who is this that obscures my plans
without knowledge?"’ Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too wonderful for me to
know. 4 You said, "Listen now, and I will speak; I will question you, and you shall
answer me." 5 My ears had heard of you but now my eyes have seen you. 6 Therefore I
despise myself and repent in dust and ashes.”
In other words, God's thoughts are far above man's thoughts.
Consequently, there are many things that man cannot understand, although we continue to learn more
through scientific study. So, God was telling Job that even if He answered Job's
questions, Job wouldn't be able to comprehend. God was saying, "OK, I'll be glad to
answer your questions, but first, in order to qualify yourself as one who will be able to understand the
answers, let me ask you some questions. Then, after you answer My questions, I
will answer yours." Then Job had to admit, "Surely I spoke of things I did not understand, things too
wonderful for me to know... Therefore, I despise myself and repent in
dust and ashes."
This makes perfect sense to me because I realize that there are so many
things that I do not understand. These things strengthen my faith, rather than
weakening it, because they remind me of how big God is, and how small I am. My lack of
knowledge actual brings me comfort rather than anxiety, knowing that God is taking care of the things that
I cannot even comprehend.
Purgatory
Is there a purgatory?
Thank you for your question. Although the doctrine of
purgatory is valid, I don't hold to it in the Roman Catholic sense, as a process
of purification where believers acquire the holiness necessary to
enter heaven. This doctrine is somewhat complex, but I'll try to summarize it here.
When Old Testament people died, their bodies went into a grave,
but apparently, there was a temporary holding place for their
souls. The Bible uses a term called hell, such as in Matthew 5:22, but
the terminology is slightly different than what we normally use.
Hell is the lake of fire where all unbelievers will spend eternity
(Revelation 20:14-15). Apparently, however, the temporary holding place
(sometimes called Sheol, or Purgatory) had separate compartments for believers
and unbelievers. (This is where the Catholics (mistakenly) built
their doctrine of purgatory.) Those who died were taken to one of
these temporary chambers, awaiting their transaction: either from
paradise to heaven; or from Hades to Hell. We learn more about this in
the story of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16. Unbelievers spent this
period in the part called torments, or "Hades" (Luke 16:23), which is where
the rich man was. However, the believers spent this time in a
place called paradise (Luke 23:43), or "Abraham's bosom" (Luke 16:22), which is where Lazarus was.
However, with the resurrection of Jesus (the first resurrection),
these Old Testament believers were transferred from paradise to
Heaven. This is apparently what was going on in Matthew 7:53, which is a
very difficult passage. Now, for us, it's completely
different. Since the resurrection of Christ has already occurred, and He has ascended
to Heaven, when believers die today, our bodies go to a grave, and
our spirits go straight to Heaven (2 Corinthians 5:1-8) to be with Christ.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Question about Worship
I would like to know if we are the bride of Christ in
a spiritual since and Christ is our spiritual husband is worship how we are spiritually united to
our spouse and become one with Him. Is worship like spiritually making love to God in a nonsexual way?
Thank you for your question.
Yes, the "bride" in Revelation 19:7-9 is the Church, and the "wedding
of the lamb" refers to Jesus Christ (the bridegroom) and the Church
(the bride). Ephesians 5:22-24 says, "Wives, submit to your
husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ
is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as
the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands
in everything." Christ is the head of the Church and the Savior
of believers. He will be united with His Church forever in
eternity, and we are to submit to Him, both in this life and in eternity.
Christ died for His Church, and words cannot express the full love
that He has for us believers. The love of this relationship is so
deep that the best way for us to understand it was in using the analogy
of marriage. Marriage is the biblical relationship where two
people can express their true love for each other in the most intimate of
ways. This love is expressed over the course of their lifetime in many
ways, including physically (sexually), mentally, and spiritually. A
man and his wife grow forever closer by sharing their thoughts, their
spiritual experiences, and their bodies (1 Corinthians 7:5). Likewise,
Christ lives in us, guiding our souls, spirits, and bodies (Romans
1-2). Although we are incapable of grasping this concept to its fullest
extent while we are still in this life, the analogy of marriage was the
best way to relate it to us.
Thanks,
Owen
Luke 7:1-10 - Praying For Healing
I have question on Luke 7:1-10
1 Now when he had ended all his sayings in the audience of the
people, he entered into Capernaum. 2 And a certain centurion's servant, who was dear unto him, was
sick, and ready to die. 3 And when he heard of Jesus, he sent unto him the elders of the
Jews, beseeching him that he would come and heal his servant.
4 And when they came to Jesus, they besought him instantly,
saying, That he was worthy for whom he should do this:
5 For he loveth our nation, and he hath built us a synagogue.
6 Then Jesus went with them. And when he was now not far from
the house, the centurion sent friends to him, saying unto him, Lord,
trouble not thyself: for I am not worthy that thou shouldest enter under
my roof: 7 Wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come unto thee: but
say in a word, and my servant shall be healed.
8 For I also am a man set under authority, having under me
soldiers, and I say unto one, Go, and he goeth; and to another, Come, and he cometh;
and to my servant, Do this, and he doeth it.
9 When Jesus heard these things, he marveled at him, and turned
him about, and said unto the people that followed him, I say unto you, I have not
found so great faith, no, not in Israel.
10 And they that were sent, returning to the house, found the
servant whole that had been sick.
The centurion with great faith in Jesus and believed in that "say
a word" by Jesus will cure the servant who was sick and ready to
die. The servant was then cured by Jesus.
My question is: When I become ill, say I have "sinusitis"
which brings me headache, hard to breath, and possibly will cause loss of vision in
a long run. The doctor's recommendation is to have a
surgery to fix it. Should I pray for Jesus to cure my illness and not to have
a surgery? Or, should I follow my doctor's recommendation to have a
surgery and pray for the mercy of Jesus to put me in the good care of my
doctor?
Your prompt answers are appreciated.
Thank you for your question. This is a difficult subject, but
I will try to be as definitive as possible.
First of all, when we are stricken with illness, I believe that
the first thing we should do is to pray for healing, including
claiming God's promises such as in 1 John 5:14-15.
At this point, and throughout this process, we can certainly
also see a doctor about our condition if we feel like God might use the doctor
as an instrument in accomplishing His healing. Although I do not
believe that doctors can do much in the way of true healing, they can often
ease our suffering--in short term situations such as with colds and the
flu; and sometimes in more serious long-term circumstances.
However, we know that doctors are sometimes wrong, and they can sometimes be more of
a hindrance than a help, despite any good intentions that they may
have. So, since we know our own bodies better than the doctors do, we need
to accept the responsibility for making the best decisions about our
health (using the common sense and wisdom that God gives us).
If God chooses not to heal us, we should ask others (such as our
church leaders) to join us in prayer for our healing, according to
James 5:13-15 and Matthew 18-18-20.
If God still chooses not to heal us, we need to review 1 John
5:14 again, and pray specifically about the part that says, "if we
ask anything according to his will, he hears us..." We need to
think through our situation and ask ourselves whether or not we believe
that it is God's will for us to be healed. This is because there
may be something else that God has in mind for us, such as a blessing
even greater than being healed; and, perhaps this greater thing can only
come about by way of our illness. If we really believe that the
illness is God's will for us (according to Romans 8:28), then we can be
satisfied and cease praying for healing. However, if we are not
satisfied that this illness is God's will for us, then we need to examine ourselves
to see if there might be some sin in our lives that is inhibiting
our healing (James 5:15), or if we perhaps have sin in our lives that
we have not confessed (1 John 1:9).
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
The Money Changers in the Temple
Here is a
question that I can't find an answer to. I have been everywhere in bible,
asked scholars, etc., and I don't know the answer. If I have doubt I put it in faith
and leave it alone. I believe it. I just don't understand it. You go
for it:
Matthew 5:43-48 (KJV): 43
Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy
neighbor, and hate thine enemy. 44 But I
say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you,
do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use
you, and persecute you; 45 That
ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for
he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain
on the just and on the unjust. 46
For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? Do
not even the publicans the same? 47 And if
ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than
others? Do not even the publicans so? 48 Be ye
therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven
is perfect.
Notes for verse 43a [Thou shalt love thy neighbor] Lev. 19:17-18;
Mt. 22:39; Lk. 10:27b [hate thine enemy]; Ex. 17:14-16 ; Dt. 7:1-2; 23:3-6
Notes For Verse 44a [But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless
them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them
which despitefully use you, and persecute you] Four commands in Mt. 5:44; 1. Love your enemies. 2. Bless them that curse you. 3. Do
good to those that hate you. 4. Pray for your persecutors. These are
four of over 1,050 commands in the New Testament to be obeyed
by Christians. The universal impression in Christendom that there are 10 commandments
to obey is far from the truth.
Notes for verse 46a [For if ye love them which love you, what
reward have ye? Do not even the publicans the same? And if ye salute your
brethren only, what do ye more than others? Do not even the publicans the
same?] Questions 5-8.
Next, Mt. 6:25b [publicans] Tax-gatherers. Used 17 times. They were despised by
the Jews, so any reference to being less than this class was the lowest
thing that could be said of anyone religious. They were classed with sinners
(Mt. 9:10-11; 11:19; 21:31-32). Many repented and were baptized (Lk.
3:12; 7:29). One of them--Matthew--became an
apostle (Lk. 5:27-29; 19:1-10)
Notes for verse 48a [perfect] Greek: teleios
(GSN-_<G5046>), complete in conformity to God's laws.
What a Christian Must Be:
1. Broken in spirit, burdened for others, meek, humble, hungry for righteousness,
merciful, pure in heart, wise, patient, loving, joyful, and gracious (Mt. 5:3-12)
2. Salt to preserve and a light to shine (Mt. 5:13-16)
3. A teacher and keeper of the truth (Mt. 5:17-19)
4. Free from hypocrisy, selfishness, and grudges (Mt. 5:20-24)
5. A peacemaker (Mt. 5:9, 25-26)
6. Free from lusts (Mt. 5:27-30)
7. A family man (Mt. 5:31-32)
8. Truthful (Mt. 5:31-37)
9. Nonresistant to mistreatment (Mt. 5:38-41)
10. Charitable, neighborly, and God-like in society (Mt. 5:38-47)
All this is possible through:
1) The new birth (2Cor. 5:17; 1 Jn. 2:29; 3:5-10; 5:1-4, 18)
2) Walking and living in the Spirit (Rom. 8:1-13; Gal. 5:16-26)
3) Proper use of Christian weapons (2 Cor. 10:5-7; Eph. 6:10-18; Col. 2:6-10; 3:3-10; 2 Tim. 2:21
Excellent and good advice and what we should try to follow coming from
our Lord and Savior.
Here is the problem. If this is the advice we are to take and do in
our life here on earth. Why Does Jesus totally go against what He preached?
Matthew 21:12 (KJV) 12 And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them
that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the
moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves, Mark 11:15 (KJV) 15 And
they come to Jerusalem: and Jesus went into the temple, and
began to cast out them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew
the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves; John
2:14-17 (KJV) 14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and
doves, and the changers of money sitting: 15
And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them
all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the
changers' money, and overthrew the tables; 16
And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence;
make not my Father's house an house of merchandise. 17 And
his disciples remembered that it was written, The zeal of
thine house hath eaten me up.
This was the second cleansing of the temple during the last week of His life, making three times.
He did this (Jn. 2:13; Mt. 21:12-16). How could He do this by Himself against so many men can only be
explained by God's power? It did bring the leaders to action to plot His death (Mk. 11:18).
These scriptures I have been totally confused on. They are a full
360 then what Jesus spoke of. "My thoughts:" Jesus was
the natural body and God in one body. Was he showing the natural
in stink of man, or was it God's wrath on man? But then there is the verse Jesus was without
sin. 1 Peter 2:22 say, Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth.
1 John
3:5 says, And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins;
and in him is no sin.
Hebrews 1:9 Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity;
therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.
Hebrews
4:15 For we have not an High Priest which cannot be touched
with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we
are, yet without sin.
2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who
knew not sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. So, was it
a sin in what He did? Or if we were to do this. Is it not against
Jesus' teaching of "sin?"
What we are taught not to do from Matthew, Mark, and John? He: [1] made
a whip (made a weapon); [2] drove out (had no passion); [3] poured out the money "no pity;" and, [4]
turned over the tables" (had anger).
Your turn for a solution to this. I do not have one..........
Take care and God bless.
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for the delay in my
reply.
Yes, the passages where Jesus cast the moneymakers out of the temple
can be a bit disconcerting. We do know that Jesus lived a sinless
life, and that includes His behavior during this incident. Consider
Ecclesiastes 3:8 which says that there is "...a time to love, and a time to
hate..." At first glance, we might think that there should never be a time
to hate. However, we should hate sin, and Jesus' anger was His
reaction to sin.
By Jesus' actions in the temple, He was indicating His disdain
with organized religion because it lacked purity and the power of
God. His violent reaction (pouring out the money and turning over the tables)
was meant to bring about true spiritual conviction. He could not
tolerate such a gross perversion of the temple. He was reacting
against the sin of greed on the part of the moneychangers.
BTW, the Ecclesiastes passage even specifies that there is "...a time
to kill...", "...a time to tear down...", and "a time for
war..." This even indicates that violence is sometimes justified, such as during
war, etc. During war, we are justified in using weapons against
our enemies and driving out aggressors who have unjustifiably invaded
another country. Even though we love them, with a mental attitude of
agape love, we cannot tolerate their sin.
Thanks,
Owen
Predestination (Faith vs. Works)
I read
your piece on pre-destination. I found it very interesting.
The one part of it I cannot reconcile is the idea that God doesn't
grant the unsaved the WILL to turn to Him. Yes, I know the
Lord "hardened" men in the OT; but to me, they idea that he would deliberately
"cripple" the intellect of some men, and thus deny them the freedom
to choose to love him and follow his Laws seems inconceivable. We are
told in the NT that ALL are granted "a measure of faith," and that
"all" are capable of being saved, not just an elite group of pre-determined
people.
I also see a conflict in the idea that God "looking down the corridor"
would mean he is in time, when in a different place you say the elect
was created "in the past." The "past" would also imply a time bound
decision and put God in time, wouldn't it? Hence, if the time-bound
rule stands, that is, that any explanation that puts God in time can
be impeached, then it seems the entire idea of "pre" determinism
can be impeached, no?
Thank you
for your questions. You have touched upon some difficult
issues, but I'll do my best to try to shed some light on them.
Yes, I believe
that evangelization includes acts of human effort. However, neither this nor any other human effort is
required for one to be saved. If there is any merit in a believer
performing evangelism, then he will be rewarded for it at the Judgment Seat
of Christ, but it has nothing to do with his salvation.
Yes, I do believe in the doctrine of election (or predestination). Specifically, you asked, "What is the point
of evangelicals going out and communicating/preaching to the unsaved
that they can be saved, if only God alone can choose to save them and
they have no choice in the matter whatsoever?" First of all, the
point in performing the evangelism is that we are commanded to do so
(Matthew 28:18-20). Also, we do not know which people are among the
elect, or even which people are truly saved, since we don't truly know the
heart of any other person. So, we must spread the gospel to
everyone.
You also asked, "Why would I go tell an unsaved man that he can repent and believe and be saved, when in reality he can
only repent and believe and be saved if he has been pre-determined to be
saved?" This, of course, is the more difficult question. I believe
that it is technically true to tell an unbeliever that he can be saved if
he believes the gospel. However, it's also a fact that the
non-elect person simply will not believe. It's still true that he would
be saved if he believed, but the Holy Spirit will simply never move his will
to make him believe. If, on the other hand, the person that we
explain the gospel to is among the elect, the Holy Spirit will (at some point)
move upon his will to believe the gospel. In some cases, it will
be our explanation of the gospel that finally compels that person to
believe, and in other cases, it will not be.
For a full explanation of my position on election, please see
my article entitled Predestination.
Owen, thank you. I have responded below (if you are inclined
to continue the discussion, if not, I understand, no worries) Ok, ONE more thing for now :) Sorry to pester you.
Pre-Determinism
In The Great Divorce CS Lewis observed: "All may be saved if they so choose"
Is this statement consistent with pre-determinism?
Mark
Another question: What of Acts 16:30? How does it fit with the idea of Pre-Determinism?
"He then brought them out and asked, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" 31 They replied, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will
be saved, you and your household." 32 Then they spoke the word
of the Lord to him and to all the others in his house.
The apostles said one only need believe to be saved. But it seems you are saying they must not only believe, but ALSO be pre-selected, isn't that right? Hence, it would appear that in
Acts 16:30 the apostles have only stated half of the proposition. In
other words, if what you say is true about pre-determinism, then why
didn't they say something along the lines of:
"Try to believe in the Lord Jesus, and IF you have been pre-selected, that is IF the Lord has not hardened you and crippled
your ability to choose Him, you and the others in your house who have
been pre-selected will be saved!"
Thank you again for your questions and comments. You have done a good job of
arguing the position of Arminianism (favoring man's free will over
election) against my position of Calvinism (favoring election
over man's limited free will), and you have made me think. Let me
first offer some general observations before I speak to the various
specific points that you made.
Throughout your arguments, you repeatedly mentioned God's
(supposed) decision of election in chronological reference to various events
of mankind:
"... before man ever arrived in the garden" "... before each exits the womb" "... before man
even arrived on earth" "... before the existence of man and sin" "... before man sinned for the
first time" "... when God made the election decisions"
However, God exists in eternity, beyond the realm of time and
space. To us who are limited by space and time, eternity is a great
mystery. In eternity, somehow, events don't occur in chronological order.
We can't even aptly describe this in words. The best we can do is to
say that in eternity events all occur at the same "time," but even then
we've interjected our limitation of time into our description. To
say that one event occurred before another in eternity probably doesn't even
make sense. I too have been guilty of this by referring to
"eternity past" just because this is my best notion of this great mystery, but I
know that this is inadequate. So, words like "time," "before,"
"after," and "when" have no place in a discussion of God in eternity.
Likewise, the argument that the doctrine of election was established "before"
man sinned is a weak argument; and, probably much more so if we were
indeed capable of understanding eternity.
Aside from this, you stated that God stamped (or pre-wired) some men
as disapproved, and that He thus discarded them before they were
born. This isn't technically true because He did give them life and grace,
and thus He didn't discard them before they were born. Of course,
I do understand your point here, and I will address it further
below.
Re. the matter of sin: When Adam sinned in the Garden of
Eden, we were in Adam's loins, so we too were guilty of his sin. All of us
have both imputed sin from Adam, as well as personal sins. Even if a
person never committed a personal sin, he would still be guilty of the imputed sin
of Adam (his federal headship). (Please see my complete article
on Imputation.)
So, what all of us really deserve is an eternity separated from
God. However, God, in His love, instituted the grace plan of salvation
where be sacrificed His Son Jesus, who was the only One who lived a
perfect live without sin. As a result, God was free to elect whoever
He desired for salvation. God is first a God of justice, but through the
sacrifice of Christ, God (who is also a God of Love) was able to satisfy
His justice in exercising His love for His elect.
As a result there is no conflict in noting that one's sin condemns
him while God's grace alone has the power to save him. Election
does not nullify the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith.
However, if left to ourselves, we sinners would never be able find God on our
own, if it weren't for His seeking us through election.
Also, I am definitely not suggesting that the Old Testament saints
(such as Abraham, Moses, Job, and Joseph) were not saved. They were
indeed saved, looking forward to Christ's sacrifice, just as we today look
back in history to His sacrifice.
Although you have made some good points in your arguments, I
believe that the final word and truth about predestination is very
clearly articulated for us in Romans 8:28-30: "28 And we know that in
all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have
been called according to his purpose. 29 For those God foreknew he
also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might
be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters. 30 And those
he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified;
those he justified, he also glorified."
Thanks,
Owen
I would have to say that I reject the
notion that God deliberately cripples the intellect of some men, and thus denies them the freedom
to choose to love him and follow his Laws. This is not a valid
description of the doctrine of election. I would argue that sin (not God)
crippled all men's intellect in the Garden of Eden.
Before I respond, first let explain what I meant when I said
the doctrine of election seems to suggest God cripples one's
intellect. I meant if the doctrine of election is true, and God really chose to
save some and not save others---before man even arrived in the garden
and sinned for the first time---then some men are pre-wired to seek and
come to know Jesus, and others are not. And by pre-wired I mean at birth
some have been granted the "ability" to discern, supplicate, repent,
etc. and others have not.
So, if election is true, and thus all men are already stamped
approved or disapproved before each exits the womb (and before man even
arrived on earth), and thus the approved man has the pre-wired "ability" to
seek and come to know God and the disapproved man does not, then
clearly the disapproved man has been "crippled" -- but NOT by sin as you
suggest, but by God.
Furthermore, IF the doctrine of election is true, and God
approved and disapproved all men prior to the existence of man and sin, and at
the same time God does not observe a man's sins to determine his
ultimate destination (i.e. God doesn't look down the corridors of time to see
how a man will choose), then your assertion that sin has condemned man
is, quite frankly, impossible.
To be clear: I think we agree that if election is true, it
happened BEFORE man arrived in the garden and thus BEFORE man sinned for
the first time. Hence, SIN cannot be the explanation and cause of
the disapproved man's condemnation when 1) Sin did not exist when God
made the election decisions; 2) God does not look down the corridors of
time to see who chose what.
Election
This is why I struggle mightily with election. It would mean that
some men, irrespective of the good works they choose to do and
irrespective of their sins, are pre-wired to succeed or fail. Some are pre-wired to attain
eternal bliss, and some are pre-wired for eternal torment.
There are the approved and the disapproved and neither can change their pre-determined
judgments. This immutable, predetermined final judgment seems
to completely negate the exhortations of the apostles, and
all their lessons about self-control, patience, alertness (lest he come
like a thief in the night), etc. After all, why bother if the decisions
have already been made and the seal of the Spirit on the approved can
never be broken no matter how great the sin (even though we are warned repeatedly
not to "grieve" the Spirit, lest God remove our lampstand - Rev 2:5)?
And why would the disapproved man care either? Nothing he can do can
change his predicament.
Many defenders of election respond: Because we don't know if
we are saved or not. But think about that response for a moment. What kind of loving
God would play such a dirty trick on His children? Why would
he EVER implore ALL men to seek him, when he already KNEW beforehand
some COULD not? Notice I didn't say WOULD not. Because again, if election
is true, and God made all His decisions before man arrived in the garden, and God
does not look down the corridors of time to see how men will choose,
he has granted only SOME the ability to seek him. Some can,
and some can't, period. Thus, the idea that BELIEF is a decision man can
make is a false teaching in the Bible, because again, if some men are pre-wired
not to seek God, they certainly would not have the ability to believe
in Him. “Whosoever believes” becomes false doctrine. Instead
it should read “Whosoever he has pre-wired and pre-selected to believe.”
And what of sin? Your contention is that SIN---NOT God---has
condemned the disapproved man, but how can that be so when 1) God chose the
elect BEFORE mankind sinned in the garden; 2) God discarded the "disapproved" man
before the man was even born and committed his first sin?
If the great election happened PRIOR to sin, and God does not
look down the corridors of time, then God based His decision on something other
than sin, and thus sin is irrelevant in a discussion about pre-determined
salvation and cannot be used as an explanation of why some men
are saved and some men are not Once man chose to bring sin into the world, a barrier
immediately arose between God and man. Man no longer had a relationship with
God because God can coexist neither with sin nor with sinful man. At
that point, man was spiritually dead, deserving of hell, and incapable of reconciliation
with God since any sacrifice that man then brought to God was
stained by sin. It was only because God instituted His plan
of grace that man had any hope of being redeemed.
It seems you are suggesting every single man was doomed until
Jesus came. I don't agree based on the relationships Abraham, Moses, Job, Joseph,
and many others enjoyed with the Lord. Recall what God said
to Satan about Job. Job was declared righteous as was Abraham.
Certainly, these great men of God co-existed with him. Clearly, though not perfected,
some of these men were heavenly favored by God for their obedience.
God loves us, and he wants a relationship with us. However,
due to the sin of man, He had to sacrifice His own perfect Son for us, as we have
nothing clean to offer Him. So, it was sin (not God) that
crippled man's intellect.
Again, I'm not sure how sin is relevant in a discussion about pre-election.
Election maintains God chose, before man existed, who goes to
heaven and who doesn't. And since, by your own admission, His election
choices are not based on him "looking down the corridor" at
the choices we will make (i.e. choices to obey him or sin), then OUR sins would not
be factored in any more than our WORKS are, because the Doctrine
of Election holds that God’s grace alone (NOTHING we have
done or not done) saves. So, again, sin is something we DO, and since salvation
is not based on ANYTHING we do, it seems irrelevant here.
On the contrary, it was the amazing power of God's love that
brought His plan of salvation. If God chooses some for salvation, those
chosen are extraordinarily blessed by grace. If He didn't choose others,
those who are not chosen deserve what their sin has brought upon them.
I see a conflict in this theory. On one hand it states God's
grace alone saves, but then on the other hand it states people's
sin condemns.
Re. "a measure of faith" (Romans
12:3): I would argue that Paul was speaking only to believers here (the recipients of his letter to
the church at Rome). He was pointing out that each believer has a
spiritual gift, and each must use his gift in the context of the church
(as explained in the subsequent verses).
Yes, one might be able say that all are
capable of being saved; however, all will not be saved. All that anyone has to do is
to present himself to God without blemish--with no imputed or personal
sin. Since we all have such sin, this is impossible. Only by God's grace
(one might say, by His "election) can any of us be saved.
Yes, we who are among the elect are
members of an elite group. However, this privilege is not accomplished through any effort on
our part. All that we can do is to thank God for His grace
(giving us what we don't deserve) and mercy (not giving us what we do
deserve).
Yes, you are right that my illustrations
of God "looking down the corridors of time," and His creation of the elect "in the past" do
seem to bound God by time and space. Although these might be
poor illustrations, I still believe that they are among the best that we
(who are indeed bound by space and time in this life) are capable
of understanding. So, I do not believe that one can reject the
doctrine of election because we cannot find an apt illustration for it.
In fact, in a way, this seems to strengthen the argument for election.
Since it is indeed inappropriate to bound God to "looking down the corridors
of time," then it is likewise somewhat silly to think that an
omniscient and omnipresent God was capable of creating man without
complete foreknowledge and predestination; i.e., How could God (in
eternity) create man outside of the doctrine of election?
Re. Acts 16:30-31: I see no
conflict with predestination here. My position is, in fact, that one does need only to believe, by
grace through faith. It would be a misrepresentation to claim that
I am saying that they must also be pre-selected. I would say it
this way: God, in eternity, predestined some to be saved, and those whom
He predestined would, in time, believe the gospel message.
Re. the claim of C.S. Lewis that "All
may be saved if they so choose:" Whether or not this statement is consistent
with predestination depends upon how he meant it. If he meant that
"all may be saved if they so choose, but some will not choose because the
Holy Spirit hasn't moved them to so choose," then it is consistent
with predestination. However, if he meant that sinful man, in his
limited freewill and through his own efforts and will can choose to be
saved outside of the sovereign will, veracity, and integrity of God, then
this is inconsistent with predestination.
The doctrine of election can be a
difficult one. However, I believe that it is easier to understand and accept once one approaches it
with the same humility with which he accepts the gospel message; i.e.,
once we realize that our salvation is completely God's doing, and by no
merit of ourselves.
The Ephesians
Were the Ephesians a portion of the divorced northern kingdom of Israel?
Thank you for your question. I do not believe that we can be
too definitive about tracing the Ephesians back to the Northern
Kingdom. However, I believe that a different translation can help
here.
In the NASB, Ephesians 2:12 says, "... remember that you were at
that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel,
and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God
in the world." The word "excluded" (or "alienate") is actually a
better translation for "apallotrioo." So, there's not really an
implication here that the Ephesians had a previous relationship with God.
The point being made is that they were completely separated from God,
perhaps pointing even to the original fall of man into sin.
Thanks,
Owen
Jesus / Deity
Can you
answer in clarity? "God gave his only begotten son" It
almost sounds like he created JESUS... now I do not believe
this. But I need it to be clear...
Thank you for your question. I apologize for the delay in my reply--I've just been very busy.
The Hebrew word used in this verse does imply Deity, so we know
that this agrees with the rest of the Scriptures that Jesus is
God. I believe that we can interpret this as referring to the incarnate
Christ; the Son who was born in the flesh; i.e., Philippians 2:7-8 tells us
that He emptied Himself of His Deity.
I hope this helps.
Meat
In the New Testament, where does Jesus say that all meat is good if
it be received with thanksgiving?
Thank you for your question. I don't believe that the New
Testament contains a quote from Jesus about all meat being good if it is
received with thanksgiving. However, here are some related
passages:
In Peter's vision in Acts 10:9-16, God illustrated that He had
abolished the Jewish ceremonial laws about clean and unclean meat.
In Romans 14:6, Paul says, "Whoever eats meat does so to the Lord,
for they give thanks to God; and whoever abstains does so to the Lord
and gives thanks to God."
In 1 Corinthians 10:25, Paul says, "Eat anything sold in the meat
market without raising questions of conscience, for, 93The earth is
the Lord's, and everything in it."
Thanks,
OwenThe Resurrection
Is the
resurrection going to be in heaven or on earth where are we living?
Thank you for your question.
We will experience the resurrection on earth (Revelation 21:1-22:5),
but not exactly where we are living now. Revelation 21:1 says,
"Then I saw 'a new heaven and a new earth,' for the first heaven and the first
earth had passed away, and there was no longer any sea." So, we
will spend eternity on earth, but it will be a new earth, unblemished by
sin. Revelation 22:3 says there will be "no more curse" (of sin and
its consequences). Revelation 22:5 even says that there will be
no more night on this new earth, "... for the Lord God will give them light.
And they will reign for ever and ever."
Thanks,
Owen
China
Is there
any scripture alluding to the rule of the yellow race in the end times?
Thank you for your question. The only possible reference to
China that I know of would be Revelation 9:16. This is when the sixth
angel blew his trumpet, and an army of 200 million troops was released toward
Armageddon, apparently from the East. It is widely believed that this
must refer to China, since it is would be the only country with a population large
enough for a 200 million-man army, and it's certainly in "the East."
Thanks,
Owen
Saints
Matthew 27:52-53 says the saints arose from their graves and
appeared to many in the holy city. Is there any more info on this in the bible?
Thank you for your question. This is a tough one, and I've
often had questions about it. There is a wide range of views on it, and
it's such a difficult passage that many theologians don't even address
it. First, let me quote from various commentaries:
Barnes - "It is probable that they were persons who had recently
died, and they appear to have been known in Jerusalem; at least, had
the ancient saints risen, they would not have been known, and would not
so soon have been credited as those who had recently died."
Gill - "... these were saints, and such as slept in Jesus; and of
whom he is the first fruits that now rose; and not all, but many of them,
as pledges of the future resurrection, and for the confirmation
of Christ's, and the accomplishment of a prophecy in Isaiah 26:19. And
they rose in the same bodies in which they before lived, otherwise they
could not be called their bodies, or known by those to whom they appeared:
but who they were is not to be known; some have thought them to be
the ancient patriarchs, as Adam, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, &c.
In the Septuagint on Job 42:17, Job is said to be one of them, and a
tradition is there recorded, which runs thus:
'it is written, that he rose with whom the Lord
rose.'
But it should seem rather, that they were some later saints, such
as Zechariah, the father of John the Baptist, John the Baptist
himself, good old Simeon, Joseph the husband of Mary, and others, well known
to persons now alive. Some think they were such, as had been martyrs in
the cause of religion; and so the Persic version renders the words, 'and
the bodies of many saints who suffered martyrdom, rose out of the
graves.'"
Wesley - "... (Perhaps Simeon, Zacharias, John the Baptist, and
others who had believed in Christ, and were known to many in Jerusalem,)
And coming out of the tombs after his resurrection, went into the holy
city (Jerusalem) and appeared to many - Who had probably known them
before: God hereby signifying, that Christ had conquered death, and would
raise all his saints in due season."
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown - "... These sleeping saints (see on [1377]
1 Th. 4:14) were Old Testament believers, who-according to the
usual punctuation in our version-were quickened into resurrection life at
the moment of their Lord's death, but lay in their graves till
His resurrection, when they came forth."
Falwell - "This incident is stated only by Matthew and indicates
that the Old Testament believers were resurrected after His resurrection
and appeared unto many. It is properly supposed that they were
resurrected from 'paradise,' or 'Abraham's bosom' and taken to heaven by
the Resurrected Christ (cf. Eph. 4:8-9)."
Now, although this is not definitive, I believe that when the
Old Testament saints encountered death, their souls were not taken
directly to heaven, as is now the case with New Testament believers.
Instead, the Old Testament believers were taken to a place called
'paradise' (Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 12:4, Revelation 2:7), or 'Abraham's
bosom' (Luke 16:22-23). Then, upon the event of Christ's crucifixion
and resurrection, these Old Testament saints were resurrected.
Today, now that Christ's resurrection has already occurred, when Christians die,
we are taken directly to heaven.
Incidentally, in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, Luke
16:23 refers to a place called "Hades," which is where the rich man
was. This seems to be to "opposite" of the place of "paradise" where Lazarus
was. This would imply that, in Old Testament times, those who died were
taken to one of these temporary chambers, awaiting their
transaction: either from paradise to heaven; or from Hades to Hell. This probably
also explains the Catholic doctrine of purgatory, which would equate to
Hades in this case.
I hope that this helps to answer your questions on a difficult
passage. If not, please reply.
Thanks,
Owen
Salvation for All
What happens to the souls that died before Jesus Christ was born
died the redemption of our sins, will they have the opportunity for
salvation or have they already received it or will they have a second chance
for redemption as implied in Revelations?
While in bible study, this question was asked and there were
three possible difference references, one from Romans chapters 1 &2,
regarding the conscience. There was the other 2, offering that the
opportunity was originally done by Christ himself (during the 3 day period of
time when Jesus was in the tomb & traveled to redeem the dead) and
finally from Revelations. Can you provide any comments and references? Have a blessed day!
Thank you for your question. It's a difficult one, and I hope that I have an answer that satisfies you.
All believers are saved by grace through faith, through the
death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. Old Testament saints were
saved by looking forward in time, via prophecy, to the cross. New
Testament saints are saved by looking back in time at what has already occurred
on the cross.
Apparently, when the Old Testament saints encountered death, their
souls were not taken directly to heaven, as is now the case with New
Testament believers. Instead, the Old Testament believers were taken to
a place called 'paradise' (Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 12:4, Revelation 2:7),
or 'Abraham's bosom' (Luke 16:22-23). Then, upon the event of
Christ's crucifixion and resurrection, these Old Testament saints were
resurrected. Today, now that Christ's resurrection has
already occurred, when Christians die, we are taken directly to heaven.
This also seems to explain the difficult passage in Matthew 27:52
where "the saints rose from their graves and appeared to many..."
Apparently they were resurrected from 'paradise,' or 'Abraham's bosom' and taken
to heaven by the Resurrected Christ (Eph. 4:8-9).
Incidentally, in the story of the rich man and Lazarus, Luke
16:23 refers to a place called "hades," which is where the rich man
was. This seems to be the "opposite" of the place of "paradise" where Lazarus
was. This would imply that, in Old Testament times, those who died
were taken to one of these temporary chambers, awaiting their
transition: either from paradise to heaven; or from hades to hell. This
probably also explains the origin of the (somewhat distorted) Catholic
doctrine of purgatory, which would equate to Hades in this case.
Thanks,
Owen
Sin
What must
we do as Christians if we still sin from to time to time?
Thank you for your question. Unfortunately, Christians do
continue to sin after salvation even though we have power over sin.
Please see my related article entitled Do Christians Sin?
However, God has made provision for this in His plan of salvation.
Just as John 3:16 is the most important verse in the Bible
for unbelievers, 1 John 1:9 is the most important verse for
believers. 1 John 1:8-10 says, "8 If we claim to be without sin, we deceive
ourselves and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful
and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out
to be a liar and his word is not in us."
Although a believer's eternal fellowship with God is never
in question, his temporal fellowship can be quite volatile while still
in this fleshly life. We can think of this as two concentric
circles where the outer circle is our eternal fellowship, and the inner circle
is temporal fellowship. Upon salvation, we're moved from
outside both circles to within the inner circle, where we can bring the
ultimate glory to God through our spiritual gifts. At this point, we
will never move outside of the outer circle again. However, in our daily
walk, we can still sin, and sin can knock us out of the inner circle.
So, if we have eternal salvation, yet sin is keeping us from
the ultimate experience of daily fellowship with God, we have a
problem. How can we get back inside the inner circle? 1 John 1:9 gives
us the answer. We must simply confess those sins which have formed a
temporary barrier. We simply admit to our sins by naming them to
God. This clears the way, and we're immediately back in temporal fellowship with Him. In addition, there are further benefits
for us:
Regular confession can actually help us to sin
less. It's like weighing every day'--we subconsciously turn down those desserts because we know that we will be weighing again tomorrow
(by habit). Confession also helps us to avoid depression, without
those lingering unconfessed sins hanging around to cause guilt (another
sin). Finally, confession renews our liberty. We restore the
freedom of our salvation through Christ Jesus our Lord.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Losing Salvation
Read over your email and have a few questions. Can a born
again Christian lose salvation and can a person always be in the inner circle if always
confessing sin and praising the Lord? Explain the circles again in simply terms.
No, a believer cannot lose his salvation. There are many
passages on this, such as John 10:27-30 which says, "27 My sheep listen to my
voice; I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life,
and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand.
29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can
snatch them out of my Father's hand. 30 I and the Father
are one."
Yes, a believer can essentially always be in the inner circle
of fellowship with God if he learns to practice the technique of confessing all known sins.
Re. the concentric circles: This is just an analogy to help
us better understand the importance of confession of sin. The inner
circle is called temporal fellowship (fellowship in time). This circle
is completely contained within a larger circle which is eternal
fellowship. When a person is saved, he is instantly moved (from outside
both circles) to inside the inner circle, so he is in both temporal
and eternal fellowship with God; and, he will never again be moved
outside of the outer circles. When he sins, he is moved outside the
inner circle of temporal fellowship, but is still inside the outer circle
of eternal fellowship. When he confesses all known sins, he is
moved back inside the inner circle.
Thanks,
Owen
Sin
How does God define Sin?
Thank you for your question. God defines sin as missing the
mark, like missing the target while shooting with a bow and arrow. If a
thought or an action doesn't hit the mark of the perfect righteousness of
Jesus Christ, then it is a sin. It doesn't matter if it comes
close, and only misses the mark by a little bit--it's still sin.
Thanks,
Owen
Systematic theology
I happened to get on your site when I googled "slave
market of sin" Anyway I like your book shelf, and it looks like
you have the 8 volumes of Systematic Theology by Dr. Chafer. Am I
right? I once heard it said, "Don't be surprised if it takes you three
weeks to get through the preface of Lewes Sperry Chafer's Systematic
Theology. I have to agree. I haven't read any of your
articles yet but I'm about to do so.
Yes, you're right. I keep going back to Chafer for
theological truth. One of my mentors was Dr. John Danish, who sat under the
teaching of Dr. Chafer at Dallas Theological Seminary. I hope you enjoy
my articles, and I look forward to any further feedback that you have.
I never
heard of Dr. John Danish. Did he write any books? Have
you written any books? Have you ever heard of RB
Thieme? He also studied under Dr. Chafer. Can you send me your site, because I lost it?
No, Dr. Danish didn't write any books. He just served
faithfully as pastor of Berean Memorial Church for over 50 years. He died
in 2003. However, I have his "complete" collection of exegetical sermons / bible studies on tape / CD,
at Berean.
Yes, I've written several books, and they're all free on my
website.
True Christianity
is a study of the doctrines of the epistles, and I believe that it's my best work.
The Book of Philippians
is a Bible study on Philippians.
Believe
is a summary (synopsis) of the whole Bible.
The Day of the Lord
is a novel about the end times.
The White Sheep
is a biography of my father's difficult life during the depression. My home page is
at Christian Data Resources.
No, I haven't heard of R.B. Thieme. I just looked him up on
the internet and he seems to be somewhat of a controversial figure, re.
the blood of Christ, etc.
Thanks for your interest.
Thanks,
Owen
Tabernacle of Moses
Good afternoon:
How are
the articles of the Tabernacle related to God's plan for man or the
lives of believers?
Thank you for your assistance.
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for my delay in
responding.
Many Bible scholars place a lot of significance upon the symbolism
of the tabernacle and the furniture in it. Basically, the
tabernacle symbolizes the Messiah, but I think that we have to be careful about
how much symbolism we apply to the articles in the temple. This
is because the New Testament does not offer a lot of information to confirm some
of the symbols that some see. (For example, some have claimed
that the four pillars of the tabernacle symbolize the four gospels of the
New Testament, but I think this is a stretch.) Hebrews 8:5 tells
us that the Tabernacle was modeled on a heavenly pattern (Hebrews 8:5), and
he used it to give meaning to the priesthood and the atoning work of
Christ (Hebrews 9:9), but without excessive symbolism.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the particular furniture
and materials used in construction of the tabernacle may have been chose,
at least in part, by culture, necessity, and availability, and they
had purpose and significance to the Jewish people even aside from
their symbolic meanings. Still, I believe that the following
symbolism is quite obvious:
The ark is the throne of God--the visible sign of His presence (1
Samuel 4:7). Jesus Christ, who "tabernacled" (John 1:14) among men
to make God present and known.
The table of shewbread ("bread of the face of the Lord") suggests
the constant (fresh) dedication of the 12 tribes to divine
service, indicating that they were always before the face of the Lord.
I believe that this can also be applied to us as Christian believers
today.
The lampstand was the only source of light for the holy
place, indicating that God is the ultimate Source of Light. There
was no provision in the holy place for natural light, just as there is no
need for light in heaven other than the light of God (Revelation
21:23). This gives meaning to the claim of Jesus to be the Light of the
World and to His challenge to believers to allow their light to shine
(Matthew 5:16). This is further understood Revelation 1:12-20 where
the seven churches of Asia are represented by seven lampstands, with
Christ standing in their midst.
The altar of incense symbolizes the ascending prayers of men to
God.
The bronze altar, with its many sacrifices, symbolizes atonement
and reconciliation, and it points to the ultimate, all-sufficient
sacrifice of Jesus Christ.
The laver, used for washing, signifies the necessity of
purity, cleansing, and confession (1 John 1:9) in our approach to
God.
The desire of man to draw near to God and God's willingness to
be approached are clearly visible in the furniture of the Tabernacle.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
The Humanity of God
Hello Owen,
It is quite odd, even interesting, when reading the bible to find
that God is really quite human, after all. Especially when we see the
mistakes he made. But, I suppose we must appreciate that he did on occasion apologize when he did wrong.
I'm not sure that I understood your comments. As the second
Member of the Trinity, Jesus Christ is (somehow) both 100% God and 100%
man. However, I do not believe that God has ever made any
"mistakes." Also, what "apologies" are you referring to?
Thanks,
Owen
The Temptations of Christ
'And the
Spirit led Jesus into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil'
Matthew 4. Owen, this seems a very strange thing to do?
Thank you for your question. Yes, this does seem somewhat
strange.
These temptations were a necessary part of Christ's earthly ministry. They constituted an attack by Satan against Jesus'
human nature--temptations that would have overcome any normal man.
However, Jesus was no ordinary man. As the virgin-born God-man, His
divine nature could not sin (1 Samuel 15:29), and this held his human nature
in check. This does not mean that the impeccability of Christ
denies the reality of Satan's temptations. Satan's rebellion against God
has already been defeated in Christ's atonement, but his rebellion is
still real, even though the outcome of God's victory is certain.
The same is true for the temptation of Christ. The temptations were real,
although the outcome was certain. In a demonstration of spirit and
power, Jesus overcame the tempter, showing that He is the One who enables us
to overcome temptation as well.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Judges 5:23
I find
the following a puzzle "Curse Meroz, says the Angel of the Lord, curse bitterly its
inhabitants, because they came not to the help of
the Lord, to
help the Lord against the mighty" (Judges 5:23).
Thank you for your question.
In Judges 5:23, a blessing and a curse are contrasted. We
must just assume that Meroz received the curse because of failing
some previous obligation--probably a failure to assist the Nation of
Israel in a battle or war against a strong enemy nation.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Why God Allows Sin (Against the Innocent)
Why does God allow innocent children be sexually abused?
Thank you for your question. This is a difficult subject--why
God allows such bad things to happen. I believe that the simplistic
answer is because of sin. Adam and Eve chose to sin, and all of the rest of us
choose to sin also, by our own freewill. Sin introduces much evil into the
world, and God still allows each of us the privilege of exercising our own freewill.
However, I think that it's helpful to consider that the Bible tells us
to be joyful even when bad things happen. James 1:2 says, "Consider
it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds." In 2
Corinthians 7:4, Paul said, "In all our troubles my joy knows no bounds." The
Bible tells us that bad things happen for three specific purposes: in order
to accomplish God's master plan; to give us perseverance; and, to provide us with
heavenly rewards.
God's Master Plan
When Paul was persecuted and imprisoned for the cause of Christ, he
wrote the prison epistles. In Philippians 1:12, he said, "Now I
want you to know, brothers, that what has happened to me has really served to advance the
gospel." Sometimes we can't see the forest for the
trees. Being so close to the physical circumstances around us prevents us from seeing the big
picture. God's master plan may include some steps where we
have to endure some negative circumstances before the next positive step of God's plan
can be accomplished, either for us or for others. Perhaps the
reason that we can't see the forest is simply because we're not omnipotent like
God. We simply have to trust Him, which is indeed the heart of the gospel
message (John 3:16).
Perseverance
In James 1:3-4, we are told that, "The testing of your faith develops perseverance. Perseverance must finish its work so that you
may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. Verse 12 says, "Blessed
is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will
receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him."
John 16:20-24 says, "You will weep and mourn while the world rejoices.
You will grieve, but your grief will turn to joy. A woman giving birth to a
child has pain because her time has come; but when her baby is born she
forgets the anguish because of her joy that a child is born into the
world. So, with you: Now is your time of grief, but I will see you again and
you will rejoice, and no one will take away your joy. In that day you will
no longer ask me anything. I tell you the truth, my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. Until now you have not asked for anything
in my name. Ask and you will receive, and your joy will be complete."
Heavenly Rewards
In Luke 16:19-31, Christ tells the story of the rich man and
Lazarus. It's a disturbing story of the rich man spending eternity in hell while the
poor man Lazarus spends eternity in Heaven. In verse 25, Abraham
told the rich man, "Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good
things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you
are in agony."
This is also the message presented to us in the Beatitudes in Matthew 5:3-12, culminating in Christ's summary, "Blessed are you when people
insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you
because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in
heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
I hope this help.
Thanks,
Owen
Time or distance
Hello,
I was going to reply to a video that a friend used on U-Tube. Because I
try to use actual scriptures, I ran into a phrase that I cannot
find in the in any translations of the Bibles that I have
here. Where do people come up with the phrase, "there is no time or distance
in the Holy Spirit?" Thanks!! May God richly bless you.
Thank you for your question. I cannot be too definitive about
the answer, but I hope I can help. These words, "There is no time
or distance in the Holy Spirit," do not come directly from the
Bible. However, this idea is a logical deduction from a couple of
scriptures.
Romans 8:9 says, "You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh
but are in the realm of the Spirit..." So, the realm of the flesh
is quite different from the realm of the Spirit.
Then, there are several verses like Titus 1:2, "...in the hope
of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the
beginning of time..." The realm of God exists beyond time.
So, the logical conclusion is that the realm of the Holy Spirit is outside of time,
and probably space (distance) as well.
Again, I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Tithe
Who do you give your tithe to?
Thank you for your question. I give to churches, missions,
other organizations (Gideons International, hospitals, etc.), and individuals. If
you haven't already done so, please see my view on Tithing.
Thanks,
Owen
Tithing
I have a
question about tithing. In all honesty I can do really
well with tithing and then dip back and not be so good. I have
personally experienced the "rewards" and have recently been curious about one aspect.
My
mindset has been to tithe on the net and then on tax returns,
etc. But should I bet tithing on the gross?
Thank you and may the Lord bless your ministry.
Thank you for your question. The way that tithing is
traditionally taught, you should be tithing on the gross amount.
However, my view on tithing is somewhat different, and you may be interested in my
related article on Tithing.
Thanks,
Owen
Tribulation
Are we
headed to the Tribulation?
Yes, I believe that we are headed for the tribulation.
However, I hold to the premillennial view which suggests that the rapture will occur at
the beginning of the seven-year tribulation period, so true believers of
the Church age will escape the tribulation. For more details you
can reference my article entitled Bible Prophecy .
Owen
Was Timothy or Paul an elder?
Paul was an apostle, and Timothy was a pastor, or elder (1 Timothy 4:14)?
Thanks,
Owen
Mormonism
I came
across your website discussing Mormon beliefs (Mormon Beliefs).
Under the salvation heading you wrote that "Mormons believe that a series of four steps
must be followed in order to get to Heaven. The first step is faith in
one's own works; second is repentance by which they mean cleaning
up one's life; third is water baptism, which is often perform by proxy
or in the place of someone else; and the fourth is the laying on of
hands from an Aaronic priest in order to receive the Holy Ghost."
Just thought I'd let you know the four steps to salvation are
stated in the 4th article of faith. "We believe that the first principles
and ordinances of the Gospel are: first, Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ; second,
Repentance; third, Baptism by immersion for the remission of sins;
fourth, Laying on of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost."
I have made this correction.
Thank you,
Owen
Hunting Animals
What is scriptural support for and against hunting animals?
Thanks for your question.
The Bible has very little to say about hunting, and it offers no direct
support for or against it. It only mentions it in passing, such as in
Genesis 27:1-4, but it always does so in a positive light. Also, the directive in Genesis 1:28
tells us that mankind is to subdue the earth, including ruling over every living creature (both domestic
and wild). So, I would argue that the Bible condones hunting animals, probably more so for
eating the game than for sport.
Thanks,
Owen
Church
Leadership
What is the rank from lowest to highest title, position, degree in the
Christian church of today. And can someone without a doctorate degree confer a doctorate on someone else?
Thank you for your questions. However, I'm not sure that I
understand what you're asking, but I'll try to answer.
Within a local church, the highest authority is usually a pastor (or
a priest), or a board of elders. Some churches ordain deacons
who may have some lower level of authority. Some churches are
completely autonomous, and the pastor or elders report to nobody, other than
Jesus Christ.
However, most churches are part of a larger organization. For
example, in the Roman Catholic Church, the priests report to bishops,
then cardinals, then the pope. Protestant churches often have
overseeing organizations, or conventions. Among these, the Methodist
denomination has a more rigid hierarchy, with bishops etc., while the
Southern Baptist Convention has a less rigid hierarchy.
However, none of these organizations then recognize the authority of
the others. For example, the Protestant churches do not recognize
the authority of the catholic pope. There is no universal
church organization that has authority over all of them--only Jesus
Christ himself.
No, I don't believe that someone without a doctorate degree
can officially confer a doctorate on someone else.
I hope this helps, but please let me know if I haven't
adequately addressed your questions.
Thanks,
Owen
Ahab
What was Ahab's age when he became king?
Thank you for your question.
We don't know how old Ahab was when he became king. Even
extra-biblical records do not record a date for his birth.
I'm sorry that I cannot be of more help.
Thanks,
Owen
Animal Sacrifices
When did the Jewish people stop sacrificing animals for their sins?
Thank you for your question.
Basically, the Jewish people stopped sacrificing animals when the
second temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. Of course, believing
Christians (gradually) stopped this practice after the death, burial, and resurrection of
Jesus Christ in 33 A.D., once they understood that Jesus' sacrifice was all
that was needed to permanently cover all of their sins.
Thanks,
Owen
| abc |
Rebuilding the Temple
Owen,
thanks for the reply. I am leading a bible study and the
question had come up and I did not have a good answer. On this
same subject, if the Jewish people stopped with sacrifice,
what is their manner of being forgiven of sins? And I have
also been taught that when you see the Jewish folks rebuilding
the temple in Jerusalem, you better get your things
together. Thanks again and God bless.
Thanks for your follow-up question.
It's my understanding that prayer and repentance have taken the place
of temple sacrifices for orthodox Jews today. They can defend
this based upon Hosea 14:3, "Take with you words, and turn to the Lord. Say to Him,
forgive all iniquity and receive us graciously, so we will offer the words of
our lips instead of calves." Still, they long for the rebuilding
of the temple so that the sacrificial system can be restored.
Yes, as a premillennialist, I believe that the temple will be rebuilt
again, and that this will be a clear sign of the end times. First,
the church will be raptured, completing the age of grace, and this event is
imminent. Then will come the seven-year tribulation period, which will be the final
seven years of the 490-year period of the age of the Jews (Daniel
9:20-27). It is during this seven-year tribulation period that the temple will be
rebuilt and the sacrificial system restored. Following that will be
the 1000-year earthly reign of Christ, and then the New Heaven and the New Earth (Revelation 21:1-8).
Thanks,
Owen
Satan
Where in the bible does it say that the devil knows the bible?
Thank you for your question. The Bible doesn't explicitly say that Satan knows the Bible. Isaiah
14:12-23 describes Satan being in Heaven originally, becoming jealous of God, plotting against God, and
being cast out of Heaven by God, to roam the earth until his eventual doom in
Hell. According to these Scriptures, we can probably assume that Satan does indeed understand
Bible truths. He is referred to in verse 12 as "morning star, son of the dawn," so I
believe we can assume that he was an exceptional angel, in intellect and wisdom, but he
unfortunately rebelled against God and fell from heaven.
Christian Data Resources
Could you
please tell me who runs this site? I want to use one of your
articles in talking with a friend but wanted to know who you
are first. Thanks
Thank you for your e-mail. My name is Owen Weber.
I'm the founder of the Christian Data Resources site, and the author of essentially all
of the articles and books on the site. As you can tell, I'm
an evangelical, with a conservative interpretation of the Bible.
I'm not a pastor; nor am I in full-time ministry. You can read more
about me on the about tab at www.christiandataresources.com. Please feel
free to use any of the material on my site in talking with your
friend.
Thanks,
Owen
Deborah
Who was Deborah?
Thank you for your question. In Judges 4-5, Deborah became
the first female judge of Israel when she went with Barak to defeat General
Sisera. Deborah led Israel for forty years in about 1300 B.C.
Thanks,
Owen
Prisoners
Who were the prisoners Jesus preached to?
Thank you for your question.
The only place I can find that you might be referencing is Luke 4:18,
where Jesus said, "He has sent me to proclaim freedom
for the prisoners..." This is a reference to lost people who are enslaved to sin, and how
Christ's death on the cross brings liberty.
Please let me know if this isn't the Scripture you had in mind.
Thanks,
OwenThe Rapture
Who will
go in the catching away (rapture)? Every born again Christian?
Or do we have to be at a certain spiritual level to go? The bible
says Jesus is coming back for a church without spot or
wrinkle. There probably are not many Christians without spot or wrinkle. And there are
many dead Christians who were only saved a short time and
then died. They never had a chance to grow to much of a level.
Thank you for your question. Every born again Christian will
be included in the rapture, regardless of his/her level of
spiritual maturity. When a person becomes a believer, the righteousness
of Christ is imputed to that new believer (among many other amazing things
that occur at salvation). So, when God looks at that believer, He
sees perfection--not the previous or future sins that have all been
forgiven and paid for on the cross. For more information about
imputation, please see my articles at Imputation
and Romans 5:19.
Thanks,
Owen
40 days and 40 Nights
What is the significance of 40 days and 40 nights in the Bible?
Thank you for your question. I'm not really confident in
my answer--perhaps only God knows--but here's what I know: Bible
scholars believe that the number 40 in the Bible is symbolic of a period
of probation, trial, testing, or chastisement (of sons). Some
have noted that it is the product of 5 and 8, pointing to the action of grace
(5), leading to and ending in revival and renewal (8). Here's what a
couple of commentaries have to say about this:
Matthew Henry: "God made the world in six days, but he was
forty days in destroying it; for he is slow to anger: but, though the
destruction came slowly and gradually, yet it came effectually."
Adam Clarke: "This period became afterwards sacred, and was
considered a proper space for humiliation. Moses fasted forty days, Deut.
9:9, Deut. 9:11; so did Elijah, 1 Kings 19:8; so did our Lord, Matt.
4:2. Forty days' respite were given to the Ninevites that they might
repent, Jonah 3:4; and thrice forty (one hundred and twenty) years were given
to the old world for the same gracious purpose, Gen. 6:3. The forty days
of Lent, in commemoration of our Lord's fasting, have a reference to
the same thing; as each of these seems to be deduced from this
primitive judgment."
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Why go to church?
Owen, with your vast bible knowledge & insight you seem too valuable
of a source to sit church out. This is a fallen world & w/your opinion of the current
system maybe you are just the man to start up a church that would be an
example to go by. I do not feel the same way about my church as you explained
in you experience, but I do see things at times that I believe I might do
differently. Having said that, I believe we can find fault anywhere we look,
except in the direction of the cross. Man has failed miserably from the
beginning & will continue to do so until joined w/Christ. I
shudder at the thought of how dis-organized & confused our country would be if
we all decided to take the same stance & go only periodically here &
there & not be engaged in the activities, therefore not knowing the direction of our church. I
have been in many churches & yes sadly you do have to make a
grand effort to find one that is truly seeking Gods Face & His Will. Finding
that particular place of worship is a very rewarding experience & is often not
a short journey for most. Not to mention that anyone, part of any church that suspects
wrongdoing in any manner has the obligation & duty to bring
these to matters to light!, or be guilty by association. How else is this
"church" going to be anything less than a place of ill-repute until it is turned around?
I did not
mean to go so long & must tend to other duties. I pray Gods presence
surround you & minister to your spirit & refresh your
outlook.
May God bless you & keep you close.
Sincerely
Thank you for your encouraging words. You made many good
points, and I am prayerfully considering your advice.
Thanks,
Owen
Will Jews Go to Heaven?
Okay Owen, here's my question...Will members of the Jewish faith
spend eternity with God in Heaven, or in the lake of fire?
I am a Christian. I'm not concerned about my own salvation so
please don't add me to your mass-mailing list. I'll only end up flagging
it and reporting it as spam. My current understanding is that accepting Christ as the Savior is
the only way to be with God. My church spent a six-week study of John 3:16. While at first
it seems so inclusive "whosoever believes in Him", I see it as being restrictive
as in "only those who believe in Him". My concern lies with all the Jewish people who have lived and died
(or will live) since the Resurrection of Jesus. (My understanding is
that Jews who lived and died prior to the Resurrection are "covered" by the Covenant
of the Old Testament.) Aside from Messianic Jews, will any other Jews receive God's
Grace? The Bible identifies the Jews as "God's chosen people", so I'm having trouble
with the idea that, for instance, all the Jews who died in
the Holocaust of WWII will spend eternity in the lake of fire. Would
God really punish all those souls for eternity?
I'm not a Bible scholar, so if you can reference any
Scripture supporting salvation for Jews who do not convert to Christianity I would be very
grateful. Thanks for your time.
Thank you for your question. FYI, I don't have a mass mailing list.
When we believe in Christ, He imputes his righteousness to
us. Without the righteousness of Jesus Christ (Romans 3:22), we would be unworthy
of God's glory. We must recognize that what we all really deserve
is eternity in Hell. Our only hope is God's plan of saving
grace. Without His grace, and without the righteousness of Christ, we cannot
enter Heaven on our own. Yes, it may seem unfair, but it isn't, and it
doesn't change the truth. Unfairness is only in the eyes of the
condemned. For more on imputation, you can read my article
entitled Imputation.
Romans 1:18-27 tells us that all of those who don't believe in
Christ deserve their punishment, and that they have no excuse for
their unbelief, since God has revealed Himself to all men. For more
on judgment, you can read my article entitled Judgment .
In John 14:6, Jesus Christ said, "I am the way and the truth and
the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." This is
true of all unbelievers, including any unbelieving Jews. We live in
the age of grace, and everyone (including Jews) must believe in Christ in order
to be saved. It may well be that the world will return to the
age of the Jews during the tribulation period in the end times, and that would
both a continuation and a conclusion of Old Testament times.
However, even then, as in each age, salvation comes through the saving blood of
Christ on the cross.
Thanks,
Owen
Youngest kings
Thank you
very much. I hope you don't mind my asking: how old was Joseph when he
was in prison; David when he was first consecrated king; and, Solomon
when he became king. Thank you sir.
The Bible doesn't specify how old Joseph was when he was imprisoned,
but most Bible scholars believe that he was about 17 years old.
David was 30 years old when he became king (2 Samuel 5:4).
The Bible doesn't specify how old Solomon was when he became king.
Thanks,
Owen
Please would you tell me the
ten youngest kings in the bible with their respective
ages and where I can find them in the bible?
Thank you for your question. Here are the youngest 16 kings
in the Bible (although the ages of some kings are not specified):
Joash, 7 years old, 2 Chronicles 24:1
Josiah, 8 years old, 2 Kings 22:1
Manasseh, 12 years old, 2 Kings 21:1
Azariah, 16 years old, 2 Kings 14:21
Uzziah, 16 years old, 2 Chronicles 26:3
Jehoiachin, 18 years old, 2 Kings 24:8
Zedekiah, 18 years old, 2 Kings 24:18
Ahaz, 20 years old, 2 Kings 16:2
Ahaziah, 22 years old, 2 Kings 8:25-26
Jotham, 22 years old, 2 Kings 16:1-2
Amon, 22 years old, 2 Kings 21:19
Jehoahaz, 23 years old, 2 Kings 22:31
Amaziah, 25 years old, 2 Kings 14:1-2
Hezekiah, 25 years old, 2 Kings 18:1-2
Jehoiakim, 25 years old, 2 Kings 23:36
Jotham, 25 years old, 2 Kings 15:32
Thanks,
Owen
More Than We Can Bear
God doesn't put more on you then you can handle. Is this an
actually verse in the Bible? If so where can I find it at?
Thank you for your question. I believe the verse that you're looking for is 1 Corinthians 10:13:
"No temptation has overtaken you except what is common to mankind.
And God is faithful; he will not let you be tempted beyond what you
can bear. But when you are tempted, he will also provide a way out so
that you can endure it."
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Adultery
What will happen to an adulteress?
Thank you for your question.
Adultery is a sin, among many other sins. Sin means "missing
the mark," which means that we have fallen short of the perfection that
God expects. All of us have sinned in some way, so we all have
missed the mark of perfection, and we need reconciliation with God. It
is only through believing the gospel message (John 3:16) that we can return
to eternal fellowship with God.
So, what happens to an adulteress? Well, the same thing that
happens to any sinner (each of us), regardless of which sin we have
committed. If we believe the gospel, we receive salvation and will spend eternity
with God. If we don't believe the gospel, we will be eternally
separated from God.
Thanks,
Owen
Salvation / Paul's Opinion
Hi, I hope you will answer my question, specifically I need your
comment on the following teaching of Jesus, Mark 10: 17-19: As Jesus started
on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. "Good teacher," he asked, "what
must I do to inherit eternal life?" "Why do
you call me good?"4 Jesus answered. "No one is good--except
God alone. You know the commandments: "Do not murder,
do not commit adultery, do not steal, do not give false testimony, do
not defraud, honor your father and mother.", please leave the letters of Paul
& the mystical language for a moment, here Jesus as I see is
not talking about right and wrong but talking about how to achieve
eternal life(salvation or justification) he was saying that the law of Moses can justify
the believer this what eternal life means, you know that Paul represents
only one form of early Christianity which became the orthodoxy
by the sanction of the roman empire power, other important form the
Jewish Christianity also claim to be the true continuation of the
tradition of Jesus and the disciples were stressing the Mosaic
Law as the true way of salvation, such passage in mark 10:17-19 strongly support
their claim unless there is another interpretation for it,
what we know that the early Christians did not regard the letters of Paul
or any other Christian writings as a scripture at all, they only believed that the
commandments of Jesus was equal to the old testament, so any other
Christian has the right to overlook the letters of Paul &
dispute first on the basis only of the commandments of Jesus, we know from the new
testament stories, we read it with caution, that Paul had to go
back to Jerusalem to seek authority from the disciples and there they disputed
truly and even Paul charged peter with hypocrisy!, if Paul
was speaking on behalf of God he will not go back to consult other
disciples and they will not fall in such dispute this means his opinion was fallible
unless they come to agreement, & only in the second half of
the second century the Christians who revered Paul so much started to
give his writings equal authority to the old testament and to the sayings
of Jesus, this is definitely not the opinion of all Christians at that time&
this was a later development so as a genuine interpreter of scripture
we have to go back to Jesus first only then we can evaluate other
people teachings, this is my point and question to you if the
old testaments laws can't be followed today this is another issue all together
please do not undermined or overlook my question, I am a lay man
but I am a serious reader, waiting your kind answer(mark 10:17-19), thanks.
Thank you for your questions. You have brought up some valid
concerns, and I have attempted to address them below.
1) Salvation Through the Law
Everyone who has ever received God's grace gift of salvation
has received it through the perfect sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the
cross. In Old Testament times, the people placed their faith in the pre-incarnate Christ by looking forward in time, based upon the
Word from the prophets. In modern times, we have the extra benefit
of actually having a historical record of Christ's sacrifice.
Yet, in one way, we are indeed justified through the law,
although indirectly. Each of us are challenged by the law, but we all
fall short. We all have personal sins in our lives (Romans 3:23,
6:23), and we also have imputed sin from Adam (Romans 5). As a result,
none of us have lived a perfect life to satisfy the law. We are
powerless to justify ourselves by our works (Galatians 2:16).
The answer to this dilemma is that God saves us by grace through
faith (Ephesians 2:8), through the perfect sacrificial lamb, Jesus
Christ. He is the only one who was able to live a life free from sin,
thereby fulfilling the law. We are saved when we simply have faith to
accept this free gift of salvation from God. We are virtually
fulfilling the law when we place our faith in the One who has actually fulfilled
it.
Now, I agree that the passage in Mark 10:17-19 is somewhat
confusing. However, please remember that the Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke,
and John) record the words of Jesus before_ he gave Himself up on the
cross. In this respect, the Gospels are set in the same timeframe as
the Old Testament (before the cross), even though they are included in what
we call "The New Testament." Jesus was speaking to those who did
not yet realize that His coming death on the cross would be the sacrifice
that they needed for their sins--to fulfill the law.
In this respect (the most logical from that perspective), Christ
was most certainly speaking the truth when He told the man in Mark 10
that he must obey the commandments in order to inherit eternal
life. When this man claimed to have fulfilled the law, Christ challenged him
in verse 21 to "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and
you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me." Only
then, in verse 22, did the man realize that he had not truly obeyed every
aspect of the law: "At this the man's face fell. He went away sad,
because he had great wealth."
2) Paul's Opinion
I too have been troubled by passages that seem to imply that
Paul's opinion was fallible, even as he was under the direction of the
Holy Spirit when writing his letters. With regard to his seeking
authority from the disciples, I believe that this was simply an attempt
for unification.
However, in addition to this instance, I find the following
scriptures somewhat troubling:
- 1 Corinthians 7:6 says, "But this I say by way of concession, not
of command."
- 1 Corinthians 7:25 says, "Now concerning virgins I have no command
of the Lord, but I give an opinion as one who by the mercy of the Lord
is trustworthy."
- 1 Corinthians 8:8 says, "I am not speaking this as a command, but
as proving through the earnestness of others the sincerity of your
love also."
Although I cannot fully explain this paradox, I do believe that
there are far fewer such instances in Paul's letters than in most extra-biblical writings.
I hope that I have helped in your understanding.
Love in Christ,
Owen
Wanting to Get Married
Who in the Bible was slain/killed for wanting to get married?
Sorry, I can't think of anyone in the Bible who was killed for
wanting to get married. However, I'll keep trying to think of what you may be referring to.
Thanks,
Owen
The Longing of the Soul
What does the soul long for?
Thank you for your question. Basically, the soul longs for
God (Psalms 143:6); i.e., the very presence of God (Psalm 84:2), as well as
His salvation (Psalms 119:81). While our enemies persecute us
(Psalm 143:3), our souls long for the peace that only God can provide
(Psalm 120:6).
Interestingly enough, in this life (short of being in God's presence
in heaven), His presence and peace comes to us through our
obedience. Psalm 119:20 says, "My soul is crushed with longing after
Your ordinances (laws / commandments) at all times." Isaiah 26:9
says, "At night my soul longs for You. Indeed, my spirit within me
seeks You diligently; For when the earth experiences Your judgments,
the inhabitants of the world learn righteousness."
In other words, it is through God's laws and judgments that we
learn righteousness and obedience, satisfying the longing of our
soul. Proverbs 13:19 says, "A longing fulfilled is sweet to the soul,
but fools detest turning from evil."
Love in Christ,
Owen
Plagues
What do the frogs represent in the ten plagues?
Thank you for your question.
The frogs were probably the small Nile frog (Dofda, rana Mosaica, or Nilotica). This plague was directed against the Egyptian god
Hapi and the frog goddess Heqt. Frogs symbolize the croaking of
politicians of Political Babylon, and the Plague of the Frogs represents the judgment of Political Babylon.
Thanks,
Owen
Unhappy Life
Hi. Does the bible say that you ask God into your life, then you tell God
to get out of your life, you will have an unhappy life?
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for my delay in
responding. The first thing to note is the security of the believer. If
one becomes a believer, he is always a believer (John 10:28-29), and he will
always have eternal fellowship with God. However, as believers, we
all still sin and drift away from God. John 1:9 tells us that
confession of our sins to God restores our temporal fellowship with God.
Furthermore, Galatians 5:3-6 talks about those who fall from grace; i.e.,
drifting back into legalism, or salvation by works. Again, confession
and repentance is the answer.
However, to more directly answer your question, no person can
experience real joy if he is separated from God. Even unbelievers know
in their hearts that they need God. Some may deny this their whole
life, and they may appear to be happy, but they're not.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Peter and Paul / Healings
Does the Bible indicate that
Peter's and Paul's ability to heal was only temporary?
Thank you for your
question. We cannot be too definitive as to why Peter and
Paul were not always able to heal in the later days of their ministries (re.
Trophimus, Epaphroditus, etc.). Briefly, there are at least two schools of thought on
this. 1) James exhorts us to call upon God through prayer for
healing. We should pray expectantly and with faith, but not presumptuously or arrogantly. God can
use us to perform miraculous healings, but this will only happen according to His will and timing,
not ours. It appears that only Jesus was able to heal every time. 2) Many believe that the gift of healing no longer exists today
(although the power of healing through prayer does still exist today). This camp
argues that the gift of healing was a sign gift, and its purpose was to authenticate the ministries of
the apostles; i.e., to show the authority of the apostles through the power of the Holy
Spirit. After it was demonstrated that the ministries of the apostles was indeed from God,
then there was no more need for this gift. As a result, it was phased out during the
last part of the first century, including the latter days of Peter's and Paul's
ministries. Thanks, Owen
Wow you are the only one I’ve asked who even see's they were
sometimes unable to heal. Everyone else say's that they always could.
Killing / Justified
I would like more info on the question, “Is killing ever justified by God in the bible?"
Thank you for your question. The two articles that you might be interested in are as follows:
Killing
Killing in Warfare
If you have already read these and still have specific questions,
please let me know what they are.
Thanks,
Owen
Premarital Sex
If you love a person so much
and you're sure you will marry him, is it okay to sleep
with him or to kiss him?
Thank you for your question. No, couples should not sleep
together until they are married. A lot of people don't really understand
what love is. To better understand these issues, please see my article entitled
Love and Marriage.
Thanks,
Owen
Mary and Joseph
Why did
Mary go with Joseph to the census? Knowing she was pregnant why wouldn’t she stay in her hometown?
Thank you for your question. Here's my understanding of this
issue:
Remember that Mary was also from the line of David. So
perhaps she was legally bound to make the trip just as Joseph was. On the
other hand, there may have been no legal necessity for Mary to have gone
to Bethlehem with Joseph. It could be that Joseph's presence
there could have met the qualifications of the census without having Mary with
him, and he could have still registered both himself and Mary for the
census, since he was the head of the household.
However, from a practical perspective, I would argue that Mary
and Joseph both wanted to be together when their baby was born, just
as husbands and wives today want to be together when their children
are born.
Also, it could be that God moved upon Caesar Augustus to issue
this decree, and he moved upon Joseph to take Mary along, all of this so
that the prophecy of Micah 5:2 would be fulfilled; i.e., that Jesus would
be born in the city of David.
Thanks,
Owen
Money
Can you
tell me where I can find in the Bible not to squander your money or budget your household?
Thank you for your question. The best passage I can think of
for money management is 1 Timothy 3:4:5, which says, "... not a lover
of money. He must manage his own family well and see that his children
obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect."
Although this is reference to pastors and deacons, the same principles apply to all
Christians. For additional passages, please see my article on
Money. Thanks, Owen
Hi Owen, Thanks
for your response it was very helpful keep up the good work.
Kingdom
What is the Kingdom? Is heaven the same as the Kingdom of God?
Thank you for your question about the kingdom. It's a
difficult one because the term "kingdom" can mean different things, depending upon the
context. However, even though our understanding may be limited, I don't lose any
sleep over what I still don't understand about the kingdom.
Nevertheless, I'll provide a brief summary here (from my dispensational view), and
I'll have to be a bit technical.
I believe that the kingdom of heaven is different than the kingdom of
God. The kingdom of heaven is always earthly while the kingdom of God
includes the whole universe and eternity. This becomes even more
confusing because these terms are sometimes seemingly used interchangeably in the
gospels; i.e., in certain parables in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. The
kingdom of heaven is entered by a righteousness exceeding the righteousness of the
scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 5:20), while the kingdom of God is entered by a new
birth (John 3:1-16). The kingdom of heaven answers the hope of
believers of all ages, while the kingdom of God answers the eternal and all-inclusive
purpose of God.
There is an eschatology of Judaism and an eschatology of Christianity,
and each reaches on into eternity, although each is different in details. Ultimately, Israel will experience a transformed earth in the New
Jerusalem under the reign of David's Son, Jesus Christ. This is a
specific 1000-year earthly kingdom during the end times (Revelation 20:1-7), and it is
often what is meant when only the word "kingdom" is used (as opposed to "the kingdom of heaven" or the "kingdom of God"). Yet, somehow,
all believers of all ages will experience the kingdom of heaven (on the new earth) in eternity.
So, the kingdom of heaven is more about the righteousness of believers
on earth. The kingdom of God is more about God's ultimate
righteousness throughout the universe and eternity. Yet, believers able to
partake of the kingdom of God as well, through faith in Christ (John 3:16).
With all of this said, we believers (Christians) today live in the age
of grace. For our day-to-day purpose of bringing glory to God, I
don't believe that we need to be too worried about the distinct differences in the doctrines of the kingdom. For most of us, there's probably
nothing wrong in thinking of heaven as the kingdom of God. I know that this is
probably more information than you were wanting, but you hit upon a subject about
which we have to be careful when explaining it.
Thanks,
Owen
Hi Owen,
Thank you very much for your quick response!
Regards,
Visions
hi about 2-3 years ago I was
sleeping with my x-boyfriend and like I could see
4 black robed things (people) at the doorway I don't know how I did
like a dream but they shot a red light at me and I put my hand
up out of a dead sleep and shot gold or white towards them ever since
then these voices tell me weird things like Satan babies they bother me in
my sleep and about a year ago they were doing red things and weird smells now they
tell me to drink water and take vitamins and read the bible I have been
reading the bible on and off for 2-3 years I don't understand I need
help they also speak in different tongues they were black and
now there white and one says he goes up I don't understand I read to kings
2 out loud and read to john to myself and they through a fit if I don't read they
say open mouth it's went from real bad to really good from what it
was please help thank you.
I believe that you need to pray and ask God to remove these visions
from your life (Matthew 8). I am also praying for you.
If you are having trouble reading through the Bible, I would suggest starting at the
book of Romans. You may also want to read these e-Books on my
website:
- Believe, A Synopsis of the Entire Bible
- True Christianity, The Doctrines of the Epistles
Thanks,
Owen
Luke 17:21
Owen,
Thank you
for your time and excellent details! I have another question.
Jesus mentioned the Kingdom of God was within us per Luke 17:21.
Could that mean the Kingdom of God is in a different realm?
Thank you again,
Thank you for your question about Luke 17:21. I suppose that
you could be right about this meaning that the kingdom of God is in a different
realm. However, I have a different view. The word "within" is a
possible translation of the Greek word "entos," but I believe that a better translation here would be
"among" or "in your midst" (NIV, NASB). So, I think that Jesus was saying that
the kingdom was present among the Pharisees (that he was speaking to) in the person of Christ Jesus, the
King of the kingdom.
Thanks,
Owen
Jesus' Death and Resurrection
Where
exactly did Jesus go between his death and resurrection, what did he
preach (second chance?), and to whom?
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for my delay in
responding. The Bible doesn't tell us a lot about where Jesus went
between His death and resurrection. Ephesians 4:8-10 tells us that He
descended into the lower parts of the earth, and we believe this to mean hades,
or hell. We don't know what he preached, but He may have
preached to Satan, the demons, or unbelievers, but I don't think that he
was offering them a "second chance." I believe that the only real
truth that we can discern from this is that Christ was demonstrating to us
how he conquered death and rose from the dead.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
River of Life
Hello. I
know that there was only 1 tree of life in the garden. I know that a
river has 2 sides so with this being said why do I read in REV
22 that the river flows from the throne of GOD and that the tree of life
stands on both sides of the river? So, we have a river with 2 sides as
they all do and now we have 2 trees or one so big it spans to both
river banks? Thanks.
Thank you for your question, and I apologize for my delay in
responding.
You have asked an interesting question, and I had not thought of
it before.
First, please allow me to offer my interpretation of this passage
in Revelation 22, in general. The pure river of the water of
life flowed from the throne of God and the lamb, down the middle of the great
street of the city. This refers to the fullness of refreshment,
life, and joy (Psalm 36:8). In Genesis, the tree of life was mentioned
first, but here, the river of life is mentioned first. There are
heavenly and earthly streams of blessing: earthly in Ezekiel 47:1 and
Zechariah 14:8; and, heavenly in this passages. All come from the seat
of His blessed government. The tree of life has satisfying fruit in
abundance. The saints will partake of the fruit, and even the leaves
will promote the sustained health of the nation.
Now, specifically to your question, verse 2 says, "On each side of
the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of
fruit..." The only way that I can envision this is with a tree that has a single
root system underground, but it results in multiple tree trunks
extending upward from ground level (like maybe a yaupon holly, a crape myrtle,
or a shrub). Perhaps this single tree has six tree trunks on one
side of the river and six on the other side of the river; maybe it has 12
tree trunks on each side of the river, yielding all twelve crops of fruit
on each side; or, it could have only one trunk on each side of the
river, each with different branches yielding the twelve crops of
fruit. (Some may even make an analogy here of the multiple Persons of the
Godhead that comprise the Trinity.)
Another thing to keep in mind is that eternity is not bound by time
or space. Perhaps there are some dimensions of that heavenly
city that we cannot understand in this life where we are indeed limited by time
and space.
I hope this helps.
Thanks,
Owen
Worship of Saints
Why shouldn't we worship saints?
Thank you for your question. The reason that we shouldn't
worship saints is because they are only humans. They are not a deity
that deserves our worship. There is only one true God whose
essence is in the three Persons of the Trinity--God the Father, God the Son, and
God the Holy Spirit. This one true God is the only deity, and the
only One who deserves our worship. Jesus Christ, who was somehow 100%
humanity and 100% deity, is the only celebrity in the Christian life.
He was perfect, while all the rest of us, including saints, are
imperfect. The truth is that, through Christ, all believers are saints (Romans
1:7); i.e., all believers were sinners and by grace through faith they
became saints, but none are to be elevated above others.
Thanks,
Owen
Masturbation
Is it okay to practice masturbation in order to satisfy your sexual desires?
Thank you for your question, and for your courage to ask it. The issue of masturbation is difficult because the Bible does not discuss it at all. As a result, it is not
specifically declared to be sinful. However, sex is obviously intended for
a healthy marriage relationship between a husband and wife, so one could argue
that it is a denial of the purity of the sexual design of God for
couples. All we can do is to study scriptures that may be related.
It would seem that if masturbation involves sexual fantasies and/or pornography, then it is certainly not pure and perhaps even
sinful. In Matthew 5:27-28, Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, 'You
shall not commit adultery'; but I say to you, that everyone who looks on a
woman to lust for her has committed adultery with her already in his
heart," If thinking lustful thoughts is sinful, then it seems that masturbation is
indeed a sin; and, one that needs to be confessed.
Although masturbation may not be sinful under certain circumstances, it
probably interferes with being sexually pure and holy.
Avoiding it could help one to master the body and not give into its desires.
This could be a lesson in controlling the body, producing great spiritual benefits.
Thanks,
Owen
The Dead Returning to Earth
I was
recently told by someone that they believe God can send the spirit of
a dead loved one back to earth to do His Will. This was strange
to me, as I hold the person who said this in high regard as
to their knowledge of God's Word. They continued to say that we can
call them to come and be a part of a special event, example:
Only child getting married and Mother ask for their daughter's
daddy, who is in Heaven to come by saying he is welcome. She said she cannot communicate
with him, but believes he can come to the event. She referenced
have you ever thought about someone you missed that was in heaven
and you were thinking about them and all of a sudden you felt such love
and peace as if they were there..
Now I have never read this in God's Word, I do not think I
have anyway. All my reading was not good things about spirits.
This is being talked about in a Bible Study group within my church
and it scares me a little. Is this person and their study group being misled,
or is it a revelation from God to those who are closer spiritually
than I may be and he is giving them knowledge that I have yet to
receive? I sure would appreciate your thoughts. Thanks so much for your time.
Thank you for your question, and I apologize about the delay in
my reply.
No, the Bible doesn't teach that God sometimes sends the spirits
of people who have died back to earth. Some people believe that
this is taught in 1 Samuel 28, where King Saul consulted the medium of Endor
to talk to Samuel's spirit. However, this was a special case to
prophesy Saul's death the next day, and I believe that this is the only time
this ever happened.
When believers die, their spirit goes immediately to be with God
in Heaven, and their body will someday be reunited with their
spirit. Again, there's no indication in the Bible that these people
can periodically return to earth. They're in a state of eternity,
and there would be no reason for them to return to a place in time and space
on the earth.
Thanks,
Owen
Luke 12:39 / Robbery
What is the New Testament scripture that refers to a thief or robber that
would not have broken into the house if the husband or father had been home? Thanks
Thanks for your question. That's in Luke 12:39:
"But understand this: If the owner of the house had known at what hour the thief was
coming, he would not have let his house be broken into."
Thanks,
Owen
Government
Where in the bible does it talk about the three divisions of government?
Thank you for your question. I assume that you are asking
where the Bible talks about the three branches of our democratic government;
i.e., legislative, executive, and judicial. The Bible does not
speak to this. This is not surprising, because the only form of government
explained by the Bible is the theocracy in the Old Testament.
Basically, under that system, God Himself wrote the laws (Exodus 20)--the
legislative branch; he sometimes made sure that the laws were enforced by
intervening Himself, and he sometimes called upon the leaders to
enforce the laws (Numbers 25:5)--the executive branch; and, although God is
the ultimate judge, He did command Moses to set up a judicial
system (Deuteronomy 1:16, 16:8) for the Jewish people
If this isn't what you were asking, please let me know.
Thanks,
Owen
Going to Church
Owen
Weber, I've enjoyed reading your experiences and thoughts. I also
have had similar feelings about 'church' and, in fact, after having to leave off going to a
particular church I left off regular attendance at another and only just recently have become
more regular in attendance.
I too have had that verse
from Hebrews brought one way or another to my attention. My feelings
about the 'attendance' part of the verse is that it may be partially
relevant now, but actually it may have more to do with those of Jews who believed but had
reservations about it becoming known and were tending to revert back to their previous
religious practices and conforming to the ways of their society.
Cautious perhaps like Nicodemus initially?
Website Languages
Greetings
Dear
Pastor in Christ,
Greetings!
I have
been studying your website and I'm very much inspired by that. I'm here to
request you to expand your outreach program in two new languages Urdu and
Punjabi.
Urdu is the language which is spoken in many countries like Pakistan, India, Iran,
Nepal, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iraq, Malaysia and in many other countries.
It's very delightful for the one who listen and study the word of God in
his own language.
I'll offer my services as Translator, Recorder, Dubbing and Printing.
Peace and
Blessings be with you.
In Christ,
How Long Before the Rapture |
The Rapture
My question to you is, How long do you REALLY think we, the New Testament
"church which is His body" (Ephesians 1:22-23) has left before the Rapture?
I'm not asking if you are Pre-Trib, Mid-Trib, or Post-Trib, and I'm not asking
you for a "day and a hour," and I'm not asking if you believe in immanency, but for your best guess estimate as to how much longer we have to wait for our Lord's coming
for us in the air?
Thank you very much for your time and attention to this matter.
Thank you for your question. Yes, I do believe that the
rapture is imminent. I will also give you a direct answer to your question as to when I believe the
rapture will occur. However, I would first like to give you some background on my thoughts.
Over the years I have done a lot of thinking about when the rapture
will occur. However, I have had mixed feelings about discussing it, for several reasons:
- The Bible does tell us that nobody knows the day or the hour when
Christ will return (His Second Coming).
- Many foolish people have spent way too much time on this when their
time would have been better spent in other pursuits. This includes the
many people who have predicted the end of the world, only to have been proven wrong when the
time of their prophecy came and went without incident (so they usually just
established another date in the future).
- Regardless of when we believe the rapture will occur, I believe that
this should have no impact upon how we live our daily lives. We should live
our lives today for Christ, no matter if the rapture occurs today or in a thousand years.
This is especially true considering the fact that we could be wrong in our expectations, just
like so many others already have been.
However, when I read your question, I felt moved to give you a direct
answer. Believe it or not, what I am sharing with you below is the first time that I
have shared these thoughts with anyone. I have a B.S. degree in Mathematics, and I have always been intrigued
by numbers, dates, etc. When combined with my desire to know God's Word,
this has resulted in my spending quite a bit of time in thinking about when the rapture (the
next prophecy of Scripture) would occur.
However, like many before me, I
have had to be careful about staying intellectually honest about this subject, without letting
my emotions interfere. After all, it's only natural that a believer would
hope that the rapture would occur soon, and sometimes our hope (wishes) can sway our sound
judgment.
At one time, I felt quite certain that the rapture would occur in the year
1988, primarily because that would have been 40 years (one generation; i.e., Matthew 24:34)
after Israel was re-established as a nation in 1948. When 1988 passed and the
rapture did not occur, I went back to the drawing board. So, during the past 25 years, I have developed a new "prediction" about
the rapture, based on several different trains of thought, and I'll know share those
with you here:
1) In 1987, I published a book entitled, "Believe: A Synopsis
of the Entire Bible." This book is available free on my website at
Believe, A Synopsis of the Entire Bible. While
doing the research for that book, I decided to construct a
timeline of Biblical events by using the Bible as my only source. I went through the
painstaking process of recording every event in the Bible that had a timeframe associated with
it. This included every place where the Bible noted a certain number of years between events,
etc. Then I had to sort of backtrack in order to determine the historical perspective for all
of these events, including the date (in B.C. years) as well as the number of years after
Creation. As a result, I included some timeline charts in the appendices at the end of
my book, and you can view these at the web page noted above.
2) When I had completed my timeline, my results showed that God created
the earth in the year 4,241 B.C. My extra-biblical research indicated that
this did not agree exactly with anyone else's timeline. The most widely accepted date
for Creation was/is 4,004 B.C. I decided that I could still accept my date with a fairly high level of
confidence, based upon the fact that others included extra-biblical sources for their
timelines, while my timeline used only the Bible. Then one day I happened to be at the library (back in the days before
the Internet), and I decided to do some more research to see if I could find any
reference to the date 4,241 B.C. What I discovered was that this is the first date
recorded in the ancient Egyptian calendar. Although all sources do not agree on that fact
either, I decided that it was good enough for me. I elected to interpret this as direct
confirmation from God that my calculations were correct, so I suddenly had an extremely high level of
confidence in my timelines.
3) There is an extra-biblical book called The Book of Barnabas which
was not included in our New Testament Canon. I think that there is the
possibility that it does indeed belong in our New Testament. However, regardless of whether or not
it was truly inspired by the Holy Spirit, I believe that we can learn much from many of these
ancient extra-biblical books. The Book of Barnabas 13:3-5 says this: "And even in the
beginning of creation He makes mention of the Sabbath. And God made in six days the works of
His hands; and He finished them on the seventh day, and He rested on the seventh day, and
sanctified it. Consider, my children, what that signifies, He finished them in six days.
The meaning of it is this: that in six thousand years the Lord God will bring all things to an
end. For with him one day is a thousand years; as Himself testifieth, saying, Behold this day shall be
as a thousand years (Psalm 90:4, 2 Peter 3:8). Therefore, children, in six days,
that is, in six thousand years, shall all things be accomplished." It just makes sense to me that God would follow this pattern.
4) I am a dispensationalist, so I believe that God grants stewardship
to certain groups of people throughout certain eras of time. This included the Age
of the Gentiles, the Age of the Jews, and the (current) Age of the Church.
5) Now, I also believe in the rapture (1 Thessalonians 4:14-18) at the
end of the Church Age. Based upon the above, I believe that the same amount of time will
be granted to the Age of the Gentiles, the Age of the Jews, and the Age of the
Church. The charts mentioned above can be summarized as follows: The Age of the Gentiles From Creation through the call of Abram 4241 B.C through 2218 B.C. 2023 years The Age of the Jews From the call of Abram through the death, burial, and
resurrection of Christ 2218 B.C. through 29 A.D. 2247 years The Age of the Church From the death burial, and resurrection of Christ through
the rapture 29 A.D. through the rapture (see below) Now, you can see that these first two time periods are not equal in
length, but there's a caveat: There are many places during the Age of the Jews when
the Bible says that "God forsook Israel." Most of these occurrences are during
the times of the Judges, and they're all denoted in my charts. I believe that God is not
counting the time when He forsook Israel; i.e., He didn't count those years when He decided how
long to extend time. So, here's how the numbers work out when this is considered: The Age of the Gentiles 2023 years The Age of the Jews 2247 years; less the 224 years when God forsook Israel; This
results in 2023 years. The Age of the Church If this is also 2023 years, then this is from 29 A.D.
through 2052 A.D. So, this is when I believe the rapture will occur:
2052 A.D.
6) I received some unexpected confirmation on this as well.
It turns out that Sir Isaac Newton was also a mathematician, as well as a theologian.
Some of his notes have indicated that he expected the world to end in the year 2060
A.D. Now, I don't know how he came to this number, but it seems to coincide with my
calculations. If the rapture occurs in 2052 A.D., as I expect, and this is followed by the
seven-year tribulation period, then Christ's second coming (the end of time, as we
know it--as well as the beginning of the Millennium) would occur in 2059 A.D.
This is a difference of only one year from Newton's date, and this could easily be due to a
rounding error or a different reconciliation for the year zero. Now, I know that 2023 years for each dispensation results in 6069 years
instead of exactly 6000 years, like Barnabas indicated. I can't explain
this for sure, but the difference could be due to something like the way that years were represented in
the ancient calendars.
For example, I've often read that the Jewish
calendar used 360-day years instead of 365-day years. If the 6069-year time periods were
360-day years, then this would be 5986 years in 365-day years, and this is even closer to 6000
years. Again, I can't really explain this difference, but this is the closest I can
come with my current understanding. (There is, however, an interesting coincidence here. If we
considered that the 2023 years was given in terms of a 360-day calendar, then we can calculate
that this would be 1993 years in terms of a 365.25-day calendar. If this
period of time actually corresponds to 1993 years, and we added that to the year 29 A.D., we
get the year 2023 B.C. So, again, the number 2023 shows up--this time as
a date instead of a number of years. So, I guess the year 2023 A.D. could be an
alternate date for the rapture.)
7)
I also seem to have additional confirmation for my rapture date of 2052. Israel became a nation again in 1948. Matthew 24:35 (which has to do
with future prophecy), says, "34 Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." If He happens to be
talking about the generation of this new nation of Israel, He could mean that somebody (perhaps a single Jew) who was alive on May 14th, 1948
(perhaps born on that date) could live an exceptionally (but reasonably) long life to the age of 104, then that person could still be alive (not
passed away) in 2052. Or perhaps He could even be alive at the end of the world (as we know it) in 2059, at the age of 111.
So, of course, I could be wrong, but I believe that the rapture will
occur in about 40 more years. What about you? When do you think
the rapture will occur? Do you think that my argument above is worth considering? I'll tell you what: If we're still here in the year 2053,
send me another e-mail, and we can discuss how I need to modify my prediction! However,
I'll probably be long gone by then! Thanks, Owen
Legislating Morality
Sir,
My son and I recently got into a conversation on legislating morality. He had some
really good arguments stating even though he thought certain things
were immoral, he didn't think we should try to make laws preventing
them. For example, prostitution, drug abuse and abortion. I
argued these were immoral and we should not support the legalization of
anything immoral. His opinion is that they just continue to
exist, and we end up spending tax payer monies to try and prevent them
and housing criminals. He also argued, these things become
even more abusive because there is no regulation upon them since they are
illegal. My spirit senses that God's laws are not in support
of allowing immoral living but I am not able to verbalize this to
him. Help! Sincerely
Thank you for your question. I have mixed feelings about
legislating morality, and it's a difficult issue, but I'll try to lay
out both sides of the argument for you. Our government already does legislate morality in many ways.
In fact, many laws are based upon upholding moral laws. Our laws
regarding murder, theft, stealing, killing, defrauding, and
misrepresenting all reflect the moral values of The Ten
Commandments. We attempt to legislate morality in ways that
are generally advantageous to our freedom, safety, and
well-being.
However, problems arise in the interpretation of these laws.
Furthermore, our laws also guarantee both the freedom of religion and
the separation of church and state. So, we are left with even
more open interpretation on how all of these issues mesh
together. Some people (voicing their freedom of speech)
believe that freedom of religion means that religion shouldn't be allowed to
influence government policy while others believe that it means that the
state will not dictate a religion (such as a state church).
I
believe that our founding fathers instituted the best possible form of
government (democracy), although it is still an imperfect human
government. Although the Bible clearly condemns adultery and homosexuality as sin,
we have no laws against these things. This is because of the
fine line between morality and freedom. For one person, a
particular law may be upholding his morality, but to another person it infringes
upon his personal choices.
This is further complicated since
one person's moral values and definition of liberty is often not the same
as the next person's. Personally, I have no doubt that
homosexuality is a sin. However, I'm not sure that we should
have a law that bans homosexuality, because this could be an infringement on
one's personal liberty. Similarly, I believe that
Christianity is the only true faith, but we shouldn't make other faiths
illegal. This not only violates the First Amendment, but I would certainly never
want the government to make Christianity illegal.
On the other hand, I also have no doubt that abortion is a sin, and it
violates the commandment against murder. In my view, if we
have a law against murder (which we do), then that law already applies to
abortion as well. I guess what I'm saying is that we need to preserve law and order while
simultaneously preserving our personal liberty. It seems that
I'm drawing the line where one person's actions infringe directly upon
another person's liberty. An act of murder (abortion or
otherwise), theft, etc. by one person harms another person, so we need
laws for these things. However, if two gay people want to
live together, and even get "married," then maybe we don't need a law
against this, as long as their situation doesn't directly hurt anyone
else.
So, I believe that we can legislate some, but not all,
morality. Personally, I tend to lean toward the Libertarian view, that
government's role is to ensure liberty, but that the Church should
guide us on moral choices. In general, I think that we have
too many laws already. For example, if it's not a crime to drink
alcohol, and prohibition didn't seem to work anyway, I'm not sure that
we need a law against using marijuana. Maybe it would be
better to legalize it, regulate it like we do alcohol, and collect taxes on it
in the same way as well. Thanks, Owen
Owen Weber 2012
|