Q. 165. If wisdom in Proverbs 8 means the Lord Jesus, what is the meaning of “I was set up,” and “I was brought forth?” Does ver. 31 mean that Christ was looking forward to the future? C. H. P.
A. The whole passage is highly poetic and figurative, and speak directly of the wisdom of God personified as a woman. Now inasmuch as Christ is “the wisdom of God,” in this wonderful scripture Christians of all ages have discerned the description of Christ Himself. Such phrases as you allude to are not to describe His beginning, but rather to show as far as human language can that He was ever with God, “set up front everlasting” being equivalent to this. Ver. 31 describes the delight Jehovah ever had in man, and His dwelling with Him, a subject alluded to throughout scripture (Exodus 15; John 14 &c.), but not consummated till sin is banished forever in the new heavens and earth. (Revelation 21:3).
Q. 166. (1) Please explain the latter part of Proverbs 16:10. (2) also of Proverbs 21:16.
A (1) This text speaks of the king, referring doubtless to both Solomon and Christ, and in an abstract way to the office as suchapter As a proposition this is alas! far from being literally true of all who reign. (2) Some read congregation of the giants others “congregation of the lost,” the meaning doubtless being the same as ver. 15. “Congregation” simply means “company.” Those that leave the way of understanding shall find their portion among the lost.
Q. 167. Where do all the “great multitudes “come from in Revelation 7:9? And would “nations” include England, &c.? J. C.
A. They are the Gentile inhabitants of the millennial earth just as the 144,000 are the Jewish ones. Observe these are before the throne; the 24 elders are round about it, and (ver. 13) are in no way part of the great multitude. The heavenly saints moreover have their home in the Jerusalem which has no temple; the great multitude on the contrary according to ver. 15, and Zechariah 14:16 shall worship in the temple in the earthly city. We should judge that 2 Thessalonians 4:8-12 excludes from this company all who have heard and rejected the gospel.
Q. 168. Why do we not have the “cup after supper” as spoken of in the New Testament? C. P.
A. We do. It is the Paschal supper that we no longer eat. In Luke 22 you get both suppers. The paschal supper is from ver. 13-18. This is done away for us, and the Lord’s supper instituted in its place, which follows in ver. 19, 20. “ After supper” does not mean after the Lord’s supper, but after the Jewish passover.
Q. 169. Does “ your fathers” in John 6:58 refer to their wicked ancestors, or ancestors generally? M. A. T.
A. Ancestors generally. The point is not whether these Israelites were saved or no, but that this new manna had life-giving properties that the old did not possess. As has been remarked, Christ came to His people in John 5 to deliver them (as in Egypt) with signs of miraculous power; in Chapter 6. He presents Himself to them as the heavenly manna for their wilderness journey, and in chaps. 7 as the joy of their feast in the land, but is rejected in all three.
Q. 170. What does it mean in 1 John 3:9, “Whosoever is born of God... cannot sin? If it said “ought not to sin” I could understand it. M. A. T.
A. This passage identifies the believer with the spotless new nature that he possesses by the new birth. The epistle regards the believer at the height of his proper standing in Christ. Every Christian is looked at here as acting solely in the power and energy of the new nature. But you may say he often does not. This is true, otherwise there were no need for 1:9, but this is not the subject here. It could not say “ought not to sin” for it is solely speaking here of what is born of God, and it is plain that nothing born of God can sin. The reason we ever sin is because we allow that within us to act which is not born of God. Such a Christian is not contemplated here.
Q. 171. How does the following text apply to the Lord’s supper, “Eat not of it raw, nor sodden at all with water, but roast with fire?” M. P.
A. Do not feed on a Christ that has died merely naturally (as the normal close of a perfect life) nor in any other way, save as having been the victim of the consuming fire of the righteous judgment of God. We feed on Him here not as our example and forerunner, but as our Savior, the one who endured God’s wrath for us. It is this that is expressed in being “roast with fire.”
Q. 172. Who were the 500, and when did our Lord see them? A. D. J.
A. Probably in Galilee, according to Matthew 28:10. They were composed of His Galilean disciples.
Q. 173. What Scriptures were written about Christ besides the prophecies? Were there any New Testament scriptures written at the time of Luke 24:27. A. D. J.
A. “All the scriptures” here refer to the Old Testament only. None of the New were extant at this time. Besides the prophets, such scriptures as Genesis 3:15; 22:18; 49:10; Numbers 21:9; Deuteronomy 18:15, 18 all refer to Christ.
Q. 174. What are we to learn from the fact that Moses and Elijah were seen in glory with Jesus on the mount? H. J. M.
A. Do we not see them there as the two great witnesses to the law and the prophets? The law was broken, the prophets despised, and Christ Himself rejected. All was then over according to Matthew 16 with the Jewish nation, and the only vindication of God’s glory was in the cross of Calvary, which formed the topic of their conversation. Looked at as a picture of the coming kingdom, (Matthew 16:28) we get Christ the center, the heavenly saints typified by Moses and Elijah, (the former representing those put to sleep by Jesus, Elijah those caught up to heaven without dying;) while Peter, James, and John represent the earthly saints in the millennium, enjoying the heavenly glory of which they are eye-witnesses.
Q. 175. Was Mary Magdalene the sister of Lazarus and the same that anointed our Lord with ointment? E. B.
A. Mary of Magdala is not the same as Mary of Bethany. She is first named in Luke 8 as a woman who had been healed of a fearful disease, and appears to have had considerable wealth (ver. 3). Neither is there any ground for connecting her with the nameless sinner of Luke 7, who was an abandoned character. The name of “Magdalene” commonly applied to such, is utterly without warrant in Scripture.
Q. 176. Please explain why they washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb, Revelation 7:14? C. M. B.
A. This figurative expression merely means that they owe all their salvation in common with all other saints to the blood of the Lamb. As already stated in Q. 167, this company form the Gentile inhabitants of the millennial earth, and are doubtless the same as the “sheep” of Matthew 25
Q. 177. Please say what is meant by following Christ, and what is the difference between suffering for Christ’s sake and for righteousness’ sake? K. T.
A. Treading in His footsteps as recorded in the four Evangelists. Suffering for righteousness’ sake is spoken of in Matthew 5:10 and 1 Peter 3:14, suffering for Christ’s sake in Matthew 5:11 and 1 Peter 4:13. The former is connected with the light of God shining on the conscience, the latter with the love of Christ attracting the heart. Hence, I suffer for righteousness when I act in daily life according to the divine standard of truth and rectitude; I suffer for Christ when I follow Him in a path or trial and rejection.
Q. 178. What is the true meaning of Matthew 18:18? Was this a special power given at that time? M. A. S.
A. It is the same power as given in John 20:23. When Jesus was down here he had special power to forgive sins on earth as Son of Man dispensationally (Luke 5:24). Before leaving the world, He gives this power in John 20:23 to the company then gathered, with Himself in the midst (compare Matthew 18:20). In the company there were probably women (20:18) and certainly others in addition to the eleven apostles (Luke 25:33), besides the two just returned from Emmaus (Luke 24:35). So that this power was not here given to an individual, nor to a body of apostles, but to a company of disciples gathered round their Lord. A practical carrying out of this power may be seen as to retaining sin, or binding in 1 Corinthians 5:4, 5. when the man’s sin was retained on him as regards his position on the earth, by a body of disciples gathered according to Matthew 18:20, a procedure ratified by God, and as to remitting or loosing in 2 Corinthians 2:6,7 where the sinner was restored and his sin remitted. This act has nothing to do with guilt before God, but is connected with the sphere of Christian communion on earth.
Q. 179. Is it likely that some of the descendants of Issachar (Genesis 46:13) who went with Jacob into Egypt to Joseph afterward lived in the land of Uz? If so, is the “Job” here the same person as in Job 1:1? E. B.
A. Job, the third son of Issachar, should be rather Jashab (1 Chronicles 7:1) and has no connection with the patriarch, who is supposed to have lived in Idumea at a very early period. Some without any good ground have supposed he was the same with Jobab (1 Chronicles 1:44), others place him before Abraham’s time from the internal evidence of the book. None can however exactly fix the date of Job’s existence, though the general evidence all shows that it must have been at a period of great antiquity.
Q. 180. As sin bearer did our Lord suffer physical pain on the cross? S. B.
A. The Lord was a true man, and not merely appeared to be suchapter Hence, He suffered agonizing pain on Calvary. But all this though fully felt could not for a moment be compared to the unutterable anguish of bearing for our sakes the wrath of God. We cannot however go deeper and distinguish further between these sufferings. The whole cross, with all its suffering and shame was so intimately connected with the bearing of our sin that we dare not attempt to separate one part from another.
Q. 181. How may it be shown that the “abomination of desolation” did not refer to the Roman Standard? W. J. H.
A. There is no doubt but that Matthew 24 is one of those numerous prophecies that have an immediate and partial fulfillment and a distant and complete one. Such prophecies we find in Daniel 11 which though referring unmistakably to Antiochus, Epiphanes to ver. 32 will yet have another and deeper fulfillment in the person of Antichrist who is clearly spoken of in v. 36 also in Acts 2 when Joel’s prophecy (to be fully accomplished in the millennium) had a partial fulfillment at Pentecost. So in Matthew 24 we find not only events which may refer to the siege and overthrow of Jerusalem (which almost exclusively occupies the corresponding prophecy in Luke 21:21-24,) but plain references to the last days. Not only is the coming of the Lord spoken of but the whole passage is descriptive of “the end of the world” (or rather “age,”) ver. 3. We therefore consider that the “abomination of desolation “though possibly referring partially to the presence of the Roman Eagle in the holy place, will not find its entire fulfillment until the image of the beast is set up in the temple during the reign of Antichrist. See Daniel 8:13; 9:27; 12:11, and Revelation 13:14, 15.
Q. 182. (1) Does the “sword” in Luke 2:35 refer to the maternal sorrow of Mary for Jesus as her son? (2) How should Luke 11:24-26 be understood? W. J. H.
A. (1) Yes, and was surely fulfilled at Calvary. (2) Does it not refer to the history of the Jews? The unclean spirit of idolatry appears to have been cast out of them in a most remarkable manner by the Babylonish captivity, for we do not read of it after their return, nor do we find it even alluded to as a current sin by our Savior. Their house, however, though swept and garnished with Rabbinical traditions, was still “empty,” when their Messiah stood at the door and knocked, they did not open to Him, (John 1:11) and therefore the spirit of idolatry will return in the last days under Antichrist, (see the preceding query), and their last state be worse than their first.
Q. 183. (1) Does 1 Corinthians 3:12-14 refer to all Christians, or only to the apostles? (2) In what sense have we “the mind of Christ” 2:16? S. B.
A. (1) It refers to all builders, not solely to the “master builders” who laid the foundation; surely “any man” is sufficiently emphatic testimony that it cannot be limited to the apostles. (2) In having the Holy Ghost as our teacher, and having a new nature or spiritual mind capable of being taught. See preceding verses.
Q. 184. (1) Does the cleansing in 1 John 1:7 refer to removing guilt, and is it conditional? (2) What is meant by the expression destroy” in Romans 14 IS, 20? J. G.
A. (1) Blood generally refers to guilt before God, and atonement for it. Cleansing by the washing of water by the word (ver. 9, see also Ephesians 5:26) refers rather to practical defilement. The cleansing here is eternal in its value; hence it is in the present tense as including past, present, and future, showing its intrinsic value. Every Christian is “in the light,” hence the only condition here implied is that of being a child of God. (2) “Destroy” in ver. 15 means to destroy or cause to perish: in ver. 20, it is a different word, rightly translated destroy overthrow” (R. V.) A parallel passage is in 1 Corinthians 8:11 and both mean that by willfully violating the conscience of another, I turn aside and (destroy as far as it is in my power) his integrity and faith.
Q. 185. Referring to Q. 70, we read in Matthew 27:7, that the priests bought the field, and in Acts 1:18 that Judas bought it. Will you explain the apparent discrepancy? C. H. P.
A. The discrepancy between the two accounts has led tradition from all time to assign two distinct places to the field of blood in Matthew 27:8, and Acts 1:18. We cannot see however any reason why taking the two passages together and accepting Matthew as the literal historical account, Judas could very well be said in an indirect manner in Acts 1:19 to have purchased the field. True he did not buy it himself, but he provided the wages of iniquity for the purpose, and hence in a sense may be said to have bought it. We think such an explanation preferable to supposing two Aceldamas. There is no doubt if we knew all the circumstances the apparent discrepancies would disappear.
Q. 186. Please say why Jericho was cursed, (Joshua 6) E. S. M.
A. Because it was the first city to resist the entry of the Israelites, and represented the power of Satan as opposed to the children of God.
Q. 187. Did Paul act according to Colossians 2 in having Timothy circumcised, (Acts 16:3). E, S. M.
A. This act was more in accordance with 1 Corinthians 9:20. On more than one occasion even Paul judaized to a considerable extent, as at Jerusalem (Acts 26:26) and probably at Cenchrea, (Acts 18. 18).
Q. 188. (1) What is meant by being a member of a church? (2) What is the usual time for partaking of the Lord’s supper? (3) Would you kindly explain “Whosoever sins ye remit,” &c. (John 20) E. S. M.
A. (1) An individual Christian was associated with his fellow-believers in the locality; but membership properly so called is only spoken of in the New Testament, in two senses, one “with Christ” and the other “with one another.” Both these are really but one, being the membership of the one body of Christ. (2) The usual time spoken of in Scripture is the first day of the week. No express command however is given on the subject. (3) You will find this fully explained in Q. 178.
Q. 189. (I) Please explain Matthew 18:10, also (2) 1 John 5:21. Does this refer to literal idols? Is there any danger of our love for the friends God has given us becoming idolatry? R. M.
A. (1) Refer to B. S. vol. i. page 138, Q. 422. We shall be glad of further light on this verse. (2) It refers to anything and everything that comes before God in our hearts. He must be first, and, if anything else is, it is an idol. There is a constant danger of Christians becoming idolators in this sense. God does not forbid natural love, but puts it in its right place.
Q. 190. What is the meaning of Luke 16:9? G. D.
A. The latter part of this verse is better translated “ye may be received.” 1 Timothy 6:17 etc., throws great light upon this scripture. The meaning of the verse is, “Lay out your riches in such a way as to bring, instead of present enjoyment, an eternal reward”; as 1 Timothy 6:19 says, “Laying up in store for themselves a good foundation against the time to come.” “He that giveth to the poor, lendeth to the Lord,” and not even a cup of cold water given in His name, shall ever lose its reward. “When ye fail” means when you die.
Q. 191. Please explain 1 Corinthians 9:27. L. B.
A. Refer to B. S. Jan. 1882 p. 19. If you want more, write again.
Q. 192. Is it not Scriptural to use the expression “Lord’s day” and not Sunday according to Revelation 1 to? and is there not in so doing an indirect testimony to the world and to Christians who know the day only as Sunday or the Sabbath? S. R. T.
A. We should decidedly say “yes.” If you refer to B. S. for March p. 97, you will find some thoughts on this subject.
Q. 193. (1) Will you explain Ezekiel 28:13-15, and (2) 2 Corinthians 12:2-4. W. J. B.
A. (1) We understand it to be a full description of the pristine beauty of the one whom we know as Satan. The fall is described in ver. 17, hence pride is called in 1 Timothy 3:6, the “condemnation of the devil.” (2) Paul here speaks of himself as being caught up to the third heaven. In scripture there are three heavens, one (Deuteronomy 4:19) the firmament or air where birds fly and the clouds gather; another (Deuteronomy 14:19) the whole of space where the sun, moon, and stars are; and thirdly (Psalms 2:4) the dwelling place of God “ the heaven of heavens.” Here he heard things too glorious to put into human language. He could not tell whether he was in or out of the body. It occurred about 14 years before, about which time Paul was stoned and left for dead at Lystra. If this were the occasion here referred to, we can quite understand how Paul would not know whether he was dead or alive.
Q. 193. (1) What is the meaning of “man did eat angels’ food,” Psalms 78:25? (2) How could gold be ground to powder, Exodus 32:20? W. J. 0.
A. (1) Bread that would be fit food for angels, did they require any; or as some read, bread provided by the ministry of angels. Considering the highly figurative character of the Psalms we think the former the more likely meaning. (2) By mixing it with about one ten-thousandth part of its weight of lead.
Q. 194. Were not the Samaritans in some sense akin to the Jews from John 4:12? And yet 2 Kings 17; Ezra 4:1-5 and the feeling with which the Jews regarded them seem to point to the contrary. W. J. H.
A. There was no doubt a great admixture. Besides the Scriptures you mention, it appears from profane history that the neighborhood of Sychar was peopled by Jews by Alexander the Great, and after this from B. C. 109 the Jews also lived in the city until Pompey the Roman general restored it to the original inhabitants of mixed origin. A comparison of 2 Kings 17:24 with 2 Kings 25:12 will show that none of the original Israelites were left in Samaria. The new comers were mainly Assyrians; but possibly by intermarriage with some of the renegade Jews left in the above settlements, by degrees they advanced a claim to Jewish origin, which however was never admitted by the Jews, nor owned by the Lord (Matthew 10:5,6).