Q. 349. Referring to the August subject, Can " spirit of glory" 1 Peter 4:14, be termed a title of the Holy Ghost? It is not printed with a capital letter in the Authorized Version? L. C.
A. It is printed with a capital letter in the Revised Version, but the word. " spirit" is not in the text at all, it is only from the context that we judge that the Holy Spirit is here spoken of.
Q. 350. Please explain how the devil can be regarded as the Lord's servant. 2 Tim. 2:26. E. S. M.
A. We cannot altogether accept the wording of the Revised Version here. The American Revisers read " having been taken captive by him unto his will." Two different pronouns are used in the Greek for "him" and " his," and the latter word probably refers to God. We should be glad to know on what authority "the Lord's servant" is put in the text.
Q. 351. Do you think that the one mentioned by John in Mark 9:38,39, and Luke 9:49,50, was a believer in the Lord Jesus? Is it not rather remarkable that he should have been empowered to work this miracle? M. A. S. W.
A. We think that he could not work miracles in a name in which he did not believe. He may have been a disciple of John's who still clung to the forerunner rather than to the Messiah. Though not as yet outwardly one of Christ's followers (which aroused the jealousy of the disciples), he was on His side against the powers of darkness, owning and proving the value and power of His name.
Q. 352. Please explain (1) Dan. 9:26,27, and (2) 12:1. F. W. B.
A. (1) We would paraphrase it briefly thus " After 434 years (62x7) shall Messiah (Jesus) be cut off (crucified), but not for himself (but for others) or " shall have nothing," i.e. of His portion as Messiah, and the people of the prince that shall come (the Romans who will hereafter be the people of the infidel head of the revived Roman earth) shall destroy Jerusalem and the temple, and at the end of the siege all shall be carried away as by a river (people, treasures and everything) and desolation shall reign over Zion (as is now the case.) All this verse is past or present, the next verse is future, and between the two, lies the present unnoticed interval of over 1800 years when God is not dealing with the Jews, but preparing a Bride for Christ. The next verse proceeds "And he (the coming prince, head of the Roman empire) shall confirm a (not " the") covenant with the many (or the mass of Jewish people) for seven years (Daniel's last week, still future); but after three years and a half this Roman prince will cause the revived circle of Jewish offerings and sacrifices to cease" (see Matt. 24, Mark 13 &c.), (as to the covenant see Isa. 28:14), " and by means of" or " on account of" the wing (or protection, see Psa. 91:4) of the abomination (which means simply idol,) he shall make the land of Israel desolate even until the close of the seventieth week, when judgment shall be poured not only on the prince, but upon the Jews whom he has made desolate by causing to trust to the protection of his idolatries. This will be at the glorious appearing of Christ for judgment when He descends to the Mount of Olives. We shall be glad of further contributions on this interesting subject. (2) Although strongly against the common practice of spiritualizing Old Testament prophecies, we cannot admit that this passage refers to a literal resurrection; we take it as referring to the same period as Ezek. 36, when the dry bones of Israel that have been slumbering in the earth (the world) will be brought back to their land. These are especially the ten tribes of Israel who will return after the great tribulation, which will in righteousness fall on the two—tribes only, who were directly concerned in the crucifixion of Messiah. These ten tribes are now slumbering in the earth, and no man can say where they are. A comparison of Luke 15:32, and Rom. 11:15 especially will show that this is by no means the only passage where the return of that which has been lost is regarded as " lite from the dead."
Q. 353. Referring to p. 317, are we told in Scripture if Methuselah lived with Adam in the garden or out of it? F. W. B.
A. No one, as far as we know, ever lived in Paradise except our first parents. Adam was driven from it before the birth of Cain, and ever after was excluded from it.
Q. 354. What was the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, Rev. 2:15? A. G.
A. The Greek word " nicolaos" is an approximate equivalent to the Hebrew Balaam. Hence it is not improbable that here we have to do with one sect under two names " those that hold the teaching of Balaam" whose history is there recorded, and then is added " So halt thou also some that hold the teaching of the Nicolaitanes in like manner." From this point of view the teaching of Balaam and of the Nicolaitanes would be identical. The two sins spoken of here were the very two things forbidden to the Gentiles by the apostolic council (Acts 15:20,29). They were closely allied, and both almost inseparable from the ordinary heathen life. In times of persecution eating things sacrificed to idols would be a crucial test. These teachers held that it was an indifferent Matter, and, still worse, sought to bring in the impurities of heathen orgies into the christian love feasts (2 Peter 2:10,12,13,18; Jude 7,8). All this was taught as doctrine, not merely regarded as laxity. Thus the special combination of sins in Balaam were reproduced. This at any rate was the doctrine of Balaam. If the Nicolaitanes are supposed to be a separate sect, their evil (from the few notices left to us) would seem to be of a similar character. It was a deliberate effort on the part of the enemy to turn the grace of God into lasciviousness.
Q. 355. What is meant by blasphemy against the Holy Ghost (Matt. 12:31), and can any one do such a thing now? (2) What is the meaning of the " concision" in Phil. 3:2? A. C.
A. The passage is primarily Jewish, but has no doubt a solemn meaning now. The sin was deliberate blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, not the mere utterance of the lips, but the belief of the heart. There is no forgiveness for this sin, because not only is the Savior rejected, but the only One who can apply the word in power is blasphemed. The expression " neither in this world, nor in that which is to come" means probably "neither in that age (that of the law) nor in the age to come (of Messiah's reign)" The Lord having taken His place as Son of Man in humiliation, this solemn warning did not extend to words spoken against Him. We could not say that such a sin could no longer be committed. (2) The concision was the mark in the flesh of the Israelite who had submitted to the outward rite, but had never been circumcised in heart. It is an expression of the utmost contempt fur empty formalism.
Q. 356. What are meant by the four cherubim and the four wheels in Ezek. 1? M. H. U.
A. The four cherubim represent the attributes of God in government. We find them characterized by the intelligence of man, the strength of the lion, the stability and patience of the ox, and the swiftness of the eagle. It will be remarked that such symbols were worshipped by the heathen as idols. As has been well remarked, " formal idolatry began with a figurative personification of the attributes of God. These attributes became their gods, men being impelled to worship them by demons, who governed them by this means, so it was these demons whom men worshipped-a worship that soon degenerated so far that they set up gods wherever there was anything to desire or to fear, or that answered to the lust which inspired these desires or these fears. Now these attributes belonged to the only God, the Creator, and the head of all creation, but, whatever their power and glory might be in action, they were but the supporters of the throne on which the God of truth is seated. Majesty, government and providence, united to form the throne of His glory. But all the instruments of His glory were below the firmament; He whom they glorified was above. It is He whom the heathen knew not." These cherubim it will be observed have four wings, whereas the seraphim (Isa. 6) have six, and cry " Holy, Holy, Holy" day and night. The cherubim appear (Gen. 3; Psa. 18; Ezek. 10) to be the executives of God's judgments, the seraphim rather of God's mercy (Isa. 6). We find the characteristics of both combined in the "four beasts" of Rev. 4 showing that mercy and truth have met together, righteousness and peace have kissed each other at and since the cross of Christ. The wheels seem to convey the idea of swiftness of motion on the earth, just as " wings" are symbols of swiftness in heaven.
Q. 357. Is there anything in Scripture to support the thought of the following well-known lines:-
" By weakness and defeat
He won the meed and crown."
Can this be said of our Lord? and if so when was He defeated' and by whom? M. H. V.
A. Christ was crucified through weakness. He also in a sense spent His strength for naught, in that He came unto His own and His own received Him not. In this limited sense it may be said that His mission as Messiah was defeated by the hardness of His people's hearts. We are not however aware that Scripture ever directly sanctions the second of the two expressions, though it clearly does the first.
Q. 358. What is meant in Matt. 5:22 by the one who calls his brother a fool being in danger of hell-fire? D. T. C.
A. The Lord is here showing that murder does not begin with the outward act, but with the heart. The law took cognizance of the latter; but God here shows that murder may exist in the heart, the only outward sign being the words " Thou fool." Hence the danger of hell-fire, for murder in the heart is as bad in God's sight as the real act.
Q. 359. (1) Were the state and place of the departed spirits of saints changed when the Lord Jesus arose? (2) Did they go to " Paradise" before He had died? He says to the thief " to-day...with me in Paradise" yet Psa. 16 shows that His soul went into Hades; was Hades Paradise? A. P. C.
A. (1) We have no record of any such change. Paradise is the part of Hades where the blessed dead go. Hades is the entire abode of departed spirits. It is divided into two parts, with a great impassable gulf between (Luke 16) Hence it is equally true that our Lord went to Hades and to Paradise, as did also Lazarus. Dives went to Hades but not to Paradise.
Q. 360. (a) Does Heb. 2:14,15 mean that when "He destroyed Him that had the power of death," He delivered from Hades those who in their lifetime had feared it, as Hezekiah in Isa. 38? (2) Would Eph. 4:8 show that He took these saints as a "multitude of captives" with Him into Paradise when He ascended? A. P. C.
A. (1) it was not that He delivered them from Hades, but that life and incorruptibility were first brought to light through the gospel. These existed before, but were not made manifest. The spirits of all Old Testament saints went to Paradise, but all their portion and hopes were in this life. Hence they had not revealed to them that light beyond the grave that robs death now of all its terrors to the Christian. Hezekiah wished to live, Paul to depart, and yet both were saints. (See also B. S. vol. ii. p. 117, Q. 134.)(2) No. In that man in the person of Christ had risen up out of death into which He had descended, He had broken its power and destroyed its terrors, and all that held man in captivity He now triumphed over in resurrection and led captive.
Q. 361. Was it ignorance that made the saints so dread Hades, or was it really an unhappy place? A. P. C.
A. It was ignorance and dread of the unknown. Some like Job may have had a light beyond the tomb, but the truth about a future state was not yet revealed. The spirits of just men however went to Paradise then as now. The great difference was that the portion of the faithful then was on this side the grave (hence long life was a favor), the Christian's is beyond.
Q. 362. (1) Please explain the latter part of Prov. 16:4. (2) Is it correct to say the Lord's body was "broken," the word is omitted in the Revised Version in 1 Cor. 11:24? W. H. M.
A. (1) The wicked are God's creatures as well as the righteous. The very powers by which they fight against God were given by Him. He made no man wicked, but on the other hand He will not save those who are wicked because they are His creatures from the day of evil. Though He may not be glorified in them, yet will His righteousness be glorified upon them in that day. Compare Psa. 10 vii. 13, 14; Rom. 9:21. (2) It is not a Scriptural expression. The Lord's body is nowhere said to be "broken"; the bread however that represents it is.
Q. 363. Did the sufferings of Christ from man before the cross form part of His atoning work? If not, why did He endure so much? M. Y.
A. We read of the sufferings of the Lord in anticipation of the cross. These and all the other bodily sufferings preliminary to it are all inseparably bound up together with the cross itself, though it was only on the latter that He atoned for sin, being made a curse for us. The whole scene must be regarded as one, though we can distinguish the special time when the Father hid His face. We doubt not too that many of the earlier sufferings were similar to those the remnant (Jewish) will pass through, and which the Lord felt in sympathy with them. See Q. 375.
Q. 364. Are "Paul's gospel" and the "preaching of Jesus Christ" (Rom. 16:25) the same, or does this passage refer both to Paul's gospel and to what Jesus preached when here? If the latter, what constitutes Paul's gospel? T. B.
A. The gospel that Paul preached is fully described in 1 Cor. 15:1-6. In 2 Cor. 4:3,4, " our gospel" is called the " gospel of the glory of Christ," while in Eph. 6:19 Paul says he is an ambassador in chains for the " mystery of the gospel." In 2 Tim. 2:8 the resurrection of Christ is insisted on (as in 1 Cor. 15) as a prominent point of Paul's gospel. From these passages and the one before us which we think proceeds to describe "my gospel" as being connected (as in Eph. 6:19) with the mystery, we should say that Paul's gospel began with the crucifixion and death of our Lord, went on to His resurrection and present glory, but did not stop until it had unfolded the mystery of the church, the one body of Christ, a doctrine specially committed to Paul. "The preaching of Jesus Christ" we understand to mean the teaching of the Gospels regarding the person rather than the work of the Lord.
Q. 365. Please define between "fellowship" (1 Cor. 1:9.) and " communion" (2 Cor. 6:14; 13:14). T. B.
A. In the Scripture you refer to, the word is the same all through. There is therefore no difference in the real meaning, of the word. In English we distinguish a snade of difference between " fellowship'' a id " communion," the former being more outward and manifest, the latter more inward and hidden. In one solitary place (2 Cor. 6:14), another word is used for fellowship signifying a temporary and voluntary bond not of as close or enduring a nature as the usual word for communion.
Q. 366. Is it right to say with reference to Gen. 6:3 that God waited 1 20 years but that the ark was not all that time being prepared? 1 Peter 3:20 seems against this. E. B.
A. Peter merely states that in this period of 120 years the ark was prepared. We think that what you suggest is correct and that it is not contrary to 1 Peter 3:20.
Q. 367. Will God the Father judge the world? See Dan. 7:9-13. E. B.
A. John 5:22 Says He will not, and verse 27 adds that judgment is given to Christ because He is the Son of Man. The Ancient of Days here gives the Son of Man full power and dominion over men. We must remember however that the Son of Man is also in one sense the Ancient of Days (Compare 7:9 with Rev. 1:13-16) and in verse 22 His coming is spoken of. The great difficulty of the passage is how Christ can in any way be presented under two figures at the same time. We must remember this is but a vision. Matt. 25 and Rev. 20 clearly show us Christ on the judgment seat. We would like further remarks on this passage.
Q. 368. Of what significance is the color of manna in regarding it as a type of Christ?
A. We cannot say, unless it be simply the purity of His spotless life.
Q. 369. What is meant by " idle words" in Matt. 12:36.
A. The word is also translated barren, and would mean any useless, worthless words. The day of judgment will investigate not merely every evil thing but whatever is an improper or foolish use of our powers of body or mind.
Q. 370. Why are the words at the end of Judg. 5:15 different from those at the end of verse 16? C. B.
A. The words in the original are different, and therefore correctly rendered by two different English words. The character of Hebrew poetry is to repeat the same thought, slightly varying it each time.
Q. 371. In 1 Kings 7:26 we are told that the molten sea held 2000 baths, and in 2 Chron. 4:5 that it "received and held 3000 baths." Please explain the difference. c. H. P.
A. We shall be glad to receive some explanation of the apparent discrepancy.
Q. 372. What should we understand the word " angel" to mean in Rev. 2 and 3? F. J.
A. They mean men viewed as representatives of different assemblies, and held responsible for the state of each church. They cannot be " angelic beings" as we can hardly conceive of our Lord writing by a man to such. The word is used in a similar sense as " a representative" in Acts 12:15.
Q. 373. Explain Matt. 5:42, and Luke 6:30.
A. The whole discourse is the contrast between the principles of law and grace. The law requires a just weight and a balance in selling, but i grace gives and lends, and it is in the spirit of grace not of law we are to walk. We cannot of course either give or lend what is not our own, and other Scriptures bring in our responsibility in other ways. The great thing to see is that the principle of our walk is now more than justice, it is grace.
Q. 374. (1) Do the " ends of the world" (1 Cor. 10:11) mean the same as " the last days" 2 Tim. 3:1? (2) Please explain Joshua's answer, " Ye are witnesses against yourselves" Josh. 24:22. W. J. B.
A. (1) It is a much broader expression, and would include the last days. It means the last ages or epochs of this world's history. (2) He meant in case that they failed in so doing, their own words would condemn them, and that hence they were witnesses against themselves.
Q. 375. (1) How can we reconcile 2 Chron. 15:19 with 1 Kings 15:16? (2) Does Lam. 1:12 refer to the sufferings of our Lord or to those of Israel? W. J. B.
A. (1) The "war" probably preceded the building of Ramah, and may be alluded to in 2 Chron. 17:2. The statement of Kings shows that there was no peace or truce between Asa and Baasha. This is quite compatible with a cessation of active hostilities for a time, which is probably what 2 Chron. 15:19 means. (2) It does refer to the sufferings of Lord, but primarily doubtless to those of the Jewish remnant into whose sorrows our Lord so largely entered in sympathy.
Q. 376. Who are the two witnesses spoken of in Rev. 11? M. H. U.
A. They are probably Moses and Elias, both of whom were carefully cared for by God in their death. Both moreover were witnesses at the Mount of Transfiguration where they were fully instructed as to Christ's coming decease. The one moreover shuts up heaven as did Elias, the other turns the water into blood as did Moses.
Q. 377. (1) What is the " glorious holy mountain" spoken of in Dan. 11:45? (2) Do we find any further account in Scripture of the battle spoken of in Rev. 16:14-16? *
A. (1) Is it not Mount Zion, which is often spoken of in such terms in scripture? (Ezek. 11:23; Zech. 8:3; Isa. 27:13). (2) Is not that in Rev. 19 the same!'