Q. 145. What is the meaning of " the second sabbath after the first "? Luke 6:1
A. Refer to B. S. vol. 2. p. 118, Q. 138, also to Jan. 1833, p. 8, Q. 1.
Q. 146. How was it possible for Samuel to be disquieted by the witch of Endor? (2) In what sense could the least in the kingdom of heaven be greater than John the Baptist? Matt. 11:11.
A. The way in which the narrative is told in I Sam. 12, seems to show that the witch was as alarmed and astonished at her success as the king himself. We cannot for one moment suppose that the incantations of any witch could disturb the blessed dead, but we can well see how God allowed Samuel here to appear to Saul, just as in a far different scene, Moses and Elias talked with Christ. (2) Refer to B. S. vol. 1. p. 541, Q. 434, also to B. S. Jan. 1883, p. 8, Q. 1.
Q. 147. Why is not the altar of incense mentioned in Heb. 9:2-5?
A. The " censer" is rendered rightly in the Revised Version margin "altar of incense." The word θυμιατήριον may mean "censer" but is used by Greek writers of the altar of incense. In Kings 6:22, it is said to be "by" or to "belong to" the oracle or Holy of Holies, but still it was not within the veil, though closely connected by the sprinkling of atoning blood with the mercy seat. It existed in Herod's temple, as shown in Luke 1:11, and was there in the Holy Place. We can well see the spiritual beauty of our altar of incense being "within the veil" in the most holy place according to Chapter 10, but cannot understand why it is here placed literally there. If we take the word θυμιατήριον to mean censer, we cannot see why the altar is omitted. Will some one explain?
Q. 148. Why did Jesus say "Go, and do thou likewise." Luke 10:37. (2) What does " The old is better " mean? Luke 5:39.
A. The man was seeking to justify himself by keeping the law, and was as yet unconscious of his inability to keep it. The Lord, after explaining its full force, left him to discover his own inability to be saved by his works. (2) The meaning is apparent, wine increasing in value according to its age.
Q. 149. Is the "tabernacle of witness" the most holy place? (2) Did Moses go in to the Holiest without blood and not die? Num. 17:7-8.
A. Yes. It appears so. (2) Yes. The blood was already sprinkled there, and Moses did not go in as a priest, but in his entirely exceptional position as the mediator of the old covenant.
Q. 150. Please explain Matt. 15:5,6.
A. The Lord here quotes from the Rabbinical traditions, which were to the effect that a form of words could absolve a son from his filial duties, as commanded by God's law.
Q. 151. How could the Sadducees believe in God? In Acts 23:8, we read that they " say there is no resurrection neither Angel nor Spirit," and our Lord said " God is a Spirit "? (2) Could not the Pharisees, at least in a great many things, be compared to the Roman Catholic priests of today?
A. The Sadducees did not believe in life after death, either in the form of angel or spirit. We do not believe they actually denied the existence of angels, as there is no record that they did, besides which their great boast was that they accepted the written law of God which so frequently speaks of angels. It is probable in this case that what the Sadducees disbelieved in were the Rabbinical traditions respecting angels, and also probably they questioned whether in that day they spoke to men. (2) We need not look so far as Romanism to find modern Pharisaism. Probably we shall find it nearer home.
Q. 152. In what way is the wave offering a type of Christ, Num. 6:20? (2) Why were the children of Israel to put their hands upon the Levites as commanded in Num. 8:10?
A. Christ is our " peace" offering, and it was this which was here waved. (2) Laying the hands upon another meant frequently identification in the Old Testament. So here, inasmuch as the Levites were in place of the people as an offering to the Lord. In a similar way the man put his hand on the head of the burnt offering in Lev. 1:4.
Q. 153. Of what are the silver trumpets (Num. 10:2.) a type?
A. The public testimony of God as to the gathering and the journeying of the people. This testimony now gathers God's people around Himself and makes them go forward. All was done in communion with God in the Holiest. In war too, an alarm was sounded, God's testimony was proclaimed without fear, and God was with them. If we give a faithful testimony we have nothing to fear.
Q. 154. What is the practical application of Rom. 14:21?
A. To consider our brother's, and not merely our own conscience in our ways. We must avoid all occasions of stumbling others. To act otherwise is mere selfishness or worse.
Q. 155. Josh. 5:9. What was the reproach of Egypt, and how was it rolled away? (2) Could Lam. 1:12,13 be applied to our Lord on the cross?
A. It appears to refer to the rite of circumcision. In Egypt the Israelites had largely fallen into the ways of the Egyptians, (Ezek. 20) and the rite of circumcision had no doubt been neglected (Ex. 4:25). (2) Primarily no doubt it refers to the sin of Zion, but, inasmuch as Christ bore all sin on the cross, it certainly may be applied in measure to Him.
Q. 156. Would it not be adhering closer to the scripture if Christians assembled in the evening to break bread?
A. The Lord's supper was originally instituted as such in connection with the Paschal supper, which had to be eaten between 4 and 6 p.m. Afterward it appears to have been eaten by Christians on the first day of the week (perhaps at first every day). In Acts 20:11 it was not eaten till day break, and since then the general custom has been to eat it in the morning. The severance of the Lord's supper, first from the Passover feast (which was only annual), and next from the ordinary supper, combined with the increased facilities afforded, when once the Lord's day became a day of rest from daily toil, may account for this change. Literally an evening assembly would be more Scriptural, but spiritually it seems fitter that this solemn act should be the first and most prominent event on the Lord's day.
Q. 157. What is meant by the "second veil" in Heb. 9:3? for in Ex. 26 we only read of one.
A. Ex. 26 speaks of two; one in verse 31, the other in verse 36.
Q. 158. Are we to understand from Acts 2:4. that all the disciples were "filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues," or only the apostles? (2) In the early days of the Church, was the descent of the Holy Ghost always accompanied by the gift of tongues; see Acts 10:44-46; 19:6?
A. Certainly: the whole body of disciples were together. (2) Probably, though it does not say so in Acts 8:17.
Q. 159. Explain 1 Cor. 5:10, especially the latter clause. (2) Does the latter part of 2 Cor. 12:14 state a divine principle, or is it only an illustration drawn from home life?
A. One cannot avoid in business &c. contact with the world, both with ungodly and with immoral men, but it ought not to be so in the Church. (2)The apostle here touchingly justifies his conduct by an illustration from home life. He merely stated what was universally true.
Q. 160. Does the latter clause of Rom. 6:12 apply to Christians?
A. Certainly, why not? We are not to obey the lusts of sin in our mortal bodies, but the will of God.
Q. 161. Referring to Q. 65 p.85, on Zech. 3.61 my difficulty is, that I cannot see the distinction here made between the false prophet of v. 3. and the one who says " Those with which I etas wounded in the house of my friends." E.
A. The alteration from "'they" (verse 4) to "he" (verse 5) seems to show that the subject is changed. The passage is a difficult one. The end of verse 5 is sometimes rendered—'Man has acquired me as a slave (or servant) from my youth." Verses 6 and 7 are clearly Christ, but it is not easy to see, in the mystical language of the prophet, where the transition is. It seems to be at verse 5.
Q. 162. Referring to Q. 66, does not Matt. 5:40 teach that one should not defend an unjust prosecution?
A. Certainly as far as my rights go. Christ may have His concerned, and we can quite understand circumstances occurring where a charge of evil or sin is made, that it would be right for the Christian to answer to the charge.
Q. 163. Explain Dan. 12:2. Is this after the Millennium, and are those who awake to everlasting life, those who are saved after the Church is caught up? Are there more than two resurrections?
A. See B. S. vol. 2. p. 197, Q. 204, also 13.S. Jan. 1883, p. 8,Q. I.
Q. 164. Does Matt. 18;23-35 refer to Christians? If so please explain ver. 34, 35. (2) Explain Heb. 10:38. (R. V.)
A. It means servants who rightly or wrongly take the place of Christians. Whether they are so or not is seen by their actions, but they are all taken on their profession and treated as servants. (2) There appears to be good authority for the "my" The sense is the same, only with the " my" it seems that God owns as His the righteous one who lives by faith.
Q. 165. Explain Heb. 11:20. Did not Jacob obtain the blessing by falsehood and deceit, and how then did Isaac bless him and Esau, " by faith "?
A. This refers to The moment when Isaac's will gave place to God's (read carefully Gen. 27:33), and though deceived at first, in faith he sees God's hand in it all.
Q. 166. What is the cross in Luke 9:23? (2) Explain Phil. 3:11.
A. Suffering for Christ's sake (1 Peter 4:14), which every disciple must incur if he follows his Lord. (2) See B. S. vol. 2. p. 224, Q. 225, also B. S. Jan. 1883, p. 8, O. 1.
Q. 167. Explain the differences in time of the crucifixion as given in Mark 15:25, "the third hour," and John 19:14, where the " sixth hour " was some time previous to the crucifixion.
A. The common and correct explanation is, that John speaks in Roman hours meaning 6 a.m.; Mark in Jewish, meaning 9 a.m.; the Jewish day beginning at 6 a.m.
Q. 168. Whom do the "beasts of the field (Deut. 7:22.) typify?
A. If the land was laid waste all at once, the wild beasts of Palestine would rapidly increase.
Q. 169. If Paul was looking for the coming of Christ at any moment, as 1 Thess. 4:17, and other Scriptures seem to show, how is it that he made provision for the saints in future? for instance see 2 Tim. 2:2;4. 3, 5; Acts 20:28-31. Does he not here seem to direct their minds to a time that must intervene before His coming.
A. Paul does make provision for the future, and even foretells what will occur after his death, and that by divine inspiration; hence strictly speaking, he could not be looking to be caught up as we can now, who have no such revelation. Moreover it is quite probable that the revelation that was made to Peter (2 Pet. 1:14), that he should die and not be changed, was also made to Paul. We have nothing of the sort.
Q. 170. Why does Paul in Gal. 2:9 say " seemed to be "? Were not James, Peter and John pillars of the Church?
A. The Revised Version makes it clear; "were reputed to be." No doubt is thrown on the fact.
Q. 171. Was Jephthah's daughter really sacrificed? I mean killed. The answer to Q. 309 vol. 2. does not make the case quite clear to me.
A. The margin in Judg. 11:31, reads "or" instead of "and." Jephthah's daughter was dedicated to God in being a virgin to her death. We do not believe she was offered up as a burnt offering. No human sacrifices were ever offered to God.
Q. 172. Is there any special significance in the words " wounded him in the head." Mark 12:4? (2) Was or was not Judas present at the institution of the Lord's supper?
A. It only seems to mark the progressive malice and boldness of the wicked husbandmen. (2) The older Christian writers generally think he was, the more modern that he was not. We have not however seen any satisfactory explanation of Luke 22:21. We shall be glad to have any further light upon the subject.
Q. 173. In Matt. the Lord's words are recorded "before the cock crow," in Mark " before the cock, crow twice" please explain. (2) Matt. 27:9. is there any explanation of the insertion of the word " Jeremy," the quotation being from Zechariah?
A. They are not contradictory; Matthew may have omitted the word "twice." (2) One version omits the word " Jeremiah," but the better explanation appears to be that the division of books containing the prophecy of Zechariah was known by the collective name of Jeremiah, that being the book with which it commenced Q. 174. What was the cause of the change of color of the manna in Num. 11:7. (where we read it was yellow like the bdellium) from the white which we find was its color Ex. 16?
A. It does not say it was yellow, but like bdellium. No one knows what this was; some think a pearl is meant, others crystal.
Q. 175. What is having the heart sprinkled from an evil conscience, Heb. 10:22? Is it the practical walk?
A. It is rather the position in which the blood of Christ has set us, see 1 Peter 1:2.
Q. 176. Is " the day" in Heb. 10:25. the time of the Lord's gathering us to Himself?
A. Yes, speaking exactly; or generally, the day of the Lord.
Q. 177. One of your previous answers’ says "There is therefore no Scripture to show that the ark took any long time in building." Is this correct? I have referred to three or four Bibles and I find by the margin the command to build the Ark was given in or about 2448 B.C., and they entered the ark 2349 B.C. This giving 99 years. The command to build the ark is given in Gen. 6:14, and the particulars for building the same in verses 15 and 16-whereas the fact of Noah's sons being married comes in the 18th verse, and I cannot see one word to prove that they were all married before God commanded Noah to build the ark, and further if we were to accept your correspondent's idea on this point how would you reconcile that with Peter 3:20.-" When once the long suffering of God waited in the days of Noah while the ark was a preparing." Where would the long suffering come in, if only a short time was occupied in the preparing? As to " Lamech living to within five years and Methusaleh till the very year of the flood," I cannot see that that proves anything.-My desire in raising this point is if possible to arrive at the truth.
A. It seems that you consider the building of the ark probably extended over about 120 years, that being the time that the longsuffering of God (1 Peter 3:20) is generally supposed to have waited, and in support of this you quote the chronology which fixes the time at about 99 years; and that further you disagree with the statement that there is no Scriptural proof that the ark took any long time in building. We will first of all consider on what grounds the idea of its taking 120 years rests. The chronology is arranged with obvious exactness to support the idea of 120 years. Thus in Bagsters' large Bible we find verse 14,.c. 2469, Chapter 7:1, B.C. 2348, an amount of exactness which if reliable would settle the question. It is clear, however, that this chronology does not so much represent the dates when these events occurred as the relation between them according to a preconceived theory based on verse 3. Our present question is, Is this theory true? We may therefore consider the chronology only as representing probably Archbishop Usher's opinion. The second objection that the command was in ver. 14, and that Noah's sons are not named till ver. 18 does not appear of much value, if the whole was spoken on the same occasion, and we think every careful reader of ver. 13-21 will see that it is one continuous address. It is therefore clear that when God ordered the ark to be built He spoke of Noah's sons as being- already married.
Now if we are to accept (not Bagsters' chronology but the word of God) not one of them was even born at this time, for the flood came in Noah's 600th year, and he was 800 years old before he begat his three sons. The reason of his being so advanced in age is obvious when we consider how desirable it was that his sons who had to re-people the earth should still have a long span of life before them when they came out of the ark. Now these three sons were probably born at different times. Japheth therefore would not be born till considerably less than 100 years before the flood, and the language of ver.18 (plainly fulfilled in seems to spew that even Japheth was then married. The youngest marriage hitherto recorded is that of Enoch at 65 years, the average age (excluding Noah's) being a little over 103 years. If we allow that Japheth was born 5 years after Shem and married at 65, this brings us to within 30 years of the flood. In reference to verses 3, 4, 7 it must be remarked that they were addressed to no one. Verse 3 too is in direct contrast to ver. 13. There God yet gave man 120 years (some think the verse means his days were shortened to 120 years henceforth), in verse 13, the end of all flesh had at last come, and the most apparent reason why even this was announced to Noah was to give him time to prepare an ark for the saving of his house. The whole language of the passage (esp. ver. 17) is as speaking of a near event. The passage in 1 Peter 3:20 speaks of the longsuffering of God waiting, and 2 Peter 2:5 speaks of Noah as a preacher. If we accept the fact that 1 Peter 3:19 means that he preached by Christ's Spirit to those spirits, afterward in prison for their disobedience to the message, this plainly limits the time of the longsuffering here alluded to, to a period subsequent to Gen. 6:14. There is no mention of 120 years.
Q. 178. Why is it that according to 1 Kings 15:1, 7, Abijam king of Judah seems to have been a wicked king, while in 2 Chron. 13 he appears in a much better light?
A. You will find that this is the case in Chronicles with other Kings beside Abijam. The Kings give us the general and public history of Israel in connection with God's government, Chronicles rather the history of the same period, under the aspect of the blessing and grace of God in connection with the house of David, exhibiting only such faults as require to be known to understand the grace.
Q. 179. Does "that day," John 14:20, refer to the descent of the Holy Ghost? (2) What is the meaning of " have erred concerning the faith," 1 Tim. 6:21?
A. Probably, in its fullness. (2) It means having left the faith, being led away by false science. Instances of this are very common now.
Q. 180. Why are ten women spoken of in Lev. 26:26?
A. Because ten among the Jews formed a company, hence ten virgins, &c..