Q. 44. —Do not Luke 7:24-28 rather sustain Iota’s thought, when Christ says “What went ye out for to see? a reed shaken with the wind?” Christ, I think, there desired to point out that John was not moved by surrounding things, and driven about and shaken by the wind. —Ephesians 4:14.
E. H.
Q. 122. —May I suggest that the reason why the burnt offering is mentioned before the sin offering in Numbers 6:14, is probably because devotion to Jehovah is the primary thought in this verse, rather than trespass against Jehovah. In the preceding verses the law provided an offering for the Nazarite who had, during the days of his separation, defiled the head of his consecration; therefore the sin offering is first mentioned in verse 11.
Before he could offer as in verse 14, the Nazarite must of necessity have proved his consecration to Jehovah by the fulfillment of his vow. As soon as the days of his separation were fulfilled, the Lord graciously allowed him, by the burnt offering, to express that he had willingly performed all that he had voluntarily undertaken to fulfill. At the same time, by offering a sin offering, he confessed and acknowledged personal failure in the practical fulfillment of his vow.
In verse 16, it is the priest who offers the Nazarite’s offering to the Lord. Now the sin offering is first mentioned —full atonement must be made for the sins he had committed, before the now freed Nazarite could enjoy that communion which the burnt offering here typifies.
It may not be out of place also to mention that, although the individual offender must needs offer his several offerings in the order set forth in the law for each particular offering, this does not necessarily infer that the burnt offerings, and those portions of the other offerings which were to be consumed by fire, were consumed in consecutive order. Even with regard to the great day of atonement, Leviticus 16:24, 25 implies that the priest’s burnt offering, the people’s burnt offering, and the fat of the sin-offering, were all consumed simultaneously. In Leviticus 9:24, we are told that fire came out from before the Lord, and consumed upon the altar the burnt-offering and the fat —what of? the burnt offering simply? The burnt offering was wholly consumed— “the fat” evidently signifies the fat of the peace and other offerings, &c., so also 2 Chronicles 7:1; 2 Chronicles 29:20-29 is most instructive on this point; v. 21 speaks of a sin offering, v. 24 of the burnt offering and sin offering, but in v. 27 the term “ the burnt offering” appears to include all that was at that moment being consumed on the altar, viz., the burnt offering, and the fat of the sin offering; compare Leviticus 4:19. At the same moment Jehovah graciously accepted the entire offering of the many worshippers. A. J.
Q. 526. —In the second part of the answer you say, “A Bible reading ought to be free for all to ask questions; the only limit mold be that which propriety would suggest when they are large or public.” Will you please give me your authority for this answer? and also when you have done so, tell me what you can about 1 Timothy 2 it, where in reply to a desire on the part of a sister as to how she should behave herself in the house of God, which is the assembly of the living God, the pillar and base of the truth, she is told to learn in silence with all subjection. Does this mean that she is to ask questions? A. J. B.
A. Our correspondent has told us a great deal more about 1 Timothy 2 Than the passage itself does, and moreover lays great stress on “silence,” which is rendered in the Revised Version “ quietness.” His main error, however, is in assuming that the reading of the Scripture for mutual edification is ever regarded as a meeting of the assembly, where the Holy Ghost is free to distribute to every man as He will. The difference is so obvious that it only needs pointing out. A reading meeting is nowhere regarded in the light our correspondent puts it, and we still adhere to our former answer.
Q. I have heard it stated that previous to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, believers went to Hades (the blessed portion, paradise) but after that He had broken the power of death by His resurrection, believers departed to be with Him, i.e., at God’s right hand, and not in Hades. Do you think that may be so? H. W. P.
A. There appears to be no good ground for this thought. Our Lord Himself and the dying thief went to Hades, and it is not abolished till Revelation 20 and we can find no Scripture to support the idea. It is worthy of note that the apostle says in Thessalonians 4:17 even of those who have died in Christ and are therefore “with Christ” “So shall we be forever with the Lord,” as something new; as it surely will be, when the complete man, body, soul, and spirit stands for the first time in the Lord’s presence on the morning of the resurrection.