prompt
stringlengths 0
158
| response
stringlengths 14
40.2k
|
|---|---|
What does the Bible say about expectations?
|
Answer
Expectations can be high or low, reasonable or unreasonable, good or bad. The Bible speaks of expectations of redemption (Romans 8:19\), expectations of judgment (Hebrews 10:27\), delayed expectations (Proverbs 13:12a), realized expectations (Proverbs 13:12b), and unrealized expectations (Proverbs 11:7\). Jesus told us to expect His return—although the *timing* of His return is beyond our knowing: “Be ready, because the Son of Man will come at an hour when you do not expect him” (Luke 12:40\).
Simply put, expectations are beliefs that come from a person’s thought process when examining evidence. We see the eastern sky grow pink, for example, and so we expect to soon see the sun. Our expectations are not always correct because of flaws in our logic and the bias of hope and desire. Sometimes, we “get our hopes up” based on a false premise or a misreading of the evidence. Often, we form expectations automatically, without conscious effort. When expectations are not met, pain ensues, and we often place blame on something or someone who did not live up to our expectations—even if our expectations were unreasonable.
Expectations based on human assumptions can cause trouble. For example, when a man and a woman get married, they both carry expectations into the marriage. The man may see evidence that his wife is a caring, kind, and patient person. He may form expectations about what she will be like as a mother. Or perhaps his own mother was a great cook, and he expects his wife to possess the same culinary skills. If she does not turn out to be a patient mother or a particularly good cook, he may feel hurt and let down. The woman going into the marriage may see evidence that her husband has a good job and is well\-liked by others. She forms an expectation that they will not likely have money troubles. Then, if he loses his job or changes careers and they begin to struggle financially, she may resent him based on her expectation. This couple is now dealing with hurt feelings and resentment based entirely on what they had *hoped* would happen. There was no promise made in either case, but they both still feel as if they’ve been deceived. Faulty expectations can create a lot of trouble in any relationship, be it parent/child, boss/employee, friends, ministry partners, or members of a sports team. Any time there is mutual dependency, expectations exist, and, if those expectations are not met, conflict can be the result.
Many times, expectations come from what we’re used to, our family growing up, or our own personalities. If you grew up in a family where shouting and open conflict was the normal way to resolve an issue, you will expect others to shout and be pugnacious if they have a problem with you. A person who prefers to hide emotion and talk issues out rationally may find it impossible to convince you that she’s been hurt—she’s not shouting yet, so it can’t be that serious—and you therefore continue to repeat the behavior that irritates her.
There are some people who the Bible says should not expect much. The wicked, Proverbs 11:7 says, should not expect to retain their ill\-gotten gains: “When the wicked dies, his hope will perish, / and the expectation of wealth perishes too” (ESV; cf. Proverbs 10:28\). Crime doesn’t pay, in other words. And the double\-minded, faithless man should not expect answers to prayer: “That person should not expect to receive anything from the Lord” (James 1:7\).
On the other hand, the Bible encourages those who trust in the Lord to expect good things from Him. “My soul, wait thou only upon God; for my expectation is from him” (Psalm 62:5, KJV). Those who live in the fear of the Lord have this promise in Proverbs 23:18: “There is surely a future hope for you, / and your hope will not be cut off.” The godly are justified in having great expectations.
The Bible lays out some principles that help us form expectations and deal with the expectations of others:
**Communicate:** Openness and honesty with ourselves and with others is the first key. We all fail ourselves and others in many ways (James 3:2\), and we should be able to admit when we are wrong. We should not base our expectations on mere assumption (see Proverbs 18:13\) but on verifiable truth, if at all possible. We should discuss with our loved ones what our expectations are and what theirs are.
**Forgive:** The people in Jesus’ day were expecting the Messiah (Luke 3:15\), but, when He came, they had some unrealistic expectations of what He’d do. They wanted the Messiah to free them from Rome, and they wrongly expected Jesus to establish His kingdom then and there (Luke 19:11\). When He did not fulfill their expectations, they were frustrated and angry enough to kill. But Jesus forgave (Luke 23:34\). If Jesus could forgive the men who called out “Crucify Him!” we can forgive our loved ones and friends who harbor wrong expectations of us.
**Love:** Love is patient and kind, and it does not insist on its own way (1 Corinthians 13:4–7\). We need to remember that all people are different. If we have formed expectations for friends or loved ones that they cannot live up to, it is not their fault. We have the power to change our expectations, and, if we find that our expectations of others are unreasonable, we should be flexible.
In everything, we should look to God and trust Him (Proverbs 3:5–6\). His promises are absolutely sound, and our expectation that He will fulfill His Word is called faith. We can expect God to do exactly what He says He will do (2 Corinthians 1:20; Joshua 21:45; Psalm 77:8; 2 Peter 1:4\). When based on God’s Word, our expectations will never fail to be met. “The statutes of the Lord are trustworthy” (Psalm 19:7\).
|
What were the various sacrifices in the Old Testament?
|
Answer
There are five main types of sacrifices, or offerings, in the Old Testament. The burnt offering (Leviticus 1; 6:8–13; 8:18\-21; 16:24\), the grain offering (Leviticus 2; 6:14–23\), the peace offering (Leviticus 3; 7:11–34\), the sin offering (Leviticus 4; 5:1–13; 6:24–30; 8:14–17; 16:3–22\), and the trespass offering (Leviticus 5:14–19; 6:1–7; 7:1–6\). Each of these sacrifices involved certain elements, either animal or fruit of the field, and had a specific purpose. Most were split into two or three portions—God’s portion, the portion for the Levites or priests, and, if there was a third, a portion kept by the person offering the sacrifice. The sacrifices can be broadly categorized as either voluntary or mandatory offerings.
**Voluntary Sacrifices**
There were three voluntary offerings. The first was the [burnt offering](burnt-offering.html), a voluntary act of worship to express devotion or commitment to God. It was also used as an atonement for unintentional sin. The elements of the burnt offering were a bull, a bird, or a ram without blemish. The meat and bones and organs of the animal were to be totally burnt, and this was God’s portion. The animal’s hide was given to the Levites, who could later sell it to earn money for themselves.
The second voluntary offering was the [grain offering](grain-offering.html), in which the fruit of the field was offered in the form of a cake or baked bread made of grain, fine flour, and oil and salt. The grain offering was one of the sacrifices accompanied by a [drink offering](drink-offering.html) of one\-quarter hin (about a quart) of wine, which was poured into the fire on the altar (Numbers 15:4–5\). The purpose of the grain offering was to express thanksgiving in recognition of God’s provision and unmerited goodwill toward the person making the sacrifice. The priests were given a portion of this offering, but it had to be eaten within the court of the tabernacle.
The third voluntary offering was the [peace offering](peace-offering.html), which consisted of any unblemished animal from the worshiper’s herd, and/or various grains or breads. This was a sacrifice of thanksgiving and fellowship followed by a shared meal. The high priest was given the breast of the animal; the officiating priest was given the right foreleg. These pieces of the offering were called the “[wave offering](wave-offering.html)” and the “heave offering” because they were waved or lifted over the altar during the ceremony. The fat, kidneys, and lobe of the liver were given to God (burnt), and the remainder of the animal was for the participants to eat, symbolizing God’s provision. The vow offering, thanksgiving offering, and freewill offering mentioned in the Old Testament were all peace offerings.
**Mandatory Sacrifices**
There were two mandatory sacrifices in the Old Testament Law. The first was the sin offering. The purpose of the sin offering was to atone for sin and cleanse from defilement. There were five possible elements of a sin sacrifice—a young bull, a male goat, a female goat, a dove/pigeon, or 1/10 ephah of fine flour. The type of animal depended on the identity and financial situation of the giver. A female goat was the sin offering for the common person, fine flour was the sacrifice of the very poor, a young bull was offered for the high priest and the congregation as a whole, and so on. These sacrifices each had specific instructions for what to do with the blood of the animal during the ceremony. The fatty portions and lobe of the liver and kidneys were given to God (burnt); the rest of the animal was either totally burned on the altar and the ashes thrown outside the camp (in atoning for the high priest and congregation), or eaten within the tabernacle court.
The other mandatory sacrifice was the trespass offering, and this sacrifice was exclusively a ram. The trespass offering was given as atonement for unintentional sins that required reimbursement to an offended party, and also as a cleansing from defiling sins or physical maladies. Again, the fat portions, kidneys, and liver were offered to God, and the remainder of the ram had to be eaten inside the court of the tabernacle.
The sacrifices in the Old Testament pointed forward to the perfect and final sacrifice of Christ. As with the rest of the Law, the sacrifices were “a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ” (Colossians 2:17\). Christians today recognize Christ’s atoning death on the cross as the only needed sacrifice for sin, offered once for all (Hebrews 10:1–10\). His death opened the “holy place” for us (Hebrews 10:19–22\) so that we can freely enter God’s presence and offer our “sacrifice of praise” (Hebrews 13:15; cf. 9:11–28; 4:14—5:10\).
|
Is belief in God compatible with quantum physics?
|
Answer
Quantum physics, also known as quantum mechanics, is an application of mathematics used to describe the behavior of matter and energy at an unimaginably tiny scale. Even more than other specialized fields within the sciences, it is extraordinarily difficult to explain quantum theories in layman’s terms. Not only does quantum mechanics involve higher\-level physics, but much of what happens at the quantum level is counterintuitive. That is, it does not follow the same flow of cause and effect we see at larger scales. Merely expressing what occurs at the quantum level sometimes requires an exceptional grasp of mathematics and physics.
The theories of quantum physics help explain why changes in physical objects at nanoscopic scales only occur in discrete amounts, known as quanta, as well as why these objects appear to act as both waves and particles. Quantum mechanics also shows that, at these tiny distances, cause\-and\-effect relationships work according to probabilities rather than determined, specific results. Like most other physical theories, quantum physics was developed over many decades through the work of many different scientists. As models go, however, it is a relatively recent one, having only been accepted by the general scientific community for the past one hundred years or so.
In common experience, quantum physics rarely makes a noticeable impact. Part of the difference between classical and quantum physics is that quantum\-level interactions occur according to a probability curve, not a well\-defined, absolute cause\-and\-effect response. However, as a system includes more and more interactions, the probability of some extreme result lessens. Thus, large\-scale systems are, in fact, well\-defined and absolute and can be predicted with accuracy. The value of quantum mechanics lies in explaining these tinier transactions, which is useful in theoretical physics and high\-level design, but practically meaningless to the average person’s daily experience.
Two aspects of quantum physics are often cited when discussing God or religion. The first is the nature of observed cause and effect in quantum\-level interactions. Actions and reactions at the quantum level can appear to violate barriers such as the speed of light and/or to occur without a logical relationship between cause and effect. Depending on how one chooses to interpret the observations, this property either makes God’s existence seem *more* likely, as it provides an unpredictable opening for some unknown “choice”; or it makes God’s existence *less* likely, since it makes what is normally considered impossible just a question of long odds.
The second common issue relating quantum physics to spirituality is the [Many Worlds hypothesis](multiverse-theory.html). This stems from the wave\-particle duality demonstrated by quantum physics and the necessity for probability rather than an objective, determined system. Since there are many possible states of a measured system and no objective way to know which ones do or do not exist, some philosophers claim that *all* of them exist, simultaneously, in parallel universes. Of course, there is no possible physical evidence to support this. The theory persists mostly because it serves to deflect [fine\-tuning](fine-tuning-argument.html) and intelligent design arguments, as well as evidence suggesting a universe of a finite age.
The Bible claims God’s handiwork can be seen in creation (Psalm 19:1; Romans 1:20\). The early pioneers of modern physics were mostly theists, particularly Christians, and they didn’t see their discoveries as eliminating God. Rather, they saw them as illuminating God’s methods. John Polkinghorne is an example of this in action, specifically involving quantum physics. Polkinghorne, a lifelong Christian, is one of the scientists responsible for discovering the sub\-nuclear particles known as quarks, a critical part of the quantum model. He retired after twenty\-five years teaching at Cambridge in order to become an Anglican priest. His scientific credentials are such that even aggressive anti\-theists, such as Richard Dawkins, are at a loss to write off his faith as delusion or confusion.
Ultimately, what impact quantum mechanics has on one’s view of God has little to do with physics and much to do with personal intentions. The scientific method has been an extremely successful way of discovering how God accomplished certain parts of His creative work. Learning the physical mechanisms of the universe doesn’t change the fact that there is a Designer and Creator who put them into place. Quantum physics, like any other scientific discipline, is perfectly [compatible](science-God.html) with the Bible’s teaching of God.
|
What does the Bible say about disobedient children?
|
Answer
From the young toddler who just learned the word “no” to the older child acting out in willful defiance, all parents face the challenge of disobedient children. And, at the heart of the matter, disobedience is not just a child issue. The Bible shows us we all battle the desire to rule ourselves and do as we please because we all are born into sin and rebellion (Psalm 51:5; Ephesians 2:3; Romans 3:10; 7:17–21\). This battle against self\-rule can wage an all\-out war on our children if their disobedience is left unchecked; a war that will affect their future relationships with teachers, employers, friends, spouses, aging parents, and even their Heavenly Father. Yet, when we turn to the Bible, we find great hope in the fact that God gives the tools to train and discipline disobedient children and even promises blessing to those who learn and grow in obedience.
The command to honor and obey parents permeates Scripture, beginning in Exodus when God gives the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:12\) all the way through the Old Testament (Leviticus 19:3; Deuteronomy 5:16; Proverbs 1:8; 6:20–21; 23:22\) and into the New. Both Jesus and the apostle Paul reaffirm the fifth commandment (Matthew 15:4; 19:19; Ephesians 6:1–3; Colossians 3:20\) and the promise that comes with it. Children are encouraged that their obedience will bring blessing and long life (Exodus 20:12; Jeremiah 35:17–19; Ephesians 6:3; Colossians 3:20\), while disobedient children who dishonor their parents are admonished that their behavior will bring punishment and shame (Leviticus 20:9; Deuteronomy 21:18; 27:16; Proverbs 10:1; 15:5; 20:20; 30:17; Matthew 15:4\). Widespread disobedience to parents will characterize society in the end times (2 Timothy 3:2\).
The nation of Israel, whom God calls His children (Exodus 4:22\), provides an example for disobedient children. Repeatedly, God commands Israel to obey Him, promising great blessing for obedience and dire consequences for disobedience. In Joshua’s day, Israel obeyed God and was blessed with victory over their enemies (Joshua 11:23\). Later, as the whole book of Judges shows, Israel’s disobedience brought trouble.
The Bible teaches the necessity of correcting disobedient children. Discipline is a part of life for everyone, and those who rebel against the authority of parents are to be [chastised](disciplining-children.html). Proverbs 19:18 says, “Discipline your children, for in that there is hope; / do not be a willing party to their death.” In this verse, discipline of a child is presented as a matter of life and death. Disobedience, left unchecked, will lead a child to eventual ruin. Proverbs 13:24 says, “Whoever [spares the rod](spare-rod-spoil-child.html) hates their children, / but the one who loves their children is careful to discipline them.” Here, love and careful discipline go hand in hand. The idea is refuted that a “loving” parent will never discipline a child. To turn a blind eye to [rebellion](rebellious-child.html) is to hate the rebellious child.
Ephesians 6 is a key passage. Verse 1 speaks to children: “Children, obey your parents in the Lord.” That is, obedience to one’s parents is the God\-given duty of every child. As long as the parents’ commands do not violate God’s Word, the child should obey. Verse 4 speaks to fathers: “Fathers, do not exasperate your children; instead, bring them up in the training and instruction of the Lord.” It is the duty of fathers to train their children in a godly way and to instruct them in the Lord’s Word. In so doing parents set their children up for the best chance for a long and prosperous life in this world (verse 3\)—and treasures in heaven, too (Matthew 6:20; Galatians 6:8–9; Ephesians 1:3–4\).
Who is wise? Let them realize these things.
Who is discerning? Let them understand.
The ways of the LORD are right;
the righteous walk in them,
but the rebellious stumble in them.
Hosea 14:9
|
What is Bel and the Dragon?
|
Answer
Bel and the Dragon is one of several additions to the book of Daniel. The original [book of Daniel](Book-of-Daniel.html) ends after chapter twelve. The extra material is found only in translations, such as the Septuagint, but not in the [Masoretic Text](Masoretic-Text.html). Bel and the Dragon is a later addition most likely derived from various legends and folk stories about Daniel. This non\-canonical material includes chapter 13, known as the “Song of the Three Children”; chapter 14, known as “Susanna”; and chapter 15, known as “Bel and the Dragon.” The fifteenth chapter is a single narrative in three parts.
According to the text of Bel and the Dragon, [Daniel](life-Daniel.html) is honored above all others by the new Persian king, [Cyrus](Cyrus-Bible.html). The king asks Daniel why he does not worship the statue of Bel, to which the people have been offering great quantities of food every day. Daniel replies that he does not worship false gods made with human hands but only the living God. Cyrus claims that Bel is a living god, since all of the food offered to him disappears each night—eaten, he claims, by the idol. Daniel repeats his belief that his God is superior to Bel.
In a rage, Cyrus pits the Persian priests against Daniel. If they cannot prove that Bel eats the food, they will be executed. If Daniel cannot prove someone else is eating it, he will be executed. The priests ask the king to place the food himself and then seal the room with his own signet. Without telling the priests, however, Daniel spreads ashes in the idol’s chamber, as the king watches. The idol and food are then sealed in the room overnight.
The next morning, the king breaks the seal and sees that the food has been eaten. He begins to praise Bel when Daniel points out the evidence in the ashes. There are footprints of men, women, and children leading to a secret door in the wall. The seventy priests and their families have been sneaking in nightly to eat the idol’s offerings. Cyrus is furious and orders the priests, their wives, and their children killed. He gives the idol of Bel to Daniel to be destroyed.
The second part of Bel and the Dragon involves an actual living dragon, which Cyrus again tells Daniel to worship. Since the dragon is flesh and blood, Cyrus claims, it is superior to Bel and should be honored. Daniel again claims to worship only God and says he can kill this dragon without weapons. The king agrees to Daniel’s demonstration, and Daniel poisons the dragon with a mixture of tar, hair, and ashes. This causes the dragon to burst open, proving it to be an inferior creature and not a god to be worshiped.
The final part of Bel and the Dragon is a re\-telling of Daniel’s experience in the [lions’ den](Daniel-lions-den.html). Angry that Daniel destroyed the idol Bel and the living dragon, the people of Persia demand Daniel be handed over to them. King Cyrus is afraid of a revolution, so he agrees. Daniel is thrown into a den with seven lions for six days. These lions were typically fed two human corpses and two sheep every day, but, to make them more ferocious for Daniel, they are starved.
According to the story, God provides for Daniel through the prophet Habakkuk. God does this by sending an angel to carry Habakkuk from Judea, by his hair, and holding him over the den so he can drop food to Daniel. On the seventh day, Cyrus sees that Daniel is alive and well. He orders the ringleaders of the people thrown into the lions’ den instead, and they are immediately devoured.
The book of Daniel is inspired, but Bel and the Dragon, as an addition to the inspired text, is not considered part of the biblical canon. It is included in some apocryphal Bibles and in Catholic versions of the text.
|
Is feminist theology biblical?
|
Answer
The term *feminism* itself is subject to many different interpretations, with varying levels of biblical support. “Feminist theology,” however, presents a number of major problems. Please note, there are themes within [feminism](feminism-Christian-feminist.html) that the Bible strongly endorses. The point here is not that all feminist or pro\-female ideas are inherently unbiblical—some are extremely biblical. The point is that re\-interpreting the Bible for the sake of female empowerment or a feminist\-political agenda is a flawed and unsupportable exercise.
First of all, adding any philosophical descriptor to theology is automatically suspect. It implies the theology is being interpreted with the deliberate intent of supporting an ideology; that the ideology comes first. This is backwards, since we ought to adjust our philosophy to match God’s words, not the other way around. When someone touts “X theology,” he is skewing theological interpretation in order to support “X.” This is the case with so\-called feminist theology, a term used to describe several different attempts to alter the Bible toward a preferred conclusion.
Feminist theology comes at different levels and in different areas. Four topics are most frequently challenged for the sake of female empowerment. These are the use of masculine language for God, female submission in marriage, the ordination of women, and reproductive rights. Advocates of feminist theology can point to legitimate support for at least some part of their ideas. The problem occurs when what the Bible says is stretched, taken out of context, or even ignored for the sake of the feminist interpretation.
Feminist theology often criticizes the use of male pronouns for God. According to this position, referring to God as “He,” “Him,” or “Father” degrades the status of women. As some advocates would say, “If God is a man, then men are gods.” The alternative is to refer to God only using gender\-neutral terms such as *the Divine* or to balance the offending terms with female equivalents such as *She*, *Her*, and *Mother*.
In this matter, however, feminist theology is opposing something that the Bible itself does not say. The Bible does not present [God as literally, biologically male](God-male-female.html). Nor does it indicate that women are morally or spiritually inferior. God’s choice to refer to Himself using masculine words in no way implies that men are superior to women. Further, the Bible does not “balance” male and female terminology with respect to God. God is sometimes described using female illustrations (Psalm 57:1; Isaiah 42:14; 66:13\), but He is never referred to using female gender words. When God refers to Himself, He always does so using masculine terms. The better interpretation is that there is something particular to the role of “Father” that better describes God’s intended relationship with us, more so than the role of “Mother.” Changing the words of God merely to satisfy a gender\-neutral preference is a dangerous form of biblical editing.
The submission of wives to husbands is also a target of feminist theology. Given that the Bible admonishes Christians to “submit to each other” (Ephesians 5:21\) and indicates that men and women are spiritually equal (Galatians 3:28\), feminist theology claims that women ought not actually “submit” to their husbands. Some go so far as to claim that marital submission makes women inferior to men.
Once again, this aspect of feminist theology not only defies what the Bible itself says, but it also creates theological contradictions. If the command to submit “to each other” is taken to the absolute, as feminist theology suggests, then children ought to expect submission from their parents. Likewise, if a person cannot be subordinate to another without being inferior, it would mean Jesus Christ is not actually God, nor equal to God, since He submitted to the Father’s will (Luke 22:42\). There is a biblical mandate for wives to submit to husbands. Of course, the Bible also says that husbands are to love their wives “as Christ loved the church” (Ephesians 5:25–26\), which means to love them humbly (Philippians 2:8\), sacrificially (Galatians 2:20\), and with a servant’s heart (John 13:4–5, 14–15\). The Bible does not give men license to be tyrants over their wives, but it does prescribe [unique and important roles](wives-submit.html) for men and women.
The ordination of women as pastors or priests is another area where feminist theology conflicts with sound biblical teachings. Using the same general arguments as above, feminist theology claims women should take on the same positions of spiritual leadership as men, with no distinction of roles. Of course, this claim relies less on interpretation of the Bible than on blatant rejection of its teaching as outdated or invalid. The role of women in the church and in the home is [not inferior](complementarianism-vs-egalitarianism.html) to that of men in any sense, but that role does not include headship (1 Timothy 2:12\). The Bible does not imply that men can never learn from a woman or be guided by one, but it does indicate that titles such as “priest” and “pastor” cannot be legitimately [claimed by women](women-in-ministry.html).
Perhaps the least biblically based attack from feminist theology involves the concept of “reproductive rights,” a common but extremely misleading term. In principle, “reproductive rights” would mean a woman has the right to choose whether or not to have children and with whom. Stated that way, it is a biblically sound concept. However, in practice, the term *reproductive rights* is almost always a euphemism for the right to abortion\-on\-demand. Once again, in order to support this branch of feminist theology, much of what the Bible says has to be abandoned outright. [The killing of unborn children](abortion-bible.html) under the guise of “reproductive rights” is patently anti\-biblical.
Some aspects of feminist theology are re\-interpretations or misinterpretations of biblical ideas. Gender\-inclusive language and the exact meaning of marital “submission” are contentious and sometimes cloudy topics. However, the ordination of women requires an almost complete rejection of biblical authority. And abortion\-on\-demand, without question, is totally incompatible with any honest approach to Scripture.
The Bible values, protects, and supports women. Aspects of feminism that empower women can easily find support in God’s Word. Feminist theology, which seeks to re\-shape the Bible according to a political agenda or a personal preference, cannot.
|
What is the Holiness movement / church?
|
Answer
The Holiness movement/church is an influence within Christianity that teaches that a person can achieve perfect holiness, or [sinless perfection](sinless-perfection.html), while on earth. This doctrine teaches “[entire sanctification](entire-sanctification.html),” which usually comes via a spiritual experience that those in the Holiness movement refer to as the “second work of grace” or the “[second blessing](second-blessing.html).” The Holiness movement is opposed by Reformed thinkers, who assert that original sin still exists in even the most faithful person.
The Holiness movement began in 1840 when a Methodist leader named Phoebe Palmer began to hold revivals and teach the necessity of holiness—and how to attain it. Groups and denominations historically associated with the Holiness movement include Wesleyans, Methodists, Nazarenes, and the Salvation Army. However, it should be noted that churches differ widely on doctrine, even within denominations. The Holiness movement did have a profound effect on the history of the church, particularly in North America during the Third Great Awakening. Holiness adherents are typically interested in obedience to the Law and see their obedience as a way to gain closeness to God and greater spirituality.
While holiness is a biblical mandate and something every believer should strive for (Hebrews 12:14\), those in the Holiness movement typically leave out an important detail: the fact that absolute holiness is impossible to attain. Perfection, sinlessness, and a holy life are not within man’s power to achieve. This idea is backed up by the Bible in numerous passages, most notably in the book of Romans. Paul’s argument in the first part of Romans is that man is fallen and unable to make himself follow the Law. In addition, it could be said that the whole history of Israel, with its repeated failures, is an object lesson about man’s inability to achieve holiness through the Law.
The Holiness movement is related to Pentecostalism in that it says that God helps the believer by giving him the “second blessing” of His Spirit. The “second blessing,” according to Holiness teaching, seals the believer in a sinless state. Unfortunately, a “sinless state” is not supported by either the Bible or human experience. While an emotional experience can make one feel that holiness is possible and that we never want to sin again, we still live in the flesh, and the flesh is still beset with weakness (Romans 7:14–19\). Even the apostle Paul was unable to be completely sinless, and he admitted as much, saying that the old law of sin was still alive in his body, even though he served God in his mind and spirit (Romans 7:21–23\). Elsewhere, Paul mentions a “thorn” in his flesh, making him rely on God’s strength instead of his own weakness (2 Corinthians 12:7\). Near the end of his life, when by all accounts he should have been the most holy, Paul called himself the chief of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15\). Had Paul not received the second blessing? Or perhaps there is no second blessing resulting in sinlessness. The fact is that none of the apostles ever hinted at the possibility that man can achieve “entire sanctification,” and there is no mention in the Bible of a “second blessing” of the Spirit.
Christians do sin (1 John 1:5–10\), but, hopefully, less and less as we mature in Christ (Philippians 3:12\). The Holiness movement is wrong in its assumption that a believer can keep enough rules to attain sinless perfection in this world.
|
What does the Bible say about a wife changing her last name at marriage?
|
Answer
The tradition of a wife taking her husband’s last name at marriage is not found in the Bible. In Bible times, most people did not even have last names. Women were often identified by where they lived (e.g., Mary Magdalene, Luke 8:2\), by their children (e.g., Mary the mother of James and Joseph, Matthew 27:56\), or by their husband (e.g., Mary the wife of Clopas, John 19:25\).
In Western culture, it has been a common tradition for a wife to change her last name to that of her husband. The vast majority of married women in the West still follow that tradition. There is nothing explicitly biblical about doing this, since the Bible issues no command to do so. Thus, there is nothing explicitly unbiblical about a wife keeping her maiden name or opting for a hyphenated hybrid.
Some women who legally change their last names after marriage are simply following cultural conventions. Many others, however, are consciously choosing to illustrate a couple of biblical principles, namely, the headship of the man and the fact that marriage is the union of two people into “one flesh.” Jesus taught that, when a man and a woman are married, “they are no longer two, but one flesh” (Mark 10:8\). A common ritual during wedding ceremonies is the lighting of the unity candle, which illustrates Genesis 2:24, “A man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh.” The husband, as the head of the home and the nurturer of his wife (Ephesians 5:23\), shares his name with her, rather than vice versa.
Other cultures may have different traditions regarding a woman changing or keeping her last name after marriage. Again, since the Bible does not specifically address the issue, the matter should be decided based on prayer, cultural considerations, and the wishes of the husband and the wife.
|
Who was King Lemuel in Proverbs 31?
|
Answer
King Lemuel is mentioned as the author of Proverbs 31, at least of the first nine verses. Proverbs 31:1 introduces this section: “The sayings of King Lemuel—an inspired utterance his mother taught him.” So, as Lemuel was growing up, his mother gave him sage advice, which he later arranged in poetic form and recorded for the ages. The whole process was supervised by the Holy Spirit, and the result was “an inspired utterance”—Holy Scripture (see 2 Peter 1:21\).
We don’t know much about King Lemuel, other than what is revealed in Proverbs 31\. The name Lemuel means “for God” or “devoted to God.” Based on the one passage attributed to Lemuel, we know that Lemuel was a king, he had a wise mother, and he wrote some poetry. Many commentators have surmised that Lemuel is actually [King Solomon](life-Solomon.html)—in which case the mother would be Bathsheba. It could be that Lemuel was a pet name for Solomon, used by his mother in tender address, and that Solomon wrote down her advice in the manner she would have expressed it. Another theory is that Lemuel is actually [King Hezekiah](life-Hezekiah.html). A third theory is that Lemuel and his mother are fictional characters created by Solomon as a picture of an ideal king and queen mother.
The counsel from King Lemuel’s mother is good advice for any leader of men. She warns Lemuel not to fall into the trap of immorality; chasing after women will sap a king’s strength (Proverbs 31:3\). Then she warns her son against the dangers of alcohol; a drunken king is never a good king. A ruler who craves beer and wine will pervert justice and act lawlessly (verses 4–7\).
Finally, King Lemuel’s mother instructs her son about the necessity of true justice: “Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, / for the rights of all who are destitute. / Speak up and judge fairly; / defend the rights of the poor and needy” (Proverbs 31:8–9\). May the Lord grant us many rulers like King Lemuel who heed this advice of a queen mother on ruling well.
|
What is Faithism and the Oahspe Bible?
|
Answer
Faithism is a religion based on *Oahspe: A New Bible*, a book written in 1882 by John Ballou Newbrough, a dentist. The book is fairly lengthy, more than three\-quarters the size of the Bible. Newbrough claimed to have written the book through automatic writing. This is a [spiritualist](spiritualism.html) technique where a person slips into a trance and produces drawings, writing, or other effects without conscious effort. While the drawings and hieroglyphs of *Oahspe* were produced by hand, Newbrough claimed to have generated the text using a typewriter. The manner in which *Oahspe* was produced should make one extremely cautious about whatever it says (Leviticus 19:26; 1 Samuel 15:23; 2 Kings 17:17; Acts 19:19\).
*Oahspe: A New Bible* inspired a small spiritualist religion known as Faithism. Followers of its teachings are known as Faithists. Faithism generally doesn’t take *Oahspe* to be inerrant or literal. Rather, they draw inspiration and guidance from it. Faithism teaches that one’s place in the afterlife is determined by how well they serve others on earth. Certain behaviors, such as eating meat, will automatically place a person in the lowest of several different heavens. Evil behavior will result in an experience much like hell. According to Faithism, however, even the worst souls will gradually progress into the higher realms. The book also talks about a lost continent in the Pacific Ocean, more or less identical to the legends of Atlantis. *Oahspe* also advocates a strong form of pacifism.
*Oahspe: A New Bible* is typical of spiritualist literature, which was a precursor to the modern [New Age movement](new-age-movement.html). Much of what the book advocates is in direct contradiction to biblical principles. First and foremost, the entire concept of a “new” approach to spirituality is anti\-biblical (Jude 1:3\). In addition, *Oahspe* advocates mandatory veganism (cp. 1 Timothy 4:1–3\), claims many religions are needed for human progress (cp. 1 Timothy 2:5\), and teaches universalism (cp. John 3:17–18\) and works\-based salvation (cp. Titus 3:5\). *Oahspe* and Faithism also claim that God is merely an advanced spiritual being, elected to His position for a limited time (cp. 1 Chronicles 16:36; Isaiah 40:28\).
|
Why are the circumstances of the death of Moses so mysterious?
|
Answer
God has not chosen to reveal much to us about the circumstances of Moses’ death. There are three references in the Bible to the death and burial of Moses, and each of them contributes to the mystery surrounding the story of the great prophet. We know that he was 120 years old when he died, “yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone” (Deuteronomy 34:7\). Despite his age, [Moses](life-Moses.html) was still in his prime when he was called home.
Because of Moses’ sin of disobedience at the waters of [Meribah Kadesh](Meribah-in-the-Bible.html) (Numbers 20:12; Deuteronomy 32:51\), Moses was not allowed to enter the Promised Land. He brought the people of Israel to the very edge of Canaan, and he was given a look into the land, but he was not allowed to go in himself. At the end of Moses’ life, God gave Moses a glimpse of the land he had left Egypt for. “Moses climbed [Mount Nebo](mount-Nebo.html) from the plains of Moab to the top of Pisgah. . . . There the LORD showed him the whole land” (Deuteronomy 34:1; cf. Numbers 27:12–13\). Moses died there on the summit, “according to the word of the Lord.” God buried him secretly, and no one knows to this day where his grave is (Deuteronomy 34:5–6\).
One mystery involves Moses’ grave. Scholars have suggested God buried Moses secretly and without a grave marker to prevent the grave from becoming a shrine or a place of worship. As the Israelites were prone to idolatry, this seems plausible. Others believe that there was no grave at all, and that Moses was translated in the manner of Enoch and Elijah. These scholars point to the appearance of Moses with Elijah on the Mount of the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1–10\). The problem with this latter view is that the Bible specifically says Moses “died” and “was buried” (Deuteronomy 34:7\). If Moses were translated straight to heaven, there would be no death and burial. In any case, the circumstance of God personally burying someone and keeping the burial place secret is unique in all of Scripture.
Another mystery involves Jude 1:9, where we learn that, when Moses died, [the archangel Michael contended with the devil](Michael-Satan-Moses.html) over the body of Moses. This passing reference is not expounded on by Jude and has been a source of debate among biblical scholars. We are not told exactly when this angelic argument occurred, although it was likely at the time of Moses’ burial. We also don’t know why the devil and Michael would be arguing over the body. Perhaps Satan was opposed to the future resurrection of Moses, accusing him of the sin at Meribah and other sins. Perhaps Satan wanted to bury the body in a more accessible place and mark the spot to tempt the people to build a shrine. Whatever the reason for the dispute, Satan lost the battle.
In spite of the mysteries surrounding Moses’ death and burial, we know some things for certain. One is that God’s Word is true and His prophecies always come to pass. Another is that sin brings the discipline of God, and no one is exempt. Also, God doesn’t always explain the mysteries in His Word. But we have this truth: “Precious in the sight of the Lord / is the death of his faithful servants” (Psalm 116:15\).
|
Who was Laban in the Bible?
|
Answer
The Bible first mentions Laban in Genesis 24:29\. Laban was the brother of Isaac’s wife, [Rebekah](Rebekah-in-the-Bible.html). Abraham had sent his trusted servant back to his home country to find a wife for Isaac among his relatives (Genesis 24:2–4\). When the servant found Rebekah, he made the purpose of his visit known, and she ran and told her father’s household the news. Her brother Laban came out to welcome the servant and invited him to stay with them.
Laban was involved in the decision to allow his sister to travel to a foreign land and marry a man she had never met (Genesis 24:50, 55\). Laban may have been the eldest son in his family, as the Bible records specifically that he played the role of host to Abraham’s servant and had the right to voice an opinion on his sister’s future (Genesis 24:29, 50, 55\).
We hear nothing more of Laban until many years later when Isaac and Rebekah send their son [Jacob](life-Jacob.html) back to those same relatives to find a wife (Genesis 28:1–2\). Jacob returned to his mother’s homeland and met Laban’s daughter Rachel, with whom he fell madly in love (Genesis 29:18\). Laban promised to give Rachel to Jacob if he would work for him for seven years (Genesis 29:19–20\).
However, Laban proved to be as duplicitous as Jacob himself. After Jacob had served the time agreed upon, Laban tricked Jacob and switched brides on the wedding night. When Jacob awoke the next morning, he found he had spent the night with Laban’s older daughter, Leah (Genesis 29:25\). Infuriated, Jacob demanded an explanation. Laban replied, “It is not our custom here to give the younger daughter in marriage before the older one. Finish this daughter’s bridal week; then we will give you the younger one also, in return for another seven years of work” (Genesis 29:26–27\).
Laban continued to connive throughout his and Jacob’s twenty\-year relationship (Genesis 31:38\). However, God blessed Jacob because Jacob was His choice to carry on the covenant He had made with his grandfather Abraham (Genesis 28:11–15\). Genesis 31:1–3 indicates that Laban’s sons were jealous of Jacob because of how much God had prospered him. They said, “‘Jacob has taken everything our father owned and has gained all this wealth from what belonged to our father.’ And Jacob noticed that Laban’s attitude toward him was not what it had been. Then the Lord said to Jacob, ‘Go back to the land of your fathers and to your relatives, and I will be with you.’”
Fearful that Laban would take his wives, children, and everything he had, Jacob fled in the night, taking what he owned. However, unbeknownst to Jacob, Rachel had stolen her father’s household idols (Genesis 31:19, 34\). When Laban learned of the departure of Jacob and his family, he pursued them. He caught up with them, and he rebuked Jacob for sneaking off. Then the idolater Laban demanded the return of his pagan images. But Jacob knew nothing of Rachel’s theft, and he scolded Laban for accusing him. Laban never found his idols.
The last mention of Laban in the Bible is after he had rebuked Jacob for disappearing without notice. After their exchange of angry words, Laban suggested that they make a covenant (Genesis 31:44\). This overture appears to have been motivated by fear that Jacob might return to harm him (verse 52\). Although there is no indication that Laban worshiped the Lord, he did hold a healthy fear of Him and invoked the name of Jacob’s God in forming the covenant between them (Genesis 31:49–50\). Laban and his son\-in\-law shared a meal, and then Laban kissed his children and grandchildren and returned home.
After Laban said good\-bye, Jacob and his family were free to continue their journey to the land God had given them. Whether he knew it or not, Laban played a large part in God’s plan for humanity, as his grandsons would grow up to head eight of the [twelve tribes](twelve-tribes-Israel.html) known as Israel (Genesis 49:28; Revelation 21:12\).
|
Who was Agur son of Jakeh (Proverbs 30)?
|
Answer
Proverbs 30:1 says the chapter’s words are “the sayings of Agur son of Jakeh.” Agur was writing “to Ithiel and Ucal” (NAS); these men could have been disciples or friends of Agur, although some Bibles translate the *meaning* of the two names with the assumption that they do not refer to actual people. Most commentators believe Agur lived in the same era as Solomon. We don’t know much about Agur except what we can glean from this one chapter.
The name *Agur* comes from a Hebrew word meaning “collector.” Agur and Jakeh are only mentioned here in the Bible and are otherwise unknown.
Agur’s proverbs offer insight regarding his thoughts on life. Agur was weary and worn out (verse 1\), he did not consider himself wise (verses 2–4\), and he considered God’s words completely true (verses 5–6\). In Proverbs 30 Agur expresses to God a request that the Lord remove lying from him and give him neither riches nor poverty (verses 7–9\).
Agur’s teachings include a warning not to slander servants (verse 10\) and an observation that many people see themselves as better than they really are (verses 11–14\). Agur then begins a numbered list of sayings that includes three things never satisfied (the barren womb, the land’s need for water, and the end of a fire, verses 15–16\). Verse 17 adds that the person who mocks his parents will experience judgment.
Verses 18–19 list four things beyond Agur’s understanding: an eagle in the sky, a serpent on a rock, a ship on the seas, and a man with a woman. In verses 21–23 is a list of four things that cause the earth to tremble: a slave who becomes king, a well\-fed fool, an unloved married woman, and a servant who replaces the wife in the household. Verses 24–28 note four small things that are very wise: ants, rock badgers, locusts, and lizards. Verses 29–31 specify four proud things: a lion, a rooster, a goat, and a king with his army. Verses 32–33 advise that, if you have been foolish in exalting yourself, you need to stop; also, prodding someone to anger is unwise.
These simple yet profound observations on life reveal many aspects of this otherwise unknown man named Agur. For example, Agur realized God’s wisdom was greater than his own. He understood the temptation of riches. He knew many aspects of life and of God’s creation would remain a mystery beyond his understanding. And Agur knew the importance of controlling anger, avoiding foolishness, and living for God. He encourages his readers to refrain from a life that dishonors God and results in judgment. Rather, Agur promotes living life with a proper fear of God and concern for other people.
|
What happened at the Council of Laodicea?
|
Answer
The Council of Laodicea was held in AD 364 and is considered a minor convention in historical Christianity. The meeting featured only about thirty members, all from the local Middle Eastern churches. The city of Laodicea is in the southwestern part of modern\-day Turkey and is mentioned as one of the seven churches of the book of Revelation (Revelation 3:14–15\).
The Council of Laodicea produced sixty rulings, or canons, covering a broad range of topics. These rulings prohibited certain foods during [Lent](what-is-Lent.html), discussed whether or not to minster to Jews and heretics, explicitly condemned astrology, specified the correct Christian “Sabbath day,” and emphasized the importance of modesty. The council also produced two rulings referencing the canon of Scripture.
The 59th ruling of the Council of Laodicea declared that only canonical books should be read in church. The 60th ruling specified this [canon](canon-of-Scripture.html) as the traditional 27 books of the New Testament, minus Revelation; and the 39 books of the Old Testament, plus the [book of Baruch](book-of-Baruch.html) and its extended ending, the [Epistle of Jeremiah](letter-of-Jeremiah.html).
In harmony with the writings of early Christians such as [Origen](Origen-of-Alexandria.html), Melito, Jerome, Cyril, and [Athanasius](Athanasian-creed.html), early conventions such as the Council of Laodicea generally treated the [Apocrypha](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html) as a separate category from inspired Scripture. The apocryphal books were considered useful, even sacred, but not inspired and not on the same level as the traditional canon.
|
Will we experience time in heaven?
|
Answer
Benjamin Franklin reminded us that time is “the stuff life is made of.” Our earthly existence is marked by time. We “waste” it and “spend” it and “save” it; we have “time on our hands,” or we “make up for lost time”; we speak of those who have “all the time in the world,” while others are “running out of time”; and, then, “when our time is up,” we exit this world. What about in [heaven](where-is-Heaven.html)? Will we still experience time as we do now? The short answer is we really don’t know.
First, let’s be clear that, when we say “heaven,” we are referring to the dwelling place of God. Revelation 21:3–4 says, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘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.” The chapter goes on to describe the [New Jerusalem](new-jerusalem.html), where believers will dwell for eternity.
Some argue that we will not experience time in heaven because we are told, “The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp” (Revelation 21:23; see also Revelation 22:5\). If the cycle of day and night is done away with, perhaps that signals the end of time—or at least our *measurement* of time. Also, we know that God exists apart from time (2 Peter 3:8\), so perhaps those dwelling with Him will also be outside of time.
However, others point to what seem to be clear references to experiencing time in heaven. For instance, Revelation 8:1 says, “There was [silence in heaven](silence-in-heaven.html) for about half an hour.” Was the “half an hour” simply John’s measurement of the period of silence from an earth\-bound perspective, or did the residents of heaven also realize the passage of time?
Those in heaven appear to be aware of the passage of time on earth, and they may even describe it as “long.” Revelation 6:9–10 says, “I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. They called out in a loud voice, ‘How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?’” Without a doubt, *how long* is a time\-related phrase. These examples occur prior to the eternal state, but they may support the idea that time factors into our existence in the dwelling place of God.
Revelation 22:1–5, speaks of the New Jerusalem: “Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city. On each side of the river stood the [tree of life](tree-of-life.html), bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. . . . There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.” The mention of “every month” and “for ever and ever” indicates the passage of time. One might suggest that John was only able to explain his vision in time\-bound terms, and that his words do not exactly represent the reality of the vision. However, *month* is still a time\-related word.
When God created the world, He created time—there was a “beginning” (Genesis 1:1\). He called the creation, including the reality of time, “very good” (Genesis 1:31\). It seems, then, that time is something good and well\-suited for God’s creation. As part of God’s creation, we are subject to time. Will that change in eternity? We cannot be sure.
Heaven is beyond our understanding. But we can rest in the fact that our God is good and what He has prepared for us is good. “He who was seated on the throne said, ‘I am making everything new!’ Then he said, ‘Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.’ He said to me: ‘It is done. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End. To the thirsty I will give water without cost from the spring of the water of life. Those who are victorious will inherit all this, and I will be their God and they will be my children’” (Revelation 21:5–7\).
|
What happened at the Council of Carthage?
|
Answer
There were several meetings regarding Christian doctrine held in the city of Carthage in northern Africa. Prior to the Council of Nicea, the councils mostly discussed issues such as how to handle apostates, whether or not to accept unorthodox baptisms, and so forth. None of the seven major councils, or “general councils,” was held in Carthage, and there is often dispute over how authoritative the decrees from Carthage are, as a result.
In AD 397 the most important of the Carthage meetings was held. This is the one most commonly referred to as the “Council of Carthage.” What we know of this council is limited, as the only surviving records are indirect accounts and depictions in other sources. The foremost result of this convention was a list of the [biblical canon](canon-of-Scripture.html), or the “accepted” books of the Bible. The Council of Carthage listed the 27 books of the New Testament, as well as the 39 books of the Old Testament, but it also included several books not part of the typical canon, such as [Maccabees](first-second-Maccabees.html) and [Esdras](first-second-Esdras.html). These books are part of what is known as the [Apocrypha](apocrypha-deuterocanonical.html) and are not considered inspired texts.
It should be noted that, both before and after the Council of Carthage, most Christian and Jewish scholars held the Apocrypha to be non\-canonical. This is seen in the Apocrypha’s omission from the works of [Philo](Philo-of-Alexandria.html) and its explicit exclusion by church leaders such as [Origen](Origen-of-Alexandria.html), Melito of Sardis, [Cyril of Jerusalem](Cyril-of-Jerusalem.html), Jerome, and [Athanasius](Athanasian-creed.html). The Council of Laodicea, which was held less than forty years prior to Carthage, also excluded the apocryphal books.
|
Who was the Queen of the South?
|
Answer
The Queen of the South is mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 12:42 and its parallel passage, Luke 11:31\. Jesus says the Queen of the South will bear witness on the Day of Judgment, condemning those Israelites who rejected Jesus as Lord. Jesus identifies the Queen of the South as a queen who visited King Solomon to benefit from his wisdom. From this, we can deduce that she is the [Queen of Sheba](Queen-of-Sheba.html) who came to test Solomon with difficult questions (1 Kings 10:1\).
Most biblical scholars believe that Sheba was a city in modern\-day Ethiopia or Yemen, and that the Queen of the South was the ruler of that city, a woman of amazing wealth and power. Having heard reports of King Solomon’s wisdom, the Queen of Sheba wanted to find out if what she had heard was true, if there really could be a king that wise. So she traveled to Jerusalem to quiz Solomon with [riddles](riddles-in-the-Bible.html). She also brought a wealth of gifts and spices and jewels from her own land to give to him (1 Kings 10:10; 2 Chronicles 9:9\). Solomon answered all her questions (1 Kings 10:3\) and repaid her in gifts of equal value. The Queen of the South then returned home (2 Chronicles 9:12\).
The Queen of the South has been the subject of many artistic works and legends. Some people also speculate that the Queen of the South is the same woman as the [Shulammite](Shulammite-woman.html) mentioned in the Song of Solomon, because of the reference to the Shulammite’s dark skin (Song of Solomon 1:5\). However, there is stronger evidence to suggest that the Shulammite came from Shunem, a region near Israel.
Jesus mentions the Queen of the South in the context of Israel’s rejection of their True King. Though she was a Gentile, she traveled a long distance to hear Solomon, and the treasures she brought showed her respect for him and the wisdom he possessed. In contrast, the Jews of Jesus’ time were unwilling to travel any distance to hear the King of kings. The Queen of Sheba’s lavish respect for Solomon stood in stark contrast to Israel’s flat\-out rejection of Christ. Yet Christ is greater than Solomon (Matthew 12:42\). Solomon was a son of David, but Jesus is *the* Son of David. Solomon was rich, but Jesus is the Creator of all riches. Solomon possessed the gift of wisdom, but Jesus is wisdom personified (1 Corinthians 1:30\).
|
What are the different types of psalms?
|
Answer
The 150 psalms in the [book of Psalms](Book-of-Psalms.html) have often been categorized into various types. There is no one way to organize the psalms, but most systems include similar categories with only slight variations. Biblical scholar Hermann Gunkel’s system covers the following categories:
*Hymns*: Many of the psalms are simple hymns or songs of praise. For example, Psalm 8 is a hymn that begins, “Lord, our Lord, / how majestic is your name in all the earth!” (verse 1\).
*[Lament](lament-in-the-Bible.html) or Complaint Psalms*: These include songs that express sadness to God or complaints against God’s enemies. For example, Psalm 3 is a lament psalm that begins, “Lord, how many are my foes! / How many rise up against me!” (verse 1\). Some complaint psalms sound quite negative, though they are set within a context of God responding in love or power. Psalm 44:23–24, for example, says, “Awake, Lord! Why do you sleep? / Rouse yourself! Do not reject us forever. / Why do you hide your face / and forget our misery and oppression?”
*Royal Psalms*: Several psalms were performed in the presence of kings or dignitaries. Psalm 18:50 states, “He gives his king great victories; / he shows unfailing love to his anointed, / to David and to his descendants forever.”
*Thanksgiving Psalms*: These songs of thanks include both thanksgiving from individuals (such as Psalms 30, 32, and 34\) and from the community (such as Psalms 67 and 124\). One of the best\-known thanksgiving psalms is Psalm 100\. Verses 4–5 proclaim, “Enter his gates with thanksgiving / and his courts with praise; / give thanks to him and praise his name. / For the Lord is good and his love endures forever; / his faithfulness continues through all generations.”
*Wisdom Psalms*: While many psalms discuss aspects of wisdom, certain psalms such as Psalms 1, 37, and 49 focus on the theme of wisdom, speaking of the fear of the Lord or offering words of wisdom. Psalm 1:1–3 is a great example: “Blessed is the one / who does not walk in step with the wicked / or stand in the way that sinners take
or sit in the company of mockers, / but whose delight is in the law of the Lord, / and who meditates on his law day and night. / That person is like a tree planted by streams of water, / which yields its fruit in season / and whose leaf does not wither— / whatever they do prospers.”
*Smaller Genres and Mixed Types*: Some psalms include a mix of types. Psalms 9, 10, and 123 are examples. Other psalms have only a small number in their category, such as psalms regarding the stories of Israel (Psalms 78, 105, and 106\). The Songs of Ascent, written to be sung by worshipers on their way up to Jerusalem, also represent a smaller genre that includes mixed types (Psalms 120—134\).
|
Who was Gautama Buddha?
|
Answer
The man known as Gautama Buddha, or simply “Buddha,” was born as Siddhartha Gautama around the 6th century BC. Much of what we know of Buddha is passed down from legends and oral traditions. There are no written works mentioning him until several centuries after his death. According to mainstream accounts, he was born to an aristocratic family who sheltered him from worldly suffering. Despite their efforts, he learned of pain and misery, became discouraged, and gave up his wealth in order to become a religious ascetic. Eventually, Gautama Buddha settled on an approach avoiding the extremes of gluttony and self\-denial. His teachings form the basis of the religion known today as [Buddhism](buddhism.html).
Historical information about Buddha is difficult to find. The earliest written texts detailing his life and teachings are dated nearly 500 years after his death. However, he is referenced indirectly in other texts, and his teachings are mentioned by others well before this. Despite the scarcity of information, scholars are confident that Gautama Buddha was an historical person and that the commonly held outline of his life is accurate. Particular details about him, including finer details of his philosophy, are impossible to know with any certainty. Not surprisingly, biographical details of Buddha’s life tend toward the fantastic, including his possessing various supernatural powers.
Siddhartha Gautama’s family was wealthy and powerful. Various biographies describe him as athletic, beautiful, and well trained as a warrior. His parents attempted to shelter him from knowledge of pain and suffering. They also kept him from religious teachings, which in that time and place were a blend of local superstitions and various interpretations of [Hinduism](hinduism.html). As a result, Buddha was nearly thirty years old before first experiencing sickness or death. Against his parents’ wishes, he ventured outside the palace walls and discovered dead bodies, elderly people, and sick people. In response, he ran away from his family and became an ascetic, living as a beggar and owning no property.
During these early years, Gautama experimented with various spiritual disciplines but rejected all of them. Buddha eventually attempted to live without even eating, an experiment that nearly killed him. This experience convinced him that neither greed nor austerity were the keys to happiness. He determined meditation to be the only way to determine truth. So, he sat under a tree and resolved to stay there until he had discovered ultimate truth. Nearly fifty days later, Siddhartha Gautama is said to have attained Enlightenment, or a state of perfect spiritual awareness. From this point on, he was known as “Buddha” or “The Enlightened One.”
For the rest of his life, Buddha lived as a wandering teacher and developed a large following. The only teaching definitively tied to Buddha himself is an emphasis on meditation as the “middle way” between hedonism and self\-denial. Whether by Buddha himself or by his early followers, Buddhism was founded on concepts such as the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, and a continuation of certain Hindu beliefs including [karma](karma.html) and [reincarnation](reincarnation.html). According to Buddhist teachings, life is suffering, and suffering is primarily caused by desire. The only way to break the cycle of rebirth, per Buddhism, is to shed all desires, follow the Middle Way, and attain the perfect state of emptiness. Once a person is purged of all cravings and repulsions, he or she becomes a Buddha and stops reincarnating.
Gautama Buddha died around the age of eighty. Various biographical sources attribute his death to either food poisoning or a bowel obstruction.
Despite what well\-meaning people may claim, Buddha’s life and teachings are starkly different from those of Jesus Christ. Their backgrounds, morality, and spirituality were drastically different, as were their approaches to life and human advancement.
Buddha’s life is known only by texts dated centuries after his life, most of which strongly contradict each other. The written documents we have speaking of Jesus’ life were written within a few years of his crucifixion, were widespread less than a century later, and contain harmonized details.
Buddha was born into privilege, struggled to find his way, and eventually spent decades as a spiritual guru. Jesus was born poor (Matthew 8:20\), was renowned for lifelong virtue (Hebrews 4:15; 1 Peter 1:19\), and taught publicly for only about three years.
Buddhism teaches that life is suffering and that one’s only hope is to cease to exist upon attaining emptiness. Christ taught that each person’s life is meaningful (John 14:3; Matthew 5:22\) and capable of happiness (John 10:10\) and that the ultimate goal of existence is eternity with God (Revelation 21:3–4\).
Buddhism makes no factual or empirical claims—one either accepts its philosophical approach, or not. Christianity is rooted in history (1 Corinthians 15:3\), evidence (Psalm 19:11; Romans 1:2\), Scripture (Acts 17:11; John 5:39, 46–47\), and prophecy (Luke 18:31; 24:27\); and it requires a person to make a decision whether to accept or reject Jesus as Messiah (John 3:17–18\).
Buddha died a revered sage of his people, at a ripe old age. Jesus was brutally executed (Mark 15:24\) at the insistence of His own people (Mark 15:14–15\) while just in His early thirties.
Most importantly, Buddha never claimed to be divine, and his death is considered the end of his story. Jesus Christ claimed to be God (Matthew 26:63–65\), intended to prove it by His miracles (John 20:30–31\), and was seen resurrected after His death by His closest friends and family (John 21:14; Acts 1:3\).
|
Are all prosperity preachers charlatans and/or false teachers?
|
Answer
Before we can give serious attention to this question, we must first define the term *prosperity preachers*. Different ministries have different approaches to presenting the gospel. For example, relief organizations meet the physical needs of the destitute while giving the credit to Jesus. Some could interpret that approach as preaching prosperity, because many impoverished people equate Christianity with Western prosperity. They may respond to the gospel message while their real motivation is to be prosperous. However, for most relief organizations, meeting physical needs is merely a part of ministering to the whole person. It is a means by which Christians earn the right to speak to the spiritual needs of hurting people. But in prosperity preaching, Jesus is presented as a ticket to perfect heath and financial wealth. The true gospel is stripped of its focus on eternity and reduced to a means by which everyone can experience [his or her best life now](best-life-now.html). It is that message we will address in this article.
In the Old Testament, God speaks a lot about blessing His servants with earthly health, wealth, and honor (e.g., Genesis 12:2; Leviticus 26:3–12; Deuteronomy 7:11–15; 30:8–9; 1 Kings 3:11–14\). Material blessings were part of the [Mosaic](Mosaic-covenant.html) and [Land Covenants](Palestinian-covenant.html) for Israel. However, the New Testament focus is on eternal, not earthly, rewards.
Not every preacher who teaches the joy of blessing is a “prosperity preacher.” God does promise blessing to those who serve Him faithfully and follow His statutes (Psalm 107:9; Malachi 3:10–11; Mark 10:29–30\). But a preacher who presents God as a *means* by which we can obtain earthly wealth is a prosperity preacher and a false teacher. This teaching portrays Almighty God as a type of jolly Santa Claus whose primary purpose is to prosper human beings and make their dreams come true. In prosperity preaching, man—not God—is the real star.
Prosperity teachers use terms such as *faith*, *positive confession*, or *visualization* to “release” the abundance God has in store. Often such preachers will entice listeners to “sow seeds into this ministry,” promising abundant returns on this investment. The gospel becomes little more than a repackaged get\-rich\-quick scheme, with the ministers becoming richer than the listeners. Often, an invitation to accept Christ is given at the conclusion of a service that has been based solely around blessing and positivity. Despite the overwhelming responses to the invitation, one has to wonder: are the responders surrendering to the Jesus of the Bible or to a new\-and\-improved version of themselves?
The shift from truth to error can be subtle, and some well\-meaning preachers have been caught up in it. We must be careful not to judge a preacher’s entire message by only one or two sermons. However, when blatant prosperity preaching dominates a speaker’s platform, this is merely an attempt to make greed and materialism sound spiritual. Ephesians 5:5 has strong words for greedy people: “For of this you can be sure: No immoral, impure or greedy person—such a person is an idolater—has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.” While we should ask God to provide for our needs and expect Him to do so (Philippians 4:19\), Jesus warned us not to stockpile earthly wealth. Rather, we should store up treasure in heaven (Luke 12:33\).
The imbalanced focus of prosperity preachers on earthy treasure is in direct contrast to the many passages that warn us not to desire riches (Proverbs 28:22; 2 Timothy 3:2; Hebrews 13:5\). First Timothy 6:8–10 speaks directly to this kind of teaching: “But if we have food and clothing, with these we will be content. But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.” When earthly wealth is our focus, we are not following the teachings of Scripture.
If the quest for prosperity dominates a preacher’s message, he or she may be someone about whom Scripture warns. The following are some common traits of many prosperity preachers or false teachers:
• The core of his/her messages is always God’s desire to bless everyone.
• There is little, if any, mention of Jesus’ words about self\-denial, taking up our crosses, or dying to the flesh (Luke 9:23; Matthew 10:38, 16:24\).
• Almost all their teaching focuses on the gratification of fleshly desires rather than spiritual transformation (Romans 8:29\).
• Obedience to God’s commands is rarely mentioned as a prerequisite to His blessing (Jeremiah 18:10\).
• Positive thinking about oneself and one’s situation is often equated with faith and is presented as the means by which one can obtain financial blessing.
• There is a marked absence of any teaching on the necessity of suffering in the life of a believer (2 Timothy 2:12; 3:12; Romans 8:17; Philippians 1:29\).
• Very little distinction is made between God’s children and the unsaved in the positive promises of the message (Malachi 3:16–18; Romans 9:15–16\).
• The speaker rarely attempts any type of real Bible teaching that does not support the continual message of positivity and blessing (1 Corinthians 3:1–3\).
• He or she stays away from passages that contradict the positive spin of the message (2 Timothy 4:3\).
• Personal wealth of the minister is often far above the average lifestyle of his congregation (Psalm 49:16–17\).
• The only attributes of God ever mentioned are love and generosity. Scant attention is given to His holiness, justice, and righteousness (Ephesians 4:22–23\).
• Neither the wrath of God against sin nor the coming judgment is ever mentioned (Romans 2:5; 1 Peter 4:5\).
• The only “sins” discussed at length are negativity, poverty, or a person’s failure to believe in themselves (1 Corinthians 6:9–10; Philippians 3:3\).
• Forgiveness is emphasized but with very little explanation of the repentance that was so important to Jesus and the disciples (Matthew 4:17; Mark 6:12; Acts 2:38\).
• The prayer of faith is often referred to as the means by which humans “leave God no choice but to bless me” (Job 40:1–2\).
There has been a subtle shift within Christianity toward a version of the gospel that the apostles would not recognize. People are becoming biblically illiterate and are thus easily swayed by preachers who appear to know Scripture but who are perverting it to make it sound more appealing. These preachers are attracting huge crowds, just as Jesus did when He fed the thousands (Matthew 14:21\), healed the sick (Mark 1:34\), and performed miracles (John 6:2\). But when Jesus began to teach the hard truths of the gospel, “many of his disciples turned away and no longer followed him” (John 6:66\). Waning popularity did not cause Jesus to water down His message. He continued to teach truth whether people liked it or not (John 8:29\). Likewise, the apostle Paul exonerated himself before the Ephesians with these words: “Therefore I testify to you this day that I am innocent of the blood of all, for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:26–27\). If today’s prosperity teachers would follow the patterns of Jesus and Paul, they could be confident that their works will not be burned up on judgment day (1 Corinthians 3:12–15\).
|
What is hadephobia?
|
Answer
The word *hadephobia* is derived from two Greek words, *Hades* (“hell” or “the underworld”) and *phobos* (“fear”). Thus, hadephobia is “the fear of hell.”
In one sense, hadephobia, also called stygiophobia, is normal and natural. [Hell](hell-real-eternal.html) is a scary place. Jesus described it as a place of darkness and weeping and the gnashing of teeth (Matthew 25:30\); a place of consuming worms and undying fire (Mark 9:48\); and a place of “eternal fire” (Matthew 25:41\). The book of Revelation pictures the lake of fire as filled with fire and brimstone, smoke, torment, and unrest (Revelation 14:10–11\). The Bible contains a severe warning for sinners: “The cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the [second death](second-death.html)” (Revelation 21:8\). So, if your name is not written in the Lamb’s book of life, you have reason to fear hell (Revelation 20:15\).
The world tends to make a joke out of hell and to speak flippantly of it. *Hell* becomes a mere cussword; people entertain notions that they will find a place to party with their friends amid the flames. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hell is a fearsome place (see Matthew 10:28\). The great theologian and preacher [Jonathan Edwards](Jonathan-Edwards.html), in his famous sermon “[Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God](sinners-in-the-hands-of-an-angry-God.html),” tapped into his audience’s natural hadephobia to good effect, and many were saved as a result.
However, hadephobia should not be part of a Christian’s life. It is true that hell is a real place where the unredeemed go, but you need not worry—if you have placed your trust in Jesus Christ, you are saved from that fate. Believers have this promise: “Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them” (Revelation 20:6\). And this one: “Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. The one who is victorious will not be hurt at all by the second death” (Revelation 2:11\).
The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23a), but Jesus took that punishment upon Himself. He died in your stead. “Christ Jesus who died—more than that, who was raised to life—is at the right hand of God and is also interceding for us” (Romans 8:34\). Because Jesus took your punishment and now [intercedes on your behalf](Jesus-interceding.html), you need not suffer from hadephobia. You need not fear ever being separated from God. “For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:38–39\).
God does not want His children to experience hadephobia. Over and over, He tells us to “fear not” (see Luke 12:32\). God wants you to “have confidence on the day of judgment” (1 John 4:17\). God’s love cannot coexist with hadephobia in your heart: “There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love” (1 John 4:18\). In other words, the more you understand the Father’s love for you, the less you will fear His punishment. God did not appoint you to suffer wrath but “to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thessalonians 5:9\).
There is a great distinction between Christianity and other beliefs that have similar concepts of hell. In Christianity, the motivation to serve the Lord is not fear but love (Romans 2:4; John 3:16\). Furthermore, the moment you accept Christ, you become His property, and no one can snatch you from His hands (John 10:28\). God is greater than the one who is in the world (Romans 8:44\).
If you are experiencing any kind of fear, including hadephobia, here are some practical steps to take:
1\) [Make sure you are saved](know-sure-Heaven.html). It is only the child of God who does not need to fear hell. The saved have the Holy Spirit—[the Comforter](paraclete-Holy-Spirit.html)—in their hearts.
2\) Do away with anything that promotes mental images of scary things, e.g., horror movies, occult practices, etc.
3\) If your fear persists, get qualified professional help, just to rule out anything clinical.
4\) Fill your mind with God’s Word (Matthew 4:4\). There is a reason why the Word is likened to food for your daily sustenance.
You need not fear hell as it was created for the devil and those he will deceive (Matthew 25:41\). Neither should you give the devil too much credit. While he is real, the Bible says he is defeated and already condemned (John 16:11\). You are more than a conqueror through Him who loves you (Romans 8:37\).
In John Bunyan’s classic book [*The Pilgrim’s Progress*](The-Pilgrims-Progress.html), the pilgrim at the beginning of the story suffers from hadephobia and an accompanying fear of death. With a great burden on his back, the pilgrim says, “I fear that this burden that is upon my back will sink me lower than the grave, and I shall fall into [Tophet](Gehenna.html). And . . . if I be not fit to go to prison, I am not fit to go to judgment, and from thence to execution; and the thoughts of these things make me cry.” How does Christian in *The Pilgrim’s Progress* overcome his hadephobia? He comes to the Place of Deliverance: “Just as Christian came up to the cross, his burden loosed from off his shoulders, and fell from off his back, and began to tumble; and so continued to do till it came to the mouth of the sepulchre, where it fell in, and I saw it no more.” Perfect love casts out fear.
|
Who was Elizabeth in the Bible?
|
Answer
Elizabeth in the Bible was the wife of a priest named [Zechariah](Zechariah-in-the-Bible.html); she was also a cousin of Mary, the mother of Jesus. Elizabeth and Zechariah are called “righteous and blameless” people who walked in all the commandments of the Lord (Luke 1:6\). Elizabeth was barren; she was unable to have children (Luke 1:7\). When Elizabeth is first mentioned in the Bible, she is an old woman, or as Luke puts it, “advanced in years” (Luke 1:7\). This could mean anything from late middle\-age to old age. In any case, she was past child\-bearing age (Luke 1:18\).
When Zechariah was in the temple offering incense to the Lord, the angel [Gabriel](angel-Gabriel.html) appeared to him, saying that he and Elizabeth would soon be parents; they were to name the baby John. This baby would grow up to be “great before the Lord” and bring joy and gladness to them, as well as to many other people (Luke 1:14–15\). Zechariah was doubtful because of his wife’s age and the fact that he was himself old (Luke 1:18\), so Gabriel—the same angel who appeared later to Mary—told Zechariah that he would be unable to speak until the prophecy was fulfilled in the birth of John (Luke 1:19–20, 26–27\).
Elizabeth, when finding herself pregnant, kept herself in seclusion for five months. She said, “The Lord has done this for me. . . . In these days he has shown his favor and taken away my disgrace among the people” (Luke 1:25\). Six months after Elizabeth conceived, Mary also became pregnant, and she went to visit Elizabeth, because Gabriel had told her of Elizabeth’s pregnancy (Luke 1:36–37\). It is a sign of God’s love and care that he placed these women in the same family. He could have just as easily made them strangers to one another, but, by making them relatives, He gave them mutual comfort and encouragement. Especially for Mary, the experience of being pregnant outside of wedlock must have been frightening and shocking. But God provided Elizabeth as a comforting presence—a trusted and known relation and older woman who was going through a similarly miraculous event (Luke 1:38–45\).
As soon as Mary arrived at Elizabeth’s home and Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, “the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: ‘Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But why am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy. Blessed is she who has believed that the Lord would fulfill his promises to her!’” (Luke 1:41–45\). The Holy Spirit told Elizabeth of Mary’s condition even before Mary could say a word.
Eight days after Elizabeth’s child was born, several neighbors and relatives were there for the ceremony of [circumcision](circumcision.html). It was during this time that children were officially given their names, and Elizabeth declared her baby’s name to be John—Zechariah was still unable to speak. The neighbors questioned Elizabeth about the name; none of her relatives had ever been called John—certainly they should name him Zechariah. But Zechariah procured a tablet and wrote on it the name of John. In this he showed his faith in the angel’s prophecy, and, with that, Zechariah was able to speak again (Luke 1:57–64\).
Elizabeth’s son grew up to be [John the Baptist](life-John-Baptist.html), who ministered “before the Lord, in the spirit and power of Elijah” (Luke 1:17\) and was the prophet who prepared the way of the Lord, fulfilling Malachi’s prophecy (Malachi 3:1; Luke 1:76; John 3:1–6\).
|
Who were the satraps in the book of Daniel?
|
Answer
Satraps are mentioned in Daniel chapters 3 and 6\. These officials were among the eight classes of officials that King Nebuchadnezzar (605—562 BC) appointed in Babylon. Satraps are also mentioned in the books of Ezra and Esther.
The satraps were the chief representatives of the king, and they most likely had charge of the various provinces of the kingdom. Other officials in Babylon were the prefects (military commanders), governors (civil administrators), advisers (counselors to those in governmental authority), treasurers (administrators of the funds of the kingdom), judges (administrators of the law), and magistrates (those who passed judgment in keeping with the law). The “other provincial officials” mentioned in Daniel 3:2 were probably subordinates of the satraps. This list of officers probably included all who served in any official capacity under Nebuchadnezzar. All of these officials, including the satraps, were required to bow down before the king’s golden image. [Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego](Shadrach-Meshach-Abednego.html) refused.
In Daniel 6, the satraps serving under [King Darius](Darius-in-the-Bible.html) had [Daniel](life-Daniel.html) as one of their overseers: “It pleased Darius to appoint 120 satraps to rule throughout the kingdom, with three administrators over them, one of whom was Daniel. The satraps were made accountable to them so that the king might not suffer loss” (verses 1–2\). The satraps were to protect the king’s possessions, and Daniel was responsible to ensure they carried out their duties. God blessed Daniel, and the satraps were not pleased that Daniel could so easily be promoted to administrator of the entire kingdom. The satraps and other officials under Darius devised a plan they were sure would lead to Daniel’s demise. Their devious ploy backfired, however, and, rather than Daniel being eaten in the lions’ den, the satraps and other officials were (Daniel 6:24\).
|
Why doesn’t GotQuestions.org allow comments on its articles?
|
Answer
In this age of blogs and social media, many people expect, and sometimes even demand, the ability to post comments to online content. Numerous people have questioned why GotQuestions.org does not allow comments. There are two primary, interrelated reasons:
(1\) The comments would have to be monitored, moderated, reviewed, and approved. We are a ministry that seeks to provide biblically based answers to spiritually related questions. A comments section that is filled with vulgarity, spam, and/or false doctrine would be counterproductive to our mission. Anyone who has done any posting on social media is well aware of how quickly an online conversation can turn into a nasty, offensive, and unproductive argument.
(2\) With well over 12,000,000 visitors a month, there would be a tremendous number of comments for us to review. It would likely take a full\-time employee, or possibly more than one, to moderate, review, and approve the comments to appear on the site. We definitely do not have the funds for this, and even if we did, we can think of far better ways to invest those funds for a much greater impact.
Ultimately, we are GotQuestions.org, not GotDebate.org. If people want to debate Christian, biblical, and theological topics, there are countless online forums with that focus.
|
What is the Feast of Dedication?
|
Answer
The Feast of Dedication, which was once also called the Feast of the Maccabees, was an eight\-day winter festival celebrated by the Jews in the month of December or sometimes late November, depending on when it fell in the lunisolar Jewish calendar. Today, this festival is called Hanukkah or the Festival of Lights.
The history of the Feast of Dedication goes back to the [intertestamental period](intertestamental-period.html) and the Maccabean Revolt. After the Seleucid king [Antiochus Ephiphanes](Antiochus-Epiphanes.html) profaned the Jewish temple and forced the Jews to abandon their sacrifices and adopt pagan rituals, a group of Jewish freedom fighters rose up, defied the oppressive pagan regime, and overthrew the Seleucids. The temple in Jerusalem was re\-dedicated to God; ever since then, the Feast of Dedication has been celebrated to commemorate this meaningful event in Jewish history.
The original Feast of Dedication involved a miracle, according to rabbinic tradition. When the Jews re\-entered the temple they could only find one small, sealed jug of olive oil that had not been profaned or contaminated by the Seleucids. They used this to light the [menorah](what-is-the-menorah.html) in the temple, and though the oil was only enough to last one day, it miraculously lasted eight days—time for more oil to be made ready. This is the reason Hanukkah lasts for eight days.
The Bible mentions the Feast of Dedication by name in the Gospel of John. “Then came the Festival of Dedication at Jerusalem. It was winter, and Jesus was in the temple courts walking in Solomon’s Colonnade” (John 10:22–23\). This is the scene in which Jesus claims oneness with the Father, for which the unbelieving Jews try to apprehend and stone Him (verses 24–39\).
The Feast of Dedication, with its roots in the miracle of the menorah, has always been associated with lights; it is sometimes called the Festival of Lights. Illuminating houses and synagogues is a tradition that was probably carried over from the Feast of Tabernacles. The recitation of Psalm 30:1–12 is also an important part of the Feast of Dedication because of its themes of God\-given victory over enemies and the replacement of mourning and sorrow with hope and joy (Psalm 30:5, 11\).
Hanukkah, or the Feast of Dedication, is not one of the [festivals](Jewish-festivals.html) instituted by God through Moses as part of the Law. That is not to say, however, that the festival is unbiblical or unpleasing to God. From Daniel to Jesus’ disciples to Jews persecuted under Hitler’s power and Christians persecuted in the Orient, both Jews and Christians have a long history of showing extraordinary courage in the face of intense persecution, just as the Jews did during the Seleucid oppression. The Feast of Dedication is about the darkness of persecution and the light of God that leads His people through the darkness of those figurative nights with a promise of joy in the morning (Psalm 30:5\).
Most Jews today do not believe in Jesus Christ as the incarnation of Yahweh. However, the Maccabees were followers of Yahweh, and Jesus’ disciples were still Jewish, even though they believed that the Great I Am had revealed Himself in the person of Jesus (Exodus 3:14; John 8:58\). Christianity has its roots in Judaism, and Christians can look to the Feast of Dedication as a celebration of God’s protection and the victory He gives His faithful people who are willing to bravely continue to worship Him in the face of persecution.
|
What is an oxgoad in the Bible?
|
Answer
An ox goad is a wooden tool, approximately eight feet long, fitted with an iron spike or point at one end, which was used to spur oxen as they pulled a plow or cart. It often had an iron scraper at the non\-pointed end to clear clods of earth from the plowshare when it became weighed down.
The ox goad is mentioned only once by that name in the Bible, in Judges 3:31\. [Shamgar](who-was-Shamgar.html), one of those who judged Israel, killed 600 hundred Philistines using only an ox goad for a weapon. Shamgar’s use of an ox goad shows how low the men of Judah had been brought at that time by their oppressors. Later, Israel was disarmed to the extent that “not a shield or spear was seen among forty thousand in Israel” (Judges 5:8\).
Ecclesiastes 12:11 refers to a goad, which is synonymous with an ox goad: “The words of the wise are like goads, / and like nails firmly fixed are the collected sayings; / they are given by one Shepherd.” In this verse, a comparison is made between the Word of God, its doctrines, and its effects upon the heart of man and an ox goad that pricks, drives, and directs sinners like oxen. The Shepherd uses the Word to prick our consciences, drive us to repentance, and direct us to Christ for salvation.
When an ox was poked with a goad, its response was sometimes to kick out at it in resistance. Naturally, kicking back at the goad was futile, not to mention painful. Jesus used this as an analogy when He confronted Saul on the [Damascus Road](Damascus-Road.html) (Acts 26:14\). Jesus asked Saul why he was persecuting Him and reminded him that, just as an ox that kicks against the pricking of the goad can hurt itself, Saul’s continued resistance to the gospel would only result in danger to himself. Saul wisely submitted to the goad and yielded himself to Christ.
|
Why doesn’t GotQuestions.org give the names of the authors of its articles?
|
Answer
We receive this question fairly often. Some people are simply curious. Others allege that we are trying to hide something by not disclosing the names of the authors of our articles. Please rest assured that there is nothing nefarious about our articles being anonymous. We offer the following reasons for why our articles do not carry bylines or in any way identify their authors:
(1\) From the very beginning of this ministry, our intent was to promote the Word of God, not to promote people’s names or enhance resumes. Now, with over 9,000 articles written over a span of 22 years, we do not have records of who wrote every article.
(2\) While some of the GotQuestions.org authors would be fine with their names being published, a significant majority would rather have their names withheld. They are all dedicated servants of the Lord, and most of them do not wish for any credit or want any praise.
(3\) Some GotQuestions.org authors have passed away or are no longer serving with our ministry. We have no way to contact all the writers of our archived articles to secure their permission to print their names in a byline.
(4\) We receive a fair amount of “hate mail” and even the occasional death threat. We absolutely do not want to expose our writers to such hostility. GotQuestions.org authors are focused on teaching God’s Word in a clear, understandable way, and we would like to spare them whatever personal attacks we can—and they would definitely endure personal attacks if their names were made public.
(5\) We would rather our answers not be accepted or rejected based on who wrote them. We want people to compare our answers with Scripture and accept or reject what we publish based on that comparison.
(6\) An author’s byline is unnecessary. The reference information given on our [citation page](citation.html) is sufficient without the author’s name in virtually every setting, academia included.
Ultimately, as the president and CEO of the ministry, S. Michael Houdmann is accountable for the content of our website.
|
Who was Chemosh?
|
Answer
Chemosh was the god of the Moabites (Numbers 21:29; Jeremiah 48:7, 13, 46\). Scripture calls him “the abomination of Moab” (1 Kings 11:7\). Unfortunately, Chemosh\-worship was introduced into Israelite culture by King Solomon, who had wives from other cultures who turned his heart to other gods (1 Kings 11:4–7\). Chemosh was one of those gods worshiped by Solomon’s wives. The cult of Chemosh was eventually destroyed in Judah by King Josiah (2 Kings 23\).
The meaning of the name *Chemosh* is not understood, though some scholars believe it may have meant “destroyer” or “subduer.” Chemosh was also seen as a fish\-god. He was the national deity of the [Moabites](Moabites.html) and the [Ammonites](Ammonites.html), and, according to the Moabite Stone (the Mesha Stele), Chemosh was associated with the goddess Ashteroth, another false god worshiped by wayward Israelites. Chemosh is thought to have been a deity similar to [Baal](who-Baal.html), and there is also evidence, both from the Moabite Stone and from Scripture, that Chemosh may have been the same deity as the Ammonite [Moloch](who-Molech.html) (1 Kings 11:7, 33\). At least, Chemosh and Moloch were two manifestations of the same false god. King Solomon built “high places” to both gods in the same location, the mountain east of Jerusalem. The worship of Chemosh was truly an abomination. One place in Scripture records Chemosh demanding human sacrifice: in the days of Judah’s King Jehoram, the king of Moab faced military defeat, and the Moabite ruler “took his firstborn son, who was to succeed him as king, and offered him as a sacrifice on the city wall” (2 Kings 3:27\).
Chemosh also features in John Milton’s epic poem [*Paradise Lost*](Paradise-Lost.html). In a passage about false gods, Milton refers to Chemosh as a god whom the Israelites worshiped with “lustful orgies” and “wanton rites” and calls Chemosh “th’ obscene dread of Moab’s sons” (Book 1, line 406\). Milton also mentions King Josiah, who “drove them thence to Hell” by abolishing the practice of Chemosh\-worship in Israel.
|
Does the name “Jesus” actually mean “Hail, Zeus”?
|
Answer
There are several strange and misleading teachings that make their rounds concerning the [name of God](Sacred-Name-Movement.html) and of Jesus Christ; one such false doctrine is the idea that the name of Jesus actually means “Hail, Zeus.” Promoters of this bizarre concept claim that anyone who uses the name *Jesus* is offering praise to a false god and is not saved. They go so far as to say a person must use only the Hebrew name for Jesus, since there is only one name by which we can be saved (Acts 4:12\).
First, we will explain the “Jesus\-means\-hail\-Zeus” theory, the best we can. Then we will look at the truth of the matter from a biblical perspective.
Those who teach that the name *Jesus* means “Hail, Zeus” usually start with the name of God, [*YAH*](YHWH-tetragrammaton.html) (see Isaiah 26:4, NET). From that name of God, they take the Messiah’s name to be *YAHSHUA*, which they say means “YAH Is Salvation.” They contend that is the name used by the apostles and by the Messiah Himself; however, after the apostles were dead and gone, the Roman Church took over Christianity. In order to make their brand of religion more palatable to the pagans, the Roman leaders changed the name of the Messiah into a Greek/Latin hybrid, *Iésous*, which (supposedly) means “Hail, Zeus.” Since [Zeus](Zeus-in-the-Bible.html) (or Jupiter) was the chief god in the Greco\-Roman pantheon, the pagans had little trouble accepting this new demigod. By changing the Savior’s name, Christianity had been effectively stripped of its Hebrew roots, and the melding with paganism was a success. The Greeks’ savior could still be Zeus. In time, the word *Iésous* was further corrupted into *Jesus* in English.
As “proof” for their conspiracy theory that *Jesus* means “Hail, Zeus,” advocates point to the fact that the second syllable of *Jesus* (*\-sus*) sounds similar to the name of the chief Greek god. Especially when *Jesus* is pronounced in Spanish, it becomes “evident” that people are “actually” saying “Hey, Zeus.” Added to these “proofs” is the fact that ancient sculptures of Zeus show him with a beard—just like modern\-day pictures of Jesus!
What can we say to such far\-fetched nonsense? First, not everyone who has a beard is trying to take the place of Jesus. Second, just because a certain word or word part *sounds* like another word is no proof of commonality. Basing theories of word origin on pronunciation is preposterous. *Humorous* sounds exactly like *humerus*, but there’s nothing particularly funny about the bone that goes from the shoulder to the elbow. Third, the Messiah’s Hebrew name is *Yeshua*, not *Yahshua*—the latter being a fabrication in order to make the name sound more like *YAH*.
Fourth, the Hebrew name *Yeshua* transliterates into Greek as *Iésous*. This is the name that the angel Gabriel commanded Joseph to name Mary’s child: “You are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins” (Matthew 1:21\). The name *Jesus* is a simply a Greek form of *Joshua*, a common name among Jews. The same verse also alludes to the meaning of the name: the Lord was to be named Jesus because “he will save his people from their sins.” The name *Jesus* means “The Lord Saves” or “The Lord Is Salvation.” Whether you spell it *Jesus* or *Joshua* or *Yeshua*, the meaning stays the same, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with Zeus.
Names can and do translate. Changing a name from one language to another does not change the meaning of the name, nor does it change the character or identity of the person. *Elizabeth* becomes *Elixabete*, *Isabella*, *Zsoka*, or *Eliska*, depending on the language. But she remains the same girl. A man named Stephen can be called *Stephanos*, *Stefan*, *Estevao*, *Teppo*, or *Estebe*, depending on where in the world he is. But he is the same person, regardless of what we call him. Similarly, *Jesus* and *Yeshua* refer to the same Person—and it’s not Zeus.
We use the name *Jesus*, an Anglicized transliteration of the Greek, because Greek is the language that Matthew and Mark and Luke and John wrote their Gospels in and because English is the language we speak. The best transliteration of *Iésous* into modern English is “Jesus.”
Part of Timothy’s work as a pastor was to “command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer or to devote themselves to myths” (1 Timothy 1:3–4\). Paul was concerned that “such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith” (verse 4\). Conspiracy theories and myths regarding the etymology of Jesus’ name are distractions from the true work of God. We should not pay any heed to claims that the name *Jesus* means anything but what Scripture says it means: “The Lord Saves.”
|
What is the difference between the manifest presence of the Holy Spirit and God’s omnipresence?
|
Answer
God’s [omnipresence](God-omnipresent.html) is His attribute of being everywhere at once. He is omnipresent even when we do not experience His presence; He is here, even if we do not recognize Him. God’s manifest presence is, of course, His presence made manifest—the fact that He is with us is made clear and convincing.
God’s omnipresence applies to each Person in the [Trinity](Trinity-Bible.html): the Father (Isaiah 66:1\), the Son (John 1:48\), and the Holy Spirit (Psalm 139:7–8\). The fact that God is omnipresent may or may not result in a special experience on our part. However, God’s manifest presence is the result of His interaction with us overtly and unmistakably. It is then we experience God.
The Bible records that each Person of the Trinity has made Himself manifestly present in the lives of certain individuals. God the Father spoke to Moses in the burning bush in Exodus 3\. God had been with Moses all along, but then, in “the far side of the wilderness” near Mt. Horeb (Exodus 3:1\), God chose to manifest Himself. God the Son made Himself manifest through the Incarnation, as John 1:14 says, “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.” On the Day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit was manifest to the believers in the upper room: “Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they were sitting. They saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them. All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues as the Spirit enabled them” (Acts 2:2–4\). The result of the manifest presence of God in the lives of the disciples was a world turned upside\-down (see Acts 17:6\).
Theologically, we understand that God is omnipresent, but that fact is not readily discerned with the senses. It is a reality, but that reality may not seem relevant to the majority of people on the planet who have no sense of His presence. They *feel* He is distant, not close, and that feeling becomes their perceived reality.
We know of God’s manifest presence experientially. The manifest presence of the Spirit may not be visible or aural or able to be sensed physically, but His presence is experienced nonetheless. At the times of His choosing, the Spirit manifests His presence, and our theological knowledge becomes an experiential knowledge. Creedal acquaintance becomes loving familiarity.
In Psalm 71, David prays in his distress to his loving, merciful, and righteous God. David understands that God is with him, and that’s the reason he prays. Near the end of the prayer, David says, “Though you have made me see troubles, many and bitter, you will restore my life again; from the depths of the earth you will again bring me up. You will increase my honor and comfort me once more” (verses 20–21\). God’s presence was hidden for a time in David’s life, and it was a time of “troubles, many and bitter”; but David trusted to once again know the manifest presence of God, and that would be a time of honor and comfort.
God never forsook Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. For a time, however, it seemed that the only potentate in existence was King Nebuchadnezzar—and he was murderously furious at the three Hebrew men. The king, unaware of God’s omnipresence, threw the three into the burning, fiery furnace. And that’s when God manifested His presence: “King Nebuchadnezzar leaped to his feet in amazement and . . . said, ‘Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods’” (Daniel 3:24–25\). The reality of God’s presence became discernable, even to the pagan king. This was God’s manifest presence.
We can never lose God’s presence in *reality*, but we can lose the sense of His presence. There is never a time when God is not present with us, but there are times when God is not manifestly with us. Sometimes His presence is not clear or obvious to the human eye or the human spirit. That’s one reason why we are called to “live by faith, not by sight” (2 Corinthians 5:7\). God’s omnipresence can exist without our awareness; God’s manifest presence cannot. The whole point of God’s manifest presence is that our awareness of Him is awakened.
Believers always have the Holy Spirit with them. The Bible teaches the indwelling of the Spirit: “Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God?” (1 Corinthians 6:19\). The Spirit will not be taken from us. He is our Comforter, our Helper, our [Paraclete](paraclete-Holy-Spirit.html) until Jesus returns (John 14:16\). At that time Jesus Himself will be with us—manifestly and forever.
But the indwelling of the Spirit is not the same as the Spirit’s manifest presence. Every believer goes through times when he doesn’t “feel” saved or days when he goes through his activities unaware of the Spirit’s presence within him. But then there are times when that same indwelling Spirit visits the believer in a special, manifest way. It could be a song the Spirit brings to mind; it could be a coincidental encounter with a friend; it could be a prompting to prayer, a desire to study the Word, or an ineffable feeling of peace—the Spirit is not limited in how He reveals Himself. The point is that He makes Himself known. He is our Comforter. “By him we cry, ‘Abba, Father.’ The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children” (Romans 8:15–16\).
Should we trust in God’s omnipresence, even when we don’t *feel* He is with us? Absolutely. God, who cannot lie, says that He never leaves or forsakes us (Hebrews 13:5\). Should we also seek God’s manifest presence? Absolutely. It’s not that we rely on feelings or that we seek after a sign, but we expect the Comforter to comfort His own—and we gladly acknowledge that we need His comfort.
|
What is the inner man?
|
Answer
Paul uses the term *inner man* several times in his epistles (2 Corinthians 4:16; Ephesians 3:16\). Romans 7:22–23 says, “For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, but I see a different law in the members of my body.” The “inner man” is another way of describing the spiritual aspect of a person. The “outer man,” by contrast, would be the visible, external aspect of a person.
Human beings were created by God with a [spirit, soul, and body](body-soul-spirit.html) (Genesis 1:27; 1 Thessalonians 5:23\). It has been said that we are not bodies with souls; we are souls that have bodies. The body—the “outer man”—is our physical housing through which we experience the world. Our bodies function primarily through the five senses and by meeting innate needs that drive us to eat, drink, and sleep. Our bodies are not evil but are gifts from God. He desires that we surrender those bodies as [living sacrifices](living-sacrifice.html) to Him (Romans 12:1–2\). When we accept God’s gift of salvation through Christ, our bodies become temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19–20; 3:16\).
Our souls are the personality centers of our beings from which our mind, will, and emotions operate. With our souls we choose either to listen to and obey the lusts of our flesh or the desires of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:16–17; Romans 8:9; Mark 14:38\). The soul of a person is the courtroom where life decisions are made. It is the seat of the self\-life and the fountain from which character traits such as self\-confidence, self\-pity, self\-seeking, and self\-affirmation originate.
Our spirits contain the inner man about which the Scriptures speak. Our spirits are where the Spirit of God communes with us. Jesus said, “God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24\). It is within our spirits that we are born again (John 3:3–6\). The “inner man” contains the [conscience](conscience.html) upon which the Holy Spirit can move and convict of sin (John 16:8; Acts 24:16\). Our spirits are the parts of us most like God, with an innate knowledge of right and wrong (Romans 2:14–15\). First Corinthians 2:11 says, “For who knows a person’s thoughts except their own spirit within them? In the same way no one knows the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God.”
Romans 12:1–2 implores us not to be conformed to this world’s way of thinking; rather, our inner man must be transformed by the “renewing of our minds.” This mind\-renewal comes about as we allow the Holy Spirit free rein within our “inner man.” He begins to change our actions and desires to match His. Romans 8:13–14 says, “For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.”
Romans 7 details the often painful battle between our flesh and spirit. Our spirits, having been reborn by the power of God, long to obey and follow Jesus. But the flesh does not die an easy death. Romans 6 explains how we can allow the inner man to triumph over the flesh. Verses 6 and 7 say, “We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. For one who has died has been set free from sin.” Until we consider ourselves “crucified with Christ” (Galatians 2:20\), the soul and body battle with the spirit for supremacy. We continue to live in a state of defeat until we die to self and allow the Spirit to have full control over every aspect of our lives, both inner and outer man.
It is God’s desire and design for human beings that we live always directed by the born\-again nature, which is in step with God’s Spirit. But our fallen natures want to rule, and so a spiritual battle rages. Romans 7:24 poses a question that every dedicated follower of Christ asks: “Who will deliver me from this body of death?” Verse 25 answers that question: “Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord!” The extent to which we surrender that inner man to the control of the Holy Spirit is the extent to which we walk in continual victory over our fallen flesh.
|
Who was Belshazzar?
|
Answer
Belshazzar was the last king of [ancient Babylon](Babylonian-empire.html) and is mentioned in Daniel 5\. Belshazzar reigned for a short time during the life of Daniel the prophet. His name, meaning “Bel protect the king,” is a prayer to a Babylonian god; as his story shows, Bel was powerless to save this evil ruler.
Belshazzar ruled Babylon, a powerful nation with a long history and a long line of powerful kings. One of those kings was [Nebuchadnezzar](Nebuchadnezzar.html), who had conquered Judah, bringing the temple treasures to Babylon along with Daniel and many other captives. Belshazzar was Nebuchadnezzar’s grandson through his daughter Nitocris. Belshazzar calls Nebuchadnezzar his “father” in Daniel 5:13, but this is a generic use of the word *father*, meaning “ancestor.”
During his life, King Nebuchadnezzar had encountered the God of Israel’s power and was humbled by Him (Daniel 4:34–37\), but twenty years after Nebuchadnezzar’s death, his grandson Belshazzar “praised the gods of gold and silver, of bronze, iron, wood and stone” (Daniel 5:4\). One fateful night in 539 BC, as the Medes and the Persians lay siege to the city of Babylon, King Belshazzar held a feast with his household and a thousand of his noblemen. The king demanded all the gold and silver cups and vessels plundered from the Jewish temple be brought to the royal banquet hall. They filled the vessels with wine and drank from them, praising their false gods (Daniel 5:1–4\). The use of the articles from the Jewish temple was a blasphemous attempt for Belshazzar to relive the glory days of his kingdom, to recall the time when Babylon was conquering other nations instead of being threatened with annihilation from the Persians outside their walls.
As the drunken king reveled, God sent him a sign: a human hand appeared, floating near the lampstand and writing four words in the plaster of the wall: “[MENE MENE TEKEL PARSIN](mene-mene-tekel-upharsin.html).” Then, the hand disappeared (Daniel 5:5, 25\). The king paled and was extremely frightened; he called his wise men and astrologers and enchanters to tell him what the writing meant, promising that “whoever reads this writing and tells me what it means will be clothed in purple and have a gold chain placed around his neck, and he will be made the third highest ruler in the kingdom” (verse 7\). But none of the wise men of Babylon could interpret the words.
Hearing a commotion in the banquet hall, the queen (possibly Nitocris or even Nebuchadnezzar’s widow) came to investigate. She remembered Daniel as one whose wisdom Nebuchadnezzar had trusted, and she told Belshazzar to summon the Jewish prophet (Daniel 5:10–12\). Daniel was brought before the king, but he refused the gifts Belshazzar offered him—the kingdom was not his to give, as it turned out (verse 17\). Daniel rebuked Belshazzar’s pride: although the king knew the story of how God humbled his grandfather, he did not humble himself. Instead, he dishonored God by drinking from the sacred items of the temple (verses 22–23\). Then, Daniel interpreted the words on the wall. *Mene* means “God has numbered the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end.” *Tekel* means “you have been weighed in the balances and found wanting.” *Parsin* means “your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians” (Daniel 5:24–28\). Daniel never revealed what language those words belong to.
That night, the Persians invaded. Cyrus the Great, king of [Medo\-Persia](Medo-Persian-empire.html), broke through the supposedly impenetrable wall of Babylon by cleverly diverting the river flowing into the city so that his soldiers could enter through the river duct. Historical records show that this invasion was made possible because the entire city was involved in a great feast—the feast of Belshazzar mentioned in Daniel 5\. “That very night Belshazzar, king of the Babylonians, was slain, and Darius the Mede took over the kingdom” (Daniel 5:30–31\). The demise of King Belshazzar illustrates the truth of Proverbs 16:18, “Pride goes before destruction, a haughty spirit before a fall.”
|
What are the Songs of Ascent?
|
Answer
The Songs of Ascent are a special group of psalms comprising Psalms 120—134\. They are also called Pilgrim Songs. Four of these songs are attributed to King David (122, 124, 131, 133\) and one to Solomon (127\), while the remaining ten are anonymous.
The city of Jerusalem is situated on a high hill. Jews traveling to Jerusalem for one of the three main annual Jewish festivals traditionally sang these songs on the “ascent” or the uphill road to the city. According to some traditions, the Jewish priests also sang some of these Songs of Ascent as they walked up the steps to the temple in Jerusalem.
Each of the psalms in this collection begins with the title “A Song of Ascents.” While perhaps they were not originally composed for this purpose, these psalms were later grouped together for use in traveling toward Jerusalem for the yearly Jewish festivals.
The theme of each Song of Ascent offers much encouragement for those who seek to worship God today:
Psalm 120: God’s presence during distress
Psalm 121: Joyful praise to the Lord
Psalm 122: Prayer for Jerusalem
Psalm 123: Patience for God’s mercy
Psalm 124: Help comes from the Lord
Psalm 125: Prayer for God’s blessing upon His people
Psalm 126: The Lord has done great things
Psalm 127: God’s blessing on man’s efforts
Psalm 128: Joy for those who follow God’s ways
Psalm 129: A cry for help to the Lord
Psalm 130: A prayer of repentance
Psalm 131: Surrender as a child to the Lord
Psalm 132: God’s sovereign plan for His people
Psalm 133: Praise of brotherly fellowship and unity
Psalm 134: Praise to God in His temple
The Songs of Ascent continue to find a place among the many hymns and songs of worship of Jews and Christians today. They serve as powerful examples of how we can express our worship and love for God through the power of song.
|
How should a Christian respond to a bad economy?
|
Answer
When faced with a bad economy that threatens job security and savings accounts, it is natural to feel trepidation and some degree of insecurity. That said, a Christian can be at peace during times of economic downturn. Here are three good ways for Christians to respond when the economy is less than ideal:
**Continue to practice wisdom.**
The Bible is filled with wise principles about money and work. Laziness is never a good thing; we know that a lazy man who refuses to work will have nothing at the time of harvest (Proverbs 13:4; 20:4\). Diligence is rewarded with wealth (Proverbs 12:27\), but massive wealth brings its own trouble (Proverbs 13:8\). Gaining little by little over time is wiser than gaining a large sum all at once (Proverbs 13:11\), but toiling and laboring endlessly to gain wealth is not the action of a discerning man (Proverbs 23:4\). All of these principles, plus many more to be found in Scripture, are tried and true and will be useful in a bad economy as well as a good one.
**Remember God’s economy.**
Certain principles will always be true, regardless of one’s economic situation. Cheerful generosity will bring a harvest—although the reaping may have to wait until the world to come (2 Corinthians 9:6–7\). Giving to the needy carries a reward (Matthew 6:4\). God never promises that we will be wealthy in this world, or even that we’ll always have as much as we want, but He does promise to supply our needs, along with giving joy, peace, and spiritual productiveness to those who have His Spirit (Galatians 5:20–21; John 7:38\). If we seek first the kingdom of God, all necessary things will be added to us (Matthew 6:33\). Our priority should always be spiritual. Christians are compared to soldiers in a war; soldiers are not concerned with civilian pursuits while they are engaged in combat (2 Timothy 2:3–4\). A bad economy will not be of too much concern for a soldier, because his mind is on other things. This is the attitude a Christian should have toward money matters. Of course, we are to manage money wisely and be generous, but it is foolish to place trust in money or anything else in this world that is so easily destroyed and lost (Matthew 6:19–21\).
**Trust in God’s provision.**
When savings accounts begin to dwindle as a result of an economic downturn, we can easily be tempted to fear, wondering how we will be provided for in the future. However, God has promised to provide for us, no matter what economic situation we are in. He fed Elijah with food delivered by ravens (1 Kings 17:4–6\). He caused the widow’s cruse to not run dry and her bin of flour to always be full (verse 16\). God even cares for the sparrows and feeds them; He will not fail to feed His children (Matthew 6:25–27\).
|
What does the Bible say about safety?
|
Answer
In an increasingly unsafe world, people are seeking safety and security. Armies face each other across vast deserts, nations arm themselves with nuclear weapons, radical ideologies endanger millions. Closer to home, we face threats to our safety and that of our families every day. Physical safety is paramount in the minds of many. The Bible has much to say about safety, both physical and spiritual.
In the Old Testament, God promised the Israelites that they would dwell in the land in safety if they obeyed His commandments (Leviticus 25:18–19; 26:3–5; Deuteronomy 12:10\). When God’s people turned away from Him and followed other gods, their safety was threatened, and the result was disaster. The ups and downs recorded in the [book of Judges](Book-of-Judges.html) clearly link ancient Israel’s national safety to their obedience to God’s Word. The Hebrew word translated “safety” in the Old Testament means “a place of refuge; security, trust, confidence, hope.” Proverbs 18:10 describes the name of the Lord as a [strong tower](name-Lord-strong-tower.html) into which the righteous run and find safety. Safety also involves trusting in the Lord, according to Proverbs 29:25\.
The New Testament does not ignore physical safety. Jesus spoke of carrying a sword for protection (Luke 22:36\), and Paul was kept safe from those who would harm him physically on several occasions (Acts 9:25; 17:10; 19:30; 23:10\). However, the New Testament focuses more on spiritual safety, i.e., salvation. Jesus and the New Testament writers had a great deal to say about being saved. Spiritual safety is found in only one place—faith in the shed blood of Christ in payment for our sin and in His resurrection (John 3:17; Acts 2:21; 4:12; Romans 10:9; Ephesians 2:8\). Jesus came into the world to provide spiritual safety and eternal security to all who would believe in Him. The need for physical safety pales in comparison to the universal need for spiritual safety. One may be in great danger in this world of physical harm and still have the assurance of an eternity of security in heaven. We fear not those who can only harm the body yet never touch the soul (see Matthew 10:28\).
Unfortunately, many are deceived into thinking that true security is provided by the things of the world—money, comforts, position, or power. But the safety these things provide is temporary and fleeting. Riches “surely sprout wings and fly off” (Proverbs 23:5\). Nothing is sure in this world: “The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all” (Ecclesiastes 9:11\). No worldly foundation can provide spiritual security in heaven. Paul spoke of a time to come when the Lord will return to earth. At that time, those who trust in anything other than Christ will find they have no peace or safety: “For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night. For when they say, ‘Peace and safety!’ then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape” (1 Thessalonians 5:2–3, NKJV).
Those who have true wisdom will [fear the Lord](fear-Lord-beginning-wisdom.html), the One who alone can give true security:
“Then you will go on your way in safety,
and your foot will not stumble.
When you lie down, you will not be afraid;
when you lie down, your sleep will be sweet.
Have no fear of sudden disaster
or of the ruin that overtakes the wicked,
for the Lord will be at your side
and will keep your foot from being snared”
(Proverbs 3:23–26\).
|
How many wives did King David have?
|
Answer
King David had many wives, according to the Bible, although only eight of them are named. Of the eight, five are mentioned only once. The other three wives figure prominently in the story of King David.
David’s first wife was [Michal](Michal-in-the-Bible.html), the daughter of [King Saul](life-Saul.html). Her story begins in 1 Samuel 18—19\. Saul gave Michal to David to marry after David defeated a hundred Philistines. But Saul, always fearful of young David’s popularity with the people, planned to kill his new son\-in\-law. However, Michal, who loved David, warned him of the plot and helped him escape. Following this, Saul gave Michal to another man. After David became king, Michal was restored as his wife (2 Samuel 3\). She later despised David when she saw him dancing before the Lord (2 Samuel 6:14–22\). Michal had no children, perhaps in punishment for mocking the servant of the Lord (verse 23\).
The story of David’s second wife of note, [Abigail](Abigail-in-the-Bible.html), is told in 1 Samuel 25\. She was originally the wife of Nabal, an evil man who disrespected David. In his anger, David planned to attack and kill Nabal and all his household. Abigail, a wise and prudent woman, met David as he and his men were approaching. She bowed down to him and convinced him not to seek revenge and cause bloodshed. David recognized that her good judgment was a gift to him from God. Abigail returned to Nabal and told him how close he had come to death. Nabal’s “heart failed him and he became like stone” (verse 37\). Ten days later, God struck Nabal and he died, and Abigail then became David’s wife.
The sad story of David’s wife [Bathsheba](David-and-Bathsheba.html) is well\-known (2 Samuel 11:1–17\). She was originally the wife of Uriah the Hittite, a trusted soldier in David’s army. While Uriah was away at war, David saw Bathsheba bathing in her courtyard one night; she was beautiful, and David lusted after her. Even knowing she was another man’s wife, David summoned her to his palace and slept with her. When she found that she was pregnant, she informed David, and the king, rather than repent, added to his sin. David ordered that Uriah be placed on the front lines of the battlefield where he was abandoned by his fellow soldiers and killed by the enemy. Then David married Bathsheba, but their child died shortly after birth. David chronicled his sin and repentance over these evil acts in Psalm 51\. David and Bathsheba had four more children (1 Chronicles 3:5\). Their son Solomon ruled after his father’s death.
The other five named wives of David were [Ahinoam](Ahinoam-of-Jezreel.html), Maacah, Haggith, Abital, and Eglah (2 Samuel 3:2–5; 1 Chronicles 3:1–3\). According to 2 Samuel 5:13, David married more wives in Jerusalem, but how many is unknown.
|
How can I overcome exam/test anxiety?
|
Answer
Taking tests is a common part of the formal educational process. Students in school know that it’s only a matter of time before exam week rolls around again—and, leading up to that time, there are the quizzes, assessments, practices, exercises, reviews, etc. Some students take it all in stride; others dread being tested; some are so anxious about making the grade on exams that they “freeze” or “choke” on the big day—which, of course, doesn’t help in making the grade.
Although the Bible does not address taking exams as practiced in modern education, it does have something to say about [anxiety](Bible-anxiety.html) and facing pressure. Here is some biblical and practical advice on handling exam anxiety:
*Prepare.* Early preparation for a test is vital. As Benjamin Franklin said, “By failing to prepare, you are preparing to fail.” Good study habits help us learn the material efficiently and prevent “cramming” the night before. Part of preparation is communicating ahead of time with the instructor in order to know what material will be covered on the test. Be sure to balance preparation for an exam with other activities. Remember that “much study wearies the body” (Ecclesiastes 12:12\). So don’t overdo it, and be sure to pay attention to the next point:
*Rest.* In the days leading up to an exam, be sure to eat well and get some exercise. A good night’s sleep the night before the test is almost always better than a late\-night cram session.
*Pray.* Ask the Lord for clarity of thought, the ability to focus, and the skill to make wise use of time during the test. Ask for the [peace of God](peace-of-God.html) to control your heart (Philippians 4:7\).
*Relax.* Exams can be fearful because they involve an element of the unknown. Refuse to panic; instead, allow the Holy Spirit to fill you with His fruit of peace. All things are known to God, and we know that He is in control. No matter what, He has promised to be with His children and not forsake them (Hebrews 13:5\).
*Trust.* Take to heart God’s promise that, no matter what, He loves His own (Romans 8:38–39\). His acceptance of us is based on the perfect work of His Son, not on our academic success (or failure).
*Obey.* The command is “fear not” (Luke 12:7\). Take courage, trust in the Lord, and do your best.
Philippians 4:6 says, “Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God.” The “anything” here includes test\-taking; the “every situation” includes when the instructor hands out exams—or says it’s time to log in to the exam online. We shouldn’t be anxious about exams, especially if we are doing as the verse says: praying with a spirit of gratitude and appealing to the Lord for help.
|
How did the apostle Peter die?
|
Answer
The Bible doesn’t tell us how the [apostle Peter](life-Peter.html) died. The most commonly accepted church tradition is that Peter was crucified upside\-down in Rome. Tradition says that, when Peter was put to death, he requested to be crucified on an inverted cross. The reason for his request was that, because he had denied his Lord, he did not consider himself worthy to die as Jesus had (see Matthew 26:33–35, 69–75\). Again, this is only a tradition, and the Bible doesn’t confirm or deny the story.
What we do know for sure about Peter’s death is Jesus’ prophecy in John 21:18–19\. “‘Very truly I tell you, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go.’ Jesus said this to indicate the kind of death by which Peter would glorify God.”
Jesus foretold the manner of Peter’s death, perhaps to prepare him for the circumstances he would face now that his Lord had been resurrected and would no longer be with him physically. Jesus reminded Peter that, in the past (“when you were younger”), Peter had a certain amount of freedom to come and go as he pleased. The day was coming when that would no longer be the case. “When you are old” does not necessarily mean Peter would live to a ripe old age. In fact, ancient writers say that Peter was put to death about thirty\-four years after Jesus’ prophecy. Peter’s precise age at that time is not known.
The means of death for Peter—crucifixion—was also predicted by the Lord. “Stretching out” his hands could easily be interpreted as Peter dying on a cross with his arms outstretched. Some historians point to the fact that the Romans also used stocks as an instrument of torture; in the stocks, a prisoner’s hands were stretched on the crosspiece. Whatever the manner of his execution, it is clear that Peter was at the mercy of others who in some way tied him and carried him to his death.
In spite of the gruesome details Peter heard about his death, he must have taken comfort and joy in hearing that his death would glorify God. Peter’s love for Jesus and his desire to obey and glorify Him were evident throughout the rest of his life and ministry. For Peter to die a martyr’s death clinging to the hope of heaven testifies to the courage, faith, patience, and perseverance of this great man of God who rejoiced to be counted worthy to die for the name of Jesus.
|
Why are both wisdom and foolishness pictured as women in Proverbs?
|
Answer
Chapter 9 of [Proverbs](Book-of-Proverbs.html) uses personification to describe wisdom and foolishness as women. Why would the author use women as his examples?
The answer is found in the descriptions used of these two terms. Wisdom is discussed in Proverbs 9:1–12, where it is personified as a wise woman. This wise lady has built her house (verse 1\), has prepared a great dinner (verse 2\), and gives wisdom to those who lack it (verses 3–5\).
The benefits to those who seek wisdom include becoming wiser and increasing in learning (verse 8\). The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom (verse 10\). Wisdom is even said to add years to one’s life (verse 11\).
In Proverbs 9:13–18, folly is associated with a seductive woman. Folly (“foolishness” in some translations) is loud, seductive, and knows nothing (verse 13\). She seduces the simple who pass by (verses 14–17\). Those who turn to her find death (verse 18\). In contrast to the lady Wisdom who provides fine food and wine, the woman Folly provides stolen water and bread eaten in secret (verse 17\).
The ninth chapter of Proverbs, then, calls readers to embrace wisdom and to flee from folly or foolishness. Those who do receive many benefits, while those who do not will experience judgment.
These teachings resemble in some ways the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 22:1–14 and Luke 14:15–24 of responding in a positive manner to God’s Word. The call to wisdom also closely resembles the New Testament’s call to salvation.
Further, a [chiastic structure](chiasm-chiastic.html) is present in Proverbs 9 that highlights verses 7–12 as the central focus of the teaching. These verses include a clear call to the benefit of wisdom. Verse 10 says, “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, / and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.”
The personification of both wisdom and folly as two different women presents the benefits of wisdom and the judgment associated with folly. A woman of wisdom benefits her husband, just as a woman of folly can destroy a husband.
These words are written as advice from a father to a son (Proverbs 2:1; 3:1; 4:20; 5:1, 20; 6:20; 7:1\), so the illustrations of two kinds of women are a powerful method to illustrate God’s wisdom. Reading these words in this context provides a deeper understanding of the passage and much application for life today.
|
What is spiritual metaphysics?
|
Answer
The term *spiritual metaphysics* references the study of human nature and human experience from a spiritual, non\-physical standpoint to understand how everything in life is connected. Spiritual metaphysicists perceive the material world not as “physical” but as “non\-physical” or “spiritual” and the true nature of human existence as a union of mind, body, and spirit in one interconnected reality. The pursuit of spiritual metaphysics is often motivated by a desire for personal growth and fulfillment or as part of a physical or emotional wellness journey. Unfortunately, spiritual metaphysics leads down a path away from biblical truth.
The term *metaphysics* (literally, “beyond the physical”) refers to the study of the basic principles underlying reality, existence, and knowledge. Metaphysics is the philosophical exploration of the ultimate nature of life, consciousness, and reality. In its most fundamental sense, it attempts to answer questions about what is real, what exists, and what that existence is like. The term *spiritual* generally refers to those aspects of human experience that pertain to the invisible, immaterial world—the non\-physical. Spiritual metaphysics, thus, encompasses a belief that the true nature of human existence is, at its core, spiritual and not physical. Everything that exists in the physical world has its basis in the spiritual world.
Corresponding with the spiritual metaphysical viewpoint is the belief that there is no real disconnection between individual aspects of our nature. Likewise, any perceived separation from other beings, from God, and from any aspects of the physical universe is merely an illusion. Spiritual metaphysicians generally claim that the ultimate reality is one uniform human experience—body, mind, and spirit. All things visible and invisible are part of that same collective truth. Thoughts are perceived as “energies” that can shape and manipulate one’s reality to bring healing, inner peace, self\-discovery, and growth.
As a science, there is no clear, widely accepted definition of spiritual metaphysics. The philosophy is not associated with any specific church, religion, or belief system, although it is compatible with [New Age](new-age-movement.html) thought. Most perspectives involving spiritual metaphysics reject traditional Christian doctrine in favor of holistic, [New Thought](New-Thought-movement.html), mystical, and transcendent belief systems. For example, a pantheistic worldview aligns closely with the “all is one” belief.
Several schools, such as the International Metaphysical Ministry (IMM), the University of Metaphysics, and the University of Sedona, offer non\-accredited ministerial degrees (including bachelor, master, and doctoral degree programs) in metaphysical science. A career in spiritual metaphysics might involve becoming a wellness coach, spiritual counselor, retreat facilitator, spiritual ceremonialist, or metaphysical parapsychology researcher.
Some spiritual metaphysical therapies include meditation, [Reiki](energy-healing-medicine.html), energy healing, and [mindfulness](Christian-mindfulness.html). Popular authors who explore the field of spiritual metaphysics are Deepak Chopra (*The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success*), Eckart Tolle (*A New Earth: Awakening to Your Life’s Purpose*), Michael Newton (*Journey of Souls*), and Paulo Coelho (*The Alchemist*).
Spiritual metaphysics is neither well\-defined nor objective, and it effectively describes nothing. Even “theocentric,” or (seemingly) God\-focused, metaphysical forms of spirituality present a dangerous threat to the Christian mindset. Similar false philosophies threatened to derail the Colossian believers from the truth, and Scripture’s warning is clear: “Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high\-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ” (Colossians 2:8, NLT). Paul called such nonsensical teachings “foolish ideas of what God was like” that cause people’s minds to “become darkened and confused” (see Romans 1:21, NLT).
|
How does love cover all wrongs (Proverbs 10:12)?
|
Answer
One of the most popular of the biblical proverbs is Proverbs 10:12, “Hatred stirs up conflict, / but love covers over all wrongs.” Some translations read, “Love covers all offenses” or “all transgressions.” What does is mean that love covers all wrongs?
This proverb is an example of [antithetical parallelism](antithetical-parallelism.html) in Hebrew poetry. A close look at the contrast involved helps provide a better understanding. “Hatred” is contrasted with “love.” The “stirring up” is contrasted with a “covering over.” And “conflict” is what hatred is promoting, whereas love seeks to make peace by covering “all wrongs.” To provide an expanded paraphrase: “Hatred looks for a fight and refuses to smooth things over, but love desires peace between warring parties and will not be involved in provoking dissension.”
Love covers all wrongs, but the wicked find motivation from hatred or spite toward others. In contrast, the righteous are motivated by love. Hatred seeks ways to cause trouble, but love looks for ways to forgive.
This same proverb is quoted in 1 Peter 4:8, “Above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins.” In this context, the proverb emphasizes that love is expressed through forgiveness of sins.
The idea of love being associated with forgiveness is found frequently in Scripture. One important example is found in 1 John 4:10, “This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.” See also John 3:16 and 1 John 3:16\. The work of Christ on the cross—the work of our forgiveness—was an act of divine love.
In our own personal relationships, we also show love in our forgiveness of others. One of love’s characteristics is that “[it keeps no record of wrongs](love-keeps-no-record-of-wrongs.html)” (1 Corinthians 13:5\). Love has no list of how or how often it has been offended. Love forgives.
A related idea from Proverbs 10:12 is the concept of “covering” sins. This concept is communicated elsewhere in the Old Testament to describe God’s forgiveness of sins. For example, Psalm 85:2 reads, “You forgave the iniquity of your people / and covered all their sins.” In the New Testament, Romans 4:7 speaks of the blessedness of knowing God’s love and [forgiveness](got-forgiveness.html): “Blessed are those whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered.”
James 5:19–20 says, “My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.” Again, the idea of “covering” many sins communicates the fact of a person’s sins being forgiven.
Our lives are to be characterized by [godly love](agape-love.html) that forgives the sins of others. Our extending of forgiveness is motivated by the truth that God has forgiven our sin through Jesus Christ (Ephesians 4:32\). How many times should we forgive? Up to seven times? That was Peter’s question in Matthew 18:21\. Jesus’ answer: “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy\-seven times” (Matthew 18:22\). Where sin increases, grace increases all the more (Romans 5:20\). Love covers a multitude of sins—and it keeps on covering.
|
Who was Moses’ mother?
|
Answer
Moses’ mother, Jochebed, was a Hebrew woman living in slavery in Egypt before the exodus. She was the daughter of a Levite, and she married [Amram](Moses-father.html), another Levite (Exodus 2:1\). According to Exodus 6:20, Jochebed married her nephew; thus, she was Amram’s aunt as well as his wife. We know that [Moses](life-Moses.html) was born several years after their marriage because she already had a daughter who was old enough at the time of Moses’ infancy to act as a lookout (Exodus 2:4\). This was likely Moses’ sister, [Miriam the prophetess](Miriam-in-the-Bible.html), who is mentioned by name in Exodus 15:20\. Along with Moses and Miriam, Jochebed had at least one other child, Moses’ brother [Aaron](life-Aaron.html) (Exodus 6:20\).
Moses was born during a troubled time for the Israelites in Egypt. The king had decreed that [midwives](Hebrew-midwives.html) were to kill all Hebrew boys when they were born, leaving only the girls alive. This progrom was Pharaoh’s attempt to control the population of the Israelites, who were strong and growing in numbers in the land of Egypt (Exodus 1:8–16\). There was rebellion against this murderous decree in many quarters. The Hebrew midwives refused to participate in the infanticide and deceived Pharaoh so they could avoid killing the baby boys (Exodus 1:17–19\). Moses’ mother Jochebed hid Moses in a basket of bulrushes and set him afloat on the Nile River to preserve his life (Exodus 2:3\). Even Pharaoh’s own daughter disobeyed the decree when she found Moses in the basket and took pity on him, adopting him as her own child (Exodus 2:5–10\). Moses was raised as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter, and it was also Pharaoh’s daughter who named him. Jochebed, in an astonishing example of God’s providence and mercy, became Moses’ nurse and was paid by the king for her service (Exodus 2:7–9\).
Moses’ mother is mentioned again in Numbers 26:59, but no other information is given about her in the Bible. Interestingly, the Qur'an tells the story of Jochebed’s decision to hide Moses, with little variation in the particulars of the biblical story—though the Qur'an adds some details about Jochebed’s pregnancy that the Bible does not corroborate.
|
Who were the Sabeans?
|
Answer
The Sabeans were an ancient people group mentioned in the Bible as coming from a nation far away from Israel (Joel 3:8\). They were a people of stature (Isaiah 45:14\) and a rival nation to Israel (Job 1:15\). The Sabeans lived in the land of Sheba, which archeology suggests was a Semitic trading state that existed for 1,000 years in the area that is now Yemen. The capital of Sheba was called Marib (or Ma’rib), and the kingdom existed from 1200 BC to AD 275, trading primarily in spices. The land of the Sabeans was eventually destroyed as a result of civil war.
The Sabeans feature in three biblical passages. The first of which, chronologically speaking, is in the book of Job. Job the man was subject to a long list of successive tragedies, of which one was an attack by the Sabeans. These raiders stole Job’s oxen and donkeys and struck down his servants with the sword, leaving only one man alive to run back and report the incident to Job (Job 1:13–15\).
The next two biblical events involving the Sabeans are prophecies by Isaiah and Joel. Isaiah prophesies about Israel’s eventual victory over three cultures: the Egyptians, the Cushites, and the Sabeans. The men of Sheba are called “those tall Sabeans” in Isaiah 45:14, meaning they were apparently men of stature and strength. Isaiah prophesies that all three of these groups will eventually be humbled before Israel and admit that Israel’s God is the true God: “They will bow down before you / and plead with you, saying, / ‘Surely God is with you, and there is no other; / there is no other god’” (Isaiah 45:14\). In Joel’s prophecy, the Sabeans are mentioned as a distant nation to whom the men of Judah will sell their enemies as slaves, as a sign of God’s punishment on Tyre and Sidon, nations who dared to come against God’s people (Joel 3:4–8\).
The [Queen of Sheba](Queen-of-Sheba.html), or the Queen of the South, who traveled a long way to hear Solomon’s wisdom, was likely a Sabean, and the elaborate riches she gave to Solomon show that the Sabeans were a wealthy people. Centuries after her visit to Jerusalem, two warring clans fought for control of Sheba and eventually weakened the empire, and it was overtaken by the Himyarite Kingdom. At that point the mighty Sabeans ceased to exist as a distinct people.
|
What are the four Servant Songs in Isaiah?
|
Answer
There are four “Servant Songs” of [Isaiah](Book-of-Isaiah.html) that describe the service, suffering, and exaltation of the [Servant of the Lord](Servant-of-the-Lord.html), the Messiah. All four songs show the Messiah to be God’s meek and gentle Servant. He is a royal figure, representing Israel in its ideal form; He is the high priest, atoning for the sins of the world. Isaiah predicts that this Servant of the Lord would deliver the world from the prison of sin. In the royal terminology of the ancient Near East, a servant was a “trusted envoy,” a “confidential representative,” or “one who is chosen.” The Servant Songs are found in Isaiah 42:1–9; Isaiah 49:1–13; Isaiah 50:4–11; and Isaiah 52:13—53:12\.
Isaiah initially identifies God’s servant as Israel (41:8; 44:1–2\), who serves as God’s witness (43:10\) and as a light to the Gentiles. Yet Israel could not fulfill this mission: Israel was deaf, blind (42:19\), and in need of God’s forgiveness (44:21–22\). Israel failed again and again. By contrast, God’s Servant, the Messiah, faithfully completes all the work He is given to do (cf. Luke 13:32; John 17:4\). The Servant of the Lord is God’s faithful and true witness to humanity.
In Acts 3:13 Peter calls Jesus the “servant” of God. That verse says, in part, “The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of our fathers, has glorified his servant Jesus.” Peter’s description of Jesus as a “servant” is accurate for at least four reasons:
1\) Jesus always did the will of the Father (John 4:34; 6:38\).
2\) Jesus never sought to please Himself but always to please the Father (John 5:30\).
3\) Jesus finished the work that God had sent Him to do (John 17:4\).
4\) Jesus came to glorify the Father (John 13:31; 17:4\).
Additionally, Peter’s reference to Jesus as the “servant of God” would have brought to the minds of his Jewish hearers the passages in Isaiah that describe the Messiah as the “Servant of the Lord.” Here is a brief look at the four Servant Songs in Isaiah:
**Isaiah 42:1–9\. This first of the four Servant Songs introduces us to the Servant of the LORD:**
“Here is my servant, whom I uphold,
my chosen one in whom I delight;
I will put my Spirit on him,
and he will bring justice to the nations.
He will not shout or cry out,
or raise his voice in the streets.
[A bruised reed he will not break](bruised-reed-not-break.html),
and a smoldering wick he will not snuff out.
In faithfulness he will bring forth justice;
he will not falter or be discouraged
till he establishes justice on earth.
In his teaching the islands will put their hope” (verses 1–4\).
According to this song, the Servant of the Lord is chosen by God, and God delights in Him. The Servant has the Spirit of God abiding on Him. The first four verses of this passage are specifically applied to Jesus in Matthew 12:18–21\.
When Jesus was baptized in the River Jordan, the Spirit of God descended upon Him, and a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” This was a divine allusion to Isaiah 42\. The clear teaching of the New Testament is that Jesus Christ is the Servant in the Servant Song prophecies.
**Isaiah 49:1–13\. This second of the four Servant Songs speaks of the Messiah’s work in the world and His success.** The Servant’s statement that “before I was born the Lord called me” (verse 1\) uses language similar to the call of the prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah 1:5\). The reference in Isaiah 49:2 to the mouth of the Servant of the LORD being “like a sharpened sword” is a prophetic image that crops up several times in the New Testament (Ephesians 6:17; Hebrews 4:12; Revelation 1:16; 2:12, 16; 19:15\).
In the second Servant Song, the Messiah displays God’s splendor (verse 3\), restores God’s people (verse 6\), and is honored in God’s eyes (verse 5\). Significantly, the Messiah feels a great loss: “I have labored in vain; / I have spent my strength for nothing at all” (verse 4\), yet He receives worldwide acclaim in the end:
“To him who was despised and abhorred by the nation,
to the servant of rulers:
‘Kings will see you and stand up,
princes will see and bow down’” (verse 7\).
The Servant of the Lord will oversee the restoration of the land and the establishing of a peaceful kingdom (verses 8–13\). The Messiah will be the agent of the Lord’s comfort to His people (verse 13\).
In addition to being the One to restore the land of Israel (verse 8\), the Messiah is chosen to redeem the Gentiles:
“It is too small a thing for you to be my servant
to restore the tribes of Jacob
and bring back those of Israel I have kept.
I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,
that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth” (verse 6\).
In this way, God’s salvation is brought to all people. Christ Jesus is “the light of the world” (Luke 2:30–32; John 8:12; 9:5\) and the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecies. On their first missionary journey, Paul and Barnabas bring the gospel to the Gentiles in Antioch, and they quote Isaiah 49:6\. The response of the Gentiles in Antioch is pure joy: “When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honored the word of the Lord” (Acts 13:48\). In Christ both Jews and Gentiles are made one (Ephesians 2:11–18\).
**Isaiah 50:4–11\. This third Servant Song contrasts Israel’s sin with the Servant’s obedience.** We also see that the Messiah will be persecuted yet vindicated. The verses preceding this song (Isaiah 50:1–3\) liken Israel to an immoral wife; only God has the power to ransom her back. Starting in verse 4, the Servant responds to the instruction of God. He is not rebellious (verse 5\), even when His obedience to God results in suffering:
“I offered my back to those who beat me,
my cheeks to those who pulled out my beard;
I did not hide my face
from mocking and spitting” (verse 6\).
The Servant of the Lord expresses His confidence that God will help Him and that He will be found innocent (verses 7–9\). In this confidence, the Messiah resolves to see His task to completion, no matter how difficult the road becomes (cf. Luke 9:51\).
Some 700 years later, Jesus fulfilled this prophecy, too. Abuse and insults were heaped upon our Lord as He was thrown to the Roman soldiers. His back was beaten, His face was hit, and He was spit upon (see John 19:1–3; Matthew 27:30\). The Lord Jesus was obedient unto death (Philippians 2:8\), and the Father vindicated His Suffering Servant by resurrecting Him. “Because the Sovereign Lord helps me, / I will not be disgraced” (Isaiah 52:7\).
**Isaiah 52:13—53:12\. This climactic [fourth Servant Song](suffering-servant-Isaiah-53.html) describes the suffering and triumph of the Servant of the LORD.** It is also one of the most detailed passages in the Old Testament concerning the [death and resurrection of the Messiah](death-resurrection-Messiah.html).
The song begins with a promise that the Servant will be exalted (Isaiah 52:13\), but then immediately turns to a description of extreme violence:
“His appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any human being
and his form marred beyond human likeness” (Isaiah 52:14\).
The Messiah will be “despised and rejected by mankind” (Isaiah 53:3\). When He is brutally punished, people will assume that He is being afflicted by God (verse 4\). But the fourth Servant Song makes it clear why He endures such persecution:
“He was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed” (verse 5\).
It is *our* iniquity being placed on *Him* that explains His suffering (verse 6\). Verse 7 predicts that the Messiah will be silent before His accusers (cf. Matthew 27:14\). Verse 9 says that, although the Servant of the Lord is innocent, He will die with the wicked and be “with the rich in his death.”
Isaiah 53:10 tells us why the Servant dies:
“It was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and...the Lord makes his life an offering for sin.”
This is the [substitutionary atonement](substitutionary-atonement.html). His life for ours. The death of the Messiah accomplished the will of God concerning our salvation.
Immediately following the prophecy of the Servant’s death, Isaiah makes a startling prophecy of the Servant’s victory:
“\[The Lord] will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.
After he has suffered,
he will see the light of life and be satisfied. . . .
Therefore I will give him a portion among the great,
and he will divide the spoils with the strong” (verses 10–12\).
So, in the fourth Servant Song, death is not the end for the Servant. *After* He suffers, He will “see the light of life.” He will “divide the spoils.” His days will be prolonged. What we have here is a prophecy of the resurrection of Christ.
The whole of Isaiah 53 is a poignant and prophetic picture of the gospel. Jesus was despised and rejected by men (Luke 13:34; John 1:10–11\); He was stricken by God (Matthew 27:46\) and pierced for our transgressions (John 19:34; 1 Peter 2:24\). By His suffering, Jesus received the punishment we deserved and became for us the ultimate and perfect sacrifice (Hebrews 10:10\). Although His Son was sinless, God laid on Him our sin, and we became God’s righteousness in Him (2 Corinthians 5:21\). Jesus was silent in front of His accusers (Matthew 27:12, 14; 1 Peter 2:23\). Jesus was crucified between two thieves yet buried in a rich man’s tomb (Matthew 27:38, 57–60\). In the Suffering Servant’s humiliation and final exaltation, He reconciles humanity with God (Matthew 8:17; Acts 8:30–35; Romans 10:15–17; 15:21; 1 Peter 2:24–25\).
As the Ethiopian eunuch is traveling home in his chariot, he is reading from one of the Servant Songs (Acts 8:32–33\). The eunuch was unsure of whom Isaiah was speaking—was it the prophet himself, or another man? Philip the evangelist had the privilege of using Isaiah 53 to point the Ethiopian to Christ: “Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus” (Acts 8:35\). Without a doubt, the four Servant Songs in Isaiah are about Jesus. Our Lord is the theme of Scripture.
|
Why didn’t Solomon follow his own advice on women?
|
Answer
[Proverbs](Book-of-Proverbs.html) offers men much wisdom related to avoiding the trap of sexually immoral relationships with women. However, Solomon’s greatest personal weakest was with women. He is recorded as having 700 wives and 300 concubines (1 Kings 11:3\). Unfortunately, “as Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods” (1 Kings 11:4\). [Solomon](life-Solomon.html) knew what was right. Why didn’t he follow his own advice concerning women?
Many explanations have been offered, though the Bible does not specifically give the answer. It should be mentioned that Solomon’s father, David, also struggled in this area, though not to the extent that Solomon did. David took many wives and concubines (2 Samuel 5:13\), but, even then, he lusted after [Bathsheba](David-and-Bathsheba.html) and committed adultery with her. Like father, like son, they say, and Solomon it seems inherited his father’s sin and amplified it in his own life.
One reason often noted for Solomon failing to follow his own advice is that Solomon learned his lessons from experience. If the Proverbs were compiled in the later part of Solomon’s life, it would make sense that he recorded wise sayings to help others avoid problems he dealt with in his own life. If so, the proverbs of Solomon are deeply personal, since they were born out of the author’s personal struggles with foolishness.
Another possible reason Solomon did not follow his own advice regarding women is that there’s a difference between having knowledge and applying knowledge. Solomon *knew* it was wrong to obtain many wives—in fact, it was against the Mosaic Law (Deuteronomy 17:17\)—but he did it regardless of his knowledge. Solomon likely later regretted his choices, as can be seen in the way he speaks of avoiding sexual immorality in Proverbs.
A third possible answer to this issue is that not all of the book of Proverbs was written by Solomon. The book indicates that some of the proverbs were written by other wise men (Proverbs 22:17—24:34\), Agur son of Jakeh (Proverbs 30:1–33\) and King Lemuel (Proverbs 31\).
A fourth possible reason that Solomon did not follow his own advice concerning women can be found in the second part of 1 Kings 11:4: “His heart was not fully devoted to the Lord his God, as the heart of David his father had been.” The historian notes that it was when Solomon was older that he strayed from God’s ways. God then gave a judgment concerning Solomon and his kingdom (1 Kings 11:9–13\). Since Solomon had experienced judgment in his own life in this area, he determined to help others to avoid similar judgment in their lives.
In the end, we have some possible reasons why Solomon may have neglected his own advice, but we are not told for certain in Scripture. Solomon was extremely wise, but he was a man with [temptations](resisting-temptation.html) like any other person. He obeyed God in many areas, yet he often failed in his relationships with women. Instead of questioning the reasons why Solomon failed to follow his own advice, we would do better to learn from his mistakes and his wisdom recorded in Proverbs to avoid these problems in our own lives.
|
What is laminin?
|
Answer
*Laminin* is the name used for a family of proteins that serve many useful functions in biology. The most important property of laminins is their ability to easily bind to each other and to other proteins. This makes laminin a critical means of holding tissues and organs together. It has been described as the protein equivalent of glue, though it functions differently than actual chemical glue will. These proteins have several short arms that bind easily to other laminins and a single long arm that binds easily to other cell structures and membranes. Flattened out, laminins have a shape generally in the form of a lower case *t*, which some have compared to the shape of a cross.
This vague resemblance to a cross is the reason for the surge of interest in laminin in some Christian circles. Several years ago, internet videos and emails began to circulate claiming that laminin’s cross\-like shape was an intentional sign from God. In particular, these claims made a connection to verses such as Colossians 1:15–17, which, speaking of Christ, says, “In Him all things hold together.” The resemblance of a molecule heavily responsible for the “holding together” of tissues to the symbol for Christ has to be more than coincidence, according to some. The correlation between laminin and the cross has also inspired t\-shirts, jewelry, and other variations on the theme.
From a practical standpoint, the shape of laminin is neither unique nor extraordinarily similar to a cross. When drawn as a two\-dimensional diagram, with three short arms and one long, it certainly looks like a crucifix. However, in actual three\-dimensional space, laminins are not clean, flat, t\-shaped structures. They have also been described as looking like flowers, jacks, or pyramids. The t\-shape itself is neither complex nor uncommon in nature. Beyond that, there are many simple shapes found in nature that could be correlated to other, non\-Christian spiritual beliefs. Viewed from the top, the DNA helix looks similar to a [yin yang](yin-yang.html) symbol from Chinese philosophy. Other molecules in DNA are shaped like [pentagrams](pentagram-meaning.html), a common shape in Satanic art.
The shape of laminin could also be interpreted to mean something completely different. The protein’s arrangement also resembles the Greek letter psi, which is used in astronomy to represent the planet Neptune. By this, could one argue human life actually started on that planet? The same Greek letter often represents parapsychology topics such as ESP and telekinesis—would this be evidence that such abilities are real? Or, could one claim laminin looks like a pitchfork and use that correlation as a biological proof of our inherited sin nature? Naturally, all of these theories are ridiculous. Such conclusions are completely unrelated to the shape, function, or purpose of laminin. These supposed connections are not the product of careful reasoning but of [sign\-seeking](signs-and-wonders.html).
One of the most direct biblical passages dealing with sign\-seeking is Mathew 16:4, where Jesus responds to a demand for a miraculous sign from the Pharisees. Jesus condemns this attitude, and this derision is repeated often in the New Testament (e.g., Matthew 12:39, 1 Corinthians 1:22\). A human desire for miraculous confirmation of truth is impossible to satisfy. At best, it distracts us from the actual signs God has put into the world (Romans 1:20, Psalm 19:1\) and from effectively contending for the faith (Jude 1:3\). At worst, it’s an attempt to skirt responsibility for our beliefs by asking for more and more spoon\-fed signals from God (John 6:26–30\).
The fact that laminin, a binding protein, has a shape vaguely similar to a cross is an interesting quirk of biology. However, this is not the means by which God makes Himself known in the world, nor are the properties of laminin what the Bible means by Christ “binding” us. This is not the type of thing serious\-minded Christians ought to put much stock in (1 Timothy 1:4\).
|
Who was Abimelech in the Bible?
|
Answer
There are actually several men named Abimelech in the Bible. Some translations, such as the NIV, spell the name *Abimelek*. Either way, the name means “father of the king.”
Some of the Philistines kings are called “Abimelech.” For example, the king of Gerar who took Sarah into his harem is called “Abimelech” in Genesis 20:2\. The same name is applied to the king of Gerar during Isaac’s sojourn there (Genesis 26:1\). The king of Gath before whom David played the madman is also called “Abimelech” in the title of Psalm 34; however, 1 Samuel 21:11 identifies the king of Gath as Achish. This has led many scholars to believe that, among the Philistines at least, *Abimelech* was a title given the king, rather than a personal name—much as the Egyptians always called their king “Pharaoh.”
Another possible Abimelech in the Bible was a son of the high priest [Abiathar](Abiathar-in-the-Bible.html), mentioned in 1 Chronicles 18:16\. The NAS, KJV, and NET Bibles put the name as *Abimelech*. But the NIV, ESV, and HCS Bibles have *Ahimelech* (or *Ahimelek*). This Abimelech/Ahimelech was a priest who served in the time of King David.
But probably the most well\-known Abimelech in the Bible is the headstrong and murderous son of [Gideon](life-Gideon.html) in the [book of Judges](Book-of-Judges.html). Please see our article on this particular [Abimelech](Abimelech-Judges.html) for more information.
|
Who was Martha in the Bible?
|
Answer
Martha is a significant New Testament figure, a personal friend of Jesus, and someone with whom many women today identify. She lived in [Bethany](Bethany-in-the-Bible.html) with her sister, [Mary](life-Mary-Bethany.html), and her brother, Lazarus, whom Jesus raised from the dead (John 11:1–15, 43–44\). We meet Martha three times in the Bible, and each event helps to build a profile of this interesting woman.
The Bible first mentions Martha in Luke 10\. She is in her home in Bethany, a small town near Jerusalem, where she is hosting Jesus and the disciples. Jesus was well\-known to Martha and her siblings; in fact, Jesus loved this little family (John 11:5\). On the day that Jesus visited, Martha’s desire was to be a good hostess—to serve the best meal with the best possible presentation, for Jesus’ sake. Her sister, Mary, however, was taking some time out to listen to Jesus (Luke 10:39\). As Martha “was distracted by all the preparations that had to be made” (Luke 10:40\), she became a little cross with Mary and spoke rather abruptly to the Lord: “Lord, don’t you care that my sister has left me to do the work by myself? Tell her to help me!” (verse 40\). In this foolish utterance, Martha implied that Jesus did not care about her, and she gave the Lord a command, demanding that He force Mary to assist in the serving. In her busyness, Martha had taken her eyes off the Savior. Jesus, who was able to see into her soul, diagnosed her problem: she was worried and troubled about the serving and had no peace in her heart. He gently told Martha that a simple dinner was more than adequate, and He reminded her that Mary’s decision to sit at His feet and hear His word was the better choice (verses 41–42\).
We see Martha again just after her brother, Lazarus, had died (John 11\). The sisters had sent for Jesus when Lazarus fell ill (verse 3\), but He did not arrive in time to heal him. When Jesus finally approached Bethany, four days after Lazarus’ death, Martha ran out to meet Him and declared, “If you had been here, my brother would not have died. But I know that even now God will give you whatever you ask” (John 11:21–22\). Notice Martha’s faith: she firmly believed that Jesus could have healed Lazarus of his illness. And her faith is not diminished by the fact that Jesus had arrived “too late.” Jesus encourages Martha with one of His “I AM” statements: “I am [the resurrection and the life](resurrection-and-life.html). The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?” (verses 25–26\). Martha’s response is one of great faith and understanding of Jesus’ divine nature: “Yes, Lord . . . I believe that you are the Messiah, the Son of God, who is to come into the world” (verse 27\). Martha’s faith was rewarded that very day as she witnessed her brother’s miraculous resurrection from the dead (verses 43–44\).
The third time we encounter Martha in the Bible, she is doing what Martha was known to do—serving (John 12:2\). Jesus is again attending a dinner in His honor in Bethany, and Martha is again serving. It is on this occasion that Martha’s sister, Mary, anoints Jesus’ feet with expensive perfume (verse 3\). It becomes apparent that Martha was likely a woman of some means, evidenced by the size of her home, the frequency of her hosting dinners, and the expensive perfumed oil her sister owned.
In Martha’s life\-changing encounters with Jesus, we see the importance of balancing service with worship, of trusting the Lord even when all seems lost, and of using our material resources for the glory of God.
|
Who was Gandhi?
|
Answer
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi was born in 1869 to a nondescript family in western India, but when he died in 1948 he was one of the greatest political leaders in human history. His influence and character were so strong that, by his mid\-forties, he was already being referred to by the title “Mahatma,” meaning “great soul.” During his life, he was also referred to with reverence as *Ghandi\-ji*, or more commonly as *Bapu*, (“father”). Gandhi’s legacy is built on his commitment to nonviolent revolution—or *satyagraha*—through which he helped India obtain independence from the British Empire. His birthday is celebrated in India as *Gandhi Jayanti*, and worldwide as the International Day of Non\-Violence.
At age thirteen, Gandhi was married by arrangement to Kastur Kapadia, age fourteen. She would remain his wife until her death sixty\-one years later. Gandhi attended law school in London, England, but struggled as a trial attorney, as he found it difficult to challenge witnesses on the stand. He then moved to South Africa. For more than twenty years, Gandhi struggled there against racial and religious discrimination. He was particularly bothered by the institutional racism that seemed to accompany British control over their territories. During this time Gandhi began to call for nonviolent revolution as a means to challenge authority. His efforts in South Africa garnered him great respect and a large following.
Gandhi returned to India, at that time still a British territory, and began working directly in politics. His primary goal was a fully independent India, one without any control from British or other foreign governments. His method for achieving this goal was *satyagraha*, roughly meaning “nonviolent revolution.” This approach focuses on pacifism and diplomacy, escalating to non\-cooperation when reason and submission do not work. After decades of struggle, intermittent imprisonments, and setbacks, as well as four failed assassination attempts, Gandhi’s goal was finally achieved in 1947, as India was granted full independence.
Gandhi’s fifth brush with an assassin was his last, when militant Hindu Nathuram Godse shot him three times in the chest in 1948\. Less than six months after realizing his dream of Indian self\-government, Gandhi was being mourned worldwide.
Interestingly, Gandhi, a Hindu, was heavily influenced by the earthly ministry of Jesus of Nazareth. Compassion for social issues is foreign to a classical Hindu worldview, and Gandhi’s social outlook was a product of his experiences with Christians and others. Gandhi also viewed Jesus’ method of nonviolent persuasion as the epitome of *satyagraha*. In particular, Gandhi valued Jesus’ moral commitment to not merely conquer a culture but to convert it. This, Gandhi realized, was the only way of effecting real, lasting change: a complete transformation in thinking. Jesus’ death on the cross, in Gandhi’s view, was humanity’s greatest possible expression of *satyagraha*: willing suffering, self\-sacrifice, and non\-violence on behalf of others.
While hailed as a great moral leader and a transforming figure, Gandhi’s legacy is markedly different from that of Jesus. Gandhi’s morals were sometimes conflicted, even contradictory. For instance, while he passionately argued for non\-violence, the effectiveness of those efforts depended on a ruling power sensitive to moral arguments. His calls for unqualified pacifism and submission in the face of [Fascist](Christian-fascism.html) regimes such as the Axis Powers of World War II were seen as naïve and unrealistic (see Luke 22:36\). And, when evidence of the extent of the Holocaust was uncovered, Gandhi’s suggestions seemed even more unreasonable.
Also, Gandhi himself was not free from morally questionable behavior. Though the details are often misunderstood, Gandhi spent some time in his later years sharing his bed with naked young girls, including children of family members. His claimed purpose for this was to test his commitment to sexual abstinence, despite being married. This behavior was extremely controversial, even among Gandhi’s most ardent admirers. Biblically, we are told not to purposefully seek temptation (Luke 11:4\), and also we are not to deprive a spouse from physical intimacy (1 Corinthians 7:5\).
Like Jesus, Gandhi spoke out against violence (Matthew 26:52\), greed (Luke 12:15\), oppression (Luke 4:18\), and hypocrisy (Matthew 23:28\). Gandhi recognized the need for a leader to identify with people (Matthew 11:19\) in order to truly change them (John 3:7\). However, Gandhi did not fully embrace the spiritual importance of Jesus Christ. As a young man, he referred to Hinduism as a “solace”; as he aged, Gandhi said he was stuck “in the slough of despond. All about me is darkness; I am praying for light.” His morality focused on each person working out his own improvement (Ephesians 2:8–9\) under a Hindu sense of karma (see Hebrews 9:27\).
Gandhi’s insight that culture needs to be transformed, not merely controlled, needed to be applied all the way down to each human heart (Romans 12:2\), including his own. Without the transformation of Christ, our efforts are ultimately just fumbling in darkness (Matthew 6:23; John 8:12\).
|
Who was Matthew in the Bible?
|
Answer
Matthew in the Bible was one of Jesus’ disciples. Matthew’s Gospel, along with the Gospels of Luke, John, and Mark, is an inspired—and thus accurate and true—history of the life of Christ. His Gospel is the longest of the four, and some scholars believe it was the first to be written.
Before Matthew became a disciple of Christ, he was a tax collector or “[publican](publican-in-the-Bible.html)” in the town of Capernaum (Matthew 9:9; 10:3\). Matthew is also called Levi, the son of Alphaeus, by Luke and Mark (Mark 2:14; Luke 5:27\). Although Luke and Mark do not come out and say, “Levi and Matthew are the same person,” we can deduce the names refer to the same individual because of context. Matthew’s account of his call matches exactly the accounts of Levi’s call in Luke and Mark, both in terms of language and chronological placement. Also, it is not uncommon for a person to be given a different name after an encounter with God. Abram became Abraham, Jacob became Israel, Simon became Peter, and Saul became Paul. It is likely that Matthew (meaning “gift of God”) was the name Jesus gave to Levi after his conversion.
Tax collectors were absolutely despised by their own culture because they worked for the Roman government and enriched themselves by collecting taxes from their own people—often dishonestly collecting excessive amounts (see Luke 19:8\). It is likely that Matthew was well\-to\-do, since Luke says that Levi hosted “a great banquet for Jesus” with “a large crowd” in attendance (Luke 5:29\).
Tax collectors such as Matthew were seen by the religious elite as very sinful people, so sinful that even spending time with them could immediately tarnish a good person’s reputation (Matthew 9:10–11\). When Jesus was having dinner at Matthew’s house, with many other tax collectors and sinners present, the Pharisees questioned the disciples about Jesus’ choice of companions. Jesus’ response is one of the clearest explanations of God’s heart and His gospel to man: “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. . . . I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Matthew 9:12–13\). Jesus came to save not the “good,” self\-righteous people, but those who knew they were not good—the people who admitted freely that they needed salvation (cf. Matthew 5:3\).
It is impossible to save a person who claims not to need saving. Many of Jesus’ followers were from the poor, the rejected, the sick, the sinful, the weary (Matthew 11:28\). He never condemned those people; He forgave them and encouraged them. Jesus’ harshest condemnations were to the Pharisees, the teachers of the Law, and the scribes who thought themselves good, worthy, and better than the “tax collectors and sinners” around them (Matthew 9:10; 23:13–15\).
Matthew was one of the tax collectors whom Jesus saved. When called by Jesus, Matthew immediately left his tax collection booth and followed the Lord (Matthew 9:9\). He left behind the source of his riches; he left his position of security and comfort for traveling, hardship, and eventual martyrdom; he left his old life for a new life with Jesus.
|
What does the Bible say about bribery?
|
Answer
A bribe is money, favor, or other consideration given in exchange for one’s influence against what is true, right, or just. The Bible is clear that giving or receiving a bribe is evil.
God’s Law, given to Moses for the people of Israel, forbade the taking of a bribe, “for a bribe blinds the discerning and perverts the words of the righteous” (Exodus 23:8\). The same rule is repeated in Deuteronomy 16:19: “You shall not pervert justice; you shall not show partiality, nor take a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous.” The negative effects of taking a bribe are clearly outlined in these two passages. Bribery perverts justice. It is a blinding influence upon wisdom and discernment. It clouds the truth and perverts or twists the words of those who would be righteous in the sight of God.
The Law went even further in the case of a bribe involving the killing of an innocent person. A judge who takes a bribe to condemn to death an innocent person was as guilty as a paid assassin—he was to be “cursed” (Deuteronomy 27:25\). There were incidents where this law against bribery was broken, to disastrous effect. The two men who testified against Naboth (1 Kings 21:4–16\) and those who testified against Stephen (Acts 6:8–14\) were probably bribed; in both instances, an innocent man was killed. When high officials give and receive bribes, it causes evil in a society. “The king establishes the land by justice, but he who receives bribes overthrows it” (Proverbs 29:4\). Bribery is one characteristic of a corrupt society.
Isaiah prophesied against the evil of Israel when they had turned from the one true God and His laws. Isaiah likened the city of Jerusalem to an unfaithful harlot; the city was once full of justice, but it had become a place of rebellion, murder, and thievery. Her leaders were those who loved bribes and chased after the money bribery brought them (Isaiah 1:2–23\). The people of Israel were not to follow the ways of evil but were to emulate God in their dealings with one another: “For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality nor takes a bribe” (Deuteronomy 10:17\).
The most heinous example of a bribe in the Bible is the [thirty pieces of silver](thirty-pieces-of-silver.html) that [Judas received to betray](Judas-betray-Jesus.html) the Lord Jesus. A direct result of Judas’s treachery was that Jesus was arrested and crucified. Eventually, even Judas realized that his acceptance of a bribe was evil. But when he tried to return the money to the chief priests and elders, they refused it, calling it what it was—“blood money” (Matthew 27:3–9\).
Delilah was bribed to entrap Samson (Judges 16:5\). Samuel’s sons disrespected their office by taking bribes (1 Samuel 8:3\). The wicked Haman bribed King Ahasuerus in an attempt to destroy the Jews in Persia (Esther 3:9\). Felix left Paul in prison, hoping to receive a bribe from Paul (Acts 24:26\). And the soldiers charged with guarding Jesus’ tomb were bribed by the chief priests and elders to spread a lie about the disappearance of Jesus’ body (Matthew 28:12–15\). In each case, those receiving the bribes cared nothing for truth or justice.
|
What is conditional immortality?
|
Answer
*Please note, as a ministry, GotQuestions.org rejects conditional immortality / conditionalism / annihilationism. We truly and fully believe that hell will be eternal conscious punishment for all who die without faith in Jesus Christ. However, we believe that conditional immortality is a valid viewpoint that a Christian can hold. In no sense is conditional immortality heresy and in no sense should conditionalists be shunned as not being brothers and sisters in Christ. We thought it would be worthwhile to have an article that positively presents conditional immortality, as it is always good for our viewpoints to be challenged, motivating us to further search the Scriptures to make sure our beliefs are biblically sound.*
Conditional immortality or conditionalism, for short, is the idea that not everyone will be raised immortal—only the saved will live forever. Conditional immortality as a label became popular in the nineteenth century for its ability to more holistically describe a view many Christians know as [annihilationism](annihilationism.html).
Traditionally, most Christians have believed that those who die in unbelief will ultimately be raised immortal and live forever in hell to suffer mental and physical torment for eternity as punishment for their sins. Conditionalists, however, believe that God will grant immortality and eternal life only to those who meet the condition of saving faith in Christ. Everyone else—the unsaved—will suffer a second, irreversible death, perishing forever and ceasing to consciously exist.
Conditionalists believe the Bible teaches that human beings have been mortal ever since the Fall. In his fallen condition, man is incapable of living forever and doomed to die unless the Lord intervenes by giving him immortality. In Genesis 3:22–23, God evicts Adam and Eve from the garden so that they could not “take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” But in Revelation 22:2 access to the tree of life is restored—but only for the inhabitants of New Jerusalem. Proponents of conditional immortality believe the lost will indeed be resurrected, but to judgment, not to life (John 5:29\). Only those covered by the blood of Christ will be raised immortal, unable to die any more (Luke 20:35–36\); only those who are being made fit to “inherit the kingdom of God” will be made imperishable and immortal (1 Corinthians 15:50, 53\). Thus, immortality and enduring life are conditioned upon salvation. The lost will not live forever, according to conditionalists.
Integral to all orthodox views of the atonement is the idea of substitution. In atoning for our sins, [Jesus took our place](Jesus-took-our-place.html), suffering what we would have otherwise suffered. Conditionalists argue that it stands to reason, then, that what Christ bore on our behalf is the fate that awaits those who refuse His gift. The biblical testimony is that Christ’s substitutionary atoning work consisted in His *death*. Paul says that “Christ died for the ungodly” (Romans 5:6\) and that His death is “of first importance” (1 Corinthians 15:3\). The fact of Christ’s substitutionary, bodily death is also taught by Peter (1 Peter 3:18\) and the author of Hebrews (Hebrews 10:10\). Conditionalists argue that therefore the risen lost must literally die a second time: if in *dying* Jesus took our place, how can it be said that the penalty for unbelief is eternal *life* in hell? If Jesus died in the place of sinners, then the fate that awaits those who reject Him is death, not life.
Conditionalists point further to the many passages in the Bible that promise death and destruction to the wicked. God “gave His only Son” not so that believers should escape eternal torment but so that they “should not perish” (John 3:16\). Paul says, “The wages of sin is death”—not living forever in torment (Romans 6:23\). Jesus tells us in Matthew 10:28 to fear God who “can destroy both soul and body in hell.” He says in Matthew 7:13—14 that the narrow and difficult path leads to “life,” while the wide and easy path leads to “destruction.” In Jesus’ parable of the wheat and the tares, the weeds are “burned up” or “consumed” (Matthew 13:30\) by fire, which Jesus interprets as meaning that the unrighteous will be thrown into a fiery furnace (verses 40–42\). This is an allusion to Malachi 4:1–3, which promises that the wicked will be reduced by fire to ashes beneath the feet of the righteous. Peter says that, in condemning Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction by burning them to ashes, He “made them an example of what is going to happen to the ungodly” (2 Peter 2:6\). The residents of Sodom and Gomorrah were incinerated. Therefore, the ungodly will not live forever in ruin; they will be utterly destroyed.
There are other texts that are often cited as challenges to conditional immortality, but which conditionalists contend are better support for their view. For example, Isaiah 66:24 speaks of unquenchable fire and undying worms that consume “corpses.” Proponents of conditional immortality point out that corpses are dead, not living, and that elsewhere in Scripture inextinguishable fire and unstoppable scavengers completely consume (Ezekiel 20:47–48; Jeremiah 17:27; Amos 5:6; Deuteronomy 28:26; Jeremiah 7:33\). Further, Isaiah says these corpses will be “abhorrent” (NET) to the living righteous, the same word used of the wicked in Daniel 12:2, which promises that only the righteous will be granted eternal life. The same promise is made in Matthew 25:46, where “eternal punishment” must therefore be eternal *capital* punishment. Conditionalists believe this conclusion is confirmed by Paul in 2 Thessalonians 1:9, which says that the punishment of the wicked will be “eternal destruction.” They argue that “eternal punishment” and “eternal destruction” do not imply ongoing activity any more than “eternal salvation” and “eternal redemption” imply ongoing saving or redeeming in Hebrews 5:9 and 9:12\. Conditionalists also contend that the eternal torment in the lake of fire in Revelation 20:10 is not literal but imagery that John and God interpret as a symbol for the “second death” (Revelation 20:14; 21:8\).
Traditionalists and conditionalists need not divide as brothers and sisters in Christ over this issue. Whether the eternal destiny of those who die in unbelief is eternal conscious punishment or a destruction that lasts for eternity, it is a fate to dread. The message of the gospel is the same, no matter which understanding of hell is correct: [Jesus saves](Jesus-saves.html)!
Here is a video based explanation of conditional immortality: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v\=C\-dT4\-zjwlQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-dT4-zjwlQ)
|
Who was Eli in the Bible?
|
Answer
Eli in the Bible was a Jewish priest living in the days of the judges and serving God at the [tabernacle](tabernacle-of-Moses.html) in Shiloh, a city near the hill country of Ephraim (1 Samuel 1:1, 3\). Eli is best remembered for his blessing on Samuel’s mother and for his part in Samuel’s first prophecy.
Eli had two wicked sons named [Hophni and Phineas](Hophni-and-Phinehas.html); they also served in the tabernacle but did not know the Lord (1 Samuel 2:12\). They violated the Law by keeping and eating meat from the sacrifices that was not allocated to them. They also had sex with the women who served at the doorway to the tent of meeting (1 Samuel 2:22\). The bad behavior of Eli’s sons was apparently widely known (1 Samuel 2:24\), and the report came back to Eli. When he found out about these things, he rebuked his sons but failed to make them stop, allowing them to continue to profane the tabernacle (1 Samuel 2:25\).
Apparently, there was some lack of zeal on Eli’s part; some part of Eli’s heart was with his sons and not with the Lord. We know this because God sent a prophet to Eli to deliver a dire message concerning Eli’s household: “I will cut short your strength and the strength of your priestly house, so that no one in it will reach old age. . . . What happens to your two sons, Hophni and Phinehas, will be a sign to you—they will both die on the same day” (1 Samuel 2:31, 34\). This was a terrible curse, because the Levites depended on the priesthood for their living (1 Samuel 2:36\). Eli’s family line would be supplanted by another, more faithful priest: “I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who will do according to what is in my heart and mind. I will firmly establish his priestly house, and they will minister before my anointed one always” (1 Samuel 2:35\).
The priest God raised up was a boy named [Samuel](life-Samuel.html), who was dedicated to the tabernacle by his mother, [Hannah](life-Hannah.html), a formerly barren woman who had prayed for a child. Hannah spoke her prayer in Eli’s presence, and he had blessed her: “Go in peace, and may the God of Israel grant you what you have asked of him” (1 Samuel 1:17\). God answered Hannah’s prayer, and she had a son. After Samuel was weaned, she gave him to the Lord’s service (1 Samuel 1:24–28\).
The young Samuel lived in the tabernacle, under the tutelage and care of Eli. Each year, Hannah brought Samuel a robe for him to wear in the house of the Lord (1 Samuel 2:19\). Eli again blessed Hannah and her husband, asking God to give Hannah children to replace the one she had dedicated to the Lord (1 Samuel 2:20\). Hannah eventually gave birth to three more sons and two daughters (verse 21\).
Later, when Samuel was a little older and Eli’s eyes were so weak that he could barely see, the Lord Himself spoke to Samuel. In the middle of the night, the Lord “came and stood” in Samuel’s room (1 Samuel 3:10\) and told the young boy to deliver to Eli the message that it was almost time for the prophesied judgment to fall upon his family (verses 11–14\). Eli humbly accepted God’s decree, and Samuel was confirmed as a prophet of the Lord in Shiloh (1 Samuel 3:19–21\).
A short time after that, the Philistines came against Israel to attack them. Eli’s sons, Hophni and Phineas, went to battle, and they brought with them the [Ark of the Covenant](ark-of-the-covenant.html) thinking it would guarantee protection against their enemies. However, God was not with them, and Eli’s two sons were killed, along with about 30,000 foot soldiers of Israel. In addition, the Ark was captured by the Philistines. When Eli heard the bad news, he fell off of his seat, and his neck was broken “for he was old and heavy” (1 Samuel 4:3, 10, 17–18\). Meanwhile, Eli’s pregnant daughter\-in\-law, Phinehas’s wife, went into labor; she died during delivery, but not before she named her son “Ichabod, saying, ‘The Glory has departed from Israel’” (verse 21\). Thus, Eli’s grandson, born on a day of death and defeat, was given a name meaning “No Glory.” Eli had been a priest in Israel and a judge for forty years.
|
What is the meaning of the rainbow?
|
Answer
Biblically speaking, the rainbow is the sign of a covenant that God made with the whole earth: He will never destroy the earth again with a flood. The rainbow is literally correlated to rainfall.
God made this [covenant](Noahic-covenant.html), with the rainbow as the token, after the waters of the flood receded and Noah and his family exited the ark. God said, “I establish my covenant with you: Never again will all life be destroyed by the waters of a flood; never again will there be a flood to destroy the earth. . . . This is the sign of the covenant I am making between me and you and every living creature with you, a covenant for all generations to come: I have set my rainbow in the clouds, and it will be the sign of the covenant between me and the earth. Whenever I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will remember my covenant between me and you and all living creatures of every kind. Never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all life. Whenever the rainbow appears in the clouds, I will see it and remember the everlasting covenant between God and all living creatures of every kind on the earth” (Genesis 9:11–15\).
God made this promise, signified by the rainbow, not only to mankind but to “every living creature . . . the birds, the livestock and all the wild animals, all those that came out of the ark . . . every living creature on earth” (Genesis 9:9–10\). The covenant is perpetual, enduring to all generations. Never again will there be a worldwide flood.
The colors of the rainbow are sometimes used as a symbol of “[gay pride](Pride-Month.html).” This began in 1978 when an artist named Gilbert Baker designed and made a flag for the [homosexual](homosexuality-Bible.html) community in San Francisco. Baker’s original design had eight colors, and he assigned a meaning to each one: hot pink (sexuality), red (life), orange (healing), yellow (the sun), green (nature), turquoise (art), indigo (harmony), and violet (spirit). Subsequent designs sported seven and then six colors. Rainbow flags and banners, as used by the LGBTQ\+ community, represent diversity, hope, and social action.
There are other rainbow flags and banners that have nothing to do with the homosexual culture. For example, the Hawaii Ko Aloha Flag has nine colored stripes representing the islands that were inhabited before Western civilization arrived. Another example is the flag of the International Order of the Rainbow for Girls, a [Masonic organization](free-masonry.html) whose banner represents seven different virtues.
The rainbow is God’s creation. We naturally delight in it. There is something awe\-inspiring in the appearance of a rainbow after a storm. It is good and right that we rejoice in the rainbow as a God\-ordained symbol of God’s faithfulness and mercy. The attempt of some to co\-opt the colors for their own purposes does not diminish the beauty and wonder of what God has made.
|
What is Potter’s House Christian Fellowship?
|
Answer
Potter’s House Christian Fellowship, officially called Christian Fellowship Ministries (CFM), was founded by Wayman Mitchell, a Pentecostal pastor, in 1970\. Mitchell was a member of the [Foursquare Gospel Church](Foursquare-Church.html) until disagreements over how pastors should be trained led to his leaving that denomination. On their official website, Christian Fellowship Ministries claims to have 2,100 churches in 43 states and 114 nations worldwide. Potter’s House Christian Fellowship is headquartered in Prescott, Arizona. Other names associated with local branches of Christian Fellowship Ministries are “The Door,” “The Lighthouse,” “Living Waters,” “Victory Chapel,” “Crossroads Chapel,” and “La Puerta.”
Christian Fellowship Ministries doctrine falls mostly in line with that of other [Pentecostal churches](Pentecostals.html), most closely resembling the Assemblies of God in doctrine and practice. A key teaching of the Potter’s House Christian Fellowship is the doctrine of a second baptism of the Holy Spirit that augments a person’s salvation experience. This baptism is characterized by the display of spiritual “sign gifts,” with an emphasis on the [gift of tongues](gift-of-tongues.html), which is exercised by the whole congregation during services. No interpreter is provided as Scripture directs (1 Corinthians 14:27\), nor is the tongues\-speaking done in an orderly manner. This practice runs contrary to Scripture (1 Corinthians 14:40\). In actuality, the [baptism of the Spirit](Spirit-baptism.html) is synonymous with salvation; when a person is saved, he is baptized by the Spirit into the Body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13\).
Church services in the Potter’s House Christian Fellowship are also characterized by [faith healings](faith-healers.html), based on the teaching that the blood of Christ provides for physical healing. Other aberrant doctrines in the Christian Fellowship Ministries include the teaching that a Christian may lose his salvation. Potter’s House churches have a hierarchy of leadership with a head pastor and a board of elders, but the pastor holds ultimate authority over all matters pertaining to the ministry and in the personal lives of its members. It is common for the pastor to have the final say on an individual’s educational goals, career choices, and even marriage plans. Ministers in the Christian Fellowship Ministries are forbidden from watching movies or television. As with many Pentecostal churches, there is an emphasis on [tithing](tithing-Christian.html) in the Potter’s House Church, which takes Old Testament commands and promises to Israel and applies them to the New Testament church—to give financially is to receive a blessing in return.
The Potter’s House has been the subject of much controversy and various exposés over the decades detailing the controlling nature of the leadership, the undue emphasis on raising money, and the obligatory tithe. Former members have testified that they were isolated from their families when they joined the Christian Fellowship Ministries and were ostracized when they left the church.
Every believer or searcher of the truth should remember that salvation comes by grace alone through faith alone. Once we have faith in Jesus as God’s Son who came to earth in the flesh, died for our sins, and was raised from the dead, we shall forever be in good standing with God—positionally holy before Him. For this reason, Jesus uttered these famous words: “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light” (Matthew 11:28–30\). Once we realize this fact, we are free to serve God and man out of love for both and out of a grateful heart—not out of compulsion or guilt, which are profoundly unhealthy motivations, indeed.
Due to the Potter’s House Christian Fellowship’s legalistic view of tithing, emphasis on tongues and healings, controlling leadership, and denial of a believer’s [eternal security](eternal-security.html), Christian Fellowship Ministries is to be avoided.
|
Who was Delilah in the Bible?
|
Answer
Delilah in the Bible is best known as the one who brought about the ruin of [Samson](life-Samson.html). Delilah lived in the Valley of Sorek, which lay on the border between the territories of the ancient Philistines and the Israelite tribe of Dan. Samson, one of the judges of Israel, had an affair with Delilah, and she betrayed him to the Philistines (Judges 16:19\).
Samson was a man of incredible strength, whose exploits are recorded in the [book of Judges](Book-of-Judges.html). Samson’s strength was legendary, unlike anything that was seen before or since. He singlehandedly struck down 1,000 Philistines using only the jawbone of a donkey (Judges 15:15\), by the power of God’s Spirit he tore a lion to pieces (Judges 14:6\), and he uprooted the gate of the town of Gaza and carried it up a hill (Judges 16:3\). All of Samson’s mighty acts were done in opposition to the Philistines, with whom he had a bitter, long\-standing rivalry, described in Judges 14 and 15\. The Philistines were always trying to understand Samson’s strength and find a way to defeat him. They were always thwarted—Samson was just too strong—until they teamed with Delilah. This woman was eventually Samson’s downfall.
When Samson began consorting with Delilah, the Philistine leaders saw an opportunity. They came to Delilah with an offer: “See if you can lure him into showing you the secret of his great strength and how we can overpower him so we may tie him up and subdue him. Each one of us will give you eleven hundred shekels of silver” (Judges 16:5\). It was an offer she couldn’t refuse, and she began to seek a way to subdue her beau.
From the very beginning of [Delilah’s relationship with Samson](Samson-and-Delilah.html), it was clearly her intention to discover Samson’s weakness and report back to the Philistines. Appealing to his supposed love for her, Delilah asked him repeatedly to confide in her the secret of his great strength. Repeatedly, Samson hides the truth from her. He lies about the source of his strength on three different occasions, and on each occasion, Delilah reports his lie to the Philistines and they come to attack him, thinking him weakened (Judges 16:5–14\). Samson’s response to Delilah’s actions is puzzling. He obviously knows she plans to betray him. Despite her wicked game, Samson stays with Delilah and refuses to acknowledge the danger. Eventually, Samson makes the quite irrational decision to tell Delilah the truth— his strength comes from his long hair, uncut because he was a Nazarite. He tells Delilah that, if his head is shaved, he will become like any other man (Judges 16:16–17\). Scripture gives the reason for Samson’s foolish revelation: Delilah was [nagging](Bible-nagging.html) him daily so that his soul was “annoyed to death” (Judges 16:16, NASB).
The wise course of action would have been for Samson to leave Delilah, rather than tell her the truth. He surely must have known that she would betray him—but his feelings for her proved stronger than wisdom. Samson did not leave her; in fact, he fell asleep with his head in her lap, and the inevitable occurred. Delilah had his hair cut, and she betrayed him, allowing the Philistines to bind him, gouge out his eyes, and take him away as a slave (Judges 16:18–21\). All this she did for a quantity of silver promised her from the Philistines (Judges 16:5\). Delilah, the original femme fatale, illustrates the truth of 1 Timothy 6:10, “The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil.”
|
Can a person be born with the wrong gender?
|
Answer
We live in a confused and fallen world, and that confusion extends everywhere, so that even the most basic questions, like “what gender am I?” become difficult for some people to answer. Some people claim they were born as the wrong gender, or at least in the wrong body. A man may believe he is actually a female, but his soul is “stuck” in a male body. Such claims receive support from others who advocate a “gender\-neutral” society. But those who view gender distinctions as nothing more than arbitrary labels or a “box” to be broken out of are actively rejecting God’s design in creation.
Fundamental to our understanding of human sexuality is that God created two (and only two) genders. Currently, the world likes to consider gender (based on a social construct) as having nothing to do with sex (based on physicality), but the Bible makes no such distinctions. The Bible cuts through the world’s confusion simply: “Male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27\). All the modern\-day speculation about multiple genders—or even a gender “continuum” with unlimited genders—is unbiblical. An individual may claim to be transgender or “gender\-fluid,” but that doesn’t nullify God’s design and purpose in creating him or her.
Children growing up in this confused world are bombarded with messages of confusion. Little boys are told they don’t have to be boys; girls are told they might not really be girls. Whatever they feel they are is what they are—boy, girl, or a mixture of the two. The world tells them it doesn’t matter. The confusion and ambiguity are reinforced in many ways: gender\-neutral days at school, the banning of terms such as *boys* and *girls* in the classroom, the proliferation of unisex restrooms, curricula that promotes homosexual marriage, etc. It’s little wonder that some people grow up struggling with their sexual identity. But our Lord warned against leading children astray: “Jesus said to his disciples: ‘Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through whom they come. It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble’” (Luke 17:1–2\).
Some people today state that they have “felt like the opposite gender since they were children.” But how would one know that? To what are they comparing their feelings? How people feel is all they know, and, for each person, how he feels is “normal” for him. Any comparisons to other people’s feelings would only be an assumption. Some people may become convinced that they “felt like the opposite gender” at some point in their lives, but they don’t truly have a baseline comparison.
Given enough conditioning, any one of us can be convinced that we identify more as the opposite gender. Too often, certain individuals are labeled as cross\-gendered because of natural differences in mannerisms and responses, and those individuals “back\-paint” the concept into their understanding of their childhood.
But this reimagining of one’s childhood is different from wishing to be another gender. A person can wish he was the other gender for many reasons, but that doesn’t make it internally so. A parent can instill that desire in a child, or a child can observe benefits enjoyed by the other gender and desire them. The child can also desire to be seven feet tall, but it doesn’t change reality.
The Bible says that God created “male and female” and He pronounced His creation “very good” (Genesis 1:27, 31\). God’s plan was perfect, but, as with everything in mankind’s sphere, perfection was corrupted by sin. Sin [negatively impacted](fall-affect-humanity.html) the entirety of creation, hurting not only humanity's relationship with God, but with one another and the rest of the created order. Our world is fallen, and the effects of sin permeate everything. Diseases, [birth defects](birth-defects.html), natural disasters, sinful acts, and the negative results of others' sin and our own sin can all be traced back to the fall. Sometimes these negative effects come in the form of naturally occurring anomalies; other times they are more directly traced to specific sin. Could an anomaly sometimes occur in gender, physically or mentally? We acknowledge that a person can be born with a combination of male and female organs—although one’s true, biological sex can be determined through medical tests.
This we know, that we are involved in a spiritual battle for our souls. The world seeks to conform us to its mold, which is why we must be transformed by the renewing of our minds (Romans 12:1–2\). Satan attempts to deceive us and urges us to question God’s plan. One of the devil’s ploys is to make us dissatisfied with how God made us. To some he whispers, “You’re fat and ugly.” To others, “You’re stupid and clumsy.” And to still others, “You look like a boy, but you’re really a girl.” In each case, the underlying message is the same: “God messed up on you.”
This we also know, that the whole creation groans for release from the curse and damage of sin (Romans 8:20–22\). The ruin wrought by sin is addressed through the redemption of Christ. Through salvation, Jesus Christ grants us forgiveness of sin, reverses the effect of our poor choices, and compensates for our brokenness.
Each of us faces a different set of battles. Yet Christ sets us on the path to victory. Hebrews 12:1–2 states, “Let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.” The cross is key. Jesus pioneered our faith, and He will perfect it. His victory will be ours as well.
Some may battle heterosexual temptation, greed, pride, anger, or any number of sins. Someone else may battle gender confusion. Regardless of the battle with sin and the devil’s lies, the question we must answer is, “Is Christ and His redemptive work sufficient for our battles?” Jesus definitely claims to be sufficient for any and all of our battles, and He desires to sanctify us through His Word of truth (John 17:17\).
As children of God, we should be content in this life (Philippians 4:11; 2 Corinthians 12:10\). We realize that we all have limitations, physically, mentally, emotionally, and spiritually. But through Christ those limitations will not interfere with the plan God has for us to honor Him and serve Him. “Do not be afraid, little flock, for your Father has been pleased to give you the kingdom” (Luke 12:32\).
If a person feels he or she has been born as the wrong gender, the answer is not gender\-reassignment surgery, hormone therapy, cross\-dressing, etc. Those are simply worldly ways of acquiescing to the devil’s lies. “Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth” (1 Corinthians 13:6\). And God does not make mistakes. The one who feels he or she was born in the wrong body needs, first and foremost, to experience the transformative power of Christ. When we “participate in the divine nature,” we escape “the corruption in the world caused by evil desires” (2 Peter 1:4\).
|
What does the Bible say about disrespect?
|
Answer
In the Bible, disrespect is always a bad thing, and respect is universally a good thing. Respect is admiration for a person because of his or her position, abilities, qualities, or achievements. Respect is associated with esteem, regard, high opinion, admiration, reverence, deference, and honor. In the Bible, respect is more specifically the act of acknowledging another person’s worth, especially because of position, honor, or age. Disrespect is the opposite of respect: it is failing to acknowledge another’s worth, withholding the honor that should be given, or actively demeaning someone.
Respect should be given to those who are owed respect (Romans 13:7\). The Bible mentions four categories of people to whom respect should be given: elders, authority figures, Jesus Christ, and mankind in general. First, elders are owed respect because of their age and experience. The Law includes a mandate to honor the face of an old man (Leviticus 19:32\), and nations or people who disrespect their elders are called “hard\-faced” (Deuteronomy 28:50, ESV). Paul exhorts Timothy not to rebuke older men in the same way he would rebuke young men, but to be gentle and encouraging and respectful, as to a father (1 Timothy 5:1\). Since the experience that comes with old age is a key element in wisdom, to respect one’s elders is to respect the wisdom they can give.
Authority figures are another group in the Bible who are owed respect, including political leaders (1 Peter 2:17\), councilmen (Mark 15:43\), church overseers (1 Timothy 3:2\), spiritual leaders (1 Thessalonians 5:12\), good fathers who discipline their children (Hebrews 12:9\), parents in general (Exodus 20:12; Matthew 15:4\), husbands (Ephesians 5:33\), and the masters of servants or slaves. Interestingly, slaves are told to respect their masters not only when their masters are good and gentle, but also when they are harsh and unjust (1 Peter 2:18\).
Jesus Christ deserves the honor and respect of man, but He was given much disrespect when He came to save. This was especially true in Jesus’ home region of Galilee (John 4:44\). Jesus told [a parable](parable-vineyard.html) once about a landowner (God) who sent his beloved son (Jesus) to a group of tenant vinedressers to check on the state of his vineyards. The landowner believed that his tenants would respect his son, but they did not. Instead, they showed him the ultimate disrespect, throwing him out of his own family’s vineyard and putting him to death (Matthew 21:33–40\). The warning at the end of this parable is sobering: what do you think the owner of the vineyard will do to those servants, in payment for their violence and disrespect, when he arrives?
Finally, respect is something that is owed to humanity in general, from one person to another, simply on the basis of our humanity. We each bear the image of God (Genesis 1:27\). Another parable is told about a wicked judge who did not fear God or respect man (Luke 18:2\). The judge’s disrespect for people is a feature of his wickedness in the story. Christians are not only to honor their fellow believers (Romans 12:10\), but also to respect those who do not believe. As we witness to the truth, and the hope that we have in Christ, we should do it with gentleness and not show disrespect (1 Peter 3:15\).
First Peter 2:17 sums up the virtue of respect nicely: “Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor.”
|
What is a heave offering?
|
Answer
A heave offering was a way of presenting one’s offering to God, and it appears in the Old Testament along with [burnt offerings](burnt-offering.html), [grain offerings](grain-offering.html), freewill offerings, and the offering of the firstborn of the flocks. The heave offering is part of the Mosaic Law and was one of the common sacrifices or offerings given to God by the Israelites.
Only a few translations, such as the KJV and the NAS, call it the “heave offering”; most translations consider it simply an offering presented before the Lord. The “heave” of the “heave offering” is a simple upward movement. It could refer to the generic movement of lifting or “heaving” the sacrifice toward the altar, or it could refer to lifting up or separating a portion of the sacrifice from the rest. This “heaved” portion was set apart for use by the priests (Leviticus 7:34\).
The heave offering was not really a separate offering but the portion of another offering that was reserved for the use of the priests. “You shall consecrate the breast of the wave offering and the thigh of the heave offering which was waved and which was offered from the ram of ordination, from the one which was for Aaron and from the one which was for his sons. It shall be for Aaron and his sons as their portion forever from the sons of Israel, for it is a heave offering; and it shall be a heave offering from the sons of Israel from the sacrifices of their peace offerings, even their heave offering to the LORD” (Exodus 29:27–28, NAS).
The heave offering was often used in conjunction with a wave offering, and both were then given to the priests. The heave and the wave refer to the movement of the sacrificed item over the altar. With a wave offering, the priest moved the offering from side to side over the altar, and, with a heave offering, the sacrificed item is presented with an up\-and\-down motion. The Hebrew word *terumah*, which is the word for “heave offering,” comes from the verb stem *rum*, which means “exalted” or “lifted up.” In most biblical instances, the heave offering was the part of a sacrifice set aside or “lifted up” for a higher purpose.
The heave offering was often given in conjunction with tithes (Leviticus 7:14, 34\) as a provision for the [Levites](Levitical-priesthood.html), the priestly tribe who did not have land of their own and therefore could not grow their own food. They depended on the Lord’s provision through tithes and heave offerings (Numbers 18:24, 29\). The heave offering is also similar to the tithe in that it was to be given of a person’s [firstfruits](firstfruits-offering.html), that is, out of the first portion of the produce harvested each year (Numbers 15:21\) The Levites themselves also offered a heave offering to the Lord out of the tithes of the Israelites. A tenth of all they were given by the other tribes was offered up to God (Numbers 18:26\).
|
How and when should we overlook an offense (Proverbs 19:11)?
|
Answer
Proverbs 19:11 teaches, “A person’s wisdom yields patience; / it is to one’s glory to overlook an offense.” To “overlook” an offense is to take no notice of wrongs done against oneself, to refuse to retaliate or seek revenge, to let affronts go, or, in a word, to forgive.
First, we can observe that the first half of the proverb focuses on self\-control. The ESV puts it this way: “Good sense makes one [slow to anger](slow-to-anger.html).” The NLT says, “Sensible people control their temper.” Patience, being slow to anger, and self\-control are good virtues to possess. Patience and self\-control are listed as part of the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22–23\), an essential part of the Christian’s lifestyle. Our responses are to be reasonable and measured. We should increasingly grow in our ability to control ourselves when angry and overlook offenses when we can.
Second, we know that anger itself is not wrong but rather how we express it. James 1:19–20 states, “Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry, because human anger does not produce the righteousness that God desires.” Offenses do come, and there are times when anger is called for, but anger should not be our first response in any given situation. Our goal is to control our expression of anger and, when possible, overlook an offense.
Third, the Bible calls us to not be easily angered. God Himself is “slow to anger” (Nahum 1:3\), and we should be, too. A “slow fuse” is the product of wisdom and love. First Corinthians 13:5 says that love “is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.” To aid us in developing this type of self\-control, we can also carefully choose our friends: “Do not make friends with a hot\-tempered person, / do not associate with one easily angered” (Proverbs 22:24\). Those who are easily angered show a lack of self\-control.
Fourth, God considers it a “glory” to overlook an offense. In other words, overlooking a wrong done to oneself is a sign of maturity and grace. Forgiving others is worthy of respect. It is a triumph for us to forgive and to take no notice of injuries and offenses. Jesus taught, “If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them. Even if they sin against you seven times in a day and seven times come back to you saying ‘I repent,’ you must forgive them” (Luke 17:3–4\). Of course, God has forgiven our sins, for Christ’s sake; for us to forgive others, for Christ’s sake, is a glorious thing.
Other proverbs also express this theme. Proverbs 17:9 notes, “Whoever would foster love covers over an offense.” Proverbs 10:12 says, “Love covers over all wrongs.” We also see this virtue lived out in David’s story. He refused to retaliate against King Saul, although the king was trying to kill him (see 1 Samuel 24:5–7\). And David chose to overlook the curses (and other things) that [Shimei](Shimei-in-the-Bible.html) hurled at him (2 Samuel 16:5–14\).
“A person’s wisdom yields patience; / it is to one’s glory to overlook an offense” (Proverbs 19:11\). Stating this verse conversely provides this paraphrase: “A person’s folly yields impatience; / it is to one’s shame to refuse to forgive.” Forgiveness is graceful; revenge is disgraceful.
Overlooking an offense does not negate justice. It doesn’t mean we turn a blind eye to sin or pretend that evil doesn’t exist. It means we are willing to forgive, especially when the offense is directed toward us. It means we refuse to hold grudges. There are many trifling things that could bother us, but by the grace of God we let them slide. There are other, not\-so\-trifling things that could harm us, but by the grace of God we determine to forgive. And there are situations that require a quick, decisive response, but by the grace of God we are slow to anger even as we stop the wrongdoing.
How is this overlooking of an offense accomplished? From a human standpoint, it is impossible. But God’s Spirit at work in the life of a believer offers the power to forgive any wrong. Jesus taught us to pray like this: “Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors” (Matthew 6:12\). We forgive because we have been forgiven, knowing that all have sinned and fall short of God’s glory (Romans 3:23\). In wisdom we know what requires a response and what does not. In patience we turn the other cheek (Matthew 5:39\). In love we choose to overlook the insults, slurs, and slights that come our way.
|
Is the Bible reliable?
|
Answer
Using the same criteria by which we judge other historical works, not only is the Bible reliable, it is more reliable than any other comparable writings. Reliability is a question of truthfulness and accurate copying. Writings that are historically and factually correct and that have been faithfully preserved over time would be considered reliable. Higher levels of historical verification and better confidence in transmission make it easier to determine whether an ancient work is worthy of trust. By those measures, we can consider the Bible reliable.
As is true with any historical work, not every single detail in the Bible can be directly confirmed. The Bible cannot be called unreliable simply because it contains parts which cannot be confirmed or have not yet been confirmed. What’s reasonable is to expect it to be accurate where it can be checked. This is the primary test of reliability, and here the Bible has a stellar track record. Not only have many of its historical details been confirmed, but certain portions that were once in doubt have been verified by later [archaeology](Christian-archaeology.html).
For example, archaeological finds in the 1920s confirmed the presence of cities much like Ur, described in Genesis 11, which some skeptics doubted had existed so early. Engravings discovered in an Egyptian tomb depict the installation of a viceroy in a manner that exactly matches the biblical description of the ceremony involving Joseph (Genesis 41:39–42\). Clay tablets dating to 2300 BC have been found in Syria strongly supporting Old Testament stories, vocabulary, and geography. Skeptics doubted the existence of the [Hittites](Hittites.html) (Genesis 15:20; 23:10; 49:29\), until a Hittite city, complete with records, was found in Turkey. There are dozens of other Old Testament facts supported by archaeological discovery.
More importantly, no facts presented in the Old or New Testaments have been shown false. This historical reliability is crucial to our trust in other statements made in Scripture.
Even the “miraculous” occurrences of Genesis have evidential basis we can appeal to today. Ancient Babylonian records describe a confusion of language, in accordance with the biblical account of the [Tower of Babel](Tower-of-Babel.html) (Genesis 11:1–9\). These same records describe a worldwide flood, an event present in literally hundreds of forms in cultures all over the world. The sites where Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19\) once sat have been found, displaying evidence of fiery and violent destruction. Even the plagues of Egypt and the resulting Exodus (Exodus 12:40–41\) [have archaeological support](http://blogos.org/theologyapologetics/evidence-exodus.php).
This trend continues in the New Testament, where the names of various cities, political officials, and events have been repeatedly confirmed by historians and archaeologists. Luke, the writer of that gospel and the [book of Acts](Book-of-Acts.html), has been described as a first\-rate historian for his attention to detail and accurate reporting. In both the Old and New Testament writings, the Bible proves reliable wherever it can be checked.
Accurate copying is also an important factor in the Bible’s reliability. New Testament writings were composed within a few decades of the events they describe, far too early for legend or myth to overtake actual history. In fact, the basic framework of the gospel can be dated to a formal creed just a few years after the crucifixion of Jesus, according to Paul’s description in 1 Corinthians 15:3–8\. Historians have access to a tremendous number of manuscripts, proving the New Testament was reliably and quickly copied and distributed. This gives ample confidence that what we read today correctly represents the original writing.
The Old Testament, as well, shows all evidence of being reliably transmitted. When [the Dead Sea Scrolls](dead-sea-scrolls.html) were discovered in the 1940s, they were 800 years older than any other available manuscripts. Comparing earlier and later manuscripts showed a meticulous approach to transmission, once again adding to our confidence that what we have today represents the original texts.
Those factors all give objective reasons to consider the Bible reliable. At the same time, it’s critically important to examine those same factors in other texts we use to write our history books. The Bible has more empirical support, a shorter time between original writing and surviving copies, and a greater number of source manuscripts than any other ancient work, by far.
For example, there are 251 copies of the works of Julius Caesar, the earliest from 950 years after he wrote, with no way to know how well those copies represent the originals. There are 109 copies of the works of the historian Herodotus, the earliest from 1,400 years after he wrote. Archaeologists have found 1800\+ manuscript copies of the works of Homer, allowing us a 95 percent confidence in the original text.
For the New Testament, there are currently more than 5,000 manuscripts, with most early copies anywhere from 200 to 300 years later, and some less than 100 years later. This gives a better than 99 percent confidence in the contents of the original text.
In short, we not only have objective reasons to claim the Bible is reliable, but we cannot call it unreliable without throwing out almost everything else we know of ancient history. If the Scriptures don’t pass a test for trustworthiness, no records from that era can. The Bible’s reliability is proven in both its historical accuracy and its accurate transmission.
Sources:
Woolley, L., et. al., "Ur," 2001, *Encyclopaedia Britannica Online*, [www.britannica.com/place/Ur](https://www.britannica.com/place/Ur)
Aling, C., "Joseph in Egypt: Part 4," *Bible and Spade*, Winter 2003, accessed at [https://biblearchaeology.org/patriarchal\-era\-list/3751\-joseph\-in\-egypt\-part\-iv](https://biblearchaeology.org/patriarchal-era-list/3751-joseph-in-egypt-part-iv)
Wilson, C., "Elba: Its Impact on Bible Records," *Acts \& Facts* 6, 1977, accessed at [www.icr.org/article/ebla\-its\-impact\-bible\-records](https://www.icr.org/article/ebla-its-impact-bible-records)
Mark, J., "The Hittites," 2018, *World History Encyclopedia Online*, [www.worldhistory.org/hittite](https://www.worldhistory.org/hittite)
Aling, C., "Cultural Change and the Confusion of Language in Ancient Sumer," *Bible and Spade*, Winter 2004, accessed at [https://biblearchaeology.org/research/chronological\-categories/patriarchal\-era/2567\-cultural\-change\-and\-the\-confusion\-of\-language\-in\-ancient\-sumer](https://biblearchaeology.org/research/chronological-categories/patriarchal-era/2567-cultural-change-and-the-confusion-of-language-in-ancient-sumer)
Lorey, F., "The Flood of Noah and the Flood of Gilgamesh," *Acts \& Facts* 26, 1997, accessed at [www.icr.org/article/noah\-flood\-gilgamesh](https://www.icr.org/article/noah-flood-gilgamesh)
"The Discovery of the Sin Cities of Sodom and Gomorrah," *Bible and Spade*, Summer 1999, accessed at [https://biblearchaeology.org/research/patriarchal\-era/2364\-the\-discovery\-of\-the\-sin\-cities\-of\-sodom\-and\-gomorrah](https://biblearchaeology.org/research/patriarchal-era/2364-the-discovery-of-the-sin-cities-of-sodom-and-gomorrah)
Law, S., "Top 10 Artifacts Show Biblical Exodus Was Real History," 2019, [https://patternsofevidence.com/2019/06/01/artifacts\-show\-biblical\-exodus](https://patternsofevidence.com/2019/06/01/artifacts-show-biblical-exodus)
Zukeran, P., "Archaeology and the New Testament," 2000, [https://probe.org/archaeology\-and\-the\-new\-testament](https://probe.org/archaeology-and-the-new-testament)
McDowell, S., "What is the Most Recent Manuscript Count for the New Testament?" 2018, [https://seanmcdowell.org/blog/what\-is\-the\-most\-recent\-manuscript\-count\-for\-the\-new\-testament](https://seanmcdowell.org/blog/what-is-the-most-recent-manuscript-count-for-the-new-testament)
|
What is the Ethiopian Orthodox Church?
|
Answer
The Ethiopian Orthodox Church is the largest of the [Oriental Orthodox Churches](Oriental-Orthodox-Church.html) in Ethiopia. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church broke away from mainline Christianity long before [the Great Schism](great-schism.html) and only recognizes the first three ecumenical councils: Nicea, Constantinople, and Ephesus. Ethiopian Orthodox churches are unique for strongly emphasizing certain Old Testament laws such as dietary restrictions, for performing exorcisms, and for using a now\-extinct language, Ge’ez, for official [liturgical](liturgy-liturgical.html) purposes. They also prescribe specific rules for who may receive communion and dedicate their church buildings to [patron saints](patron-saints.html). Membership of this denomination is estimated at more than 40 million.
The Oriental Orthodox Church split from mainline Christianity after the [Council of Chalcedon](council-of-Chalcedon.html). Prior to Chalcedon, councils such as [Nicea](council-of-Nicea.html), [Constantinople](Council-of-Constantinople.html), and [Ephesus](Council-of-Ephesus.html) had defined the orthodox view of Christ’s divinity. [Nestorianism](Nestorianism.html), which emphasized that the human and divine natures of Jesus Christ were two completely different entities, had been rejected. The Council of Chalcedon declared that Christ was a single person with two unified natures, human and divine. Some felt this was too close to Nestorianism and rejected the council’s decision.
Politics also played a role in this split, as pro\-Chalcedonian Emperor Justinian I attempted to replace all Christian bishops with like\-minded believers. The groups that would eventually form the Oriental Orthodox Church refused to cooperate with this move. In recent years, particularly between Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches, there has been much discussion about whether the split between the two was really one of theology or mere terminology.
The Ethiopian Orthodox Church is the largest sect within the Oriental Orthodox, which itself is discrete from the [Eastern Orthodox Church](Eastern-Orthodox-church.html). The other sects within Oriental Orthodoxy are [Coptic](Coptic-Christianity.html), [Syriac](Syriac-Orthodox-Church.html), Eritrean, [Armenian Apostolic](Armenian-Orthodox-Church.html), and Malankara Syrian. As a result of the split between the Chalcedonian and non\-Chalcedonian churches, these groups are sometimes referred to as “[monophysite](monophysitism.html)” churches. However, they typically prefer the term *miaphysite*, since they reject Nestorianism.
Ethiopian Orthodox Churches are notable for their strong adherence to many Old Testament practices, including restrictions on pork and other non\-kosher foods. They also heavily emphasize certain feast and fast days. Worshipers are expected to remove their shoes prior to entering a church building. Women are seated separately from men and may not enter during their menstrual period. Ethiopian Orthodox churches are each devoted to a patron saint and frequently pray to him/her, as well as to Mary. [Exorcism](Christian-exorcism.html) is a common practice as well. Ethiopian Orthodox churches usually use the local dialect for sermons and other communication, but all liturgy is performed in the Ge’ez language, which today is used for no other purpose.
|
What does the Bible say about crystals?
|
Answer
Crystals of different types are mentioned in the Bible a few times. The Bible mentions rubies (Proverbs 8:11\), sapphires (Lamentations 4:7\), and topaz (Job 28:19\), for example. The breastplate worn by the Levitical high priest contained twelve stones, each engraved with the name of a tribe of Israel: “The first row was carnelian, chrysolite and beryl; the second row was turquoise, lapis lazuli and emerald; the third row was jacinth, agate and amethyst; the fourth row was topaz, onyx and jasper. They were mounted in gold filigree settings” (Exodus 39:10–13\). The river flowing from the heavenly throne is “as clear as crystal” (Revelation 22:1\), the area before the throne is something like “a sea of glass, clear as crystal” (Revelation 4:6\), and “spread out above the heads of the living creatures was what looked something like a vault, sparkling like crystal, and awesome” (Ezekiel 1:22\). The Bible never assigns any mystical properties to crystals.
Besides being beautiful mineral structures, crystals are used in the practice of crystal healing, a pseudoscience that purports to heal various ailments. According to crystal healers, the careful placing of crystals on a patient’s body is supposed to line up with or stimulate the body’s chakras and promote healing.
Some people also believe that crystals have an inherent power that can be harnessed and used to their benefit. Some use crystals to ward off evil spirits or bad energy and thus bring good luck. Crystals are sometimes used in [feng shui](feng-shui.html), in the belief that they emanate good vibrations. Crystals that absorb too much bad energy in the process of protecting a home must be “cleansed” to reset the vibrations.
None of these superstitious beliefs about crystals come from the Bible. The Bible does not say that crystals are beneficial for attracting wealth, rekindling romance, or warding off evil spirits; neither does it say that crystals are needed to connect to God’s Spirit. On the contrary, the Bible warns strongly against engaging in anything related to [superstition](superstitions.html) and [the occult](occult.html). God declares the practice of the occult detestable (Deuteronomy 18:10–12\), and witchcraft is named along with idolatry as ungodly behavior (Galatians 5:19–21\). The use of crystals as charms, amulets, or talismans is a type of occult practice, however benign it seems. Anything that seeks to manipulate the spirit world can be categorized as witchcraft.
The superstitious use of crystals is yet another example of fallen mankind taking what God has created and twisting it for an ungodly purpose. Crystals are striking examples of God’s handiwork. There is nothing wrong with using crystals for home décor or wearing them as jewelry, but there is nothing magical about them. Using crystals for protection or healing is, at its root, an idolatrous practice. It is [idolatry](idolatry-definition.html) because it depends on spiritual forces other than God for healing and protection; in other words, it is the worship of something other than God. Idolatry is repeatedly and strongly forbidden in the Bible (Deuteronomy 4:15–20; Jeremiah 44:1–4; 1 Corinthians 10:14–20; 2 Corinthians 6:16–17\).
|
How much of the Bible was transmitted by oral tradition?
|
Answer
First, we have to distinguish between oral “tradition” and oral “transmission.” The term *tradition* implies a long\-held belief or practice that is not necessarily connected to any explicit facts or evidence. *Transmission* is a method of conveying information. The content of the Bible was, in some cases, first relayed through oral “transmission,” but not as the result of “tradition.” Rather, what was being transmitted was a direct explanation of specific facts regarding certain people, places, and times. In most cases, the biblical text was put into written form at the time of, or soon after, the events described.
A good example of this is the [book of Luke](Gospel-of-Luke.html), which explicitly states its origins in chapter 1\. Luke is putting the results of his investigation into writing, using the experiences of actual eyewitnesses. Historians have found Luke to be a first\-rate source of accurate information. Parts of this Gospel could be considered “oral transmission” prior to his authorship, though many of the same facts are found in the earlier Gospel of Mark.
[Mark](Gospel-of-Mark.html) is believed to have been written around AD 55, far too close to the events described for it to fall into the “oral tradition” category. Further, many people often forget that the Gospels are neither the earliest Christian writings nor the original sources of their contents. The letters of Paul, for example, were almost all written prior to the Gospels. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul describes the basic outlines of Christian belief. He says these points are those he was taught at his conversion, which occurred just a few years after the resurrection.
The same can be said of the Old Testament. The words were being written intentionally, to record the message or events occurring. The Old Testament books are not collections of prior legends, phrased in “once upon a time” language, and they are not detached from historical facts.
This direct recording of messages and events is in strong contrast to the writings of other faiths, such as Islam. The Qur’an was carried exclusively in an oral form for the entire forty\-year ministry of [Muhammad](who-was-Muhammad.html). Small portions of the Qur’an were written in scraps and fragments, but never in manuscript form. Only after Muhammad’s death were his sayings put into a compilation, which was itself edited and revised until competing copies were destroyed by the caliph Uthman. Further, a major source of Islamic knowledge is the *hadith*, which are quite literally “oral traditions,” in that their only support is trust in the spiritual integrity of their sources. Islam’s process of determining this trustworthiness is known as *isnad*.
Another example of Christianity’s separation from oral “traditions” came from Jesus Himself. The Pharisees had used oral traditions as a means to interpret the Law of Moses. Although Jesus spoke highly of the Scriptures, He roundly condemned the reliance on oral tradition for its tendency to reflect the desires of the traditionalists, rather than the will of God (see Mark 7:6–9\).
Oral transmission, in and of itself, is not a completely unreliable method, particularly for simpler messages. In a time when most people did not read or write, oral transmission was common, and maintaining the exact original words was considered critical. The real advantage of a written over an oral message is that the writing preserves a snapshot of a message from an instant in time. One can compare the differences between different claims objectively, and a single message can be re\-read with identical precision over and over. According to internal and external evidence, the words of the Bible were preserved in written form extremely early as records of fact, not oral traditions.
|
Who was Zipporah in the Bible?
|
Answer
Zipporah in the Bible was the wife of [Moses](life-Moses.html) and the daughter of [Jethro](Jethro-in-the-Bible.html), the priest of Midian. When Moses fled from Egypt to the land of Midian, he met Jethro’s seven daughters, who were having some trouble getting enough water for their flocks (Exodus 2\). In that area, the troughs for watering flocks were being monopolized by some shepherds who denied Jethro’s daughters access to the troughs. Moses assisted the women by driving the shepherds away so their flocks could be watered. Zipporah was among the sisters helped by Moses.
Zipporah and her sisters brought Moses back to their tent to meet their father, the priest of Midian, who liked Moses. Moses was content to stay there in Midian (Exodus 2:21\). Moses later married Zipporah and began a new life. Zipporah gave birth to a son. Moses named him Gershom, a name that sounds like the Hebrew word meaning “a foreigner there.” Gershom’s name was a reminder that Moses was a foreigner and living among foreigners. Later, Zipporah had another son named [Eliezer](Eliezer-in-the-Bible.html) (Exodus 18:4\).
Later in the book of Exodus, there is a strange passage involving Zipporah. Moses and his wife are traveling to Egypt because God had told Moses to bring the Israelites out of bondage (Exodus 3\). On the way, Moses and Zipporah stop at an inn, and the Lord meets Moses there, seeking to kill him. Perceiving that Moses was in mortal danger, Zipporah takes a sharp stone and [circumcises](circumcision.html) her son. She takes her son’s foreskin and, touching Moses’ feet with it, she utters the enigmatic statement, “Surely you are a [bridegroom of blood](bridegroom-of-blood.html) to me!” (Exodus 4:25\). Her action worked. After Zipporah’s intervention, the Lord left Moses alone. The Bible does not explicitly explain why the Lord desired to kill Moses, but it was probably because Moses had not performed the rite of circumcision. Circumcision was an important symbol of the [Abrahamic Covenant](Abrahamic-covenant.html), and the lack of circumcision would mark a person as cut off from God’s people (Genesis 17:9–14\). For Moses to neglect to circumcise his son was an affront to God, as if he were saying that he and his family did not truly belong to God. How could Moses be an effective leader of God’s people if he were in violation of God’s clear command?
Zipporah’s words to Moses are puzzling, but the text explains that “she said ‘bridegroom of blood,’ referring to circumcision” (Exodus 4:26\). It seems that Zipporah was angry at having to perform the rite, which should have been completed by Moses. Sometime after this incident, Moses sent Zipporah and his two sons back to Midian to stay with Zipporah’s father (see Exodus 18:2–3\).
|
What is Shincheonji?
|
Answer
Shincheonji, sometimes spelled *Shinchonji* or abbreviated as *SCJ*, is a pseudo\-Christian religion primarily practiced in South Korea. The religion’s official name is Shincheonji Church of Jesus, the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony. It was created by Lee Man\-hee in the 1980s and, by 2020, claimed just under 200,000 adherents (www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/25/coronavirus\-south\-korea\-to\-test\-200000\-sect\-members\-as\-pandemic\-fears\-hit\-markets, accessed 02/07/23\). The word *Shincheonji* itself is a combination of the Korean terms for “new,” “heaven,” and “earth.”
The group has been criticized for shallow, academically weak teachings, a promotion of an extremely figurative view of biblical texts, a cult\-like atmosphere, and its members’ involvement in various social, civil, and legal troubles.
Shincheonji believes itself to be the end\-time expression of the true church through the direct fulfillment of the prophecies in Revelation. The leader and founder, Lee Man\-hee (“the Promised Pastor”), claims by divine revelation to have been sent by the Holy Spirit to create “God’s kingdom of heaven here on earth, exactly as he witnessed it in heaven” (http://en4\.shincheonji.kr/?ch\=about02\_01 accessed 02/07/23\).
The sect’s twisting of Scripture has inspired several anti\-Shincheonji task forces. Some are run by church groups, others by organizations like newspapers and television stations. The general Korean strategy for opposing Shincheonji uses social and internet media to discourage people from joining it. Similar materials also warn people about evangelism efforts that seem Christian but are actually coming from a Shincheonji group. Many genuine Christian churches in South Korea actively work to keep their members from being dragged into Shincheonji’s aberrant theology.
The word [*cult*](cult-definition.html) is controversial and can be difficult to define. By the most common use of the term, however, it would be fair to consider Shincheonji a very large, very successful cult. The group is headed by a single charismatic leader, Lee Man\-hee, who claims to have a special ability to interpret the Bible. Man\-hee can be evasive when challenged about his authority. He frequently implies that he is immortal and that salvation requires faith in him rather than in Jesus Christ. In fact, Man\-hee’s Shincheonji church teaches that the Bible is primarily composed of metaphors, and he alone has the spiritual gift for correctly interpreting them.
Cults typically practice indoctrination rather than education. Shincheonji offers free Bible classes, which are slanted toward their theology. However, those involved in SJC are also taught that counterevidence or other challenges are tests of their faith. As a result, adherents ignore facts, reasons, and evidence that contradict Lee Man\-hee’s teaching. In some cases, Shincheonji disciples are discouraged from reading the news or using the internet, as these media can contain messages potentially harmful to their faith.
False teachings are a hallmark of cults. Shincheonji teaches that the 144,000 mentioned in Revelation 7:4 are members of the 12 “tribes” of Shincheonji. The group denies the Trinity. It claims all angels are humans and that only Lee Man\-hee has the ability to interpret the Word of God correctly. In fact, Shincheonji goes so far as to claim that Revelation 7:2 is a specific reference to Korea (“East”) and Man\-hee (the first “angel”).
The Zion Christian Mission Center is the educational arm of the Shincheonji Church. According to the organization’s website (http://en4\.shincheonji.kr/?ch\=about03\_02 accessed 02/07/23\), about 85,000 students have graduated from this program, which is offered at roughly 300 centers worldwide. The group’s primary proselytizing efforts focus on inviting people to attend classes at their various centers. When recruits graduate, they are said to be “sealed” as members of the 144,000\.
The Zion Christian Mission Center offers three levels of course study. In the entry\-level course (The True Knowledge of the Secrets of the Kingdom of Heaven), students are taught “the true meaning of the parables that are written in the Bible.” If students do not understand the parables correctly, asserts Lee Man\-hee, they “cannot be forgiven nor will they be saved.” The second\-level course offers an overview of the Bible that, according to Lee Man\-hee, will help students “grasp the general context of the Bible” to aid them in their learning and ultimate salvation. The third and final level covers the entire Book of Revelation. A correct comprehension of Revelation’s prophecies and their fulfillment is essential to the student’s salvation, according to Shincheonji.
The Shincheonji church is active in cultural and volunteer efforts. The church runs several social action organizations that disguise their relationship to Shincheonji teachings. One of their more famous events is an Olympics\-style athletics festival.
Unfortunately, the most significant aspect of Shincheonji in South Korea is its success. By some estimates, there are as many as fifty heretical, home\-grown, pseudo\-Christian sects—or cults—in South Korea. Most are relatively small and have a low impact. However, the Shincheonji Church of Jesus, the Temple of the Tabernacle of the Testimony, is a major diversion from the true gospel.
|
Why is apocalyptic literature so strange?
|
Answer
Apocalyptic literature is a specific form of prophecy, largely involving symbols and imagery and predicting disaster and destruction. Apocalyptic literature frequently contains strange descriptions and bizarre imagery: the terrible, iron\-toothed beast of Daniel 7, the long\-haired locusts with men’s faces of Revelation 9, the four\-faced creatures of Ezekiel 1\.
Apocalyptic literature involves descriptions of the end of the world and typically depicts grandiose, cataclysmic events. In the Old Testament, books such as [Ezekiel](Book-of-Ezekiel.html), [Daniel](Book-of-Daniel.html), and [Zechariah](Book-of-Zechariah.html) contain elements of apocalyptic literature. The same is true of certain passages in the New Testament, such as 2 Thessalonians 2, Mark 13, and Matthew 24\. And, of course, the entire [book of Revelation](Book-of-Revelation.html) is apocalyptic; in fact, the Greek word *apocalypse* means “revelation.”
Some of the strangeness of apocalyptic literature may stem from the difficulty of explaining events that the observer simply did not understand, or perhaps the writer’s visions really were as unusual as they are described. Another reason for the strangeness of apocalyptic literature is the subject matter itself. By necessity, “the end of the world” is going to involve abnormal events. This is particularly true in apocalyptic works where there is a final reckoning or balancing of justice. As divine power interferes with nature in order to bring about this reckoning, things on earth will become extremely abnormal.
Another reason for the weirdness in apocalyptic literature is the heavy use of symbolism. In both biblical and non\-biblical apocalyptic literature, symbols are an important means of conveying the message. For this reason, many events are described in metaphors, rather than in literal terms. For instance, in the book of Revelation, John describes a [woman clothed with the sun](Revelation-chapter-12.html), in childbirth pain, with a dragon waiting to attack her child (Revelation 12:1–4\). Elsewhere, John describes a beast from the sea with seven heads and ten horns (Revelation 13:1\). Readers of the genre would recognize these as symbols, not as literal creatures. The otherworldly descriptions serve as clues pointing toward some future person, thing, or event.
Another possible reason for strange language in apocalyptic literature is the difficulty inherent in explaining the future. If, for instance, John actually saw things such as tanks, airplanes, nuclear weapons, or televisions, how would he explain them? What would he call an air\-to\-ground missile, using only his own vocabulary? Would he even know what they were or how to tell others about them? More than likely, John’s descriptions would be of what those things might look like to someone of his time, such as animals, stars, or spells.
More than likely, whatever visions an apocalyptic writer had were literal visions, faithfully recorded, but the visions themselves were conveyed metaphorically. That is, God chose to show the writers symbols rather than literal people or things. Perhaps John really did visualize a woman wearing the sun, and he really did see a dragon with multiple heads, since those were the symbols God wanted him to relate in Revelation.
Biblical apocalyptic literature is generically similar to other works of its type, but with some important differences. Most writing of this type is anonymous and vague about whom it addresses. This was often due to the purpose of apocalyptic writing: to send a subversive message from a fictional prophet of the past. But in the case of John, the writer explicitly identifies himself (Revelation 1:1–2\), directs the message to particular people (Revelation 1:9–10\), and writes many centuries before the fulfillment occurred (Revelation 22:8–10\). The content of apocalyptic literature is certainly strange, but no stranger than one would expect for that genre and subject matter.
|
Who was Nathan in the Bible?
|
Answer
Nathan was a prophet in the Bible who lived during the reign of [King David](life-David.html) in Israel. God spoke to David through Nathan on several occasions. Nathan was a member of David’s royal court and one of his closest advisers. Nathan apparently also knew Bathsheba well enough to speak to her about [Adonijah’s](Solomon-Adonijah-Abishag.html) attempt to usurp David’s throne from her son, Solomon (1 Kings 1:11\) and to enlist her help in bringing the matter to the king. There are three or four stories in the Bible featuring Nathan that occurred during some of the darkest and most emotional times in David’s life.
The first mention of Nathan establishes his relationship with David as a trusted adviser. David decides to build God a house, because the king is living in a beautiful cedar palace and thinks it wrong that the Ark of the Covenant should be housed in a lowly tent (the tabernacle). David tells Nathan about his plans to build a house for God, and Nathan says he should go ahead and do it because the Lord is with him (2 Samuel 7:2–3\). Then God visits Nathan in a vision and tells him to return to David and inform him that God doesn’t need the king to build him a house; rather, God would establish David’s dynasty, through his son, forever. His son Solomon would be the one to build God’s house (2 Samuel 7:4–17\). Nathan relays this important message to the king, and David utters a grateful and beautiful prayer to God for His grace (2 Samuel 7:18–29\).
The next time Nathan is mentioned, it is after David had committed adultery with [Bathsheba](David-and-Bathsheba.html) and brought about her husband’s death to hide her pregnancy (2 Samuel 12:1\). At that point, David had made Bathsheba his wife and had seemingly gotten away with his sin, but the Lord knew about it and told Nathan to rebuke David. Nathan went to David and wisely told the king a fable about a rich man and a poor man: the rich man was visited by a traveler, so he took the poor man’s only possession, a little ewe lamb that he loved as a pet, to feed his guest—rather than taking a lamb from his own extensive flocks. David was enraged at the story and declared that the rich man had no pity and deserved to die. Nathan then points to David and says, “You are the man!” (2 Samuel 12:7\). Nathan reveals that David’s sin was like that of the rich man, because David took away Uriah’s wife. Nathan then prophesies to David, in God’s own words: “I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you out of the hand of Saul. And I gave you your master’s house and your master’s wives into your arms and gave you the house of Israel and of Judah. And if this were too little, I would add to you as much more. Why have you despised the word of the LORD, to do what is evil in his sight? You have struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword and have taken his wife to be your wife and have killed him with the sword of the Ammonites. Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house, because you have despised me and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife” (2 Samuel 12:7–10\). David confesses to Nathan that he has sinned against the Lord, and Nathan comforts him, saying that the Lord has forgiven his sin and that David’s life will not be required of him. Nonetheless, David’s child by Bathsheba was to die. David, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, pens Psalm 51 after this encounter with Nathan the prophet.
After the death of David’s child, his wife Bathsheba became pregnant again, this time with a son whom they named [Solomon](life-Solomon.html). The Lord sent Nathan to David again, this time to say that the Lord loved his son Solomon, and they called Solomon “Jedidiah,” a name that means “beloved of the Lord” (2 Samuel 12:24–25\). Solomon later built God’s house, the temple, and became an ancestor of the Lord Jesus Christ.
First Chronicles 3:5 reveals the fact that King David and Queen Bathsheba named one of their sons born to them in Jerusalem “Nathan.” No doubt, the child’s name is a reflection of the royal couple’s appreciation for the prophet Nathan’s faithfulness, friendship, and tough love through the years.
|
What is a fool according to the book of Proverbs?
|
Answer
The word *fool* appears forty times in the ESV version of [Proverbs](Book-of-Proverbs.html). The ways of the fool are often contrasted with the ways of the wise. In modern usage a “fool” can be a “dupe,” an “ignoramus,” or just a “ridiculous person,” but how is a “fool” defined in Proverbs?
A look at some of the occurrences of the word *fool* in Proverbs helps provide an explanation. Proverbs 10:8 refers to a “babbling fool.” One trait of a fool is that he is a constant talker who is not known for listening to wisdom (see also 10:10\).
Proverbs 10:14 states, “The mouth of a fool brings ruin near.” This contrasts the speech of the fool with the knowledge of the wise. A fool does not care about learning. He’s too busy talking.
Proverbs 10:18 teaches, “Whoever utters slander is a fool.” The fool will speak poorly of other people rather than be known as an encourager.
Proverbs 10:23 adds that “doing wrong is like a joke to a fool.” A foolish person does not take sin or its consequences seriously.
Proverbs 12:15 says, “The way of a fool is right in his own eyes, but a wise man listens to advice.” The fool rejects the advice of others and instead listens only to himself.
Proverbs 13:16 notes, “A fool flaunts his folly.” In other words, a foolish person is proud of his wrong actions.
Proverbs 14:16 teaches that “a fool is reckless and careless.” A fool does not plan ahead but rather lives life without considering the impact his actions have on himself and others.
Proverbs 15:5 shows that “a fool despises his father’s instruction.” The foolish person will not listen to his parents or obey them. In fact, he spurns what his father says.
Proverbs 26:11 uses [emblematic parallelism](emblematic-parallelism.html) to graphically illustrate the behavior of fools: “As a dog returns to its vomit, so fools repeat their folly.” A fool is known for repeating mistakes rather than learning from past wrongs.
Often in Scripture, a fool is associated with wickedness and a direct denial of God (e.g., in Psalm 53:1\). Because God has infinite wisdom, the person who neglects God will naturally miss out on wisdom—he will become a fool. A fool is anyone who does not follow the warnings and commands of God. A fool lacks wisdom, has no concern for others, does not desire to avoid sin, and brags about his sinful actions. The Scripture is clear we are to avoid living as a fool; rather, we are to fear the Lord, walk in His wisdom, and follow His ways. We know that “those who walk in wisdom are kept safe” (Proverbs 28:26\).
|
What is 119 Ministries?
|
Answer
*Please note: the information below is based on our general assessment of 119 Ministries. As with any active organization, current events may drastically change both perceptions and interpretations. The information below is fair and accurate, to the best of our knowledge, as of the time this article was written.*
119 Ministries is a [Hebrew Roots](Hebrew-Roots.html) organization primarily operating through their website. The group’s name is a reference to Psalm 119, which speaks in depth about following God’s Law. 119 Ministries is extremely active on social media and the internet, with smartphone apps and an extensive library of online teachings. DVDs, books, and videos are available as tools to promote their theology.
119 Ministries is associated with the Hebrew Roots movement, which claims Jesus did not do away with many of the Old Testament restrictions on diet, ceremonial purity, and so forth. This is a view long rejected by the majority of Christian theologians. Most Hebrew Roots teachers accept generally correct views of salvation, sin, Christ, and the Bible. However, they often reject the Trinity, and the strained approach they’re forced to use on the New Testament presents some additional problems. The general, clear sense of Scripture is that Christ’s “fulfillment” of the Law meant the end of those minute legalisms.
119 Ministries would claim that supposedly clear statements in books such as [Galatians](Book-of-Galatians.html) have been misinterpreted. And yet, that conclusion only results from assuming what one is trying to prove. The catch phrase for 119 Ministries seems to be “test everything,” which underscores the group’s apologetics\-flavored approach to promoting their beliefs. Yet, unless a person is pre\-determined toward their conclusions, the Hebrew Roots\-related information they provide doesn’t withstand scrutiny.
Another problem with 119 Ministries, as with many Hebrew Roots organizations, is the tendency to focus outrageous levels of time and attention on minutiae. For example, the exact day or lunar cycle of a particular festival. Or speculations about [blood moons](blood-red-moon.html) or whether a calendar day should start at sunrise or sunset. Legalistic gnat\-straining like this (Titus 3:9\) is exactly the kind of bureaucracy we were meant to be freed from. At the same time, that style of convenient legalism is comforting, since it makes our spirituality seem like a matter of obeying a list, rather than having a moment\-to\-moment, perpetual sense of obeying God’s will in our lives.
Ironically, despite the claim to uphold the entire Old Testament Law as binding on believers today, most Hebrew Roots interpretations allow for behaviors that Old Testament Jews would have considered blatantly in error, such as having a clean\-shaven face or wearing clothes of mixed cloth. 119 Ministries is no different, as in one teaching they dismiss explicit Torah commands not to cut one’s hair (Leviticus 19:27\) as merely references to pagan practices. At the same time, they insist that foods like pork and shellfish are still “unclean,” despite overt statements such as Mark 7:19\.
There are many things to test, question, and doubt within the teachings of 119 Ministries. Those involved in the Hebrew Roots movement are generally well\-meaning, and their primary message regarding salvation is essentially true. However, their approach to Scripture is extremely prejudiced and can’t really be sustained, except in the minds of those who prefer to believe it to begin with.
|
What is antitheism?
|
Answer
*Antitheism* is a broad term referring to active, intentional opposition to belief in God or religion in general. The word describes a person’s intent and approach more so than his beliefs, as a person might well hold to an [agnostic](agnosticism.html) or [atheistic](atheism.html) worldview but not be considered an antitheist. Antitheism holds that [theism](what-is-a-theist.html) is harmful and should be countered. As with other political or social philosophies, there are varying levels of antitheism and numerous applications.
As one would expect, the Bible has nothing positive to say about the attitude of antitheism. While simple ignorance is viewed as a forgivable error (John 9:41; Luke 23:34\), willful hatred toward God is not. Those who purposefully defy God (Romans 1:18–23\) as a result of disbelief or hatred are labeled as “fools” (Psalm 10:4; 14:1\) and warned of dire consequences (Proverbs 29:1; Romans 1:24–25\).
The most visible expression of antitheism in the modern world was the rise of the so\-called [New Atheists](new-atheism.html) just after the turn of the century. Catalyzed by the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, a more antagonistic, hostile attack on religion came into fashion. This was spearheaded by personalities such as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens. These men openly and aggressively attacked belief in God as both false and damaging to society. Most of these figures had written and spoken to that effect long before, but their ideas became far more popular during the time after 9/11\. Though the effects of New Atheism have lingered, its popularity has waned as both religious and non\-religious figures have criticized it for shallow, divisive approaches.
From a historical perspective, there is nothing “new” about New Atheism or antitheism. The only truly novel aspects of New Atheism were an unusual level of social popularity and an extraordinary level of arrogance. Even fellow atheists frequently faulted the rhetoric of New Atheism for being more derogatory than reasoned and more snide than rational. The modern antitheists’ tendency to demean and belittle is seen in the titles of their books [*The God Delusion*](God-delusion.html) and *God Is Not Great* and the movie [*Religulous*](religulous.html). In eras past, such attitudes have been described as misotheism (“hatred of God”) or maltheism (“belief in an evil God”).
The remnants of New Atheism continue in the public work of Lawrence Krauss, Jerry Coyne, Victor Stenger, and others. Actors and comedians such as Bill Maher, Ricky Gervais, and Penn Jillette could be fairly described as antitheists. In some cases, antitheists are former professing believers, such as Dan Barker and John Loftus.
Non\-believers are not necessarily antitheists; a person who merely disbelieves in God but does not hold theism to be stupid or immoral would not be considered an antitheist. Nor is antitheism always identified with one political group. Some antitheists hold worldviews remarkably similar to pantheist or New Age systems. The common theme of antitheism is not necessarily political or social or even spiritual. Antitheism is primarily an attitude of aggressive hostility toward religion and, by extension, religious people and ideas. Unfortunately, antitheism tends to express itself in negative ways, with arrogance, derision, or outright bigotry.
|
What is biblical manhood?
|
Answer
In the postmodern world, few topics invite as much controversy as discussions of gender. Adding a religious dimension makes the concept even more prone to distortion and emotional reactions. Some of what the Bible says about men and women, how they relate, and what God’s expectations are for them may run contrary to our preferences. Those ideas may conflict with our cultures, upbringing, or the opinions of our peers. And yet the definition of biblical manhood (and [womanhood](biblical-womanhood.html)) is exactly that: biblical, not opinion\-driven.
All the same, even within Christianity, there is significant debate over the best way to apply the Bible’s concepts of manhood and womanhood. How to live out the unique, God\-given roles of men and women isn’t quite so easy in practice as it is in theory. So, rather than attempt a detailed explanation of every aspect of biblical manhood, our intent here is only to highlight the topic in broad strokes.
Biblical manhood can be boiled down to five basic principles, which each man is expected to conform to. These are 1\) humility before his God, 2\) control of his appetites, 3\) protecting his family, 4\) providing for his family, and 5\) leading his family. Men who fail to meet these expectations are not behaving as “men,” biblically speaking, but as something less noble (Psalm 49:20\). Some good examples of biblical manhood in Scripture are Daniel, Caleb, Joshua, Paul, and, of course, Jesus.
Men and women are created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26–27\), something no other creature can claim. This makes every single human being valuable and worthy of respect. And yet males and females are not identical. We are biologically, psychologically, and emotionally distinct. This is not in any sense a bad thing; God called His original creation, which included distinct genders, “very good” (Genesis 1:31\). Biblical manhood must include a godly view of women. Mistreatments of women such as forbidding education, sexual abuse, or denying civil rights are violations of the image\-of\-God principle. So, too, are attitudes that ignore meaningful differences between the sexes or erase gender roles.
Critically, note those things that Scripture does *not* include as part of biblical manhood. Men are not called to be tyrants, ruling a home with an iron fist and a dictator’s attitude. Nor are they instructed to be cowed and weak\-kneed toward their families. Nor are men called on to enforce, in any sense, the biblical ideals of womanhood in their wives. Humility, self\-control, protection, provision, and leadership are the man’s responsibilities and his tools. Men are accountable for spiritual leadership within their families, yet each person is ultimately accountable to God for his or her own life.
The proper perspective for this leadership comes from Ephesians 5:25–32\. The goal of every believer’s life is to become more and more like Christ (Romans 8:29\). For men in their God\-given role, this means leading and loving their wives in the same way Christ loved the church: sacrificially (Ephesians 5:2\), through service (John 13:14–15\), and in selfless love (Ephesians 5:28\). Just as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are equal yet serve different roles, so, too, can [men and women be equal](men-women-equal.html) in value and in spiritual worth yet have different roles to play.
The fundamental requirement for biblical manhood is a proper relationship with God (Micah 6:8\). This informs and empowers every other responsibility a man has in his life. Humility means an acknowledgement of his imperfection (Romans 3:23\), acceptance of Christ for salvation (2 Peter 3:9\), and a continual sense of dependence on God (1 Peter 5:7; Hebrews 13:15\). A godly man will study, learn, and understand the will of God (Matthew 6:33; Romans 12:2\) through the Word of God (Hebrews 4:12\). This gives him the tools to meet all of his other obligations; it does not automatically make his life biblically sound (1 Corinthians 3:2\).
Knowing what God wants is only the first step, as biblical manhood also requires submission to that knowledge. Men are called on to control their urges and appetites (1 Thessalonians 4:3–5\), relying on God to overcome temptations (1 Corinthians 10:13\). Men, according to the Bible, are not to twist the Scripture in order to get their way (Mark 7:8–9\) or to match their own preferences (Proverbs 14:12\). Instead, they are to follow God’s commands (Proverbs 1:7\) instead of their own urges (Romans 6:12; 1 Peter 1:14\). This includes the other requirements of biblical manhood, which can be difficult to apply in a humble, godly way.
Biblical manhood includes the responsibility to protect one’s family. This may mean physically, to the point of laying down his life (Ephesians 5:25\). In the Bible, men are called to fight to protect their wives and children (Nehemiah 4:13–14\); women are never called to do the same for their husbands. This also involves spiritual protection—consider that Eve sinned first, but Adam was blamed for failing to lead her (Genesis 3:11, 17\). Men are instructed to “honor” their wives as a “weaker vessel” (1 Peter 3:7\), a phrase that in context invokes something precious, expensive, and valuable. Protecting one’s spouse and family from harm, both spiritual and physical, should be a natural instinct for Christian men.
Men are also called to be the primary providers for their families. Obviously, this can take different forms, and particular circumstances can change who contributes to family finances. Unemployment, illness, injury, and so forth are circumstances, not deliberate arrangements. Adam’s punishment at the fall was increased pain in his primary responsibility within the family, which was to be a provider (Genesis 3:17–19\). Passages such as 1 Timothy 5:9 describe support for widows but not for widowers. Rather, it is men who are singled out to provide for their own families, in the clearest of terms (1 Timothy 5:8\). Repeatedly, the Bible calls on men to provide and for women to care for the home.
The role of leader, both within the church and within a marriage, is also part of biblical manhood. This requirement originates even before the fall, where Adam and Eve shared equality in differing responsibilities (Romans 12:4–5\). It is also seen in Adam’s naming of Eve (Genesis 2:23\), an act which symbolizes authority. As already referenced, Christ has to be the model for this type of leadership. A man is called to lead through love, through service, and through sacrifice. This is not a domineering leadership or a repressive arrogance. Male leadership in the home and in the church is meant to reflect the relationship between Christ and the church.
Of course, these principles of biblical manhood are easier to understand than to apply. Our fallen nature leads us to resist God’s will (Hebrews 3:15\), even when we don’t reject it outright (Romans 7:23–25\). Biblical manhood is particularly important, however, as a fundamental part of living out God’s commands. There is nothing “manly,” worthwhile, or commendable about a male who shirks these responsibilities (Proverbs 19:1; 29:1\). Nor is there anything admirable about a society that despises the characteristics of a godly man (Jude 1:10\).
|
Who was Jonathan in the Bible?
|
Answer
Ten men named Jonathan are mentioned in the Bible, but we will only look at two here. The first is the son of Gershom, making this Jonathan the grandson of Moses. He was of the tribe of Levi and is notable (or notorious, rather) for being the priest hired to lead idol\-worship in the tribe of Dan during the chaotic time of the judges (Judges 18:3–4, 30\).
The other prominent Jonathan in the Bible is the son of [King Saul](life-Saul.html). This Jonathan was a noble man of true character, faith, and integrity. Despite Saul’s hatred of David, [Jonathan and David](David-and-Jonathan.html) were very close friends (1 Samuel 18:1–3\), and Jonathan protected David and helped him to escape Saul (1 Samuel 19:1–2\). Since David was married to Jonathan’s sister [Michal](David-and-Michal.html), Jonathan was also David’s brother\-in\-law.
In 1 Samuel 14, we see Jonathan’s good character contrasted with his father’s foolishness. Saul and his men were battling the [Philistines](Philistines.html), and Jonathan decided to raid a Philistine outpost (1 Samuel 14:1\). He took only his young armor\-bearer with him, and he told no one else of their plans (verse 3\). Jonathan’s bravery as they approached the enemy garrison was rooted in faith, as he told his armor\-bearer, “Perhaps the Lord will act in our behalf. Nothing can hinder the Lord from saving, whether by many or by few” (verse 6\). The Lord was indeed with Jonathan, and he and his companion killed about twenty Philistines (verse 14\). Then God sent a panic into the enemy camp, along with an earthquake, and the enemy was routed (verses 15, 20, 23\). Meanwhile, King Saul had placed his troops under an oath: no one was allowed to eat anything all day (verse 24\). Jonathan, who had not been present when Saul made his foolish demand, found some honey after the battle and ate it (verse 27\). When Saul found out that his son had eaten the honey, he demanded that he be slain (verse 44\). It was only through the intervention of the rest of the army that faithful, brave Jonathan was spared that day (verse 45\).
Jonathan was not much like his father. Jonathan was known for his deep love, loyal friendship, and faith in God, while Saul repeatedly showed foolishness, pride, and disobedience to God (1 Samuel 13:8–13; 14:24–30; 15:1–34\). God eventually rejected Saul’s kingship and replaced him with David (1 Samuel 16:11–13\). Jonathan was faithful to the Lord and positioned himself against his father politically, because he knew that God had chosen David to be the next king. He made a covenant with the house of David and therefore recognized David’s family, rather than his own, as the chosen line of kingship (1 Samuel 20:16\). Jonathan and Saul were obviously not on good terms, for Jonathan actually desired that the Lord take vengeance on David’s enemies (1 Samuel 20:16\), and Saul, when he suspected Jonathan’s betrayal in favor of David, threw a spear at his son in an attempt to murder him (1 Samuel 20:33\). Saul also insulted both Jonathan and his mother, calling Jonathan a “stupid son of a whore” (1 Samuel 20:30, NLT).
In a later battle with the Philistines, Jonathan was killed alongside two of his two brothers, Abinadab and Malchi\-shua (1 Samuel 31:2\). Saul himself was also badly wounded and told his armor\-bearer to slay him. When the armor\-bearer was unwilling to take the king’s life, Saul fell on his own sword, and his grieved armor\-bearer followed his example. Even in death, Jonathan’s righteousness exceeded that of his father. In that way, the line of Saul ended, and David’s line continued as prophesied. Jonathan’s five\-year\-old son, [Mephibosheth](Mephibosheth.html), was crippled on the day that his household received news of Jonathan’s death (2 Samuel 4:4\). Later, King David honored Mephibosheth and treated him as his own son for the sake of his friend Jonathan (2 Samuel 9\).
|
What are the different sects of Judaism?
|
Answer
Like most major religions, [Judaism](Judaism.html) worldwide is comprised of several different sects. However, the branches of Judaism active today are not the same as those seen in the Bible, so the ancient and modern eras have to be understood separately. When looking at different sects of Judaism, one should also note that the term *Jewish* can refer to a religious identity, an ethnic identity, or a racial identity. Historically, these have been intertwined to the point of being nearly identical. However, from a religious standpoint, different sects are separated purely on the basis of their theological views.
**Sects of Judaism in the Ancient Era**
In the Bible, sects of Judaism were divided mostly by their view of a literal afterlife and bodily resurrection, or by whether or not they felt called to take an active or passive role in end\-times events. [Josephus](Flavius-Josephus.html), an early Jewish historian of Judea, defined four major sects of Judaism: [Pharisees](Pharisees.html), [Sadducees](Sadducees.html), [Essenes](Essenes.html), and [Zealots](Zealots-Bible.html). From a literal standpoint, Christianity began as a “sect” of Judaism, as well. This perspective—Judaic, but accepting of Jesus as Messiah—is known today as [Messianic Judaism](Messianic-Judaism.html). There were other, smaller groups with unique beliefs. The four mentioned by Josephus, however, were the major divisions.
Though the term *Pharisee* is often used in a derogatory sense today, the Pharisees in New Testament times were deeply committed to moral behavior and a scholarly approach to the Scriptures. Their stance on morality included a rigid adherence to behavioral aspects of Mosaic Law. However, since some of those biblical laws were vague, the Pharisees developed an “Oral Torah”: a set of traditions that created a buffer zone around the law of Moses, ensuring piety. Pharisees believed in a literal afterlife and the bodily resurrection of the dead. Of the four major sects of Judaism, the Pharisees held the strongest belief in determinism. The later rabbinic interpretation grew out of the Pharisee sect. Jesus not only criticized the Pharisees for their hollow legalism (Matthew 23:2–7\) but also for distorting the commandments of God by way of their traditions (Mark 7:8–9\).
The Sadducees differed significantly from Pharisees in their theology. Sadducees did not believe in a literal afterlife or a bodily resurrection. In fact, the Sadducees’ primary interest was politics, which made them useful conduits for Roman authority. They saw the Old Testament law in a less rigid light than the Pharisees, though they were committed, in their own way, to its core concepts. Of the four major sects of Judaism, the Sadducees were by far the most cooperative with the Roman Empire. They tended to be aristocrats and were in control of the high priesthood. Annas and Caiaphas, mentioned in the New Testament (Luke 3:2\), were Sadducees.
The [Essenes](Essenes.html) were a monastic group. Unlike the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Zealots, the Essenes felt called to separate from society in preparation for the end of the world. In broad strokes, the Essenes could be considered a doomsday sect. They felt the end times were imminent, and it was their duty to patiently, passively await the apocalypse. The Essenes produced written materials found millennia later, known as the [Dead Sea Scrolls](dead-sea-scrolls.html). These critically important documents show how carefully and accurately the Old Testament Scriptures had been preserved over the centuries.
On the other side of the apocalyptic coin were the [Zealots](Zealots-Bible.html), by far the smallest of the four groups. Like the Essenes, the Zealots were something of a doomsday sect of Judaism. However, the Zealots believed their actions would directly influence when and how this apocalypse occurred. Specifically, they believed they were called to commit acts of violence against the Roman occupiers and to incite others to revolution. Theologically, Zealots were all but identical to the Pharisees, except for their fanatical, anti\-Roman militancy. This view not only brought them into conflict with the Roman\-friendly Sadducees, but it accelerated Roman aggression against Jews, culminating in the destruction of the temple.
**Sects of Judaism in Transition**
The destruction of the temple by Rome in AD 70 began an era of division between the sects of Judaism. Ever since that event, there have been no temple, no priests, and no sacrifices on behalf of the nation of Israel. In a very real sense, modern Judaism is not—and cannot be—the same as biblical Judaism. Political and religious changes over the first few centuries AD resulted in one particular interpretation becoming dominant, today known as Rabbinic Judaism.
The Rabbinic school was the result of a consolidation of power within the sects of Judaism following the destruction of the temple and the [Bar Kokhba revolt](Bar-Kokhba-revolt.html) about 60 years later. This school grew out of the Pharisees, and it retained their heavy emphasis on scholars and rabbis. It taught that there was a written [Torah](what-is-the-Torah.html) as well as an “Oral Torah,” which required a tradition\-based teaching authority in order to be properly interpreted. In this way, Rabbinic Judaism proposes something similar to the magisterium of the Roman Catholic Church. The Rabbinic sect produced enormous quantities of literature defining the *halakha*, or interpretations of the Law.
As Rabbinic Judaism grew, Christianity became viewed less as a sect and more as a heresy by mainline Judaism. Christianity and Judaism were already growing apart in their spiritual approach prior to the Bar Kokhba revolt. But when Christ\-following Jews refused to proclaim Simon bar Kokhba as Messiah, they were branded as complete heretics by mainline Rabbinic Judaism. From that point on, Christianity and Judaism were seen as completely separate theologies. Another small sect arising during this time was Karaite Judaism, which accepted only the canonical written books of the Old Testament and rejected the Rabbinic writings and oral traditions. The Rabbinic period lasted until around the end of the 17th century.
**Sects of Judaism in the Modern Era**
In the early part of the 18th century, Judaism began to fracture as modern approaches to Scripture and society emerged. The resulting sects of Judaism essentially divide modern Jews into three groups: [Orthodox](Orthodox-Judaism.html), [Conservative](Conservative-Judaism.html), and [Reform](Reform-Judaism.html). As always, there are numerous smaller, less influential sects of Judaism, such as Torah Judaism and Reconstructionist Judaism. The overwhelming majority of Jews in the world are Orthodox, though Conservative and Reform are more common in the United States and certain parts of Europe.
Reform Judaism, which emerged in Germany the early 1800s, is by far the most theologically liberal sect. Reform Judaism is primarily an “ethical monotheism,” based on interpretation of traditional practices rather than strict adherence to them. Concepts such as prayers in Hebrew, kosher dietary laws, and the separation of genders during worship are rejected as irrelevant, or even backwards. The Scriptures, according to Reform Judaism, are human developments, subject to our interpretations and fallibilities.
In response to the rise of Reform Judaism, some Jews doubled down on the approach of Rabbinic Judaism, emphasizing traditional rituals, interpretations, and practices. Their core contention is that the Torah, handed down directly to Moses by God, is applicable in all ways and at all times. This group is today referred to as “Orthodox,” a term originally used as a criticism by more liberally minded Jews. Most practicing Jews in the world today, save for in the U.S. and parts of Europe, would be considered Orthodox.
The tension between liberal\-leaning Reform and deeply conservative Orthodox resulted in the growth of the third major sect of Judaism, referred to as Conservative. This group is significantly more common in the United States. Conservative Judaism keeps to the laws of the Torah and Talmud, but with certain concessions made to modern cultural preferences. The key interest in Conservative Judaism is the centrality of religion and Jewish religious identity. Conservative Judaism maintains kosher dietary laws and the regular Sabbath but uses both local and Hebrew language for liturgy and does not separate genders during worship. Like Reform, however, Conservative Judaism does not see the Scriptures as inspired or inerrant.
|
Who was Balaam in the Bible?
|
Answer
Balaam was a wicked prophet in the Bible and is noteworthy because, although he was a wicked prophet, he was not a false prophet. That is, Balaam did hear from God, and God did give him some true prophecies to speak. However, Balaam’s heart was not right with God, and eventually he showed his true colors by betraying Israel and leading them astray.
In Numbers 22—24, we find the story about Balaam and the king of Moab, a man called Balak. [King Balak](Balak-in-the-Bible.html) wanted to weaken the children of Israel, who on their way to Canaan had moved in on his territory. Balak sent to Balaam, who lived in Mesopotamia along the Euphrates River (Numbers 22:5\), and asked him to curse Israel in exchange for a reward. Balaam was apparently willing to do this but said he needed God’s permission (verse 8\). Balaam, of course, had no power, in himself, to curse Israel, but, if God were willing to curse Israel, Balaam would be rewarded through Balak. God told Balaam, “You must not put a curse on those people, because they are blessed” (verse 12\). King Balak then sent “other officials, more numerous and more distinguished than the first” (verse 15\), promising a handsome reward. This time God said, “Go with them, but do only what I tell you” (verse 20\).
The next morning, Balaam saddled his [donkey](Balaam-donkey.html) and left for Moab (Numbers 22:21\). God sent an angel to oppose Balaam on the way. The donkey Balaam was riding could see the angel, but Balaam could not, and when the donkey three times moved to avoid the angel, Balaam was angry and beat the animal. “Then the Lord opened the donkey’s mouth” (verse 28\), and it rebuked the prophet for the beatings. “Then the Lord opened Balaam’s eyes, and he saw the angel of the Lord standing in the road with his sword drawn” (verse 31\). The angel told Balaam that he certainly would have killed Balaam had not the donkey spared his life. Ironically, a dumb beast had more wisdom than God’s prophet. The angel then repeated to Balaam the instruction that he was only to speak what God told him to speak concerning the Hebrews (verses 33–35\).
In Moab, King Balak took the prophet Balaam up to a high place called Bamoth Baal and told him to curse the Israelites (Numbers 22:41\). Balaam first offered fourteen sacrifices on seven altars and met with the Lord (Numbers 23:1–5\). He then declared the message God gave him: a blessing on Israel: “How can I curse / those whom God has not cursed? / How can I denounce / those whom the Lord has not denounced?” (verse 8\).
King Balak was upset that Balaam had pronounced a blessing on Israel rather than a curse, but he had him try again, this time from the top of Pisgah (Numbers 23:14\). Balaam sacrificed another fourteen animals and met with the Lord. When he faced Israel, Balaam again spoke a blessing: “I have received a command to bless; / he has blessed, and I cannot change it” (verse 20\).
King Balak told Balaam that, if he was going to keep blessing Israel, it was better for him to just shut up (Numbers 23:25\). But the king decided to try one more time, taking Balaam to the top of Peor, overlooking the wasteland (verse 28\). Again, Balaam offered fourteen animals on seven newly built altars (verse 29\). Then “the Spirit of God came on him and he spoke his message” (Numbers 24:2–3\). The third message was not what the Moabite king wanted to hear: “How beautiful are your tents, Jacob, / your dwelling places, Israel!” (verse 5\).
Balaam’s three prophecies of blessing on Israel infuriated the king of Moab, who told the prophet to go back home with no reward: “Now leave at once and go home! I said I would reward you handsomely, but the Lord has kept you from being rewarded” (Numbers 24:11\). Before he left, Balaam reminded the king that he had said from the very beginning he could only say what God told him to say. Then he gave the king four more prophecies, gratis. In the fourth prophecy, Balaam foretold of the Messiah: “A star will come out of Jacob; / a scepter will rise out of Israel. / He will crush the foreheads of Moab, / the skulls of all the people of Sheth” (verse 17\). Balaam’s seven prophecies were seven blessings on God’s people; it was God’s enemies who were cursed.
However, later on Balaam figured out a way to get his reward from Balak. Balaam advised the Moabites on how to entice the people of Israel with prostitutes and idolatry. He could not curse Israel directly, so he came up with a plan for Israel to bring a curse upon themselves. Balak followed Balaam’s advice, and Israel fell into sin, worshiping [Baal of Peor](Baal-Peor.html) and committing fornication with Midianite women. For this God plagued them, and 24,000 men died (Numbers 25:1–9; Deuteronomy 23:3–6\).
Balaam’s name and story became infamous, and he is referred to several times in the New Testament. Peter compares false teachers to Balaam, “who loved the wages of wickedness” (2 Peter 2:15\). Jude echoes this sentiment, associating Balaam with the selling of one’s soul for financial gain (Jude 1:11\). Finally, Jesus speaks of Balaam when He warns [the church in Pergamum](church-in-Pergamum.html) of their sin: “There are some among you who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin so that they ate food sacrificed to idols and committed sexual immorality” (Revelation 2:14\). Satan’s tactics haven’t changed all that much. If he cannot curse God’s people directly, he will try the back\-door approach, and [idolatry](idolatry-modern.html) and [sexual immorality](sexual-sin.html) are his go\-to temptations.
|
Who was Jael in the Bible?
|
Answer
Jael in the Bible was the wife of a man named Heber, who was a Kenite. The Kenites were related to the [Midianites](Midianites.html). Jael features in the [book of Judges](Book-of-Judges.html) as a heroic woman who killed [Sisera](Sisera-in-the-Bible.html), the leader of King Jabin’s Canaanite army. Jabin was trying to conquer Israel, which was at that time under the leadership of Deborah, a prophetess and the only female to judge the nation of Israel.
When Sisera and his army came against Israel, [Deborah sent word to Barak](Deborah-and-Barak.html) of the tribe of Naphtali that he was to fight the Canaanites and deliver Israel from Jabin’s hand. Barak was unwilling to go into battle without Deborah by his side. Deborah agreed to go with him but told him that, because of his reticence, a woman would get the honor of killing Sisera, the captain of Jabin’s army (Judges 4:4–7\).
As the Israelites were winning the battle, as prophesied by Deborah, Sisera left his decimated army at the Kishon River and fled on foot (Judges 4:16–17\). He came to Heber’s property and sought refuge there, knowing that Heber was in alliance with King Jabin. Heber’s wife, Jael, welcomed Sisera with the words “Come, my lord, come right in. Don’t be afraid” (Judges 4:18\). She brought Sisera into her tent, covered him with a blanket, and gave him some milk to drink (verses 18–19\). Jael was kind and hospitable, but she had an ulterior motive. After Sisera had eaten well and was asleep, Jael took a tent peg and a mallet and sneaked up on Sisera. She placed the tent peg’s point on his temple and hit the peg with the mallet, driving it through his temple with such force that it stuck in the ground on the other side of his head. Thus Sisera died (Judges 4:21\).
Deborah’s prophecy was fulfilled: the honor of killing the captain of Jabin’s army went to a woman. That woman was Jael. As Barak pursued Sisera, he came to Heber’s settlement. Jael went to meet him and brought him into the tent to show him what she had done—Sisera’s body was lying there with a tent peg in his temple (Judges 4:22\). Later, Barak and Deborah sang a song of the battle, and in the song they honored Jael by name:
“Most blessed of women be Jael,
the wife of Heber the Kenite,
most blessed of tent\-dwelling women.
He asked for water, and she gave him milk;
in a bowl fit for nobles she brought him curdled milk.
Her hand reached for the tent peg,
her right hand for the workman’s hammer.
She struck Sisera, she crushed his head,
she shattered and pierced his temple.
At her feet he sank,
he fell; there he lay.
At her feet he sank, he fell;
where he sank, there he fell—dead” (Judges 5:24–27\).
|
Who were Westcott and Hort, and what did they have to do with the text of the Bible?
|
Answer
Brooke Westcott and Fenton Hort were 19th\-century theologians and Bible scholars. Together, they produced *The New Testament in the Original Greek*, one of the earliest examples of modern textual criticism. Since its publication in 1881, Westcott and Hort’s work has proved to be impressively accurate, though far from perfect. Their approach not only advanced the science of textual criticism, but it added considerable weight to the claim that the Bible had been preserved from tampering and corruption.
The goal of textual criticism is removing changes, errors, and additions to a text in order to determine the original words. The King James translators, for example, generated their work from a series of manuscripts, none of which exactly matches their final product. They chose between variant readings or spellings, deciding what was most likely original through various techniques. Recognizing the need to use prior scholarship combined with new discoveries, the KJV translators made a good faith effort to improve upon what had already been done. This process continues today, albeit with a much greater number of manuscripts available. The differences between the various texts are trivial, amounting to less than one half of one percent of the words in the New Testament.
Not all textual critics use the same methods or give the same weight to certain manuscript families. The specific methods used by Westcott and Hort are no longer held as ideal by Bible scholars. Modern research considers their approach overly reliant on two manuscripts, [Sinaiticus and Vaticanus](Codex-Sinaiticus-Vaticanus.html), as well as the principle of “shorter is earlier.” For these reasons, though the effective differences are minimal, *The New Testament in the Original Greek* is not the basis for any modern translation of the Bible. Rather, the [United Bible Societies](United-Bible-Societies-Greek-New-Testament.html) and [Nestle\-Aland](Nestle-Aland-Greek-New-Testament.html) [critical texts](critical-text.html) are typically sourced for English translations today.
Unfortunately, Westcott and Hort are still infamous names with respect to the Bible, despite their text not being the basis of any major modern translations. Most mentions of the pair today are from detractors of their work, particularly those supporting the [King James Only movement (KJVO)](KJV-only.html). Such critics tend to focus entirely on Westcott’s and Hort’s non\-orthodox spiritual beliefs. In truth, both men held to several ideas that modern conservative Christianity would consider heretical. Then again, the same can be said for church fathers such as [Origen](Origen-of-Alexandria.html), Jerome, and [Augustine](Saint-Augustine.html). And, it’s worth noting that the King James translators themselves were, variously, supporters of [Anglicanism](Anglicans.html), [infant baptism](infant-baptism.html), and so forth.
One of the great strengths of the Bible as a sacred text is its manuscript evidence. Even compared to secular works, the Bible exists in more early, preserved copies than any other ancient text. Westcott and Hort’s work is valuable precisely because it can be examined, tested, and corrected where evidence supports that correction. As other Bible scholars such as [Erasmus](Desiderius-Erasmus.html), Wycliffe, and Tyndale had done, Westcott and Hort advanced the work of their predecessors and produced a scholarly resource for the study of the Bible.
|
What does the Bible say about common sense?
|
Answer
Common sense is sound judgment in practical matters. In Proverbs 8:5 some translations speak of the need to develop “common sense,” which other translations simply call “prudence” or “discretion.” Biblically, common sense can be thought of as a combination of wisdom and discretion (Proverbs 3:21; 8:12–14\). Wisdom is knowing what to do; discretion is knowing when and where to do it.
Part of being [a fool](fool-Bible.html) is having no common sense or being “void of understanding,” as the KJV puts it (Proverbs 7:7; 24:30\). The [book of Proverbs](Book-of-Proverbs.html) proclaims the benefits of gaining wisdom and also shows the folly of being a fool (Proverbs 13:16; 16:22; 26:11\). Proverbs 3:13–14 says, “Blessed are those who find wisdom, those who gain understanding, for she is more profitable than silver and yields better returns than gold.” Wisdom allows us to see life the way God does. When we seek God’s perspective, we can make decisions based upon their eternal significance rather than selfish interest. When we choose to make decisions based on [wisdom](wisdom-knowledge.html) alone, we are exercising common sense.
The desire for instant gratification is the enemy of common sense. Many people have become ensnared in trouble and heartache because they rejected a wise path and sought instead immediate satisfaction. Common sense is often developed by learning from the consequences of such poor choices—the school of hard knocks educates many. Everyone makes bad decisions at some point. The difference between the wise and the foolish is that one learns from his mistakes and the other keeps repeating them. Some people seem born with a more level head, while others learn from experience. Either way, wisdom and common sense should be continually pursued in order to experience the best God has for us (Proverbs 2:1–8\).
|
Who was Salome in the Bible?
|
Answer
There are two women named Salome in the Bible, but only one is mentioned by that name. One Salome was righteous; the other unrighteous.
The righteous Salome was the wife of [Zebedee](Zebedee-in-the-Bible.html) (Matthew 27:56\), the mother of the disciples [James and John](sons-of-thunder.html), and a female follower of Jesus. This Salome was the one who came to Jesus with the request that her sons sit in places of honor in the kingdom (Matthew 20:20–21\). She was also one of the women “looking on from a distance” when Jesus was being crucified—with her were Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of Joseph and James (Mark 15:40\). These same women were together on the third day after that, bringing spices to Jesus’ tomb to anoint Him. When they encountered the angel, who told them that Jesus was risen, they ran to tell the disciples the good news (Mark 16:1–8\). Mark’s Gospel is the only one that mentions Salome by name.
The other, unrighteous Salome is not mentioned by name in the Bible, but we read about what she did in Mark 6\. This Salome was part the [Herod dynasty](Herods.html), and her family history was convoluted: Herod Antipas (the “King Herod” of Mark 6:14\) had divorced his wife and married [Herodias](Herodias-in-the-Bible.html), who was the wife of his half\-brother Philip (Mark 6:17\). However, Herodias herself was the daughter of *another* of Herod’s half\-brothers, Aristobulus, making her not only the wife but the niece of both Philip and Herod—and a sister\-in\-law of Herod. Salome was Herodias’s daughter through Philip. Thus, Salome was the daughter (and grandniece) of Philip and the step\-daughter (and grandniece by marriage) of Herod; she was also both daughter and grandniece to her own mother. When Herodias came to live with Herod Antipas, Salome came with her. This royal family is significant in Bible history because it figures into the story of the death of [John the Baptist](life-John-Baptist.html). John the Baptist had publicly criticized King Herod for his divorce and remarriage to his niece/sister\-in\-law, and Herodias was enraged. Herod Antipas had John thrown into prison to placate his wife/niece/sister\-in\-law, Herodias.
John the Baptist’s fate was decided when Herodias’s daughter (Salome) danced for Herod at his birthday banquet. Pleased with the girl’s performance, Herod offered her a rash boon. Salome went to Herodias to ask her advice on what the gift should be, and Herodias told her to ask for the head of John the Baptist on a platter. Salome obediently asked Herod for this grisly gift, and, though the Bible says Herod was grieved, he honored his promise. John was beheaded in prison, and his head given to Herodias’s daughter who took it to her mother (Mark 6:21–28\). Though Salome is not mentioned by name in the biblical record, the historian [Josephus](Flavius-Josephus.html) tells us her name.
|
How should a Christian react to all the doomsday predictions out there?
|
Answer
In the 1950s the world feared it was on the edge of a nuclear apocalypse. Near the turn of the century, there was worldwide speculation about Y2K and the possible end of the civilized world as a result. A pop culture stir arose over the end of the [Mayan calendar in 2012](2012-Mayan-prophecy.html). Then there was discussion in Christian circles over the appearance of [blood moons](blood-red-moon.html), supposedly also a sign of catastrophic events. How, then, should a Christian respond to doomsday predictions and related news events?
From a Christian perspective, our first reaction should be to take a deep breath and relax. At some point in time, this world is going to end (2 Peter 3:10\). Christ will return (Revelation 19:11–13\) at the time He is prepared for (1 Corinthians 15:51–52\). And yet, every single person on earth is a split second away from a personal doomsday, right now (Psalm 39:5\). Heart attacks, war, accidents, and such can bring us face\-to\-face with our Creator more readily than a global catastrophe (James 4:13–15\). Whether the [end times](living-in-the-end-times.html) are right around the corner or a long way off, we are called to be prepared (2 Corinthians 6:2\), not panicked.
The vast majority of doomsday predictions are pure speculation, myth, or uninformed hysteria. Even the Mayans didn’t think of their calendar cycle as predicting the end of the world. Computer experts were not the ones pushing the Y2K panic. And virtually no Christian theologians think that the blood moon phenomenon is a major indicator of any particular event. As with other fads and crazes, the discussions are driven by poor reasoning and even worse facts.
Born\-again Christians can be confident in their salvation and trust in God to handle everything else, too (Matthew 6:25–34\). We are told that it’s possible to read the signs of the times (Matthew 16:3\) but also that it’s impossible for any person to know for sure when the end times will really occur (Matthew 24:36\). Rather than focusing on dates, disputes, and rumors, we ought to concentrate on bringing the gospel to as many people as possible. The ship is going down, but before we worry about how and when the end will come, we need to get more people into lifeboats and life jackets!
|
What is Spy Wednesday / Holy Wednesday?
|
Answer
In Christianity, Holy Wednesday or Spy Wednesday is the last Wednesday prior to Easter Sunday; it is the fourth day of Holy Week after [Palm Sunday](Palm-Sunday.html), [Holy Monday](Holy-Monday.html), and [Holy Tuesday](Holy-Tuesday.html). Depending on the denomination, this particular day may or may not be celebrated at all. Those that do observe Holy Wednesday, such as [Eastern Orthodox](Eastern-Orthodox-church.html) churches, typically mark it with readings of Scripture and the singing of relevant hymns.
According to the traditional interpretation of the Bible, Holy Wednesday is the day on which Jesus was anointed with [spikenard](spikenard-in-the-Bible.html) during a meal (Matthew 26:6–13\). The day is sometimes called “Spy Wednesday” since it is traditionally thought of as the day Judas conspired with local authorities to betray Jesus (Matthew 26:14–16\). The following day is sometimes referred to as [Maundy Thursday](Maundy-Thursday.html), the fifth day of Holy Week.
The Bible does not mention Holy Wednesday or Spy Wednesday. And it should be noted that events within the Gospels were not necessarily arranged chronologically, following the fashion of similar works written during the same time period. Also, the chronology of each Gospel was affected by cultural rules, as Roman and Jewish days started at different times. For these reasons, it’s unwise to be dogmatic about precisely which events occurred on which days leading up to Jesus’ arrest and crucifixion.
**Spy Wednesday Calendar:**
2024 — March 27
2025 — April 16
|
What is Holy Tuesday?
|
Answer
In Christianity, Holy Tuesday is the last Tuesday prior to [Easter Sunday](Easter-Sunday.html); it is the third day of [Holy Week](Passion-Week.html) after [Palm Sunday](Palm-Sunday.html) and [Holy Monday](Holy-Monday.html). Depending on the denomination, this day may or may not be celebrated at all. Those that do observe Holy Tuesday, such as [Eastern Orthodox](Eastern-Orthodox-church.html) churches, typically mark it with readings of particular passages of Scriptures and the singing of relevant hymns.
According to common interpretation of the Bible, Holy Tuesday is when Jesus was issued various challenges by the Pharisees and Sadducees over subjects such as marriage in heaven, paying taxes to Caesar, and the source of His authority (Matthew 21:23—23:39; Mark 11:27—12:44; Luke 20:1—21:4\). By this same interpretation, this is the day Jesus commented on the widow’s donation (Mark 12; Luke 21\) and was approached by a number of God\-fearing Greeks (John 12:20–36\). Tuesday would also be the day Jesus spoke His seven “woes” against the Pharisees (Matthew 23:13–36\) and the evening on which He delivered the [Olivet Discourse](Olivet-discourse.html) (Matthew 24—25; Mark 13; Luke 21:5–36\).
Holy Tuesday is the day following Holy Monday, and the next day in Holy Week is sometimes referred to as [Holy Wednesday](Spy-Wednesday.html) or Spy Wednesday.
It should be noted that events in the Gospels were not necessarily recorded chronologically. Also, Roman and Jewish days started at different times, making the chronology even more difficult to sort out. For these reasons, it’s unwise to be dogmatic about precisely which events occurred on which days leading up to Jesus’ arrest and crucifixion.
**Holy Tuesday Calendar:**
2024 — March 26
2025 — April 15
|
What is Holy Monday?
|
Answer
In Christianity, Holy Monday is the last Monday prior to [Easter Sunday](Easter-Sunday.html); it is the second day of Holy Week after [Palm Sunday](Palm-Sunday.html). Some denominations celebrate Holy Monday, and some do not. The Eastern Orthodox Church observes the day, typically marking it with Bible readings and certain hymns.
According to tradition, Holy Monday is the day on which Jesus cleansed the temple, was praised by local children, and cursed the fig tree (Matthew 21:12–22\). It is the day following Palm Sunday, when Jesus came to Jerusalem in the [triumphal entry](triumphal-entry.html) (Matthew 21:1–11\). The following day is sometimes referred to as [Holy Tuesday](Holy-Tuesday.html), the third day of [Holy Week](Passion-Week.html).
We should note that events in the biblical Gospels were not necessarily written in chronological order. Also, since the Romans and the Jews had different methods for calculating the start of a day, an exact sequence of events is difficult to determine. For these reasons, we can’t be dogmatic about the chronology of events leading up to Jesus’ betrayal and crucifixion.
**Holy Monday Calendar:**
2024 — March 25
2025 — April 14
|
What are the seven pillars of wisdom in Proverbs 9:1?
|
Answer
Proverbs 9:1 states, “Wisdom has built her house; / she has set up its seven pillars.” This is obviously a symbolic description, since [wisdom](wisdom-knowledge.html) is personified. What are these “seven pillars” that wisdom has erected?
Many explanations exist regarding the seven pillars of wisdom in this passage. One idea is that, since the number seven often expresses completeness in Scripture, the passage communicates that the application of wisdom results in a complete, orderly, well\-furnished house, one that lacks nothing.
Some commentators see the seven pillars as describing a traditional banquet pavilion. Understood this way, Wisdom’s call in Proverbs 9:5 is perfectly fitting: “Come, eat my food / and drink the wine I have mixed.”
Some ancient writings described the world as resting on seven pillars. If this was the author’s meaning, it is possible that “her house” in Proverbs 9:1 is parallel in some way with the world. However, this is an unlikely understanding of this particular proverb.
Some have theorized that the seven pillars of wisdom may refer to seven sections of [Proverbs](Book-of-Proverbs.html) in the content previous to chapter 9\.
In considering these interpretive options, it is most likely that “her house” and “seven pillars” both refer to a home that is in proper order, with the use of “seven” emphasizing its completeness and all\-sufficiency. The following verses continue to describe other aspects of wisdom personified as a woman. She prepares a meal and invites people to attend to gain wisdom: “Leave your simple ways and you will live; / walk in the way of insight” (Proverbs 9:6\). Wisdom has much to offer, and she invites everyone to come share her satisfying feast.
In contrast, verses 13–18 describe the way of [folly](Bible-foolishness.html), also personified as a woman. Folly is loud, seductive, and unwise (Proverbs 9:13\). She seeks to deceive the simple\-minded into stopping at her home to drink stolen water and secret bread (verses 16–17\). Those who do find death instead of life (verse 18\).
Proverbs chapter 9 is presented in a [chiastic structure](chiasm-chiastic.html), meaning the first and last portions are parallel ideas with the main point in the center passage (verses 7–12\). These verses emphasize a central truth: “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, / and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding” (Proverbs 9:10\). The entire chapter is devoted to the emphasis of seeking wisdom, avoiding folly, and finding this wisdom in the Lord.
|
What is Aramaic Primacy?
|
Answer
The term *Aramaic Primacy* is used, informally, to refer to the claim that the New Testament was originally written not in [Koine Greek](Koine-Greek.html) but in a dialect of Aramaic. This theory is more commonly referred to as “Peshitta Primacy,” referring to the ancient Aramaic manuscripts of the Bible, a collection known as the [Peshitta](Peshitta.html). The Aramaic Primacy Theory is drastically different from the consensus of historians and New Testament scholars, who hold that the original works of the New Testament were in fact written in Greek. A large number of researchers suggest that the Gospels of Mark and Matthew may have drawn from earlier Aramaic sources, but the claims of Aramaic Primacy go far beyond this.
Certain denominations hold to Aramaic Primacy as an article of faith, such as the Assyrian Church of the East. George Lamsa, a proponent of the [Nestorian heresy](Nestorianism.html), was instrumental in advancing the view that the New Testament was originally written in Aramaic. As with other views running contrary to general scholarship, Aramaic/Peshitta Primacy is primarily supported by the work of a single author, in this case, Lamsa. Both contemporaries of Lamsa and later scholars have concluded he frequently confused then\-modern Syriac with ancient Aramaic, two languages that are extremely similar. More problematic is Lamsa’s translation of the Bible from the Aramaic, published in full in 1957\. His translation work is inaccurate and filled with subtle changes to the text that undermine the doctrines of the Trinity and the deity of Christ, among others.
Textual scholars have examined the Peshitta and found clear evidence of influence from later translations. The dialect used in the Peshitta is from a later time period than that of Jesus and His disciples. The Peshitta utilizes phrases that obscure wordplay and metaphor; this is expected of a translation but not an original autograph. The massive number of biblical manuscripts available makes it possible to recognize variations, translation choices, and so forth, over time and geography. In other words, all available evidence points to the Peshitta’s being a later translation, not an original manuscript. Peshitta Primacy, or Aramaic Primacy, is not supported by evidence or scholarship. Despite the traditional view of Syriac churches, certain segments of [Messianic Judaism](Messianic-Judaism.html), and the [Hebrew Roots Movement](Hebrew-Roots.html), the New Testament was not originally written in Aramaic.
|
What was the significance of the new moon in Bible times?
|
Answer
The significance of the new moon in Bible times is that it marked the beginning of a new month (the [Hebrew calendar](Jewish-calendar.html) is lunar\-based), and it was a time when the Israelites were to bring an offering to God. The beginning of the month was known not by astronomical calculations but by the testimony of messengers appointed to watch for the first visible appearance of the new moon. As soon as the first sliver was seen, the fact was announced throughout the whole country by signal fires on the mountaintops and the blowing of trumpets. The Hebrew word for “month” (*hodesh*) literally means “new moon.”
In Numbers 28:11, the New Moon offering is commanded for the first time: “On the first of every month, present to the Lord a burnt offering of two young bulls, one ram and seven male lambs a year old, all without defect.” Each of the animal sacrifices was to be accompanied by a grain offering and a drink offering (verses 12–14\). In addition to [burnt offerings](burnt-offering.html), a goat was to be sacrificed to the Lord as a sin offering (verse 15\). The New Moon festival marked the consecration to God of each new month in the year. New Moon festivals were marked by sacrifices, the blowing of trumpets over the sacrifices (Numbers 10:10\), the suspension of all labor and trade (Nehemiah 10:31\), and social or family feasts (1 Samuel 20:5\).
As with any religious ritual, there was a danger of observing the New Moon festivals without a true heart to follow God. Later in their history, the Israelites continued to observe the New Moon festivals outwardly, even after their hearts had turned cold toward God. They readily parted with their bulls and lambs and goats, but they would not give up their sins. They relied on the outward observations to cleanse them, even though there was still evil in their hearts. God had severe words for such hypocrisy: “Stop bringing meaningless offerings! Your incense is detestable to me. New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations—I cannot bear your worthless assemblies. Your New Moon feasts and your appointed festivals I hate with all my being. They have become a burden to me; I am weary of bearing them” (Isaiah 1:13–14\). Sin is hateful to God, and no amount of ritual or ceremony or sacrament can make up for a sinful heart. “Behold, you delight in truth in the inward being” (Psalm 51:6, ESV; see also Hosea 6:6\).
Observance of New Moon festivals and their sacrifices is no longer required. When the perfect Sacrifice, the spotless Lamb of God, appeared, He rendered the observation of these ordinances no longer necessary. All the righteous requirements of the Law were fulfilled by Him (Matthew 5:17\), and His work on the cross means that no longer are sacrifices for sin required. Paul reminds us of this fact: “Do not let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a New Moon celebration or a Sabbath day. These are a shadow of the things that were to come; the reality, however, is found in Christ” (Colossians 2:16–17\).
|
How does fearing God add length to a person’s life (Proverbs 10:27)?
|
Answer
Proverbs 10:27 states, “The fear of the LORD adds length to life, / but the years of the wicked are cut short.” We know that [the fear of God](fear-Lord-beginning-wisdom.html) is the beginning of wisdom (Proverbs 9:10\), but how does that relate to a longer life?
First, it should be noted that, like all [proverbs](proverb-Bible.html), Proverbs 10:27 is a general principle and not a promise. In other words, there are some people who fear the Lord and die young, and there are some people who have no fear of God and live long lives. However, the proverb simply observes that those who fear God generally live longer than those who do not.
There are two aspects involved in the explanation of this life principle. The first half of the proverb says that those who fear the Lord live longer lives. What is the best explanation for this statement? Those who live in fear of the Lord—those who have godly wisdom—will avoid sinful, reckless actions that can shorten one’s life. They will also practice wholesome, beneficial actions that are conducive to longer life.
The fear of God may add length to life by causing one to avoid violent activities, to refrain from unhealthy eating, to abstain from illicit sex, and to say no to harmful drugs and other addictive things. Having the fear of God also promotes a greater level of self\-control and personal responsibility, resulting in a lifestyle of working hard to provide for daily needs and regular sleep to maintain long\-term health. Relationally, a person who fears God will regularly spend time in prayer, develop godly relationships, and seek to live in harmony with family members and friends, resulting in a lower stress level and the lifestyle benefits that come with that.
The second half of the proverb completes the [antithetical parallelism](antithetical-parallelism.html) of the verse: the years of the wicked will be cut short. So, the godly person (who fears the Lord) will likely live longer, and, conversely, the wicked (who do not fear the Lord) will likely live a shorter life. Why? The ungodly person is more likely to continue unhealthy patterns that can include overeating, sexual promiscuity, addictions to alcohol or drugs, lack of exercise and hard work, involvement in fighting, or stressful relationship problems. Because of the wicked person’s lack of wisdom, he will be more likely to repeat mistakes that lead to negative consequences resulting in an earlier death. A reckless lifestyle will increase the probability of living fewer years.
While Christians often overlook the relationship between their faith and personal health, this proverb highlights this important connection. We are to glorify God with our bodies (1 Corinthians 6:20\). This can include everything from sexual purity to how we eat, drink, exercise, and sleep. The Christian who fears God and applies His wisdom to these areas of life will more likely enjoy a longer lifespan than those who do not.
|
What are the esoteric keys to the Bible?
|
Answer
“Esoteric” knowledge is that which is accessible only to a select group of people. This may be due to their particular interest, special permission, or unique aptitude. For all of human history, people have claimed to know secrets of spirituality and religion to which other people have no access. This includes the ancient mystery religions, the [Gnosticism](Christian-gnosticism.html) of the New Testament era, and [spiritualist](spiritualism.html) religions in the modern world. Some associate their esoteric knowledge with concepts such as numerology, [astrology](astrology-Bible.html), sacred geometry, and so forth.
Some people claim that the Bible contains esoteric keys that “unlock” hidden knowledge and allow a person to understand what the Bible “really” means. Naturally, this belief assumes that every other scholar, theologian, believer, and skeptic has been totally ignorant of these possibilities. In most cases, such claims are paired with the assumption that all religions have a common source and have been modified over time for political reasons.
Biblically, there is no reason to believe in Esotericism or search for esoteric keys. In fact, a major aspect of the gospel is its accessibility to all people, regardless of knowledge or experience (Matthew 11:25\). Those things that are hidden belong to God (Deuteronomy 29:29\); that which can be known is accessible to all people, not a select few (Matthew 10:26\). “The grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people” (Titus 2:11\), not just to those with special insight into mysterious meanings. “\[God] commands all people everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30\), not to look for arcane knowledge or obscure interpretations.
One commonly referenced pop culture presentation of Esotericism was the June 22, 1995, radio broadcast of William Cooper on his show *The Hour of the Time*. Cooper was a conspiracy theorist who broadcast his ideas on this shortwave radio program for eight years prior to his death, when he was killed by police after shooting a sheriff’s deputy. In the 1995 broadcast, Cooper claimed that all religions taught people to do “good things,” that Paul had no concept of an incarnate, crucified Jesus, that the Gospel of John had been changed and modified many times, and that most Christians were unaware of the esoteric nature of the Bible, which, according to Cooper, is essentially a vessel for hidden meanings.
Of course, archaeology and history, as well as Christian theology, flatly contradict all of these points. Religions such as that of the Aztecs taught human sacrifice, for example, so not all religions have taught love and goodness. We have copies of the Gospel of John from little more than a century after the original writing, not to mention thousands of early copies of other biblical texts. Paul’s summary of the faith in 1 Corinthians 15 can be traced to within three years of the crucifixion. This statement includes a reference to Jesus’ death and resurrection as something Paul learned at his own conversion.
Like any other ancient work, the Bible needs to be carefully considered in historical and language contexts. There are aspects of Scripture that require some advanced knowledge in order to fully understand. This, however, is not information hidden or obscured for all but a select, cabalistic few. The Bible is extremely clear about the core of the gospel, and knowledge of other points is not necessary for a faithful, spiritual life. There is no legitimately “secret” knowledge in Scripture. We do not need any esoteric keys to the Bible in order to truly understand it.
|
How long did it take to write the Bible?
|
Answer
The books of the Bible were written at different times by different authors over a period of approximately 1,500 years. But that is not to say that it took 1,500 years to write the Bible, only that it took that long for the complete [canon of Scripture](canon-of-Scripture.html) to be penned as God progressively revealed His Word. The oldest book of the Bible, according to most scholars, is either Genesis or Job, both thought to have been written by Moses and completed around 1400 BC, about 3,400 years ago. The newest book, Revelation, was written around AD 90\.
The books of the Bible were not being written continuously. For example, 400 years elapsed between the completion of the last book of the Old Testament, Malachi, and the beginning of the New Testament with the gospel of Matthew. The [“400 years of silence”](400-years-of-silence.html) occurred because the Spirit of God did not [inspire](Bible-inspired.html) any Scripture during that time. Although Matthew’s gospel is placed first in the New Testament, it is believed that the first New Testament book written was actually the epistle of James, written in approximately AD 44—49\. The entire New Testament was written in about 50 years, from AD 44 to 90 or 95\.
It is impossible to know how long it took each author to write his particular book. Moses wrote the first five books of the Old Testament in about 40 years (1445—1405 BC). Does that mean he was continually writing for 40 years? We just don’t know the answer. Paul’s letters to the New Testament churches, especially the shorter ones such as Philemon, may have been written in one sitting. The same can be said of 2 John and 3 John, which are very short letters written to specific individuals.
We do know that each of the Bible’s authors wrote only as much and as long as they were led to do so. Each author wrote at the direction of the Holy Spirit who “breathed out” Scripture to him. Peter explains this process: “Prophecy never had its origin in the human will, but prophets, though human, spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21; cf. 2 Timothy 3:16\).
|
How does oppressing the poor show contempt for their Maker (Proverbs 14:31)?
|
Answer
Proverbs 14:31 states, “Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, / but whoever is kind to the needy honors God.” This verse teaches an important biblical principle: our treatment of others reflects (and affects) our relationship with God.
The word translated as “oppresses” can also be translated “slanders.” It includes the idea of putting down or belittling others. Those who belittle or demean the [poor](Bible-poor.html) show contempt for or insult God. The same principle is also found in Proverbs 17:5, which says, “Whoever mocks the poor shows contempt for their Maker.” The question remains of *why*? How does slandering the poor insult God?
The key is found in the word *Maker*. All people, regardless of their social condition or financial standing, are created by God in His own image (Genesis 1:27\). This truth is repeated in Proverbs 22:2, “Rich and poor have this in common: / The LORD is the Maker of them all.” To pour contempt on God’s creation is to slander God.
In Matthew 25:31–45 Jesus speaks of a coming judgment after the tribulation. In verses 41–46 the Lord links one’s treatment of others with a relationship to Himself:
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’
“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’
“He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’”
Jesus clearly notes that the way we treat those in need is how we treat Him.
James 2:1 adds, “Believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ must not show favoritism.” Using the example of how those in the church might respond to a rich man and a poor man (verses 2–4\), James reminds his readers that our treatment of the poor is an application of loving our neighbors as ourselves (verse 8\). If we do not show concern for the poor, we are not obeying God’s commands.
This, then, shows another way that oppressing the poor shows contempt for God—it is direct disobedience to His commands to love your neighbor as yourself and not to show [favoritism](Bible-favoritism.html). First John 3:17 uses a rhetorical question to make the same point: “If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person?”
God cares deeply for the poor and expects His followers to also care. More than that, we are to act on that care: “Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth” (James 3:18\). The way we treat the poor reflects our love for God. When we mistreat the poor, we treat God with contempt.
|
What is the Shemitah?
|
Answer
The Shemitah (sometimes spelled *Shemittah* or *Shmita*) is the final year in a seven\-year cycle of debt forgiveness and land use prescribed for Israel in the Old Testament. The term *Shemitah* has been popularized lately with the publication of the book *The Mystery of the Shemitah* by Rabbi Jonathan Cahn. According to Cahn, the Shemitah year culminates in the Day of Remission, Ehul 29\.
Every seventh year, the people of Israel were instructed to forgive debts owed by fellow Israelites, refrain from direct cultivation, and permit people and animals to harvest the free\-growing crops that remained. The instructions concerning the Shemitah are mentioned in passages such as Exodus 21:2; 23:10–11; Leviticus 25:1–7; Deuteronomy 15:1–6; and 31:10–13\.
The purpose of the Shemitah was to allow the land to recover from agriculture, as well as to provide sustenance for the poor. The Shemitah was also meant to break the cycle of perpetual debt and poverty in which many people found themselves trapped (Deuteronomy 15:4, 11\). This Sabbath year reflected God’s decision to rest on the seventh day of creation (Genesis 2:1–3\). As with many religious concepts, there are different interpretations of the Sabbath year within each of the various sects of Judaism.
Historically, the Shemitah seems to have been all but ignored by Judaism, even in the days of the Old Testament. Today, the only aspect of the Sabbath year that seems to be upheld is a prohibition on certain kinds of food exports for crops actually grown within the boundaries of Israel during the seventh year of the cycle. Modern reasons for rejecting this law involve claims that agricultural laws only apply within the boundaries of Israel and that they are generally no longer in effect, thereby cancelling the associated laws on debt forgiveness.
Even for those inclined to consider the Shemitah binding, [Talmudic](Talmud.html) scholars developed a mechanism known as a *pruzbul* to effectively negate the loan\-forgiveness aspects of Shemitah. This process hinges on the scriptural command to forgive the debts of a “friend or brother” (Deuteronomy 15:2\), which Talmudic scholars chose to interpret as implying that only private debts are cancelled. Making a *pruzbul* transfers the debt to a public religious court, a *beit din*, so the debt is theoretically no longer between friends, brothers, or neighbors. According to this interpretation, the once\-private debt is fully recoverable, and nothing is forgiven (see Mark 7:8–9\).
Likewise, those interested in maintaining farms during a Shemitah Sabbath year have turned to a rabbinic interpretation, which effectively nullifies the law. By hiring non\-Jewish hands to work the land, the landowner can claim to be following the Shemitah by not (himself) cultivating the land—others are doing it for him, and he is not laboring personally.
In his book *The Mystery of the Shemitah*, Jonathan Cahn makes the case that nations who do not follow the principles of the Shemitah will be judged by God. He applies this warning specifically to America, showing how Ehul 29, the Day of Remission on the Jewish calendar, has coincided with drastic drops in the stock market, credit crises, oil shocks, recessions, sell\-offs, and the Great Depression in America. Cahn figures that we finished a Shemitah year, which ended on September 13, 2015\. After that is a possible [Year of Jubilee](Jubilee-2017.html), a “super Shemitah,” according to Cahn, if it is the year following seven Shemitah years (7 sets of 7 years). In Cahn’s book, the Year of Jubilee could bring even more of God’s judgment on rebellious nations such as America. Adding to the portents of doom, according to Cahn, are the [four blood moons](blood-red-moon.html) and two [solar eclipses](eclipse-sign-end-times.html) we’ve recently seen.
In *The Mystery of the Shemitah*, Cahn relates many events concerning the World Trade Center to a Shemitah year: The WTC was conceived in 1945\. Groundbreaking occurred in 1966\. The twin towers opened in 1973\. Terrorists bombed the north tower in 1993\. Both towers were destroyed in 2001\. The new tower, One World Trade Center, or the Freedom Tower, opened in 2014\. Cahn points out that all of these years are Shemitah years.
Author Cahn was careful not to be dogmatic about his predictions of divine judgment on the United States. He did not attempt to predict what, if anything, would happen during the next Shemitah or on the next Day of Remission, September 13\. His assertion that America has a covenant relationship with God, much like Israel has, is questionable. His teaching of a seven\-year pattern of calamity could be dismissed as mere coincidence. But his call to America to repent and seek salvation in Christ is definitely biblical.
|
What does it mean that a righteous person cares for the needs of animals (Proverbs 12:10)?
|
Answer
Proverbs 12:10 states, “The righteous care for the needs of their animals, / but the kindest acts of the wicked are cruel.” This verse specifically links righteousness to the humane treatment of animals.
This proverb, written in [antithetical parallelism](antithetical-parallelism.html), states in the second half, “The kindest acts of the wicked are cruel.” In other words, even the most compassionate works of a wicked person are bad—the wicked are always cruel. In contrast, a godly person is always kind, and that kindness extends to the animals under his care. The righteous person cares about all life, including animal life.
This principle has important applications for today’s Christian. While Scripture expresses a clear priority for human life over animal life (see Luke 12:7\), animals are part of God’s creation and are to be shown proper care and humane treatment. Animal cruelty or mistreatment has no place in the life of a Christian.
Jesus asked in Matthew 12:11, “If any of you has a sheep and it falls into a pit on the Sabbath, will you not take hold of it and lift it out?” As He made a broader point about Sabbath\-keeping, Jesus appealed to His audience’s care of their livestock. If they had an animal in trouble, they would help. That is good and proper. Jesus used the analogy to highlight the necessity of helping people, too: “How much more valuable is a person than a sheep!” (verse 12\).
In the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus spoke of the great care God has for animal life, including each bird that flies in the sky (Matthew 6:26\). One of the psalms expresses God’s oversight of all the animals He has made: “The lions roar for their prey / and seek their food from God. . . . All creatures look to you / to give them their food at the proper time. / When you give it to them, / they gather it up; / when you open your hand, / they are satisfied with good things” (Psalm 104:21, 27–28\). God cares for the needs of His animals, and God’s people should do the same.
Two important accounts in the Old Testament also reveal God’s care for animal life. In the account of Noah and the flood, God went to great lengths to make sure every kind of animal would survive on the ark. And in Jonah’s story, part of God’s explanation of holding back His destruction of Nineveh was the importance of the animals of the city. God said, “Should I not have concern for the great city of Nineveh, in which there are more than a hundred and twenty thousand people who cannot tell their right hand from their left—and also many animals?” (Jonah 4:11\).
God cares greatly for the animals He has created. Those who seek to follow His ways will also care about His creation, including animal life. Animal cruelty, the neglect of pets, and the wanton destruction of a species are sin. Christians are called to care for animals, expressing the same attitude toward animal life as our Creator has.
|
Why did Nebuchadnezzar change Daniel’s name to Belteshazzar?
|
Answer
[Nebuchadnezzar](Nebuchadnezzar.html) was king of [Babylonia](Babylonian-empire.html) from 605 BC to around 563 BC, and he was responsible for changing Daniel’s name to Belteshazzar. King Nebuchadnezzar had conquered Judah, destroying Jerusalem in 586 BC, an event that had been prophesied by the prophet Jeremiah (Jeremiah 25:9\). Some of the inhabitants of Judah were taken back to Babylon as captives, including a number of the children of royal and noble families, to be integrated into Babylonian society (Daniel 1:3–4\). Among those taken were four boys, around the age of 14 at the time, named [Daniel](life-Daniel.html), Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah.
All four of these Hebrew names had meanings connected to faith in God. But upon arrival in Babylon, their names were changed: “The chief official \[of Babylon] gave them new names: to Daniel, the name Belteshazzar; to Hananiah, Shadrach; to Mishael, Meshach; and to Azariah, Abednego” (Daniel 1:7\). The boys’ names were changed as a way of encouraging them to forget the God and traditions of their homeland and become conformed to the ways and gods of Babylon. It was a forced assimilation; Nebuchadnezzar wanted Daniel and his friends to “conform to the pattern of this world” (Romans 12:2\), and a name change was one step toward that goal.
Each name Daniel and his friends were given carried a meaning associated with a different Babylonian deity. *Abednego* means “servant of Nebo,” for example. *Belteshazzar*, the name given to Daniel, means “Bel protects his life.” The meaning of the name *Daniel* is “God is my judge.” The suffix of Daniel’s name (and Mishael’s) is *\-el*, which refers to *Elohim*, one of the names of the God of Israel. *Azariah* and *Hananiah* carry the suffix *\-iah* or *\-yah*, which is short for *Yahweh*, the covenant name of God (see Isaiah 26:4\).
Miraculously, God kept these young men alive, even though they refused to conform to the indoctrination, diet, and religion of Babylon. Daniel and his companions asked to be fed vegetables rather than the king’s unlawful food, and they were granted their wish on the condition that their health did not suffer. God made them thrive physically beyond their peers, because of their God\-honoring obedience (Daniel 1:8–16\). They would not bow down to the idol of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar’s image, and were sentenced to death, but God saved them from the midst of a fiery furnace (Daniel 3:23–27\). In the end, Nebuchadnezzar was forced to acknowledge the miracle, and he decreed that the people of Babylon honor the God of [Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego](Shadrach-Meshach-Abednego.html) (verses 28–29\).
After the wonders of God were shown to him, Nebuchadnezzar himself acknowledged Daniel’s true name and honored the God of Israel, writing, “Daniel came into my presence. . . . (He is called Belteshazzar, after the name of my god, and the spirit of the holy gods is in him)” (Daniel 4:8\). Years later, the queen of Babylon still referred to Daniel by his Hebrew name, although she knows of Nebuchadnezzar’s attempt to change it: she spoke of him as “Daniel, whom the king called Belteshazzar” (Daniel 5:12\).
|
Do the news reports of rivers turning blood red have anything to do with the end times?
|
Answer
In recent years, several news reports of water turning a blood\-red color have appeared. A canal in Nootdorp, the Netherlands; Bondi Beach in Australia; the Beirut River in Lebanon; a river in Zhejiang Province, China; rainfall in Sewanagala, Sri Lanka—all reported blood\-red by reliable news outlets. These stories have had many people wondering: is this a fulfillment of end\-times prophecy? Is the water turning to blood?
The water\-to\-blood prophecies are found in the [book of Revelation](Book-of-Revelation.html). The second trumpet judgment will bring a great calamity upon the earth: “The second angel sounded his trumpet, and something like a huge mountain, all ablaze, was thrown into the sea. A third of the sea turned into blood, a third of the living creatures in the sea died, and a third of the ships were destroyed” (Revelation 8:8–9\).
In Revelation 16:3, during the second half of the [tribulation](tribulation.html), God will indeed turn the waters of the sea to blood: “The second angel poured out his bowl on the sea, and it turned into blood like that of a dead person, and every living thing in the sea died.” Then in verses 4–6 God does the same to the world’s fresh water supply: “The third angel poured out his bowl on the rivers and springs of water, and they became blood. Then I heard the angel in charge of the waters say: ‘You are just in these judgments, O Holy One, you who are and who were; for they have shed the blood of your holy people and your prophets, and you have given them blood to drink as they deserve.’”
We also see that God’s two special witnesses during the tribulation will be empowered to perform miracles: “They have power to turn the waters into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague as often as they want” (Revelation 11:6\). The two end\-times prophets will have the same ability as Moses, who turned the Nile River to blood (Exodus 7:20\).
Modern reports of water turning bloody red do not match up with the end\-times prophecies of Revelation. For one thing, the tribulation has not started yet. For another, the sea turning to blood at the third trumpet judgment is preceded by trumpets one and two—the first will involve hail and fire and blood raining down on the earth, and the second will cause a third of the trees and all of the grass to be burned. None of that has happened yet. And the bowl judgments that turn the sea and fresh water to blood are later still.
So, the red rain in Sri Lanka and the red river in Lebanon are *not* fulfillments of Revelation. The [seal, trumpet, and bowl judgments](seven-seals-trumpets.html) described in that book will be much worse than anything that is happening today (see Matthew 24:21\). If these recent events are not signs of the apocalypse, then what are they? There are three possible reasons for why water turns blood red. The first is natural, the second is man\-caused, and the third is supernatural.
*Blood\-red water attributed to natural causes.* When a body of water suddenly turns blood\-red, it is often the result of a rare natural phenomenon called an algal bloom or a red tide. An algal bloom occurs when conditions are just right for colonies of algae to grow out of control. In high concentrations, the algae’s pigmentation discolors the water. Algal blooms can happen in fresh water and in salt water. The red water reported in Nootdorp, the Netherlands, has been attributed to these natural causes.
*Blood\-red water attributed to man\-made causes.* Sometimes, bodies of water are discolored due to man\-made substances released into the water. The red color of the river in Zhejiang Province, China, was determined to be due to an illegal dumping of red dye. The report of the Beirut River in Lebanon turning red resulted in a government investigation. The cause was traced back to a factory releasing a chemical into the river.
*Blood\-red water attributed to supernatural causes.* We know that, in the past, God has caused water to turn to blood: “\[Moses] raised his staff in the presence of Pharaoh and his officials and struck the water of the Nile, and all the water was changed into blood. The fish in the Nile died, and the river smelled so bad that the Egyptians could not drink its water. Blood was everywhere in Egypt” (Exodus 7:20–21\).
The description of this plague in the Bible indicates a truly supernatural event. The general understanding is that, when Moses’ rod struck the river, the change from water to blood took place immediately. And all the water in Egypt was affected: “streams and canals . . . the ponds and all the reservoirs . . . even in vessels of wood and stone” (Exodus 7:19\). An algal bloom or a poured chemical would not have affected the whole water supply—cisterns, rain barrels, and everything.
Also, the biblical account of the plague in Egypt suggests the water was turned into actual blood. Nothing is said in Exodus about the water having only the “appearance” of blood; it simply says, “Blood was everywhere” (Exodus 7:21\). The same holds true for the prophecies in Revelation. The description is of “blood,” accompanied by massive fish kills and the destruction of entire fleets of ships.
Among all the modern reports of water changing to a blood\-red color, none report the presence of actual blood. Instead, the news stories indicate the water was changed either by natural means (by bacteria or algae) or by men dumping chemicals into the water. In no instance is the water turned to actual blood. We are not living in the tribulation.
|
When and why was Saul’s name changed to Paul?
|
Answer
One of the often\-thought\-of “[name changes](name-change.html)” in the Bible is that of *Saul* to *Paul*. The change is commonly linked to Saul’s conversion on the [Damascus Road](Damascus-Road.html), when the Lord Jesus commissioned him to take the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 9:1–19\). However, at the time of Saul’s conversion, Jesus still addressed him as “Saul.” Later, Jesus told Ananias to find “Saul” in Damascus and restore his sight. Acts 9 goes on to describe “Saul” as increasing in spiritual strength and understanding of Jesus as the Messiah. So, it was not Jesus who changed his name on the road to Damascus. If it wasn’t Jesus’ doing, how did the change from *Saul* to *Paul* happen, and when?
The answer is that Saul’s name was also *Paul*. The custom of [dual names](more-than-one-name.html) was common in those days. Acts 13:9 describes the apostle as “Saul, who was also called Paul.” From that verse on, Saul is always referred to in Scripture as “Paul.”
Paul was a Jew, born in the Roman city of Tarsus. He was proud of his Jewish heritage, as he describes in Philippians 3:5: “Circumcised on the eighth day, of the race of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrew parentage, in observance of the law a Pharisee.” So zealous and devout was he that persecuting Christians was the natural way for him to show his devotion. He chose to use his Hebrew name, *Saul*, until sometime after he began to believe in and preach Christ. After that time, as “[the apostle to the Gentiles](apostle-to-the-Gentiles.html)” (Romans 11:13\), he used his Roman name, *Paul*. It would make sense for Paul to use his Roman name as he traveled farther and farther into the Gentile world.
It is interesting that Paul began using his Roman name on Cyprus when the Roman proconsul on that island was converted (Acts 13:12\). This was during Paul’s first [missionary journey](missionary-journeys-Paul.html) and involved a high\-ranking, idolatrous Gentile coming to faith in Christ. The fact that the proconsul’s name was Sergius Paulus has led some to think that Saul took the name *Paulus/Paul* as a reminder of this event, but the apostle’s name being the same as the proconsul’s is most likely a coincidence.
Using his Roman name was fitting for the man who proclaimed that he would become “all things to all people,” a Jew to the Jews in order to win the Jews, weak to the weak in order to win the weak, etc., all for the sake of the gospel (1 Corinthians 9:19–23\). Adopting his Roman name would allow Paul to approach the Gentiles to whom he was sent and speak to them in their own language, becoming as one of them and setting them at ease. It is also possible that Paul gave up the use of his Hebrew name, *Saul*, with its regal connotation and chose to use his Roman name, *Paul*, meaning “little” or “small,” because he desired to became smaller in order to present Christ as greater (cf. John 3:30\).
Unlike the changing of Simon’s name to *Peter* (Matthew 16:18–19\), which Jesus did for a specific purpose, there is no reference in the Bible to Jesus’ changing Saul’s name to *Paul*.
|
What is an invocation prayer?
|
Answer
An invocation prayer is a request for the spiritual presence and blessing of God in a ceremony or event. To invoke is to call upon earnestly, so an “invocation” in the context of prayer is a serious, intentional calling upon God. It is common for prayers of invocation to be offered publicly at the beginning of a church service or other Christian gathering. Such prayers call upon God to grant His presence in the worship, to bless the service or activity, and to hear the prayers of petition offered to Him.
[The Psalms](Book-of-Psalms.html) are full of prayers of invocation. Many times, David prayed for God to be present with him and to hear his prayers, particularly in times of trouble and persecution. When David was in danger of being betrayed to King Saul by his enemies, he invoked God’s attention to his prayers: “Hear my prayer, O God; listen to the words of my mouth” (Psalm 54:2\). Also, in times of deep affliction, David invoked God’s presence: “Listen to my prayer, O God, do not ignore my plea” (Psalm 55:1\). “Hear my cry, O God; listen to my prayer” (Psalm 61:1\).
David’s prayers of invocation also begged God to help him in times of trouble. In a prayer that includes elements of [imprecation](imprecatory-prayer.html), David invoked God’s presence and help against his enemies in Psalm 71:12–13: “Do not be far from me, my God; come quickly, God, to help me. May my accusers perish in shame; may those who want to harm me be covered with scorn and disgrace.” Psalm 79:9 invokes God’s help for the glory of His name: “Help us, God our Savior, for the glory of your name; deliver us and forgive our sins for your name’s sake.” David also offered an invocation for God’s blessing in a song of praise in Psalm 67:1: “May God be gracious to us and bless us and make his face shine on us.”
In what is known as [the Lord’s Prayer](Lords-prayer.html) (Matthew 6:9–15\), Jesus begins with an invocation that 1\) identifies God and our relationship to Him: “Our Father in heaven”; 2\) ascribes glory and honor to God: “Hallowed be Your name”; and 3\) lines up the petitioner with God’s will: “Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven.” As Christians, we have access to the throne of God through faith in Christ (Ephesians 3:12\). All our prayers of invocation should contain the elements of humility, praise, and reverence as we approach, [in Jesus’ name](pray-Jesus-name.html), the One whose blessing we seek.
|
How can we commit our work to the Lord and have our plans established (Proverbs 16:3)?
|
Answer
Proverbs 16:3 states, “Commit your work to the LORD, / and your plans will be established” (ESV). This wonderful verse speaks of our responsibility to serve God and the result of discharging our duty faithfully.
The first verb, *commit*, is a word that, in Hebrew, literally means “to roll.” Other passages such as Genesis 29:3 and Psalm 22:8–9 likewise use the idea of “rolling” something to the Lord. The idea is that we completely give something over to God in dependence upon Him. When we “commit” our work to the Lord, we offer everything we do completely to Him.
The Hebrew syntax also reveals the idea that we commit our work to the Lord *in order that* our plans will be established. We must do the first part if we expect God to fulfill the second part.
If we completely depend upon God in our work, He will “establish” our plans. That is, He will “bring about” or “cause to happen” our plans. We can expect God to bring our work to fruition in God’s way and in God’s time when we depend on Him in our efforts. Part of committing our work to God, of course, is seeking and following God’s will; when our work aligns with God’s will, then success will follow.
[Proverbs](proverb-Bible.html), as a literary form, communicate general life principles and not exact promises. In other words, we can generally expect God to bless our work when we operate according to His ways in dependence upon Him. However, this does not mean we will never lose a job or have trouble in our work. Instead, we can expect God to fulfill His promise of Romans 8:28, “We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.”
This proverb is similar in context to Psalm 1:1–3:
“Blessed is the one
who does not walk in step with the wicked
or stand in the way that sinners take
or sit in the company of mockers,
but whose delight is in the law of the Lord,
and who meditates on his law day and night.
That person is like a tree planted by streams of water,
which yields its fruit in season
and whose leaf does not wither—
whatever they do prospers.”
When we commit our ways and our work to the Lord, He will bless our efforts according to His perfect will in ways beyond our understanding. We should serve the Lord faithfully and then leave the results to Him. Though we will still face times of difficulty, we can trust that God is working for His ultimate good—and ours—through our efforts to please Him in our daily vocation.
|
What is the Recovery Version of the Bible?
|
Answer
The Recovery Version of the Bible is a direct English translation of the Scriptures, produced and published by Living Stream Ministries, part of the [Local Church movement](Witness-Lee-Local-Church.html). The relationship between the Local Church and the Recovery Version of the Bible may or may not raise questions about its trustworthiness, depending on how one views this particular group. At the very least, one should be cautioned to treat the specific translations and footnotes of the Recovery Version with caution, if not a large dose of skepticism.
The Recovery Version is presented as a formal translation, and most analysts would agree that it uses an extremely literal approach. From an objective standpoint, the text follows reasonably closely to accepted manuscripts of the Bible, with some editorial license in which ones to follow. In some cases, this results in the use of phrases that are nearly meaningless in English. The book also includes extensive footnotes—so many that they could be fairly described as a commentary. The Recovery Version has raised some caution flags over particular translated passages, as well as the content of these footnotes.
The general opinion of Witness Lee’s theology is mixed, and the same goes for the content of the Recovery Version. Both feature confusing and sometimes contradictory accounts of doctrines such as the Trinity and human nature. According to supporters of Local Church, this is just a matter of cultural confusion, and taking all of the commentary in context results in an orthodox view of theology. According to detractors, the Recovery Version is the result of beliefs that are either aberrant or conflicted, or both. Also, the fact that the names and credentials of the translators are not publicly available is a legitimate source of suspicion.
Given that the Bible was not originally written in English, [differences between various versions](Bible-versions.html) are not necessarily a problem. And, as compared to cult\-specific efforts such as the [New World Translation](New-World-Translation.html), the Recovery Version does not appear to have an overtly biased approach to translation. In fact, its stated purpose is to avoid such bias, resulting in sometimes overly literal phrasing. Then again, there are already English translations aimed at literalness, such as the NASB and the Amplified Bible, reducing the need for translations like the Recovery Version.
As a lesser\-known and lesser\-studied version, it would be impossible for Got Questions to adamantly endorse or condemn the Recovery Version of the Bible. However, given some of its widely noted flaws, it should be handled with caution and only in conjunction with other, less worrisome translations.
|
What is the doctrine of Balaam?
|
Answer
In Revelation 2:14, the [church of Pergamum](church-in-Pergamum.html) is scolded for tolerating the “teaching of Balaam,” or the “doctrine of Balaam.” Balaam’s name is also invoked in 2 Peter 2:15 and Jude 1:11, both in warnings about the conduct and message of false teachers. All of these are references to the Old Testament character of Balaam, who tried unsuccessfully to prophesy against the people of Israel (Numbers 22\). He eventually advised [King Balak of Moab](Balak-in-the-Bible.html), the enemy of Israel, to pursue a campaign of seduction against them (Numbers 31:16\). The doctrine of Balaam is not only a serious problem, but a devious one. When the frontal assault failed, Balaam took a back\-door approach.
Balaam, a prophet from Mesopotamia, was willing to use his God\-given talents for illicit purposes. Even though he knew Balak was God’s enemy, he tried to sell his prophetic gifts to help him. When that didn’t work, Balaam counseled Balak on the most effective way to weaken Israel. This was through seduction, using Moabite and Midianite women to tempt the Israelites into sexual relationships and into pagan rituals. The Israelites who participated brought God’s judgment upon themselves (Numbers 25:1–9\).
According to 2 Peter 2:15, Balaam’s “way” is a choice to promote falsehood for financial reasons. According to Jude 1:11, Balaam’s “error” was his willingness to accommodate pagan beliefs out of greed. Jude 1:4 also refers to the sin of those “who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality.” One trait of [false teachers](false-teachers.html) in the church is that they attempt to turn Christian liberty into a “freedom” to be promiscuous (see Romans 14:1–5\).
Putting these ideas together gives a clear view of the doctrine of Balaam. It is the attitude that one can be fully cooperative with the world and still serve God. The doctrine of Balaam teaches compromise, wanting Christians to forget they are called to be separate and holy (Leviticus 20:26; 1 Peter 1:2\); the doctrine of Balaam makes believers indistinguishable from the unbelieving world (Matthew 5:13\). The doctrine of Balaam is a belief that “a little sin” doesn’t hurt (Galatians 5:9\), especially if there’s some financial or personal benefit involved (1 Timothy 6:5\). A person following the doctrine of Balaam is willing to compromise his beliefs for the sake of economics. He acts to enable sinful behaviors for personal gain or even participate in them (Romans 1:32\).
In practical terms, the teaching or doctrine of Balaam is the view that Christians can—or even should—compromise their convictions for the sake of popularity, money, sexual gratification, or personal gain. It’s the attitude that treats sin as “no big deal.” Christians can’t—and shouldn’t—totally shun the presence of sinners or unbelievers (Luke 7:34; 1 Corinthians 5:9–13\), but we are obligated to stand up for truth (Ephesians 4:25\), righteousness (Proverbs 23:20; Romans 14:22\), and goodness (2 Peter 1:5, Matthew 5:16\), whether it’s what others want to hear or not (John 4:16–18; 8:11; Acts 24:24–25\).
|
Why does God allow people to be disabled / handicapped?
|
Answer
The Lord is God of the physically healthy and the mentally strong, but He is also the God of the physically disabled and the mentally handicapped. He is sovereign over the fragile and feeble as well as over the adroit and mighty. The Bible teaches that every person conceived in this world is a unique creation of God (see Psalm 139:16\), and that includes the disabled and the handicapped.
A natural question is why God allows some people to be born disabled or handicapped or why He allows accidents that bring about a disability or handicap later in life. This issue falls under the umbrella of a theological/philosophical debate known as “the problem of evil” or “the problem of pain.” If God is both good and omnipotent, why does He allow bad things to happen? What is the point of someone losing his sight or being forced to walk with a prosthesis? How can we reconcile God’s goodness and perfection with the fact that so much of His creation is broken and wounded?
Before we proceed, we should acknowledge that we are *all* disabled or handicapped in some way. The need for eyeglasses indicates impaired or “handicapped” vision. Dental braces are a sign of imperfect teeth. Diabetes, arthritis, rosacea, a “trick” knee—these can all be considered disabilities to some extent. The whole human race lives with the reality of imperfection. Everyone experiences less\-than\-ideal conditions. We are all broken in some way. The handicaps we live with are simply a matter of *degree*.
When a person is disabled or handicapped, to whatever degree, it is a symptom of [original sin](original-sin.html), when evil came into the world. Sin entered the world as a result of man’s disobedience to God, and that sin brought with it sickness, imperfection, and disease (see Romans 5:12\). The world was blemished. One reason God allows people to be disabled or handicapped is that such conditions are the natural result of mankind’s rebellion against God. We live in a world of cause and effect, and it is a fallen world. Jesus said that “in this world you will have trouble” (John 16:33\). This is not to say that every disability is the direct result of personal sin (Jesus countered that idea in John 9:1–3\), but, generally speaking, the existence of handicaps and disabilities can be traced back to the existence of sin.
Another basic reason that God allows some people to be disabled or handicapped is that God will glorify Himself through it. When the disciples wondered about the man born blind, Jesus told them, “This happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him” (John 9:3\). When the same disciples later wondered about Lazarus’ sickness, Jesus told them, “It is for God’s glory so that God’s Son may be glorified through it” (John 11:4\). In both instances, God was glorified *through* the disability—in the case of the man born blind, the temple rulers had incontrovertible proof of Jesus’ power to heal; in the case of Lazarus, “many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary, and had seen what Jesus did, believed in him” (John 11:45\).
Another reason why God allows disabilities or handicaps is that we must learn to trust in Him rather than in ourselves. When the Lord God called Moses in the wilderness, Moses was reluctant at first to heed the call. In fact, he tried to use his disability to excuse himself from service: “Moses said to the Lord, ‘Pardon your servant, Lord. I have never been eloquent. . . . I am slow of speech and tongue’” (Exodus 4:10\). But God knew all about Moses’ problem: “The Lord said to him, ‘Who gave human beings their mouths? Who makes them deaf or mute? Who gives them sight or makes them blind? Is it not I, the Lord? Now go; I will help you speak and will teach you what to say’” (Exodus 4:11–12\). In this amazing passage, we see that all human ability—and disability—is part of God’s plan and that God will help His obedient servants. He doesn’t call the equipped so much as He equips the called.
Joni Eareckson Tada suffered a diving accident as a teenager, and for the past five decades she has lived as a quadriplegic. In her booklet *Hope . . . the Best of Things*, Joni imagines meeting Jesus in heaven and speaking to Him about her wheelchair: “The weaker I was in that thing \[my wheelchair], the harder I leaned on you. And the harder I leaned on you, the stronger I discovered you to be. It never would have happened had you not given me the bruising of the blessing of that wheelchair” (Crossway Books, Wheaton, Illinois, 2008\). How can she speak of her “bruising” as a “blessing”? Only by the grace of God. With that sentiment, Joni echoes the apostle Paul who accepted Christ’s sufficient grace for his [thorn in the flesh](Paul-thorn-flesh.html) with these words: “I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ’s power may rest on me. . . . For when I am weak, then I am strong” (2 Corinthians 12:9–10\).
Another reason why God allows some to be disabled or handicapped is that, in His overarching plan, He has chosen the weak things of this world for a special purpose: “God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him” (1 Corinthians 1:27–29\).
God doesn’t need human might or skill or fitness to accomplish His work. He can use disability and handicap just as well. He can use children: “Through the praise of children and infants you have established a stronghold against your enemies, to silence the foe and the avenger” (Psalm 8:2\). He can use anyone. Remembering this truth can help handicapped believers to maintain focus on who God is. It’s easy to “curl up in a ball” and have pity parties when life makes no sense, but Christ’s power is made perfect in weakness (2 Corinthians 12:9\).
In a sense, when Jesus came into this world, He became voluntarily disabled. He handicapped Himself as He left the perfection of heaven to live among the sinners on earth. He laid aside His glory to wrap Himself in inglorious humanity. At [the Incarnation](incarnation-of-Christ.html), Jesus took on human flesh in all its frailty and vulnerability. “He made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant” (Philippians 2:7\). The Son of God took part in our human condition and suffered on our behalf. And that is why “we do not have a high priest who is unable to empathize with our weaknesses” (Hebrews 4:15\); rather, we have an Intercessor who understands our weakness, relates to our disability, and identifies with our pain.
God promises that disabilities and handicaps are temporary. Those conditions are part of this fallen world, not the world to come. God’s children—those who by faith in Christ are made children of God (John 1:12\) —have a bright and glorious future. When Jesus came the first time, He gave us a taste of good things yet to come: “People brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering severe pain, the demon\-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralyzed; and he healed them” (Matthew 4:24\). When Jesus comes the second time, “Then will the eyes of the blind be opened and the ears of the deaf unstopped. Then will the lame leap like a deer, and the mute tongue shout for joy” (Isaiah 35:5–6\).
Joni’s wheelchair\-bound perspective is enlightening: “Maybe the truly handicapped people are the ones that don’t need God as much” (*The God I Love: A Lifetime of Walking with Jesus*, Zondervan Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2003\). The position of weakness, disability, and handicap—the position of having to trust God in this world—is a position of honor and blessing indeed.
|
Subsets and Splits
Top Long Responses
Returns the prompts and responses where the response length falls within a specified range, ordered by decreasing length, which provides basic insight into the distribution of response lengths.