Split (1)

train · 9.53k rows

prompt stringlengths 0 158	response stringlengths 14 40.2k
Who was Gad the seer?	Answer Gad the [seer](seer-Bible.html) (or prophet) is first mentioned in 1 Samuel 22:5\. Before the Holy Spirit was poured out on believers at Pentecost (Acts 2\), God communicated to His people primarily through His chosen prophets. In the Old Testament, those prophets are sometimes called seers (1 Samuel 9:9\). Seers were sought by kings and others in authority when they needed direction from the Lord (2 Kings 17:13; 1 Chronicles 25:5\). Gad appears suddenly in the book of 1 Samuel as a consultant to [David](life-David.html) while he was on the run from Saul. At that time, Gad counsels David to leave Moab and return to Judah (1 Samuel 22:5\). Gad is not mentioned again until David took the throne as the king of Israel and Gad is named as his seer (2 Samuel 24:11\). At that time, kings had specific prophets whose counsel they sought, much as an American President has an advisory council. The difference is that these seers were to represent the Lord’s counsel and not merely present good advice. However, seers were not always trustworthy, and the Lord brought judgment on those who spoke from their own authority (Jeremiah 14:14–15\). Gad, it appears, was an honorable man and faithfully spoke the Lord’s words to David. After David had sinned by [numbering the troops](David-census.html), the Lord sent Gad to rebuke him and give three options of punishment (2 Samuel 24:11–14\). Gad later went back to David to give him the Lord’s command about making his sin right through offering a sacrifice (2 Samuel 24:18\). Gad remained loyal to David throughout his reign and is later listed as a compiler of the king’s chronicles (1 Chronicles 29:29\). Gad must have been a young man when he first joined David’s band, since he outlived David and wrote a history of his life. Though rarely mentioned by name, Gad the seer may have played a crucial role in David’s success as king. His initial advice while David was on the run from Saul not only kept David safe, but it allowed David to build a reputation as a mighty warrior, making him popular with the people (1 Chronicles 12:1–22\). From that, we learn that leaders need to surround themselves with wise people who understand God’s Word and can communicate God’s message accurately (see Isaiah 6:8–9; 1 Corinthians 14:1–4\). For every great leader, there are nameless supporters who advise, rebuke, encourage, and warn, using their gifts for the betterment of another. Though his name is rarely mentioned, Gad’s influence is seen throughout the incredible life and successes of King David. Where David excelled, Gad’s counsel was right behind him. When David failed, Gad’s rebukes and advice quickly followed. Gad worked in harmony with God’s other influential prophet, Nathan, to keep David’s heart and life pleasing to God and worthy of the throne (2 Chronicles 29:29; 2 Samuel 12:1\). Because Gad was faithful to his calling, David had the godly insights he needed to fulfill the role God called him to play.
Who is the Servant of the Lord in the Bible?	Answer A servant is someone who carries out the will of another. The Servant of the Lord fulfills God’s will and is often presented in Scripture as someone chosen by God to hold a leadership position, to represent Him, and to accomplish a certain divine work. In the Bible, the term Servant of the Lord has been applied to individual people, certain groups of people, the nation of Israel, and the Messiah, who is identified as Jesus Christ in the New Testament. The book of Isaiah contains four “[Servant Songs](Servant-Songs.html)” describing the Servant of the Lord. The first is found in Isaiah 42:1–9; the second in Isaiah 49:1–13; the third in Isaiah 50:4–11; and the fourth in Isaiah 52:13 through 53:12\. In Jewish tradition, the Servant of the Lord in all four passages refers to the nation of Israel. In the final Servant Song of Isaiah 53, a singular pronoun he is used for the Servant of the Lord. Rabbis understand this singular pronoun to be a collective reference to a faithful remnant of Israel, a personification treating the group as one person. The New Testament clearly identifies the Servant of the Lord in Isaiah as our Savior, Jesus Christ of Nazareth. This unique Servant takes a preeminent place above all others in Scripture. This perfect Servant never fails to accomplish the will of the Lord and the purposes of God (John 17:5\). The final Servant Song (Isaiah 53\) is about an innocent [Suffering Servant](suffering-servant-Isaiah-53.html) who dies in place of the guilty. That passage foretells the life, ministry, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Isaiah 53:3 says about the Servant of the Lord, “He was despised and rejected by mankind, a man of suffering, and familiar with pain. Like one from whom people hide their faces he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.” Jesus was despised by the religious people of His day and rejected as their [Messiah](what-does-Messiah-mean.html). Jesus Christ, the Servant of the Lord, 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” (Isaiah 53:5\). In giving His life for us, “he was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth” (verse 7\). At His trial, Jesus did not defend Himself but remained silent against His accusers. He suffered and died in the place of guilty sinners. The sins of all people were placed upon Him, the sacrificial Lamb of God. Jesus paid the price for our salvation. These are just a few of many details in Isaiah 53 that point to Jesus Christ as the fulfillment of messianic prophecy (Matthew 8:17; Luke 22:37; John 12:38; Acts 8:32–33; Romans 10:16; 1 Peter 2:22, 24–25\). When God the Son came to earth, He took on the role of a servant. The Creator chose to serve His creatures. Jesus said that He had come “to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28\). In the book of Acts, the word servant is applied to Jesus four times in connection with His death (Acts 3:13, 26; 4:27, 30 ). The humility of Jesus, the Servant of the Lord, is unmistakably seen in Philippians 2:7–8: “He gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When he appeared in human form, he humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross” (NLT). While Jesus the Messiah is the ultimate fulfillment of prophecies concerning the Servant of the Lord, the Bible also applies the title to others. In the Old Testament, God describes about fifteen different individuals as “My servant” or “the servant of the Lord.” The patriarchs are often named as servants of the Lord: “Remember your servants Abraham, Isaac and Israel, to whom you swore by your own self: ‘I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and I will give your descendants all this land I promised them, and it will be their inheritance forever’” (Exodus 32:13; see also Genesis 18:3; 32:10; Deuteronomy 9:27; 1 Chronicles 16:13; Psalm 105:6\). God called Job His servant: “Then the LORD said to Satan, ‘Have you considered my servant Job?’” (Job 1:8; cf. 2:3 and 42:7–8\). [Moses](life-Moses.html) is repeatedly called the servant of the Lord: “And Moses the servant of the LORD died there in Moab, as the LORD had said” (Deuteronomy 34:5; see also Exodus 14:31; Numbers 12:7–8; Joshua 1:1–2; Nehemiah 1:7–8; Malachi 4:4\). Significantly, Moses told the people that “the LORD your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among you, from your fellow Israelites. You must listen to him” (Deuteronomy 18:15\). This messianic prophecy was fulfilled in Jesus, who, like Moses, was “the servant of the Lord” but in an even greater way (see Acts 3:22 and Hebrews 3:3\). The Bible describes leaders like Caleb, Joshua, and Samson as servants of the Lord (Numbers 14:24; Joshua 5:14; 24:29; Judges 2:8; 15:18\). David, Solomon, and Hezekiah are kings referred to as the Lord’s servants (Psalm 89:20; 1 Samuel 23:11; 2 Samuel 7:5; 1 Chronicles 17:4; 1 Kings 3:7–9; 14:8; 2 Chronicles 32:16\). Prophets such as Ahijah, Elijah, Jonah, and Isaiah are also called servants of the Lord (1 Kings 14:18; 18:36; 2 Kings 14:25; Isaiah 20:3\). Samuel’s mother, [Hannah](life-Hannah.html), describes herself as a servant of the Lord in 1 Samuel 1:11\. Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, is described as a servant of the Lord in Haggai 2:23\. Even the pagan kings Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus are named among the servants of the Lord in that they fulfilled the purposes of God (Jeremiah 25:9; 43:10; Isaiah 45:1\). Groups referred to as servants of the Lord in the Bible are the people of Israel (Isaiah 41:8–9; 43:10; Leviticus 25:42,55; Nehemiah 1:6,10; Jeremiah 30:10–11; 46:27–28; Luke 1:54\), the priests (Exodus 28:1, 41; Leviticus 7:35; Numbers 18:7\), the Levites (Deuteronomy 18:7; 1 Chronicles 23:28–31; Ezra 6:18; Ezekiel 44:11\), and the prophets (Jeremiah 7:25; 29:19; 44:4; Ezekiel 38:17; Daniel 9:6; Amos 3:7; Zechariah 1:6; Matthew 21:34–36; Mark 12:2–5; Luke 20:10–12; Revelation 10:7\). Other nations are also called the Lord’s servants on occasion (Psalm 72:11; Isaiah 56:6; Zephaniah 3:9\). In the New Testament, several believers define themselves or are named by God as servants of the Lord. They include Mary the mother of Jesus (Luke 1:38, 48\), Simeon (Luke 2:29\), Paul (Acts 27:2; Romans 1:1; Ephesians 3:1\), James (James 1:1\), Simon Peter (2 Peter 1:1\), Jude (Jude 1\), and John (Revelation 1:1\). All of these servants are simply following the example of the ultimate Servant of the Lord, Jesus Christ.
What was Augustus Caesar’s impact on biblical history?	Answer Augustus Caesar’s birth name was Gaius Octavius. He was the nephew, adopted son, and hand\-picked successor to Julius Caesar. Upon Julius’ death, Octavian (as he was then called) had to fight to consolidate control, but, when he finally secured his position as the first Roman emperor, he reigned the longest of any of the Caesars in Julius’ line, from 63 BC to AD 14\. He received the name Augustus (“Venerable”) in 27 BC. Caesar Augustus is only mentioned once in the New Testament, at the beginning of the well\-known Christmas story recorded in Luke 2: “In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a [census](Quirinius-census.html) should be taken of the entire Roman world” (verse 1\). As a result of this decree, Joseph had to return to his ancestral home, Bethlehem, and he took with him Mary, who was already expecting the Baby Jesus. While they were there in Bethlehem, Jesus was born, as the prophet Micah had foretold: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times” (Micah 5:2\). The census that forced Joseph and Mary to go to Bethlehem was Augustus Caesar’s most obvious impact on biblical history; however, there are other facts concerning Caesar Augustus that would have been meaningful to first\-century readers of the Gospels. Octavian was given the name Augustus, which means “great” or “venerable” or “worthy of reverence,” which is an insinuation that he was worthy of worship. In 42 BC, the Senate formally deified Julius Caesar as divus Iulius (“the divine Julius”). This led to his adopted son, Octavian, being known as divi filius (“son of the god”), a title that Augustus Caesar embraced. Coins issued by Augustus featured Caesar’s image and inscriptions such as “Divine Caesar and Son of God.” An Egyptian inscription calls Augustus Caesar a star “shining with the brilliance of the Great Heavenly Savior.” In 17 BC an uncommon star did appear in the heavens; Augustus commanded a celebration, and Virgil pronounced, “The turning point of the ages has come.” During Augustus’ reign, emperor worship exploded, especially in Asia Minor, which later became a hotbed for persecution of Christians. (Asia Minor was the area Paul covered in his first two [missionary journeys](missionary-journeys-Paul.html) as well as the location of the [seven churches](seven-churches-Revelation.html) receiving letters in Revelation.) From what we know of Augustus and the worship that was paid to him, it is clear that Luke is telling the story of Jesus in such a way that Christ is seen as the true possessor of the titles claimed by Augustus. It is not Augustus who is Savior and Lord, but “Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is Christ, the Lord” (Luke 2:11\). It is not Augustus, but Jesus who is the Son of God (Luke 1:32\). And it is not in Augustus that the turning point of the ages has come, but in Jesus Christ, who ushers in the kingdom of God (Luke 4:43\). The Roman creed stated, “Caesar is Lord,” but the Christian only recognizes Jesus as Lord. Because of their longstanding history of monotheism, Jews were granted an exemption from the required emperor worship. As long as Christianity was considered a sect of Judaism, Christians were also exempt from being forced to worship the Roman emperor. But as Jews began to denounce Christians and put them out of the synagogues, the Christians no longer were allowed this exception. Thus, the Roman government was the instrument of Jewish persecution in much of the New Testament. We see the first instance of this in the charges brought against Jesus Himself (Luke 23:1–2\). This happened again to Paul and Silas in Thessalonica, where some unbelieving Jews stirred up the crowd by saying, “They are all defying Caesar’s decrees, saying that there is another king, one called Jesus” (Acts 17:7\). Augustus Caesar died shortly after Jesus’ birth. While Augustus himself may not have claimed the prerogatives of deity, he accepted divine titles as a means of propaganda. As the Roman religion developed, emperor worship became a patriotic duty. The New Testament refutes Roman religion at every turn, proclaiming Jesus, not Caesar, as the Son of God and Lord (Mark 1:1; 1 Thessalonians 1:1\). Augustus decreed the census that was the human mechanism God used to fulfill the prophecy regarding the place of the Messiah’s birth. Augustus thought he was taking measure of the greatness of his kingdom, but, in reality, he was setting the scene for his ultimate Replacement. It was also under Augustus Caesar that the [Roman peace](Pax-Romana.html) was established, roads were built, and a common, stable culture was established so that the [gospel](what-is-the-gospel.html) could easily spread throughout the Roman Empire. While Augustus and the emperors after him thought they were building their own kingdom, they were simply unwitting and often unwilling actors in the building of the kingdom of God.
What is the biblical significance of Beer Lahai Roi?	Answer Beer Lahai Roi is a place first mentioned in Genesis 16\. God had promised [Abram](life-Abraham.html) children, but it had been years and still no children had come. Abram’s wife, [Sarai](life-Sarah.html), suggests that Abram take Sarai’s slave girl [Hagar](Hagar-in-the-Bible.html) and have a child with her. In the thinking of the day, the slave girl would have the child for her mistress. (We see the same sort of thinking with [Jacob and his wives](Jacob-Leah-Rachel.html) and their slave women in Genesis 30\.) The plan is successful, and Hagar conceives. However, as might be expected, strife and jealousy ensue. Hagar feels prideful, and Sarai blames Abram. Abram tells Sarai to deal with the situation however she sees fit. So she mistreats Hagar, and Hagar runs away, fleeing into the desert. Then we read of the origin of Beer Lahai Roi as a place name: “The angel of the LORD found Hagar near a spring in the desert; it was the spring that is beside the road to Shur. And he said, ‘Hagar, slave of Sarai, where have you come from, and where are you going?’ “‘I’m running away from my mistress Sarai,’ she answered. “Then the angel of the LORD told her, ‘Go back to your mistress and submit to her. . . . I will increase your descendants so much that they will be too numerous to count.’ “The angel of the LORD also said to her: ‘You are now pregnant and you will give birth to a son. You shall name him Ishmael, for the LORD has heard of your misery. . . .’ “She gave this name to the LORD who spoke to her: ‘You are the God who sees me,’ for she said, ‘I have now seen the One who sees me.’ That is why the well was called Beer Lahai Roi; it is still there, between Kadesh and Bered” (Genesis 16:7–14\). Beer Lahai Roi literally means “the well of him that lives and sees me” or “the well of the vision of life.” Regardless of the exact translation, Hagar named the location thus because the Living God saw her situation and intervened to give her hope and comfort. The same location is mentioned two other times as the place where Isaac was living. Genesis 24:62 says, “Now Isaac had come from Beer Lahai Roi, for he was living in the Negev,” and Genesis 25:11 adds, “After Abraham’s death, God blessed his son Isaac, who then lived near Beer Lahai Roi.” When Moses recorded the incident involving Hagar and the angel, it was more than 400 years later. Apparently, the well was still known to people in Moses’ day, and it went by the same name. The use of the name Beer Lahai Roi would have illustrated to the Hebrews that Abram and his family had been active in the land of Canaan long before the exodus and that God, through Moses, was simply bringing the people back in fulfillment of His promise to Abram. He is the Living God who saw the plight of the Egyptian slave Hagar, and He also saw the plight of the Israelites when they were enslaved in Egypt. Beer Lahai Roi can also be a reminder to us that the Living God sees our plight. When we were enslaved by sin and under the sentence of death, He saw us—that is, He knew our condition and had pity. El Roi, the God Who Sees, has done everything necessary to save us, coming to us in a manger, which led to a cross and a glorious resurrection.
What does it mean that God is a God of miracles?	Answer God is a God of miracles: “You are the God who performs miracles; you display your power among the peoples” (Psalm 77:14\). Who can study the universe and doubt His power in creation? Who can study the history of Israel and fail to see His providential arrangement of events? In contrast to the handiwork of the God of miracles, the work of man is puny and trifling. God does marvelous things, and He does them all with His own power, with no help from others. The Bible uses three main words to refer to a [miracle](miracles-literal.html): sign, wonder, and power. These three words help us better understand what the phrase God of miracles means. Basically, a miracle is an act of God beyond human understanding that displays God’s power, inspires wonder in humans, and acts as a sign that God is at work in the world. From a human perspective, a miracle of God is an extraordinary or unnatural event (a wonder) that reveals or confirms a specific message (a sign) through a mighty work (power). From the God of miracle’s vantage point, a miracle is nothing extraordinary or unnatural. It is simply a divine display of His might (power) that attracts the attention of humans (a wonder) to His Word or His purposes (a sign). The God of miracles uses supernatural power to reveal Himself to people on earth. The Greek word translated “miracle” is dunamis (the root of our word dynamite) and means “power.” God’s miracles often defy or overpower the laws of nature, but not always. God can also work within nature to perform a miracle. When God [parted the Red Sea](parting-Red-Sea.html), He used a powerful wind: “Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and all that night the LORD drove the sea back with a strong east wind and turned it into dry land. The waters were divided” (Exodus 14:21\). God does not use miracles merely as a means of authenticating Himself to people, but to reveal Himself to people who have eyes of faith to see. The God of miracles works extraordinary wonders to capture people’s attention. The unusual, unnatural dimension of God’s miracles commands our attention. When the Lord caused a [bush to burn](burning-bush.html) but not be consumed, Moses took notice: “The angel of the LORD appeared to him in flames of fire from within a bush. Moses saw that though the bush was on fire it did not burn up. So Moses thought, ‘I will go over and see this strange sight—why the bush does not burn up.’ When the LORD saw that he had gone over to look, God called to him from within the bush, ‘Moses! Moses!’ And Moses said, ‘Here I am’” (Exodus 3:2–4\). The wonder of it all piqued Moses’ interest and moved him to the place where he was ready to receive God’s message. The God of miracles uses signs to convey a message or reveal truth. People who seek signs often want to be entertained like Herod in Luke 23:8\. But God never uses miracles to amuse us; they always serve a purpose. Their overall objective is to glorify God. When Jesus raised [Lazarus](Lazarus-in-the-Bible.html) from the dead, He confirmed this purpose: “Then Jesus said, ‘Did I not tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?’ So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, ‘Father, I thank you that you have heard me. I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me’” (John 11:40–42\). Then Jesus called Lazarus back from the dead to life. Many of the Jews who had come to visit Mary saw this astounding miracle. As a result, they put their faith in Christ and believed that Jesus was the Son of God. Jesus showed the disciples, and the world, that He has power over death (verses 43–45\). The power reveals the source of the miracle: God. The wonder reveals the nature of the miracle: wonderful, awe\-inspiring, worthy of attention. The sign reveals the purpose of the miracle: to confirm a message or convey a truth. The Bible portrays God as a God of miracles, a God who has revealed His power to us and is worthy of praise: “Praise be to the LORD God, the God of Israel, who alone does marvelous deeds” (Psalm 72:18\). His miracles declare His absolute control over nature, events, people, and powers. His miracles reveal who God is and awaken humans to His presence and the presence of His Kingdom. God works through miracles to reveal His glory, confirm His message, and convey His purposes and truths to those who see Him with eyes of faith. His greatest miracle is that He gave His one and only Son to become a man who, through His sacrificial death on the cross, overcame the power of death through resurrection. Jesus paid the ultimate price, the penalty for our sin, and accomplished the miracle of salvation.
Who was Micaiah in the Bible?	Answer Micaiah was a common Hebrew name in the Bible. It means “Who is Like Yahweh?” Several people in the Old Testament bore the name Micaiah, the most prominent being Micaiah the prophet and son of Imlah. The account of Micaiah the prophet in 1 Kings 22:1–38 (and in the parallel passage, 2 Chronicles 18:1–27\) calls attention to the conflict surrounding prophecy in ancient Israel. When [Ahab](King-Ahab.html) ruled over Israel and [Jehoshaphat](King-Jehoshaphat.html) over Judah, the two kings decided to come together to attack the city of Ramoth\-Gilead to retake it from the Arameans. Before going to battle, they consulted with more than 400 royally appointed counselors of Israel. These were apostate prophets who had no regard for correctly delivering the word of the Lord. To please King Ahab and obtain his favor, these prophets only served to tell the king what he wanted to hear. The counselors brought before Ahab all prophesied victory in battle, but King Jehoshaphat remained suspicious. He wanted to hear from an independent prophet who would be faithful to the word of the Lord. Ahab offered to seek the counsel of Micaiah but warned Jehoshaphat that he hated this prophet. The reason? Micaiah always predicted evil for Ahab. An evil king is bound to receive bad news from God, so, if Micaiah was true to his calling, he could do nothing but deliver “evil” messages to Ahab. So Ahab hated him. At Jehoshaphat’s insistence, Micaiah was summoned, and the messenger sent to bring the prophet pleaded with Micaiah to fit in with the crowd for once: “Look, the other prophets without exception are predicting success for the king. Let your word agree with theirs, and speak favorably,” he said (1 Kings 22:13\). The honorable Micaiah said in reply, “As surely as the Lord lives, I can tell him only what the Lord tells me” (verse 14\). Standing before the two kings, Micaiah at first mockingly told Ahab what he wanted to hear, forecasting good news of victory over the Arameans. But Ahab, knowing Micaiah’s sarcasm, made him swear to tell the truth, and Micaiah told the wicked king what God really had to say. The prophet’s report was devastating: “I saw all Israel scattered on the hills like sheep without a shepherd, and the LORD said, ‘These people have no master. Let each one go home in peace’” (1 Kings 22:17\). Micaiah went on to tell King Ahab that a [deceiving spirit](lying-spirit.html) had misled the other prophets to predict victory so that Ahab would die in the battle. So angry was Zedekiah, the leader of the royal prophets, that he struck Micaiah on the cheek and publicly mocked his prophecy. In response, Micaiah prophesied Zedekiah’s eventual destruction (2 Chronicles 18:24\). King Ahab had Micaiah put in prison until he returned from battle. As he was being led away, Micaiah issued a final, urgent warning: “If you ever return safely, the Lord has not spoken through me. . . . Mark my words, all you people!” (1 Kings 22:28\). The kings did not believe him, but Micaiah had spoken the truth of God. King Ahab was killed in the fighting, just as Micaiah had predicted. Nothing more is said of the prophet Micaiah in the Bible. His courage in the face of intense political and professional pressure stands as a model for us. His truth\-telling led to persecution, but his words came to pass, being as they were a message from God. Micaiah, a man of integrity, is surely one of the prophets spoken of in the Bible’s “Hall of Faith”: “Some faced jeers and flogging, and even chains and imprisonment. . . . They went about in sheepskins and goatskins, destitute, persecuted and mistreated—the world was not worthy of them” (Hebrews 11:36–38\). Other people in the Bible named Micaiah are mentioned only briefly. The first was the father of Achbor, one of the court officials sent by King Josiah to the prophetess Huldah to inquire about the book of the law that the high priest Hilkiah had found in the temple (2 Kings 22:12\). The next was Micaiah, the mother of King Abijah of Judah and daughter of Uriel of Gibeah (2 Chronicles 13:2, ESV). Alternate spellings for Micaiah here are Maakah (NIV) and Maacah (NLT). A fourth Micaiah was one of the official princes sent by King Jehoshaphat to teach the law of the Lord in the towns of Judah (2 Chronicles 17:7\). In Nehemiah 12:35, the son of Zichri was called Micaiah. He was one of the priestly trumpeters in the procession at the dedication of the temple wall. And in Nehemiah 12:41 another Micaiah is named among the priests who blew trumpets at the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem. Finally, Micaiah the son of Gemariah and friend of Jeremiah recounted the words of the Lord to the Jewish officials during the reign of King Jehoiakim (Jeremiah 36:11–13\).
How serious of an issue is sermon plagiarism?	Answer Plagiarism of any type is always a serious issue. For a pastor, it is especially so. Sermon plagiarism—presenting all or part of another person’s sermon as one’s own—is a real temptation in this information age with so many sermons available online. But plagiarism in sermon preparation violates the [qualifications](qualifications-elders-deacons.html) of a pastor/elder in 1 Timothy 3 and Titus 1: a pastor is to be above reproach. Consider also 2 Timothy 2:15, which states that the pastor is to correctly handle the word of truth. A pastor is to be a person of deep integrity and truthfulness in his capacity as a preacher and teacher of the Word of God and in all of his life. Plagiarism is a theft of intellectual property, and such dishonesty is a serious issue in pastoral ministry. What constitutes sermon plagiarism? Of course, preaching a sermon from another pastor more or less verbatim, with no attribution to the author, is plagiarism. Whether the preacher actually claims the borrowed sermon as his own or simply gives an unspoken impression that it is his, it is plagiarism. When using the gist of a sermon, following the main points or organizational structure, or quoting a creative turn of phrase, the preacher should give proper citation to avoid plagiarizing. If it is discovered that the pastor has knowingly plagiarized a sermon, the leadership in the church will need to begin the process of loving church discipline as outlined in Matthew 18\. As part of his restoration, the pastor will need to confess to the church body because he sinned against them and effectively lied. If the offense was something less than verbatim plagiarism, the leadership will need to approach the situation more cautiously. For instance, if the sermon contained points from another sermon used without credit but the pastor was clearly generating his own thoughts based on those points, the issue still needs to be addressed, but the leadership should not rush into church discipline. Sermon plagiarism can be more of a temptation for those not committed to doing the hard work of study and original [preparation](preparing-a-sermon.html) on a consistent basis. In that case, the problem of discipline in the study needs to be addressed as well as the problem of plagiarism. Pastors often have several favorite commentators whom they consult in sermon preparation. If the pastor is consistent in referencing and quoting a given commentator or other preacher, the congregation should be aware of this. If sermon material is drawn from another sermon, citation should be made. Preachers are all standing on the shoulders of giants, and all are standing, ultimately, on the Word of God. Given all the sermons prepared over all the years, there are no truly original thoughts. Charles Spurgeon, perhaps the greatest English\-speaking preacher, said, “All originality and no plagiarism makes for dull preaching.” The intent behind Spurgeon’s statement was to advocate for being well\-read and studied in sermon preparation, not for stealing others’ words and passing them off as one’s own. A pastor should be encouraged to read others to make sure his thoughts are in line with other great thinkers. He should feel free to incorporate the ideas of others into his sermons to deepen and strengthen his messages. But he should take care to maintain his integrity in the pulpit, and, when he is leaning heavily on the thoughts of others, he should joyously and thankfully give them due and public credit.
What are the ophanim?	Answer Ophanim is the ancient Hebrew word for “wheels.” The singular is ophan. Of course, wheels are mentioned a number of times in the Old Testament, and ophanim can refer to normal wheels on a cart or chariot; but of special interest are the [wheels on the throne of God](Ezekiel-wheels.html) mentioned in Ezekiel’s vision. Ophanim are mentioned in Ezekiel 1:15–21: “As I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel on the ground beside each creature with its four faces. This was the appearance and structure of the wheels: They sparkled like topaz, and all four looked alike. Each appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel. As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the creatures faced; the wheels did not change direction as the creatures went. Their rims were high and awesome, and all four rims were full of eyes all around.” Ophanim are also mentioned in a similar fashion in Ezekiel 10:9–13: “And then I saw four wheels beside the cherubim, one beside each cherub. The wheels radiating were sparkling like diamonds in the sun. All four wheels looked alike, each like a wheel within a wheel. When they moved, they went in any of the four directions but in a perfectly straight line. Where the cherubim went, the wheels went straight ahead. The cherubim were full of eyes in their backs, hands, and wings. The wheels likewise were full of eyes. I heard the wheels called ‘wheels within wheels.’” In the passages above, the throne of God is set on wheels (ophanim) and then pushed by four angels. There are wheels inside of wheels at cross angles, with the effect that the throne can move in any direction without having to turn. The angels who are powering the throne also have four faces, one facing each direction, so they can likewise travel in any direction without having to turn. The angels are identified as cherubim. This seems clear enough—at least as clear as an apocalyptic passage full of symbolism can be. The throne is on wheels, it can move in any direction, and it is powered by cherubim. Of course, Ezekiel’s description should not be understood as a “literal” picture of God’s throne. God is spirit and therefore does not literally sit on a throne constructed of physical materials; likewise, He is omnipotent, so He does not need to be carried around on a throne from place to place. The point of the visions involving ophanim in Ezekiel is to show that God’s reign (throne) is all\-encompassing, responding to any situation in any location with lightning speed. The visions are simply a picturesque way of saying that God is sovereign and omnipresent. The fact that the wheels and the angels are “full of eyes” emphasizes God’s omniscience. The ophanim have been a point of fascination for many, and later Jewish apocalyptic writers gave them a life of their own. The wheels themselves came to be identified as a particular class of angel, the ophanim. [Seraphim](seraphim.html) and [cherubim](cherubim.html) are mentioned in Scripture as angels, and to this some have added the ophanim (also spelled ofanim). The pseudepigraphal [Book of Enoch](book-of-Enoch.html) has helped further the idea that ophanim are angelic beings. Colossians 1:16 speaks of “thrones” in a way that some interpret as a type of spiritual being: “For by \[Christ] all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.” The “thrones” here have come to be associated by some with the ophanim, angels who help guard the throne of God. There are several problems with this interpretation of Colossians 1:16\. First, it is not clear at all that the verse is speaking of specific spiritual beings. It seems much more natural to interpret the passage as simply referring to various authorities (human or otherwise) that will one day be subjected to Christ. Second, although not specifically stated as such, the thrones in Colossians 1:16 seem to be a metonymical representation of rivals to Christ’s authority, whereas the ophanim, assuming they exist as angels, would be agents of His authority and already in submission to Him. This brings us back to the biggest problem of all, and that is making the ophanim a separate class of angel. It is best to simply understand the ophanim as nothing other than wheels on the throne of God, not literal wheels on a literal throne, and not wheel\-like creatures guarding the throne. The ophanim are just the wheels that Ezekiel saw in a vision that emphasizes the all\-encompassing sovereignty and power of God—He reigns in every direction and in every location.
What is the Protoevangelium of James?	Answer The Protoevangelium of James is a [pseudepigraphal](pseudepigrapha.html) work also known as the Book of James (not to be confused with the New Testament [Epistle of James](Book-of-James.html)), the Gospel of James, or the Infancy Gospel of James. It is subtitled “The Birth of Mary the Holy Mother of God, and Very Glorious Mother of Jesus Christ.” The word protoevangelium means “proto\-gospel” or “precursor to the gospel,” which in this case means Mary’s story. The Protoevangelium of James claims to have been written by [James](life-James.html), the leader of the church in Jerusalem and the author of the New Testament Epistle of James. (Traditionally, James is designated as the half\-brother of Jesus, but, according to this work, he would have to be the stepbrother of Jesus.) The Protoevangelium of James claims to give additional details about Mary’s birth and childhood as well as about the birth of Jesus. The story related in the Protoevangelium of James begins with Joachim, Mary’s father, and Anna, her mother, who are suffering because of their childlessness. They each call out to God for a child and promise to give the child to the priests to serve in the temple if they are blessed with one. God hears their prayers and tells them they will have a child. When Mary is born, they keep close watch over her to make sure she cannot come into contact with any unclean thing, keeping her in her sanctuary\-bedroom most of the time. At the age of three, Mary is taken to the temple and given to the priest who prophesies over her: “The Lord has magnified thy name in all generations. In thee, on the last of the days, the Lord will manifest His redemption to the sons of Israel” (\&sect. 7\). According to the Protoevangelium of James, Mary lives in the temple until she is twelve (§ 8\); at that time, the priests decide she should marry, as it would not be proper for her to continue living in the temple. Joseph is chosen by lot to marry her, but he objects: “I have children, and I am an old man, and she is a young girl. I am afraid lest I become a laughing\-stock to the sons of Israel” (§ 9\). The priest warns Joseph that he needs to submit to God’s will or face judgment, so he acquiesces out of fear. Time passes, and the angel announces to Mary that she will bear a child. By this time, she is about sixteen years old and still a virgin (§ 12\). The exchange between Mary and the angel, as related in the Protoevangelium of James, is similar to that found in the New Testament. After six months, Joseph discovers Mary is pregnant. He is in anguish because it was his job to make sure nothing happened to her, and now it appears he has failed. Mary explains the circumstances surrounding her pregnancy, but Joseph is torn because, on one hand, he does not want to conceal a sin if Mary has been unfaithful, and, on the other hand, he does not want to fight against God if Mary’s baby is indeed miraculously conceived. According to the Protoevangelium of James, the priests find out that Mary is pregnant and accuse Joseph of a horrible sin, as he was supposed to keep her pure (§ 15\). However, they administer a test, “the water of ordeal of the Lord” (similar to that found in Numbers 5:11–31\), and both are found to be innocent of any sin (§ 16\). Then comes the Roman decree for everyone to register in their hometown, so Joseph travels to Bethlehem with Mary and some of his sons by an earlier marriage (§ 17\). He debates whether he should register Mary as his wife or his daughter. On the way to Bethlehem, Mary goes into labor, so they find a cave, and Joseph goes to look for a midwife. He finds a midwife who seems to know all about Mary and the situation, and she reassures Joseph. Jesus is born (§ 19\). In the timeline presented in the Protoevangelium of James, the magi show up in Jerusalem soon after Jesus’ birth, and commotion follows. Herod orders the killing of all the babies in Bethlehem, but Mary and Joseph escape. However, John the Baptist is in danger, so he is hidden. When John’s father, [Zacharias](Zechariah-in-the-Bible.html), will not give him up, he is killed (§ 23\). [Simeon](Simeon-in-the-Bible.html), who later sees Jesus in the temple, is chosen by lot to replace Zacharias in the temple. The Protoevangelium of James is the first work to insist that Mary remained a perpetual virgin. Joseph marries her simply to have her legally live in his home and had no intention of ever having sexual relations with her. He already has children through a previous marriage, so the “brothers” of Jesus are merely His stepbrothers and older than He is. Scholarly consensus is that the Protoevangelium of James was written in the mid\-second century; thus, is could not have been written by Jesus’ half\-brother (or stepbrother, as this work would maintain). Since it is pseudepigraphal (written by someone claiming to be someone else) the Protoevangelium of James was rejected by the church. Origen speaks of it in the third century as of dubious origin. The work has been condemned by church councils and church officials through the years, and even by the Catholic Church, which teaches the [perpetual virginity](perpetual-virginity-Mary.html) of Mary. While it is natural to be curious about the details of Jesus’ (and Mary’s) upbringing, God has told us all we need to know in the New Testament. Some imaginative speculation may be acceptable, but it is unacceptable to represent that speculation as truth, and this appears to be what the author of the Protoevangelium of James has done.
Who was Obed-Edom in the Bible?	Answer Obed\-Edom was a man from the tribe of Levi. We first read about Obed\-Edom in 2 Samuel 6:10 when David was bringing the [ark of the covenant](ark-of-the-covenant.html) to Jerusalem for a more permanent resting place. The ark had been in the home of Abinadab and his sons Eleazar, Uzzah, and Ahio for many years since being captured by the Philistines and returned to Israel (1 Samuel 5:1; 7:1–2\). David and thirty thousand men arrived at Abinadab’s house to escort the ark to Jerusalem. The problems began when they placed the ark on a cart drawn by oxen instead of transporting it on the shoulders of the Levites as God had instructed in Numbers 7:9\. It may have been that in the excitement David forgot the instruction about its transport. But, whatever the reason, Uzzah, Ahio and all David’s men were joyfully transporting the ark of the covenant to Jerusalem on a cart when the oxen stumbled. Fearing the ark was about to slide off, [Uzzah](Uzzah.html) reached out to steady it. When his hand touched the ark, the “the Lord’s anger burned against Uzzah because of his irreverent act; therefore God struck him down, and he died there beside the ark of God” (2 Samuel 6:7\). While this punishment may seem extreme to us, the Israelites had been warned for centuries that the ark of the covenant was holy to the Lord. Only Levites could carry it, only high priests could minister before it, and no one was to look inside it (Exodus 40:20–21; Numbers 4:15; 1 Samuel 6:19\). David was angry over this incident and became afraid of the Lord, refusing to take the ark to Jerusalem himself. Instead of completing the journey to Jerusalem with the ark, David placed the ark in the home of a man named Obed\-Edom the Gittite, and it remained there for three months (2 Samuel 6:10–11\). During the three months that the ark was in the possession of Obed\-Edom, the Lord blessed Obed\-Edom and his entire household (1 Chronicles 13:13–14\). We can infer from this that Obed\-Edom was a God\-fearing man and showed proper reverence for the ark, unlike Uzzah who may have become overly familiar with it while it remained in his father’s house for twenty years. Despite knowing about Uzzah’s fate, Obed\-Edom welcomed the ark and seemed to have no misgivings. Indeed, as a godly man, Obed\-Edom had nothing to fear: “The righteous are as bold as a lion” (Proverbs 28:1\). It could be that he viewed having the ark in his home as a high honor rather than a nuisance, and God rewarded his attitude. When King David saw that God had blessed rather than cursed Obed\-Edom, his fear of transporting the ark dissipated and he went once again to retrieve the ark (1 Chronicles 15:25\). This time he did according to God’s law and brought Levites to carry the ark on their shoulders. He also showed utmost respect for the ark: “When those who were carrying the ark of the LORD had taken six steps, he sacrificed a bull and a fattened calf” (2 Samuel 6:13\). One of the ways God blessed Obed\-Edom was in giving him many sons—eight to be exact. First Chronicles 26:4–6 lists them and their own sons, along with their father, as gatekeepers in God’s temple. Obed\-Edom named each of his sons in honor of God’s blessing on his household. For example, he named one son Jehozabad (“The Lord Has Given”) and another Issachar (“Reward”). Obed\-Edom had sixty\-two strong male heirs, and it appears that all were faithful to the Lord. Although his was a minor role in Scripture, Obed\-Edom is an example to us that God is fully aware of those whose hearts are wholly His (2 Chronicles 16:9\), and He delights to bless those who honor Him (see 1 Samuel 2:30\).
Who was Doeg the Edomite?	Answer Doeg the Edomite is first mentioned in 1 Samuel 21:7 and described as a servant of [King Saul](life-Saul.html). Doeg is called Saul’s chief shepherd, which probably means he was in charge of all the servants tending Saul’s animals. Doeg was an Edomite, not a Hebrew. Israel had been at war with Edom, so Doeg may have entered Saul’s service as either a captive or a traitor to his people (1 Samuel 14:47\). Doeg was an evil man. Although he pretended to serve Israel, he served only himself. One day while David was running from Saul, he stopped to seek assistance at the tabernacle in Nob, and it so happened that Doeg was also at the tabernacle that day, “detained before the Lord” (1 Samuel 21:7\). It could be that Doeg was at the tabernacle because it was the sabbath day, and he could travel no farther without breaking the law; or it could be that he was there to offer a sacrifice to complete a vow or to be ceremonially cleansed. Regardless of why Doeg was there, this was a fateful encounter with David. At the tabernacle, the priest Ahimilech gave David and his men some [consecrated bread](bread-of-the-presence.html) from the table of showbread (1 Samuel 21:6\) and Goliath’s sword (verses 8–9\). Doeg witnessed all this and later told Saul of David’s whereabouts: “I saw the son of Jesse come to Ahimelek son of Ahitub at Nob. Ahimelek inquired of the Lord for him; he also gave him provisions and the sword of Goliath the Philistine” (1 Samuel 22:9–10\). By sharing this information while Saul was in a petulant mood, Doeg placed all the Lord’s priests in peril. King Saul summoned Ahimilech and his family and, when they stood before the king, charged them with treason. “Then the king ordered the guards at his side: ‘Turn and kill the priests of the Lord, because they too have sided with David. They knew he was fleeing, yet they did not tell me’” (verse 17\). Saul’s Israelite guards refused to murder God’s anointed priests, so the king turned to Doeg the Edomite and told him to kill them. The wicked Doeg may have seen this as an opportunity to ingratiate himself with the king, so he murdered eighty\-five priests, but he did not stop there. Doeg continued the slaughter by wiping out the entire population of Nob, the city where David had sought help: “He also put to the sword Nob, the town of the priests, with its men and women, its children and infants, and its cattle, donkeys and sheep” (1 Samuel 22:19\). One priest, a son of Ahimilech, escaped and ran to join David’s band of men. He told David what had happened. Sorrowful, David replied, “That day, when Doeg the Edomite was there, I knew he would be sure to tell Saul. I am responsible for the death of your whole family. Stay with me; don’t be afraid. The man who wants to kill you is trying to kill me too. You will be safe with me” (1 Samuel 22:22–23\). Doeg the Edomite was a self\-seeking, bloodthirsty man and an enemy of God. After the incident at Nob, David wrote Psalm 52: “Why do you boast of evil, you mighty hero? Why do you boast all day long, you who are a disgrace in the eyes of God? . . . You love evil rather than good, falsehood rather than speaking the truth” (Psalm 52:1, 3\). Destruction is promised for the Doegs of the world: “Surely God will bring you down to everlasting ruin; . . . he will uproot you from the land of the living” (verse 5\). In contrast, the man who follows the Lord has hope for the future: “But I am like an olive tree flourishing in the house of God; I trust in God’s unfailing love for ever and ever” (verse 8\).
What is the meaning of chaff in the Bible?	Answer Chaff is the loose, outer covering on wheat and other grains that must be separated in the threshing and winnowing process of harvesting grain. In Bible times, grain was threshed, or trampled, crushed, and beaten, on outdoor [threshing floors](threshing-floor.html) to separate out the inedible parts of the grain, called chaff. The lightweight chaff would blow away on the wind or sometimes was burned as fuel. In the winnowing process, the grain was then tossed into the air, allowing the wind to further separate any remaining bits of the husk from the wheat. These bits, called chaff, would be carried away in fine particles like dust. In a few instances in Scripture, chaff also refers to dried grass or hay (Isaiah 5:24; 33:11\). Threshing and winnowing by hand were common in ancient times, allowing for vivid biblical imagery. Separating the worthless chaff from the valuable grain was a ready symbol for separating good from evil or showing the difference between God’s treatment of the godly versus the wicked. In Psalm 1:1–4, the people of God are blessed and firmly established, but “not so the wicked! They are like chaff that the wind blows away” (verse 4\). In Isaiah 33, the righteous people of God survive judgment while the wicked nations are consumed. Speaking of the Assyrians, Isaiah says, “You conceive chaff, you give birth to straw; your breath is a fire that consumes you” (verse 11\). According to Hosea, God’s way of dealing with wickedness in Israel was to remove the idolaters like chaff swirling away on the wind: “Therefore they will be like the morning mist, like the early dew that disappears, like chaff swirling from a threshing floor, like smoke escaping through a window” (Hosea 13:3\). The powerlessness of wicked people and nations against the judgment of God is compared to chaff floating on the wind: “Although the peoples roar like the roar of surging waters, when he rebukes them they flee far away, driven before the wind like chaff on the hills, like tumbleweed before a gale” (Isaiah 17:13; see also Zephaniah 2:2\). In Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, the ungodly nations of the world, represented as a statue constructed of various elements, disintegrate and disperse like chaff before the victorious kingdom of God: “Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were all broken to pieces and became like chaff on a threshing floor in the summer. The wind swept them away without leaving a trace. But the rock that struck the statue became a huge mountain and filled the whole earth” (Daniel 2:35\). In the New Testament, the Messiah, Jesus Christ, is portrayed by [John the Baptist](life-John-Baptist.html) as the winnower or harvester of grain: “I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. His winnowing fork is in his hand, and he will clear his threshing floor, gathering his wheat into the barn and burning up the chaff with unquenchable fire” (Matthew 3:11–12; see also Luke 3:17\). Jesus came the first time to save, but the second time He will come to judge the world with righteousness. The chaff—the wicked, the ungodly, the faithless, the unbelieving, the unfruitful—He will separate from the godly and consign to a horrible fate. Therefore, “be always on the watch, and pray that you may be able to escape all that is about to happen, and that you may be able to stand before the Son of Man” (Luke 21:36\).
Who was Ithamar in the Bible?	Answer Ithamar is first mentioned in Exodus 6:23 as one of four sons of Aaron the priest, Moses’ brother. Aaron’s sons—[Nadab, Abihu](Nadab-and-Abihu.html), [Eleazar](Eleazar-in-the-Bible.html), and Ithamar—also served as priests to the Lord (Exodus 28:1\). According to Numbers 3:2, Ithamar was most likely the youngest son. Although the Bible does not often mention the names of mothers, it does in Ithamar’s case. Aaron had married a woman named Elishiba, the daughter of a man named Amminadab. This is significant because we learn from the genealogy in the book of Ruth that Amminadab was also the great\-grandfather of Boaz (Ruth 4:19–21\). So Ithamar was a distant relative of Boaz and eventually of King David (Ruth 20:22\). Ithamar is mentioned again in Leviticus 10\. Aaron’s two older sons, acting in their priestly roles, desecrated God’s holiness by offering “[strange fire](strange-fire.html)” to the Lord. For this act of blatant disobedience, the Lord struck them both dead. The Lord then instructed [Aaron](life-Aaron.html) and his two remaining sons, Eleazar and Ithamar, not to mourn for their brothers and sons, although the rest of the camp could do so (Leviticus 10:6\). While this seems a harsh order, it could be that Eleazar and Ithamar had already been consecrated as active priests and were in their season of serving, and they could not set that role aside to grieve for two men whom the Lord had judged. Moses explained God’s reason for killing Nadab and Abihu: “Among those who approach me I will be proved holy; in the sight of all the people I will be honored” (Leviticus 10:3\). Later, the Lord Himself spoke to Aaron, explaining why priests must adhere to all God had commanded them. He said it was so that the Israelites would learn to “distinguish between the holy and the common, between the unclean and the clean, and so you can teach the Israelites all the decrees the Lord has given them through Moses” (verses 10–11\). We can assume that this tragic event made a strong impression on Aaron’s remaining sons, and they served the Lord faithfully as priests from then on (1 Chronicles 24:2\). Ithamar’s specific assignment was to oversee the clans of Levites called the [Gershonites and the Merarites](Kohathites-Gershonites-Merarites.html) (Numbers 4:28, 33\). The Gershonites, under the direction of Ithamar, were “to carry the curtains of the tabernacle, that is, the tent of meeting, its covering and its outer covering of durable leather, the curtains for the entrance to the tent of meeting, the curtains of the courtyard surrounding the tabernacle and altar, the curtain for the entrance to the courtyard, the ropes and all the equipment used in the service of the tent” (Numbers 4:25–26\). The Merarites were “to carry the frames of the tabernacle, its crossbars, posts and bases, as well as the posts of the surrounding courtyard with their bases, tent pegs, ropes, all their equipment and everything related to their use” (Numbers 4:31–32\). Because Ithamar remained faithful to his God, unlike his brothers who had the same opportunities, Aaron’s priestly line continued through him. Five high priests, beginning with [Eli](Eli-in-the-Bible.html), were descendants of Ithamar, but most of the high priests were from his brother Eleazar’s line. While two of his older brothers chose dishonor, Ithamar chose to honor the Lord, and his name is recorded in Scripture as a faithful priest of the Lord.
What is foreknowledge in the Bible?	Answer Foreknowledge is knowing things or events before they exist or happen. In Greek, the term for “foreknowledge” is prognosis, which expresses the idea of knowing reality before it is real and events before they occur. In Christian theology, foreknowledge refers to the all\-knowing, [omniscient](God-omniscient.html) nature of God whereby He knows reality before it is real, all things and events before they happen, and all people before they exist. Both Old and New Testaments speak of God’s foreknowledge. Nothing in the future is hidden from God’s eyes (Isaiah 41:23; 42:9; 44:6–8; 46:10\). God sees our lives, our bodies, and our days even before we are conceived: “My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be” (Psalm 139:15–16\). God promised to bless future peoples through Abraham (Genesis 12:3\). God told Moses what would happen with Pharaoh (Exodus 3:19\). Through God’s foreknowledge, the prophets spoke of a coming Messiah (Isaiah 9:1–7; Jeremiah 23:5–6\). Through Daniel, God made known the future rise and fall of kingdoms (Daniel 2:31–45; 7\). And in many New Testament passages, Old Testament prophecies are fulfilled in Jesus Christ’s ministry and in the formation of the church (Matthew 1:22; 4:14; 8:17; John 12:38–41; Acts 2:17–21; 3:22–25; Galatians 3:8; Hebrews 5:6; 1 Peter 1:10–12\). The apostle Peter teaches that God had foreknowledge of His Son’s sacrificial death long before Jesus died (1 Peter 1:20; see also Revelation 13:8\). Jesus’ death on the cross was part of God’s eternal plan of salvation before the creation of the world. On the day of Pentecost, Peter condemns those who put Christ to death but at the same time points to the sovereignty of God: they had been given free rein to do as they wished with Christ because of “God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge” (Acts 2:23\). Although evil rulers had conspired to kill the Lord Jesus, His death had been decided by God beforehand (Acts 4:28\). The Bible teaches that God’s children were [chosen beforehand](predestination-foreknowledge.html), and God’s foreknowledge was involved. The elect are those “who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father” (1 Peter 1:2\). “For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers and sisters” (Romans 8:29\). But God’s choice of [the elect](elect-of-God.html) was not simply based on His foreknowledge of events; it was based on His good pleasure: “For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will” (Ephesians 1:4–5\). In Romans 11:2, divine foreknowledge suggests an eternal connection between God and His chosen or “foreknown” people because of His loving faithfulness: “God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew” (ESV). The foreknowledge of God is far more than His ability to “see the future”; His foreknowledge is a true “knowing” of what will come to pass, based on His free choice. He decrees what will come to pass. In other words, foreknowledge is not just intellectual; it is personal and relational.
What is the Gospel of Truth?	Answer The Gospel of Truth is one of the Gnostic writings discovered at Nag Hamadi. Nag Hamadi is a location in Egypt where thirteen ancient books were found in 1945, and translations of these books were finally completed in the 1970s. Along with the Gospel of Truth, the [Nag Hamadi library](Nag-Hammadi.html) (as it has come to be called) also contains the more well\-known [Gospel of Thomas](gospel-of-Thomas.html) and the [Gospel of Philip](gospel-of-Philip.html). The term Gnostic comes from the Greek word gnosis, which simply means “knowledge.” (For instance, an agnostic is someone who claims to have no knowledge of God’s existence.) The Gnostics were a heretical branch of Christianity that taught that special knowledge was imparted to their leaders and that this special, secret, hidden knowledge was the true key to salvation. The Gnostics believed that this knowledge was not revealed in the canonical gospels or in the rest of the canonical writings of the New Testament but is revealed in the [Gnostic writings](Gnostic-gospels.html), including the Gospel of Truth. According to Gnosticism, Christ came to save us from ignorance more than from the penalty of sin. The first line of the Gospel of Truth highlights this aspect of salvation: “The gospel of truth is joy to those who have received from the Father of truth the gift of knowing him by the power of the Logos” (tr. by Robert M. Grant) The Gospel of Truth does not contain any firsthand accounts of Jesus’ life such as we find in the New Testament gospels, although it does use some similar language. For instance, the Gospel of Truth contains this description: “He labored even on the Sabbath for the sheep which he found fallen into the pit,” which seems to be a reference to Jesus’ healing of the man with a withered hand in Matthew 12:9–14\. However, the passage goes on to put a Gnostic spin on it by saying, “He saved the life of that sheep, bringing it up from the pit in order that you may understand fully what that Sabbath is, you who possess full understanding.” In another passage, the Gospel of Truth starts out with something that sounds very much like the parable of the lost sheep in Luke 15:1–7: “He is the shepherd who left behind the ninety\-nine sheep which had not strayed and went in search of that one which was lost. He rejoiced when he had found it.” But, once again, the Gospel of Truth expounds on the story in typical Gnostic fashion, inserting some esoteric knowledge that can only be understood by a select few: “For ninety\-nine is a number of the left hand, which holds it. The moment he finds the one, however, the whole number is transferred to the right hand. Thus it is with him who lacks the one, that is, the entire right hand which attracts that in which it is deficient, seizes it from the left side and transfers it to the right. In this way, then, the number becomes one hundred. This number signifies the Father.” The New Testament gospels give us eyewitness accounts of the life and teaching of Jesus. The Gospel of Truth gives us esoteric and mystical teaching about God and the world. Much of it is difficult to make any sense of. The discovery of the Gospel of Truth and other ancient documents at Nag Hamadi has caused some people to question the validity of the canonical New Testament. Many reason that these early “Gnostic Christians” understood the original teachings of Jesus better than those who compiled the canonical New Testament. There is a rise of Gnosticism today, including a resurgence of Gnostic churches. In the final analysis, the Gospel of Truth is written far later than the New Testament gospels and epistles. Most scholars put the date of composition of the Gospel of Truth between AD 140 and 180\. The work was known to several of the early church fathers who rejected it. While the Gnostic works from the Nag Hamadi library can give us valuable insight into the controversies and heresies in the early church, they cannot give us reliable information about the gospel—a gospel that not only informs us but offers forgiveness of sin to everyone who believes. “And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit” (Ephesians 1:13\).
Who was Herod the Great?	Answer The name Herod comes up again and again in the New Testament from Matthew 2 to Acts 26\. A casual reader might think that Herod had tremendous longevity as a ruler. However, Herod is the family name of a ruling dynasty in Palestine. There are four different Herods in the New Testament as well as Herod Philip II, who is referred to as Philip the tetrarch in the New Testament. Herod I came to be known as Herod the Great and was also called King of the Jews. He ruled from 37 or 36 BC to 4 BC. He is mentioned in the New Testament in Matthew 2\. Magi from the East came to Jerusalem looking for the one who had been born [King of the Jews](King-of-the-Jews.html). Of course, this would arrest Herod’s attention, as this was his title. Herod called the scribes and determined that, according to prophecy, the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. As the [magi](three-wise-men.html) left for Bethlehem to find the Messiah, Herod asked them to report back to him with the location of the newborn King “so that I too may go and worship him” (Matthew 2:8\). Of course, Herod had no such intentions. The magi find Jesus and worship Him, presenting their gifts to Him, but they are then warned by God in a dream not to return to Herod. When Herod realizes that the magi have not reported back to him, he is furious and calls for the slaughter of all the boys up to two years old in Bethlehem and the surrounding area, hoping to end the life of any potential rival. God warns Joseph that he needs to flee to Egypt with Jesus and Mary. Jesus is not harmed; however, there is a great [slaughter of the innocents](Massacre-of-the-Innocents.html) in and around Bethlehem (Matthew 2:16–18\). Such is Herod the Great’s biblical legacy. Herod the Great was the son of a high\-ranking official in the Hasmonean dynasty, which was ruling Palestine as an independent kingdom. He was an Idumean or [Edomite](Edomites.html) (a descendant of Esau), but there had been intermarriage between Jews and Edomites, and Herod publicly identified himself as a Jew, although he was not faithful to observe Jewish Law. In 41 BC Herod the Great was named governor of Galilee. However, the Jewish Hasmonean dynasty was in conflict with Rome, and Herod supported Rome in the conflict. He was given the title King of the Jews by the Roman Senate and then charged with the responsibility of conquering [Judea](Judea-in-the-Bible.html) so that he could rule as a client king. After about three years of fighting, Herod was victorious in 37 or 36 BC. As king of Judea, Herod the Great’s primary directive was to carry out the wishes of Rome. As always, Rome wanted to maintain peace and foster good will among the local inhabitants who had been conquered. (If that didn’t work, Rome would eventually respond with overwhelming force.) Herod tried to foster good will by reducing taxes, enacting policies that helped bring about economic prosperity, and building public works including the incredible artificial port city of Caesarea, the fortress of Masada, and fortifications around Jerusalem. Herod also built a magnificent palace for himself atop a man\-made mountain. The palace was called the Herodium. In order to gain favor with the Jews, Herod the Great greatly enlarged and updated the temple in Jerusalem to a size and magnificence it had never enjoyed before, not even under Solomon. This renovated structure became known as Herod’s temple. He also married Mariamne, a Hasmonean princess, and appointed her brother as high priest. Despite his brilliant and ambitious building projects, Herod the Great had a dark side that showed itself in the events of Matthew 2 and in other historical events. He always feared potential rivals. He had his wife’s brother Aristobulus, the high priest, drowned in the swimming pool in his palace. He put to death 46 members of the Sanhedrin. He killed his mother\-in\-law. He also had his wife Mariamne murdered along with two of their sons, as he considered them potential rivals with legitimate claim to the throne because of their Hasmonean lineage. (Herod had ten wives in all and many other children who did not have Hasmonean blood.) Augustus Caesar is reported to have said, “It is better to be Herod’s dog than one of his children.” When placed in this context, the incident in Matthew 2 does not seem out of character. In BC 4, after a long and excruciating illness, Herod the Great died. This news was reported to Joseph by an angel of the Lord in a dream in Matthew 2:19, so Joseph knew it was safe to return to Israel with Jesus. Of course, our dating system will cause some consternation. We know that Herod died in 4 BC, which means that Jesus must have been born before 4 BC. It is normally assumed that Jesus was born in 1 BC (or perhaps 0 BC or AD 1\), but these dates were assigned at least nine centuries later, and there were some errors in the calculations. So Jesus was born some time before 4 BC, and we do not know how much time passed between Joseph’s taking his family to safety in Egypt and Herod’s death. Upon Herod the Great’s death, his sons were appointed rulers in his place. Archelaus was appointed ethnarch (ruler of an ethnic group, but not a king) of Samaria, Judea, and Idumea. He is mentioned once in Scripture: when Joseph heard that Archelaus was ruling in Judea in place of his father Herod, Joseph took his family to Nazareth in Galilee (Matthew 2:22–23\). Philip (Herod Philip II) was appointed tetrarch of Iturea and Traconitus. Philip is mentioned later in the New Testament as the one who lost his wife to his half\-brother, Herod Antipas, the Herod who was then rebuked by John the Baptist for taking his brother Philip’s wife (Matthew 14:3–4\). Herod the Great was an ambitious and ruthless ruler who set himself in opposition to the [King of kings and Lord of lords](King-of-kings-Lord-of-lords.html). Throughout history and the scriptural record, we see the Herod family following in the footsteps of their father in opposing Christ.
Can we speak things into existence?	Answer Speaking things into existence is solely within God’s power and exclusively His right. When God created the world, He simply spoke, and light appeared (Genesis 1:3\); the sky was formed (verses 7–8\); dry land emerged (verse 9\); vegetation sprang up (verse 11\); the sun, moon, and stars appeared (verses 14–15\); fish and birds materialized (verses 20–21\); and animal life appeared (verse 24\). God’s act of creation shows His unique and mighty power in a way that can never be duplicated. God is the only one who can speak things into existence. It is not something we, as human beings, have the power to do. When God brought [the plagues](ten-plagues-Egypt.html) upon Egypt, the pagan magicians were able to mimic the results of the first two miracles. But when Moses turned the dust of the ground into gnats, the magi of Egypt were stumped. They could not animate inanimate things: “This is the finger of God,” they told Pharaoh (Exodus 8:19\). There are people who believe it is possible for mankind to speak things into existence. Some of them base their claims on a misinterpretation of certain Scripture passages. When we only look at one verse of one short section of Scripture, without considering that passage in its [proper context](context-Bible.html), we can make those kinds of mistakes. One verse people often cite when trying to prove that man can speak things into existence is Mark 11:24, “I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours.” First, these words of Jesus do not in any way communicate the idea of creation—bringing something into existence that did not exist previously. In the previous verse (Mark 11:23\), Jesus gives the example of moving a mountain, but He does not mention the idea of speaking a new mountain into existence. Second, Mark 11:24 must be taken in context with the rest of Scripture. First John 5:14 says, “If we ask anything according to his will, he hears us.” We are told to submit to God’s will in our prayers. We are never given the power to speak things into existence. Elsewhere, Jesus taught, “Seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness” (Matthew 6:33, ESV). When we seek God first and align our thoughts and desires with His thoughts and desires, then we are showing true faith. That, in turn, leads to us asking for the things that God wants, not the things that we want. Our desires become His desires, and our prayers become requests to fulfill His desires rather than our own. The purpose of prayer is not to speak things into existence but to conform our will to God’s (see Luke 22:42\). Another passage often used as a proof text that we can speak things into existence is Romans 4:17, which speaks of “the God who gives life to the dead and calls into being things that were not.” Many [prosperity teachers](prosperity-gospel.html) latch onto the phrase “calls into being things that were not” and try to use it as biblical evidence that we can do the same thing. They misread the passage, however. Paul is clearly talking about God, not man, calling things into existence. Speaking things into existence is God’s domain. Finally, another passage in Scripture plainly shows mankind’s inability to speak things into existence. Lamentations 3:37 asks the rhetorical question, “Who can speak and have it happen if the Lord has not decreed it?” The answer, of course, is “no one.” None of us has the power to speak and bring things to pass through the sheer force of our word. Only God has that power. His decrees will stand. When He speaks, it’s as good as done.
What does the Bible mean when it says not to touch God’s anointed?	Answer The command to touch not God’s anointed is found in two places in Scripture: “Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm” (1 Chronicles 16:22; Psalm 105:15\). These passages are sometimes used in [Pentecostal](Pentecostals.html) and [Charismatic](Charismatic-movement.html) circles to defend certain preachers from criticism. Preachers who promote themselves or their ministries as “anointed” warn their would\-be critics, “Do not touch God’s anointed!” Of course, this helps to insulate them from scrutiny and allows them to spread falsehood and bad theology unrestrained. Others take God’s command “Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm” to mean that Christians are promised protection from all bad things. Both of the above interpretations of “Do not touch my anointed ones” ignore the context of the passages in question. The “anointed ones” in these passages are not modern\-day Pentecostal preachers. And the Bible never promises that God’s prophets, anointed ones, children, or other faithful believers will never suffer harm from evil people. As Jesus explained to the Pharisees, “God in his wisdom said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, some of whom they will kill and others they will persecute’” (Luke 11:49\). Here is the context of 1 Chronicles 16:22: David is publicly praising God by giving a condensed review of the miraculous history of Israel. He cites some of the miracles God performed to fulfill His promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (1 Chronicles 16:15–18, referencing Genesis 50:24 and Exodus 2:24\). Through these miracles, God created a nation of Abraham’s descendants that would bless the entire world (see Genesis 12:1–3\). No one and nothing could prevent God’s promise from being fulfilled, even against all odds. In the verses leading up to God’s command “Do not touch my anointed ones,” we read this: “When they were but few in number, few indeed, and strangers in it, they wandered from nation to nation, from one kingdom to another. He allowed no one to oppress them; for their sake he rebuked kings” (1 Chronicles 16:19–21\). This passage refers to the [patriarchs](biblical-patriarchs.html), Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. When “they” (the patriarchs) were few in number, they lived as wandering strangers in a strange land (see Hebrews 11:9\). Through all their travels and travails, God protected them, increased their number, and prevented the powerful rulers of the lands where they stayed from harming them. For example, God protected Abraham twice while staying in hostile nations whose kings lusted after his wife. Neither king laid a finger on Abraham or Sarah but instead sent the couple away unharmed and even enriched them (Genesis 12 and 20\). The same happened to Isaac (Genesis 26\). Jacob arrived in Paddan Aram with nothing, but he left with vast riches (Genesis 31\); after all his dealings with his unscrupulous Uncle Laban, Jacob said, “God has not allowed him to harm me” (verse 7\). So the point of 1 Chronicles 16:22 (and Psalm 105:15\) is that nothing and no one can derail God’s will; God had a plan for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and He refused to let the kings of Canaan and Egypt injure them: “For their sake he rebuked kings: ‘Do not touch my anointed ones’” (1 Chronicles 16:21–22\). The patriarchs were His prophets. They were His “anointed ones”; that is, God chose them to accomplish a specific work in the world. David, who orchestrated the praise of 1 Chronicles 16, applied God’s command not to injure God’s anointed to his own situation. King Saul was trying to kill [David](David-loyal-Saul.html) at one time, and David and his men were on the run. One night, David’s men came upon Saul and his army while they were sleeping. Abishai rejoiced that they had the advantage over their enemies and suggested they kill Saul then and there. But David said to Abishai, “Do not destroy him, for who can lift a hand against the LORD’s anointed and be guiltless? . . . As surely as the LORD lives, the LORD Himself will strike him down. . . . But the LORD forbid that I should stretch out my hand against the LORD’s anointed” (1 Samuel 26:9–11\). It is God who takes vengeance, not we (Deuteronomy 32:35; Romans 12:19\). The command from God “Do not touch my anointed ones; do my prophets no harm” was for a specific group of people for a specific time: God preserved the patriarchs from physical harm. The prophets of the Old Testament have given way to teachers in the New (see 2 Peter 2:1\). No one today can properly quote 1 Chronicles 16:22 to deflect criticism or silence challengers. No apostle in the New Testament ever told anyone “Do not touch God’s anointed” as a means of insulating himself from critique. The fact is that all believers today are God’s [anointed](anointed.html). We are all set apart for the work God is accomplishing in this world (1 John 2:20\). “Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and has anointed us is God, who also has sealed us and given us the Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee” (2 Corinthians 1:21–22\). Since all believers are God’s anointed, does this mean that His command “Do not touch my anointed ones” keeps us from all harm? No, believers still suffer the effects of living in a fallen world. But, at the same time, believers know that God is 100 percent in control, and He can easily protect His children. Whatever happens to them is allowed by Him. Satan himself can’t lay a finger on God’s children without God’s explicit permission (see Job 1:12; 2:6\). So we trust God in everything. No matter what happens in our lives, we trust that God is in control and will equip, empower, and protect us to complete His plan for us: “I am sure of this, that he who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ” (Philippians 1:6, ESV).
Who was Herod Antipas?	Answer The name Herod comes up again and again in the New Testament from Matthew 1 to Acts 26\. Herod is simply the family name of a ruling dynasty in Israel. There are four different rulers referred to as Herod in the New Testament as well as Herod Philip II, who is referred to as Philip the tetrarch. There were a number of other Herods who are not mentioned in the New Testament. Herod Antipater (nicknamed Antipas) became tetrarch of Galilee and [Perea](Perea-in-the-Bible.html) upon the death of his father Herod the Great (Herod I). A tetrarch is a “ruler of one quarter,” as he receives one fourth of his father’s kingdom. Herod Antipas ruled as a Roman client and was responsible for building projects including the capital city of Tiberius on the Sea of Galilee. Herod Antipas is the Herod mentioned most often in the New Testament, and, with the exception of Herod the Great mentioned in Matthew 2 and Luke 1, every mention of Herod in the gospels refers to Herod Antipas. Herod Antipas divorced his first wife to marry [Herodias](Herodias-in-the-Bible.html), who had been the wife of his half\-brother Philip the tetrarch. According to Josephus the two fell in love and made plans to get married while Antipas was visiting with his brother Philip. [John the Baptist](life-John-Baptist.html) began his ministry during the reigns of Philip and Antipas (Luke 3:1\). In the course of his fiery preaching and denunciation of sin, he “rebuked Herod the tetrarch because of his marriage to Herodias, his brother’s wife, and all the other evil things he had done, \[and] Herod added this to them all: He locked John up in prison” (Luke 3:19–20\). Matthew 14:3–5 gives more detail of the wickedness of Herod Antipas: “Now Herod had arrested John and bound him and put him in prison because of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, for John had been saying to him: ‘It is not lawful for you to have her.’ Herod wanted to kill John, but he was afraid of the people, because they considered John a prophet.” Herodias also hated John and wanted to have him killed, but Herod Antipas was afraid to follow through, because the general populace was on John’s side. “So Herodias nursed a grudge against John and wanted to kill him. But she was not able to, because Herod feared John and protected him, knowing him to be a righteous and holy man. When Herod heard John, he was greatly puzzled; yet he liked to listen to him” (Mark 6:19–20\). Herodias hatched a scheme with [her daughter](Salome-in-the-Bible.html) whereby she forced her husband’s hand. “On Herod’s birthday the daughter of Herodias danced for the guests and pleased Herod so much that he promised with an oath to give her whatever she asked. Prompted by her mother, she said, ‘Give me here on a platter the head of John the Baptist.’ The king was distressed, but because of his oaths and his dinner guests, he ordered that her request be granted and had John beheaded in the prison. His head was brought in on a platter and given to the girl, who carried it to her mother” (Matthew 14:6–11\). As Jesus’ ministry became more well\-known, Herod Antipas began to fear that John the Baptist had risen from the dead (Matthew 14:1–2\). Apparently, he wanted to kill Jesus as well, and this was reported to Jesus by some Jewish leaders in Galilee who hoped to entice Him into moving on to a different area. Jesus, unafraid, replied, “Go tell that fox, ‘I will keep on driving out demons and healing people today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will reach my goal.’ In any case, I must press on today and tomorrow and the next day—for surely no prophet can die outside Jerusalem!” (Luke 13:32–33\). Jesus’ reply is not only dismissive of Herod but also critical of the Jewish authorities who had a long history of killing prophets. Throughout Jesus’ ministry, some of the rulers of the Jews plotted with the [Herodians](Herodians.html) (supporters of Herod) against Jesus (Mark 3:6; 8:25; 12:13\). Jesus was finally arrested and brought before [Pilate](Pontius-Pilate.html), the governor or prefect of Judea. Pilate tried to escape responsibility for dealing with Jesus, and he thought he had found his way out when he heard that Jesus was from Galilee: he could shift the responsibility to Herod Antipas, he reasoned. So Pilate sent Jesus to Herod, who happened to be in Jerusalem for the Passover at the time (Luke 23:6–7\). Herod Antipas was excited to see Jesus in person and tried to get Jesus to perform some miracles for him and asked Him many questions. Jesus refused to answer, probably because He knew Herod Antipas was not sincerely seeking truth. Of course, Jesus also refused to perform any miracles. Herod allowed his soldiers to ridicule and beat Jesus and then sent Him back to Pilate (Luke 23:8–11\). That day, Herod and Pilate became friends, whereas before they had been at odds (Luke 23:12\). Although Herod Antipas is mentioned in Acts as being partially responsible for the crucifixion, we gain no new information about him. Herod Antipas eventually fell out of favor with Rome and was exiled to Gaul. The King Herod mentioned later in Acts as a persecutor of the church in Jerusalem is his nephew, Herod Agrippa I, who replaced the Roman governor over Judea as King of the Jews, ruling in Jerusalem from AD 41 to 44\.
What does the Bible mean when it says in your anger do not sin (Ephesians 4:26)?	Answer Ephesians 4:26 says, “‘In your anger do not sin’: Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry.” In understanding this command, it’s good to differentiate emotions from actions. We all feel emotion. At various times, we feel sadness, grief, frustration, excitement, happiness, and [anger](Bible-anger.html). Such feelings come naturally and are not sinful in and of themselves. It is how we act on those emotions that can be sinful. Emotion is internal and not directed against people. Action is external and can be directed positively or negatively toward others. Here is the context of the verse: “Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to your neighbor, for we are all members of one body. ‘In your anger do not sin’: Do not let the sun go down while you are still angry, and do not give the devil a foothold. Anyone who has been stealing must steal no longer, but must work, doing something useful with their own hands, that they may have something to share with those in need. Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen. And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, with whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you” (Ephesians 4:25–32\). This passage follows Paul’s teaching about the new nature that we embrace through the Holy Spirit by faith in Jesus Christ (Ephesians 4:17–24\). If we become angry for some reason—we experience the involuntary emotion or passion of anger—we are not to allow it to prompt sinful actions. And we do not stay angry. We do not dwell on it. We deal with it quickly, in constructive and God\-honoring ways, so it does not grow stronger and produce bitterness in our lives. The biblical admonition is to deal with the anger on the same day as the provocation. Before we go to sleep that night, we should have taken positive steps to find a solution to the problem and alleviate the anger. If we fail to deal with anger constructively and we engage in sinful expressions of anger, we give the devil some leverage against us (Ephesians 4:27\). The same passage continues to say that we should strive to get rid of all anger and its companion sins: “Get rid of your bitterness, hot tempers, anger, loud quarreling, cursing, and hatred” (verse 31, GWT). Instead of allowing the emotion of anger to turn into sinful actions, we should “be kind and merciful, and forgive others, just as God forgave you because of Christ” (Ephesians 4:32, CEV). It’s all part of “the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness” (verse 24\). One of the powers that the Holy Spirit has given to believers after their spiritual transformation through faith in Jesus Christ is [self\-control](fruit-Holy-Spirit-self-control.html) (see Galatians 5:22–23\). We need to ask God to fill us with His Spirit when we become angry; self\-control will be the supernatural result. We all allow our anger to get the best of us at times. When we are wronged or feel unfairly disadvantaged, we naturally want to retaliate or “fix the problem” in the fastest way. But when our response involves “rage, anger, harsh words, and slander” (Ephesians 4:31, NLT), we have crossed a line. We have sinned in our anger and given the devil a foothold. Sometimes, long after we should have moved on, we harbor a desire to revisit the wound and hang on to the anger. This only leads to [bitterness](Bible-bitterness.html). We must yield to the Holy Spirit and trust in His power to overcome such sin. Solomon in his wisdom had some practical things to say about how to handle anger: “He who is slow to wrath has great understanding, but he who is impulsive exalts folly” (Proverbs 14:29, NKJV). “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger” (Proverbs 15:1\). “A hot\-tempered man stirs up conflict, but a man slow to anger calms strife” (Proverbs 15:18, CSB). “Whoever is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he who rules his spirit than he who takes a city” (Proverbs 16:32, ESV).
What does it mean to call upon the name of the Lord?	Answer The first mention in Scripture of people calling on the name of the Lord is Genesis 4:26: “Seth also had a son, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to call on the name of the Lord.” Here, to call on the name of the Lord means that people began to gather for corporate worship and seeking the help of the Creator. Cain’s family line is contrasted with Seth’s: descendants of Cain began to practice herding (verse 20\), music production (verse 21\), and metallurgy (verse 22\). At the same time, the world was becoming more and more wicked (verses 19 and 23\). Seth’s descendants stood out from their corrupt society in that they began to call on the name of the Lord. When Abram entered Canaan, he camped between Ai and Bethel. There, “he built an altar to the Lord and called on the name of the Lord” (Genesis 12:8\). In other words, Abram publicly thanked God, praised His name, and sought His protection and guidance. Years later, Abraham’s son Isaac built an altar to the Lord in Beersheba and also “called on the name of the Lord” (Genesis 26:25\). To call on the name of the Lord is to invoke His proper name “in audible and social prayer and praise” ([Albert Barnes](Albert-Barnes.html)). To call on the name of the Lord is to approach Him in thanksgiving, worship, and petition, and in so doing proclaim the name of God. To call on the name of the Lord is to pray “in a more public and solemn manner” (Matthew Poole). Those who are children of God will naturally call on the name of the Lord. Calling on the name of the Lord is basic for salvation and presupposes faith in the Lord. God promises to save those who, in faith, call upon His name: “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:13; cf. Joel 2:32\). Everyone who invokes the name of God for mercy and salvation, by or in the name of Jesus, shall be saved (Acts 2:21\). “There is salvation in no one else! God has given no other name under heaven by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12, NLT). Using a person’s name expresses familiarity and helps connect one person to another. The first thing we do upon meeting someone is to extend a hand and introduce ourselves. This builds familiarity for future interactions. To call upon the name of the Lord is a sign of knowing Him and a way of connecting to Him. There is a difference between knowing about God and knowing Him personally. Calling on the name of the Lord indicates personal interaction and relationship. When we call upon the name of the Lord, as a form of worship, we recognize our dependence upon Him. What saves a person is not the action, per se, of “calling upon” the name of Jesus; what saves is God’s grace in response to one’s personal faith in the Savior being called upon. Calling on the name of the Lord is more than a verbal expression; it is also shown in the heart and in deed through [repentance](repentance.html). “If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved” (Romans 10:9\). “Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out” (Acts 3:19\). Calling on the name of the Lord is to be a lifelong pursuit (Psalm 116:2\). God commands us to call on Him in times of trouble (Psalm 50:15\). The one who “dwells in the shelter of the Most High will rest in the shadow of the Almighty” (Psalm 91:1\) and has God’s promise of blessing: “‘Because he loves me,’ says the Lord, ‘I will rescue him; I will protect him, for he acknowledges my name. He will call on me, and I will answer him; I will be with him in trouble, I will deliver him and honor him’” (verses 14–15\). Those who refuse to call upon the name of the Lord are also described in Scripture, along with the results of their disobedience: “Will the workers of iniquity never learn? . . . They refuse to call upon the Lord. There they are, overwhelmed with dread, where there was nothing to fear” (Psalm 14:4–5, BSB). Even as rebellious or ignorant people neglect to call upon the name of the Lord, He is willing to hear them and accept them. God wants to be found; He is ready to be known: “I was ready to be sought by those who did not ask for me; I was ready to be found by those who did not seek me. I said, ‘Here I am, here I am,’ to a nation that was not called by my name” (Isaiah 65:1, ESV; cf. Romans 10:20\). In 1 Corinthians 1:2, those who call upon the name of the Lord are identified as believers: “To the church of God in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people, together with all those everywhere who call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ—their Lord and ours.” Calling on the name of the Lord is one of the marks of a Christian. In summary, those who call on the name of the Lord are those who recognize Him as Savior. Whether it is a first\-time calling upon Jesus’ name for forgiveness of sins or a continuous calling as the relationship progresses and grows, giving Him lordship over our lives in surrender to His will, calling on the name of the Lord is vital to spiritual life. Ultimately, calling on the name of the Lord is a sign of humility and dependence on God our Creator and Redeemer.
Who was Herod Agrippa I?	Answer The New Testament mentions several different Herods from Matthew 1 to Acts 26\. Herod Agrippa I is one of the Roman\-appointed rulers in Israel from the Herod dynasty. Herod the Great was “king of the Jews” at Jesus’ birth and tried to have Him killed (Matthew 2\). Herod Antipas was king during the ministries of [John the Baptist](life-John-Baptist.html) and Jesus. Antipas had John executed (Mark 6\) and later declined to pass judgment on Jesus, sending Him back to Pilate (Luke 23:7–12\). In Acts 4:27, Herod Antipas (simply called Herod) is mentioned as one of those guilty of the crucifixion of Jesus. Acts 12 speaks of Herod as a persecutor of the apostles, but this is a different Herod—Herod Agrippa I. Herod Antipas was a ruler in Galilee, but Herod Agrippa I, leading the persecution in Acts, is ruling as king in Jerusalem. Luke, the writer of Acts, did not see the need to explain who the Herods were, as that would have been common knowledge to his readers. Also, Herod was a family name almost synonymous with “ruler,” so it could be used in much the same way that today a writer might speak of “the President” or “the sheriff” without stopping to explain each time that he might be speaking of a different person occupying the office. Herod Agrippa I was the king of Judea from AD 41 to 44\. He was a grandson of Herod the Great and nephew of Herod Antipas. A series of prefects (of which [Pilate](Pontius-Pilate.html) was one) had governed Judea as a Roman province for over 30 years. Rome placed Agrippa I on the throne as a client king for about 3 years. Agrippa had spent time in Rome where he developed a friendship with the emperor Tiberius and the future emperors Caligula and Claudius. These friendships helped him secure his ruling position. After Agrippa’s death, he was replaced with a Roman procurator. As a client of Rome, the king of Judea’s job was primarily to keep the peace. Herod Agrippa I knew that, if anything was troubling the Jewish population, appeasing them was in his best interest. Apparently, keeping the peace was Agrippa’s reason for persecuting the church. Acts 12:1–3 reports, “King Herod arrested some who belonged to the church, intending to persecute them. He had James, the brother of John, put to death with the sword. When he saw that this met with approval among the Jews, he proceeded to seize Peter also.” Luke specifically attributes Peter’s arrest to the fact that it pleased the Jews. Peter did not die at Herod Agrippa’s hands but was miraculously rescued from prison (Acts 12:5–17\). When it was discovered that Peter had escaped, “there was no small commotion among the soldiers” (verse 18\). Herod Agrippa was frustrated: “After Herod had a thorough search made for him and did not find him, he cross\-examined the guards and ordered that they be executed. Then Herod went from Judea to Caesarea and stayed there” (verses 18–19\). It was in Caesarea that Herod Agrippa I met his demise. “\[Agrippa] had been quarreling with the people of Tyre and Sidon; they now joined together and sought an audience with him. After securing the support of Blastus, a trusted personal servant of the king, they asked for peace, because they depended on the king’s country for their food supply. On the appointed day Herod, wearing his royal robes, sat on his throne and delivered a public address to the people. They shouted, ‘This is the voice of a god, not of a man.’ Immediately, because Herod did not give praise to God, an angel of the Lord struck him down, and he was eaten by worms and died” (Acts 12:20–23\). From the information Luke gives, one might expect that Agrippa was suddenly overpowered by worms that consumed him in a matter of seconds, and one can envision how this might be portrayed gruesomely in a Hollywood movie. But Luke does not say that Herod died immediately, only that he was “struck down” immediately. According to Josephus, Herod Agrippa I was immediately incapacitated by a severe pain his stomach; the pain lingered for five days before he died. The book of Acts tells us that the cause of death was worms (parasites, probably) directly from the hand of God. The fate of Herod Agrippa I is a graphic reminder that it does not pay to fight against God (see also Psalm 1\). While Herod the king is writhing on a bed of pain with worms in his gut, Peter the apostle is free to spread the gospel and serve the Lord. Herod died, “but the word of God continued to spread and flourish” (Acts 12:24\).
Who was Herod Agrippa II?	Answer There are several different Herods mentioned in the New Testament. All of them are members of the Herod dynasty, rulers appointed by the powers in Rome to oversee Israel. Herod Agrippa II is the one who heard Paul’s defense of the gospel and famously rejected Paul’s appeal to be saved. The godfather of the Herod clan was Herod the Great, the king when Jesus was born and one who tried to have Him killed (Matthew 2\). Herod Antipas ruled during the ministries of John the Baptist and Jesus. He is the one who had John executed (Mark 6\) and sat in judgment at one of Jesus’ trials (Luke 23:7–12\). Herod Agrippa I was king of Judea for a few years and the one who had James executed. His death is recorded in Acts 12\. Herod Agrippa II was only seventeen when his father, Herod Agrippa I, died. He was in Rome at the time and was favored by Emperor Claudius. Claudius kept Agrippa II in Rome for a few more years and then made him tetrarch of the Syrian kingdom called Chalcis and gave him the responsibility to supervise the temple in Jerusalem. Herod Agrippa II eventually gave up the territory of Chalcis but was granted the title of king and given more territory, including all that had been ruled by Herod Philip. [Nero](who-was-Nero.html) later added to his territory, including some of Galilee. Herod Agrippa II lived with Bernice, who was herself in the Herodian line, being a daughter of Herod Agrippa I. She had been married to her uncle, Herod Pollio of Chalcis (not mentioned in Scripture), but after his death moved in with her brother, Agrippa II, in an incestuous relationship. Late in his career, Herod Agrippa II saw that tensions were rising between Rome and the Jews, and he tried unsuccessfully to prevent war. Ultimately, he sided with Rome, and he was expelled by his Jewish subjects. He lived out the rest of his life in Rome. He was the last of Herod’s line to be a king. Herod Agrippa II makes a brief appearance in the New Testament in Acts 25 and 26\. Paul had been arrested in Jerusalem and accused by the Jewish leaders of desecrating the temple. For Paul’s protection, the centurion in charge had sent him under heavy guard to the Roman governor [Felix](Felix-in-the-Bible.html) in Caesarea (Acts 23\). Felix, who happened to be married to [Drusilla](Drusilla-in-the-Bible.html) (a sister of both Bernice and Agrippa II), heard the charges brought by the Jewish leadership but deferred judgment, for he hoped that Paul would offer him some kind of bribe to be set free (Acts 23:25–26\). After two years, Felix was succeeded by [Porcius Festus](Porcius-Festus.html), but Paul remained in prison because Felix did not want to anger the Jews (Acts 23:27\). Governor Festus wanted to clear up old court cases, so he entertained the accusations of the Jews and asked Paul if he would be willing to stand trial in Jerusalem. Paul realized he would have no chance there, so he invoked his right as a Roman citizen to appeal to Caesar: “I am now standing before Caesar’s court, where I ought to be tried. I have not done any wrong to the Jews, as you yourself know very well. If, however, I am guilty of doing anything deserving death, I do not refuse to die. But if the charges brought against me by these Jews are not true, no one has the right to hand me over to them. I appeal to Caesar!” (Acts 25:10–11\). Festus had no choice but to send him to Caesar, which had the immediate result of preserving Paul from the Jewish leadership. Festus, however, was perplexed as to what charges should be sent with Paul to Rome, so, when King Herod Agrippa II paid a visit to Caesarea, Festus discussed Paul’s case with him, thinking that Agrippa might have more knowledge of the religious issues involved. Then Agrippa told Festus that he would like to hear from Paul himself, and Festus said, “Tomorrow you will hear him” (Acts 25:22\). On the next day, with much pomp and circumstance, Festus, Agrippa II, and Bernice gather to hear Paul. Festus introduces Paul by saying, “King Agrippa, and all who are present with us, you see this man! The whole Jewish community has petitioned me about him in Jerusalem and here in Caesarea, shouting that he ought not to live any longer. I found he had done nothing deserving of death, but because he made his appeal to the Emperor I decided to send him to Rome. But I have nothing definite to write to His Majesty about him. Therefore I have brought him before all of you, and especially before you, King Agrippa, so that as a result of this investigation I may have something to write. For I think it is unreasonable to send a prisoner on to Rome without specifying the charges against him” (Acts 25:24–27\). Herod Agrippa II then gave Paul leave to speak for himself. “So Paul motioned with his hand and began his defense: ‘King Agrippa, I consider myself fortunate to stand before you today as I make my defense against all the accusations of the Jews, and especially so because you are well acquainted with all the Jewish customs and controversies. Therefore, I beg you to listen to me patiently’” (Acts 26:1–3\). Paul then goes on to tell the story of his life as a persecutor of the church and how Jesus appeared to him on the [road to Damascus](Damascus-Road.html). He concludes with referencing prophecies that the Messiah would rise from the dead and that salvation would be provided to the Gentiles. Governor Festus interrupted Paul’s defense at that point, shouting, “You are out of your mind, Paul! . . . Your great learning is driving you insane” (Acts 26:24\). Paul replied, “I am not insane, most excellent Festus. . . . What I am saying is true and reasonable. The king is familiar with these things, and I can speak freely to him. I am convinced that none of this has escaped his notice, because it was not done in a corner. King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know you do” (verses 25–27\). Then Herod Agrippa II said to Paul, “Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?” (verse 28\). Paul’s reply shows the heart of an evangelist: “Short time or long—I pray to God that not only you but all who are listening to me today may become what I am, except for these chains” (verse 29\). At that, the royals left the room, convinced of Paul’s innocence. Herod Agrippa II said to Festus, “This man could have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar” (verse 32\). It is significant that Herod Agrippa II admits Paul had done nothing wrong and should by all rights be set free. With the possible exception of Herod Antipas who liked to listen to John—albeit for superstitious reasons—this is the only biblical record of a positive interaction between a Herodian king and Jesus and His church. Herod Agrippa II also makes a statement to Paul that has sparked the imagination of millions of Christians. In the King James Version, Acts 26:28 is translated “Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.” Many sermons over the years have been preached about the man who “almost” became a Christian but ultimately did not. The words of Agrippa II have become a cautionary tale of “almost” becoming a Christian, but waiting too long. A gospel song titled “Almost Persuaded” was written by prolific songwriter Philip Bliss in 1871 and has been sung in churches for several generations: Almost persuaded now to believe; Almost persuaded Christ to receive; Seems now some soul to say, Go, Spirit, go Thy way, Some more convenient day On Thee I’ll call. Almost persuaded, come, come today; Almost persuaded, turn not away; Jesus invites you here, Angels are lingering near Prayers rise from hearts so dear; O wanderer, come! Almost persuaded, harvest is past! Almost persuaded, doom comes at last! Almost cannot avail; Almost is but to fail! Sad, sad, that bitter wail— Almost, but lost! The sentiments expressed in the hymn are noble, and certainly the Bible warns about waiting because “today is the day of salvation” (2 Corinthians 6:2; cf. Hebrews 3:7–15\). However, the sermons and song are based on a poor translation of what Agrippa II actually said. There is no hint in Acts 25 that Agrippa was seriously considering becoming a Christian. In fact, a more accurate translation of what he said gives almost the opposite impression. The NIV accurately translates verse 28, “Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?” In other words, Agrippa fully understood what Paul was trying to do, and he tells Paul plainly that it is not going to happen, at least not in such a short time. There is a lesson for us here on [personal evangelism](personal-evangelism.html). Acts 25—26 gives a great example for believers to follow. Paul was in chains with his life and freedom on the line, but he did not shrink back from faithfully proclaiming the gospel to those in positions of power. While the number of people who are “almost persuaded” to believe but then turn away is disturbing, what should be even more troubling is the number of Christians who are “almost persuaded” to boldly speak for Christ when they are given the opportunity, only to meekly let the opportunity pass them by.
Why does God ask questions if He is omniscient?	Answer God is [omniscient](God-omniscient.html)—He knows everything. We also see in Scripture where God asks questions. In the Garden of Eden, God asks Adam where he is and what he had done (Genesis 3:9, 11\). In heaven, He asks Satan where he has been (Job 1:7\). In the wilderness, God asks Moses what he holds in his hand (Exodus 4:2\). In the crowd on the way to Jarius’s house, Jesus asks who touched Him (Mark 5:30\). Being omniscient, God already knew the answers to these questions. “He knows the secrets of the heart” (Psalm 44:21\). So why does He ask? The questions God asks always serve a purpose. He does not ask to obtain information, since He already possesses all information; His questions serve a different purpose, and that purpose varies based on the context of the question and the needs of the one to whom the question is directed. After Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit and hid themselves from God, God called out, “Where are you?” (Genesis 3:9\). Of course, God knew Adam’s physical location; that wasn’t the point of the question. The question was designed to draw Adam out of hiding. God could have approached His sinful creation in anger, with harsh words of condemnation and instant judgment, but He did not. Instead, God approached Adam with a question and so showed His grace, gentleness, and desire for reconciliation. When teaching a young student basic arithmetic, a teacher might ask, “What is 2 \+ 2?” The teacher does not ask this because she doesn’t know the answer but because she wants to focus the student’s thinking on the problem at hand. When God asked Adam, “Where are you?” the question’s purpose was, in part, to focus Adam on the problem he and his wife were tangled in. Other questions of God in Scripture may have other purposes. In Job 38 — 41, God questions Job relentlessly about everything from Job’s absence when the foundations of the earth were set (Job 38:4\) to Job’s inability to fish for sea monsters (Job 41:1\). Here, it’s obvious God is using questions as an instructional tool to emphasize His own power and sovereignty. God’s repeated question to Jonah, “Is it right for you to be angry?” (Jonah 4:4, 9\) was designed to stir self\-examination on Jonah’s part. God’s question to Elijah, “What are you doing here?” (1 Kings 19:9\) pointed out how Elijah was straying from God’s purpose for him. God’s question in Isaiah’s presence, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?” (Isaiah 6:8\) had the effect of prompting the prophet to volunteer. During Jesus’ ministry on earth, He often asked questions. A good teacher will use strategic questions to facilitate the learning process, and Jesus was the Master Teacher. Jesus at times asked questions in order to set up an opportunity for learning: “Who do people say I am?” (Mark 8:27\). Or to focus His hearers’ attention on something significant: “What is written in the Law? . . . How do you read it?” (Luke 10:26\). Or to prompt introspection: “Do you want to get well?” (John 5:6\). Or to prod deeper thinking: “What is the meaning of that which is written: ‘The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone’?” (Luke 20:17\). Or to bring faith to light: “Who touched me?” (Luke 8:45\). Or to set up a big revelation: “Why are you crying? Who is it you are looking for?” (John 20:15\). God is a Father who uses language to teach within the context of relationship. He is a Teacher who uses questions to involve His students, force them to think, and point them to the truth. When He asks a question, it’s not because He doesn’t know the answer but because He wants us to know.
Who was Sennacherib in the Bible?	Answer Sennacherib was the king of [Assyria](Assyria-in-the-Bible.html) who reigned from about 720 BC to 683 BC. Archaeologists have uncovered the remains of his palace in Khorsebad, near the ancient city of Nineveh (Jonah 1:1–3\). During the reign of [King Hezekiah](life-Hezekiah.html) in Judah, Sennacherib invaded Judah, bent on conquering Jerusalem (2 Kings 18:13\). Assyria had already conquered the northern kingdom of Israel in 722 BC and had taken the people captive. Second Kings 18:12 says, “This happened because they did not listen to the voice of the LORD their God, but violated His covenant—all that Moses the servant of the LORD had commanded—and would neither listen nor obey.” Now, under Sennacherib, Assyria stood poised to conquer Judah, too. King Sennacherib’s men first attacked forty\-six of Judah’s fortified cities and captured them (Isaiah 36:1\). Then they laid siege on Jerusalem. In desperation, Hezekiah sent gold and silver as a peace offering to Assyria, hoping to appease the power\-hungry Sennacherib (2 Kings 18:13–16\). The Lord sent word to Hezekiah that Sennacherib would not step foot inside the city of Jerusalem (Isaiah 37:33\), so Hezekiah stood firm and refused to give in to the Assyrian king’s boastful threats (2 Kings 18:28–35; 2 Chronicles 32:17\). He commanded the terrified citizens of Jerusalem not to answer taunts from Sennacherib’s men outside the wall (2 Kings 18:36\). Instead, Hezekiah encouraged the people in the Lord: “Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or discouraged because of the king of Assyria and the vast army with him, for there is a greater power with us than with him. With him is only the arm of flesh, but with us is the Lord our God to help us and to fight our battles” (2 Chronicles 32:7–8\). Hezekiah sent messengers to Isaiah the prophet to learn what God said on the matter. Because Sennacherib had blasphemed the Lord in his threats against Jerusalem, Isaiah told the king’s messengers, “Tell your master that this is what the LORD says: ‘Do not be afraid of the words you have heard, with which the servants of the king of Assyria have blasphemed Me. Behold, I will put a spirit in him so that he will hear a rumor and return to his own land, where I will cause him to fall by the sword’” (2 Kings 19:5–7\). Hezekiah received the message from Isaiah gladly, but Sennacherib sent Hezekiah a letter of his own: “Do not let the god you depend on deceive you when he says, ‘Jerusalem will not be given into the hands of the king of Assyria.’ Surely you have heard what the kings of Assyria have done to all the countries, destroying them completely. And will you be delivered? Did the gods of the nations that were destroyed by my predecessors deliver them—the gods of Gozan, Harran, Rezeph and the people of Eden who were in Tel Assar? Where is the king of Hamath or the king of Arpad? Where are the kings of Lair, Sepharvaim, Hena and Ivvah?” (2 Kings 19:10–13\). King Sennacherib had a long list of victories to boast of, but he made the mistake of thinking Israel’s God was just like the gods of the nations he had defeated. King Hezekiah took the boastful letter he received from Sennacherib to the temple where he spread it out before the Lord. Then he prayed, “Lord, the God of Israel, enthroned between the cherubim, you alone are God over all the kingdoms of the earth. You have made heaven and earth. Give ear, Lord, and hear; open your eyes, Lord, and see; listen to the words Sennacherib has sent to ridicule the living God” (2 Kings 19:15–16\). Hezekiah acknowledged that Assyria was powerful, but he knew that God was more powerful: “It is true, Lord, that the Assyrian kings have laid waste these nations and their lands. They have thrown their gods into the fire and destroyed them, for they were not gods but only wood and stone, fashioned by human hands. Now, Lord our God, deliver us from his hand, so that all the kingdoms of the earth may know that you alone, Lord, are God” (verses 17–19\). The [prophet Isaiah](life-Isaiah.html) sent word to Hezekiah that, because of Sennacherib’s blasphemous taunts about the God of Israel, the Lord Himself would fight for them and destroy Sennacherib and his armies. Sennacherib was not just defying Israel; he was defying the Living God. That night, the angel of the Lord slew 185,000 in the Assyrian camp. When Sennacherib saw the carnage, he abandoned his conquest of Jerusalem and fled to Nineveh. He never stepped foot inside Jerusalem, just as Isaiah had said. As Psalm 139:7–12 reminds us, no one can hide from the Lord. One day as Sennacherib was worshiping in his god’s temple, his own sons killed him with a sword (2 Kings 19:36–37\). Thus Isaiah’s prophecy of verse 7 was fulfilled. Hezekiah’s passive victory over Sennacherib is another example of the Lord’s promise to fight for His people (Exodus 14:14; 1 Samuel 17:47; cf. 2 Kings 19:34\). As long as they honored Him and obeyed His commands, the Lord was their Defender. He often allowed them to face opposition greater than their resources in order to demonstrate His power and love. The Lord still seeks those who will honor Him so that He can show Himself strong on their behalf (2 Chronicles 16:9\). The account of Sennacherib’s failed siege ends with this: “So the Lord saved Hezekiah and the people of Jerusalem from the hand of Sennacherib king of Assyria and from the hand of all others. He took care of them on every side” (2 Chronicles 32:22\). Once again, the Lord demonstrated to Judah and to all who call upon His name that “the battle is the Lord’s” (1 Samuel 17:47\).
What is the Mount of Transfiguration?	Answer The Mount of Transfiguration is the mountain upon which Jesus was transfigured (Matthew 17, Mark 9, Luke 9\). The actual location of the mountain is unknown. In Matthew 16, Jesus tells the disciples that He will be killed and raised to life (verse 21\). Peter rebukes Him: “Never, Lord!” he says. “This shall never happen to you!” (verse 22\). Jesus has to rebuke Peter and goes on to explain that whoever will be His disciple must “take up his cross,” that is, be willing to die also. In the final verse of chapter 16, Jesus makes a rather enigmatic statement: “Truly I tell you, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom” (see also Luke 9:27\). In the next event recorded in Matthew and Luke, Jesus takes Peter, James, and John with Him up to a “high mountain.” This unnamed mountain is what we call the Mount of Transfiguration today, because of what takes place next: “There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light. Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus” (Matthew 17:2–3\). The [transfiguration of Jesus](transfiguration.html) on the mountain is significant, for it gave those three disciples a glimpse of the glory that Jesus had before the Incarnation and that He would have again. Perhaps it was also the fulfillment of Jesus’ prophecy that some of the disciples would see Him coming in the kingdom before they died (Matthew 16:28\). What happened on the Mount of Transfiguration has parallels to what happened on Sinai. Moses went up to a mountain to meet the Lord and came back with his face shining (Exodus 34\). In the New Testament, Jesus goes up a mountain and meets with Moses; however, a voice from heaven makes it clear that Jesus is the primary character, not Moses: “While he was still speaking, a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, ‘This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!’ When the disciples heard this, they fell facedown to the ground, terrified. But Jesus came and touched them. ‘Get up,’ he said. ‘Don’t be afraid.’ When they looked up, they saw no one except Jesus” (Matthew 17:5–8\). Just as the meeting on Sinai between Moses and the Lord signified a new era in God’s dealing with His people, so this meeting between the Lord and Moses signifies a new era in redemption history. The “high mountain” that we call the Mount of Transfiguration is never clearly identified in Scripture. Both [Mount Tabor](mount-Tabor.html) and Mount Hermon have been identified as the Mount of Transfiguration by various traditions. Mount Tabor is a little less than 2,000 feet, but it stands alone in the area. The earliest tradition identifies Mount Tabor as the Mount of Transfiguration, and it is the location of the Church of the Transfiguration, which is built on the ruins of fourth\-century church. Mount Hermon is a much higher mountain, almost 10,000 feet, and it is closer to [Caesarea Philippi](Caesarea-Philippi.html) where the previous events in Matthew 16 took place. For these reasons, some scholars feel that Mount Hermon is a more likely candidate to be the Mount of Transfiguration. In the final analysis, we simply do not know what mountain is the Mount of Transfiguration. It could be Tabor or Hermon or another mountain that no one has suggested. The fact that the transfiguration happened on a mountain is an important point in the recapitulation of Moses’ meeting on Mount Sinai. However, the importance of the transfiguration is not bound to what mountain it occurred on. Years later, Peter refers to this event: “For we did not follow cleverly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received honor and glory from God the Father when the voice from the Majestic Glory came to Him, saying, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.’ And we ourselves heard this voice from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain” (2 Peter 1:16–18\). Unfortunately, there are too many “cleverly devised fables” that try to identify specific locations in the Holy Land, such as the site of the Mount of Transfiguration, while losing sight of the more important issues.
Is Christmas a pagan holiday?	Answer No, Christmas is not a pagan holiday. Christmas is the Christian remembrance and celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. Christians believe that, in Christ, God entered the human race and so deserves the title Immanuel or “God With Us” (Matthew 1:23\). Even so, some say that various Christmas traditions have pagan origins, so the question is legitimate. First, the pagan origins of Christmas are far from certain. The winter solstice, often tied with Christmas, never falls on December 25\. Likewise, [Saturnalia](Christmas-Saturnalia.html), which has also been proposed as the origin of Christmas, was never celebrated on December 25\. Other Christmas symbols, such as trees and candles, may have had some pagan connotations, but these are so common in human experience that it can hardly be claimed that their use was ever exclusive to paganism. Second, the meaning of any word, symbol, or custom is determined by current usage, not origin. Many words and practices have departed from their origins and no longer mean anything close to what they once did. For instance, the swastika has been around for thousands of years as a symbol of good fortune. It was therefore reasonable for the Nazi party to take this as their symbol, as they emphasized that they were the party to bring good times back to Germany, which was going through hard times after World War I. However, it would be absolute foolishness for a person to decorate his home today with swastikas based on their “real meaning.” The swastika has been so thoroughly identified with the horrors of the Holocaust that, in the current culture, it is a symbol for anti\-Semitism and all things evil. The original meaning of the symbol is completely irrelevant. Likewise, if you asked the average American to tell you about Nike, probably better than 90 percent would talk about a brand of athletic shoes and clothing with hardly any mention of the Greek goddess of victory for whom the company is named. In a Google search of the term Nike, you would have to sift through dozens of results before you found anything about the Greek goddess Nike. When you see someone wearing the famous “swoosh,” your first thought is of a modern company, not an ancient goddess, and no one would assume that the wearer of said clothing is a worshiper of the goddess. Regardless of what the Christmas symbols may once have meant, their use today needs to be evaluated on the basis of what they mean today. To automatically associate candles, colored lights, or decorated trees with pagan worship is unwarranted. If there are unbiblical practices in our Christmas celebration, then those should be forsaken. Feasting is biblical, but [gluttony](gluttony-sin.html) is not, so perhaps that is an area that Christians need to think about in their Christmas celebrations. Drinking alcoholic beverages is not forbidden by the Bible, but [getting drunk](is-getting-drunk-a-sin.html) is. So, a Christian celebration should not involve drunkenness. Giving of gifts is biblical, but [going into debt](money-debt.html) or spending beyond your means is not, so Christmas gifts should be purchased responsibly. It’s good for Christians to examine their celebrations to make sure that they truly honor God. Third, when cultures clash, there is always an attempt to change and co\-opt language and cultural symbols. Paul had no problem co\-opting a pagan altar in order to spread the gospel. Speaking at the [Areopagus](Mars-Hill.html), he says, “Men of Athens, I perceive that in every way you are very religious. For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription: ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you” (Acts 17:23–24\). If what we know as Christmas originally started out as a pagan celebration, then it has been so successfully co\-opted by Christians that any self\-respecting pagan would be distressed at what Christians have done to it. Christmas celebrations are so completely the opposite of [paganism](pagan-paganism.html) that any suggested link between the two can be disregarded. Christians celebrating Christmas are no more pagan than are churches who gather to worship on Sunday (so named because it was the pagan “Day of the Sun”) or who hold a prayer service on Wednesday (named after the Norse god Woden). The pagan origins of the names of the days of the week have nothing to do with the church’s weekly gatherings, and ancient pagan winter festivals have no real bearing on the modern Christian celebration of Christmas. Imagine a second\- or third\-century Christian reflecting on his town’s celebration of Saturnalia. He thinks to himself: “The whole town is celebrating Saturnalia with feasting and giving of gifts. They are talking about ‘freeing souls into immortality’ and ‘the dawn of a golden age.’ I think this might be a great time to throw a party and invite my friends over to tell them how their souls really can be freed into immortality and the dawning of the truest golden age of all, the Kingdom of God. I think it might be a good idea to give them some gifts as well in honor of God’s giving us the greatest gift of all.” In this way, a celebration is “redeemed” for God’s glory and Christians are given a biblical alternative to the pagan day. With every cultural practice, Christians usually fall into three different camps. Some simply accept the practice wholesale without any reflection. Obviously, this is unwise. Other Christians will simply reject it and often retreat into a Christian subculture. Finally, some will carefully reflect on the cultural practice, embrace what they can, reject what’s ungodly, and redeem what’s worth saving. Christians have been so successful in co\-opting some cultural practices that no one even remembers what the original meaning of the practices was. If the origins of Christmas are indeed pagan, then this is what happened, to God be the glory! Would to God that it would happen to more of our social and cultural conventions and activities. Although not written about Christmas, Romans 14:5–6 seems to apply: “One person considers one day more sacred than another; another considers every day alike. Each of them should be fully convinced in their own mind. Whoever regards one day as special does so to the Lord.” If an individual Christian does not feel comfortable with some or all aspects of the celebration of Christmas, that Christian should do what he or she believes to be right. He should not judge others who believe and celebrate differently, nor should the others judge him, when no clear biblical guideline is involved.
Who was Dathan in the Bible?	Answer Dathan was one of four ringleaders who incited a rebellion against the leadership of Moses and Aaron while the Israelites journeyed in the [wilderness](wilderness-wandering.html) (Numbers 16\). Dathan was the son of Eliab, from the tribe of Reuben. He, his brother [Abiram](Abiram-in-the-Bible.html), a fellow Reubenite named On, and a Levite named Korah brought 250 Israelite leaders to challenge Moses’ right to lead them. They said, “The whole community is holy, every one of them, and the Lord is with them. Why then do you set yourselves above the Lord’s assembly” (verse 3\)? Moses was distraught at this challenge and the rebelliousness behind it, and he ordered Dathan and the other men to appear before him the next morning with censers full of incense and hot coals to offer to the Lord. Offering incense was to be performed only by God’s priests, but these men claimed that they should have the same right as Moses and Aaron to be leaders. Moses’ plan would let the Lord show them the foolishness of their demand. Dathan and the other malcontents, along with the high priest, Aaron, would offer their incense, and the Lord would publicly choose His priest. Moses tried to reason separately with Korah, reminding him that as a [Levite](Levitical-priesthood.html) he was already chosen by the Lord for special service (Numbers 16:8–11\). But Korah would not listen. When Moses summoned Dathan and Abiram, they defied his command and issued a surly response: “We will not come! Isn’t it enough that you have brought us up out of a land flowing with milk and honey to kill us in the wilderness? And now you also want to lord it over us! Moreover, you haven’t brought us into a land flowing with milk and honey or given us an inheritance of fields and vineyards. Do you want to treat these men like slaves? No, we will not come!” (Numbers 16:12–14\). None of the rebels were willing to listen to Moses’ appeals. The next morning, Dathan and the others came to the tabernacle with censers in hand. The Lord was so angry at their insolence that He wanted to destroy all of the Israelites, and He told Moses and Aaron to step aside so He could. Moses pleaded with the Lord for mercy, so the Lord brought judgment only on the ones who had incited the rebellion. Dathan, Abiram, and Korah stood with their families and possessions at the entry to their tents, and the Lord caused the ground to open and swallow them (Numbers 16:31–33\). At the same time, the Lord sent fire to consume the 250 men who held the censers, incinerating the rebels. Later, God told Eleazar the priest to collect the censers, scatter the coals, and “hammer the censers into sheets to overlay the altar, for they were presented before the Lord and have become holy” (Numbers 16:38\). The bronze overlay was to “be a sign to the Israelites” of God’s wrath against sin and the importance of accepting God’s choice. Because Korah was a Levite, the tribe already chosen by God to lead the people in worship, the Lord seems to have held him most responsible for this rebellion. Jude 1:11 refers to this event as “[Korah’s rebellion](rebellion-of-Korah.html).” However, Dathan and his cohorts received the same punishment that God gave Korah. While the judgment may seem severe to us, God was showing His people Israel that He was holy and would not tolerate their defiance of His decrees. They could not approach His presence and offer to Him whatever they chose, but they must obey Him in everything, including the offering of sacrifices (Numbers 15:40\). We can learn from Dathan’s sin that the Lord requires more from those to whom more has been given (Luke 12:48\). He holds us responsible for the knowledge, callings, and opportunities He gives us. Korah, Dathan, and Abiram serve as reminders that God takes seriously our disregard for His holiness and that a terrible fate awaits those who reject His choice of a Savior (Revelation 21:8\).
What is spiritual darkness?	Answer Spiritual darkness is the state of a person who is living apart from God. The Old Testament book of Isaiah, in prophesying of the Messiah, speaks of a deep spiritual darkness that enveloped the people: “The people walking in darkness have seen a great light; on those living in the land of deep darkness a light has dawned” (Isaiah 9:2\). This passage reappears in the New Testament, in Matthew 4:16, to announce that those who have come to know the God of Israel through His Son Jesus Christ are the ones who have been delivered from spiritual darkness and now walk in the light of God’s life. The apostle John taught that [God is light](God-is-light.html): “This is the message we heard from Jesus and now declare to you: God is light, and there is no darkness in him at all. So we are lying if we say we have fellowship with God but go on living in spiritual darkness; we are not practicing the truth” (1 John 1:5–6, NLT). And Jesus declared that He is the light of the world: “I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life” (John 8:12\). Thus, spiritual darkness means not having fellowship with God through a relationship with Jesus Christ. The darkness of separation from God is overcome through Christ: “In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it” (John 1:4–5\). From the moment [Adam and Eve](Adam-and-Eve-questions.html) sinned, humans have lived in a fallen world. All people are born in a fallen state of sin and separation from God. Until a person is reborn of God’s Spirit, he or she lives in spiritual darkness. Sin darkens our understanding and destroys our spiritual sight, cloaking us in deep darkness: “But the way of the wicked is like deep darkness; they do not know what makes them stumble” (Proverbs 4:19\). Moses compares this state of sin and disobedience to groping about like “a blind person in the dark” (Deuteronomy 28:29\). One of Job’s friends speaks of those who are lost in spiritual darkness: “Darkness comes upon them in the daytime; at noon they grope as in the night” (Job 5:14\). Living in rebellion to God and His will is equivalent to living in spiritual darkness. When the Lord commissioned [Paul](life-Paul.html), He said, “I am sending you to the Gentiles to open their eyes, so they may turn from darkness to light and from the power of Satan to God. Then they will receive forgiveness for their sins and be given a place among God’s people, who are set apart by faith in me” (Acts 26:17–18, NLT). After salvation, believers become beacons of the spiritual light of Christ: “For you were once darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Live as children of light” (Ephesians 5:8\). Those who are in Jesus Christ have been rescued from the kingdom of darkness: “He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son” (Colossians 1:13, ESV). Those who reject Jesus Christ face eternal separation from God in “blackest darkness” (Jude 1:4–13\). In Judaism, a person’s inner character and moral quality are understood to be reflected through the eyes. In Matthew 6:22–23, Jesus compares the moral condition of an unregenerate soul to darkness: “The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are healthy, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eyes are unhealthy, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!” Jesus’ listeners would have understood that a healthy eye is one that lets in light just as a healthy regenerated heart lets in spiritual light. But a sick or sinful eye (or heart) shuts out light, leaving the soul in spiritual darkness. The apostle Paul describes those in a sinful state before knowing Christ as possessing a darkened, closed mind and a hardened heart: “Their minds are full of darkness; they wander far from the life God gives because they have closed their minds and hardened their hearts against him” (Ephesians 4:18, NLT). Unbelievers live in spiritual darkness because Satan, the god of this world, has blinded their minds. They cannot see the glorious light of the gospel: “Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God” (2 Corinthians 4:4, NLT). Spiritual darkness refers to all that is in opposition to the light of God’s love in Christ. The good news that Jesus brings to this world is that His light—His life\-giving Spirit—floods light and life into the spiritual darkness of the sinner’s heart. The One who opened the eyes of the blind can also bring us out of spiritual darkness. No matter how deep the darkness, the light of God’s love and truth overcomes every sin that separates us from God.
What is a pariah?	Answer A pariah is an outcast or someone to be avoided. The word is not used in the Bible, but the concept is there. In the traditional Hindu [caste system](Casteism-caste-system.html), the pariahs are members of the lowest caste, called the Paraiyan, and were untouchable by members of the other castes. The word pariah has been loaned to other languages, and it seems that every society has outcasts. Often, in modern societies, outcast status is less clearly defined than in India, and a person has the opportunity to grow beyond it. For instance, a person who is the member of an ethnic minority living in poverty may be considered an outcast by the wealthy elite, but if that person becomes a successful athlete, entertainer, author, scientist, politician, entrepreneur, etc., he or she may actually be accepted into elite society. However, this is not because the elites have changed their standards to become more inclusive but because the outcast has shed the characteristics that identified him as a pariah to begin with. There are other things that might cause someone to be an outcast or pariah. Being accused of a horrible crime, even if there is no conviction, might bestow pariah status. Likewise, the children of someone accused of a crime or serving time in prison might be shunned by their peers. Sometimes, politically conservative actors will say that, socially, they are treated as pariahs in Hollywood. The Old Testament speaks of outcasts who are considered ceremonially unclean. There were people who, because of an uncleanness of some type, were treated as pariahs for a limited time; others were isolated from society for their whole lives. The most prominent example in the Law is people who had [leprosy](Bible-leprosy.html). In the Bible, leprosy is any type of skin disorder that looked like it might be contagious. It was identified in various ways, such as white discoloration or scaliness. Leviticus 13 gives an extensive list of skin symptoms that would cause someone to be “unclean.” If anyone was diagnosed with such a skin disorder by the priest, he or she would have to live outside the camp until the condition abated. At that time, the victim would show himself to the priest again to be declared “clean.” In some cases, the skin condition never improved, and these persons were permanent pariahs: “Anyone with such a defiling disease must wear torn clothes, let their hair be unkempt, cover the lower part of their face and cry out, ‘Unclean! Unclean!’ As long as they have the disease they remain unclean. They must live alone; they must live outside the camp” (Leviticus 13:45–46\). These people were true pariahs; they might be able to associate with each other but not with people in healthy society. To modern ears, this treatment of people suffering from an illness or disease sounds especially harsh. But it should be noted that, in the absence of modern medicine, such precautions were necessary for controlling contagious diseases. Even today, with more exact science, we still quarantine people for similar reasons. More importantly, there was theological significance to the practice of putting the “pariahs” outside the camp in Israel. God was the one who defined who was in and who was out. This is also a notion that is troubling to many in modern cultures because the idea of a sovereign God who passes final judgment runs counter to the modern ideas of individualism, libertarian freedom, personal autonomy, and personal fulfillment. We should also note that modern societies still have pariahs, only for different reasons. A disease is not considered a reason to shun a person, but his beliefs are. More and more, Christians are considered to be “intolerant” and therefore worthy of being shunned. [Political correctness](political-correctness.html) makes pariahs of people; enforcers of progressive orthodoxy are adept at identifying people who qualify as outcasts. In the New Testament, we see Jesus tearing down the walls between the “clean” and “unclean.” Those regulations served a purpose at one time, but, with His coming, the time for them was passing away. Thus, Jesus declared all foods clean (Mark 7:19\). He healed lepers and in the process touched them (Matthew 8:3\). He ate with tax collectors and “sinners” who were the social/spiritual pariahs of the time (Mark 2:16\). He ministered to Samaritans who were also pariahs (John 4\). Ultimately, believing Gentiles were brought into God’s kingdom on equal footing with the believing Jews. Heaven will be full of former pariahs. Ephesians 2:11–18 explains: “Therefore remember that formerly you who are Gentiles in the flesh and called uncircumcised by the so\-called circumcision (that done in the body by human hands)—remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, alienated from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ. For He Himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has torn down the dividing wall of hostility by abolishing in His flesh the law of commandments and decrees. He did this to create in Himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace and reconciling both of them to God in one body through the cross, by which He extinguished their hostility. He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. For through Him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.” In Christ, there are no pariahs. The divisions between Jew and Gentile have been broken down. Previously, a Jew was not even permitted to eat with a Gentile (Acts 10:29\). But Acts 10 clearly connects the abolition of food laws with the entrance of Gentiles into the kingdom. All those who have faith in Christ are “accepted in the beloved” (Ephesians 1:6, KJV). “Through the gospel the Gentiles are heirs together with Israel, members together of one body, and sharers together in the promise in Christ Jesus” (Ephesians 3:6\). Christians should have no pariahs. We are to reach out to everyone with the good news of Jesus Christ. However, God still decides who is in and who is out. Ultimately, anyone who does not come to know Christ will be rejected by God (Matthew 7:23; Revelation 20:15\). In the meantime, we are to love our neighbors as we love ourselves (Luke 10:27\), and we are to take the gospel to all kinds of people regardless of ethnicity or status (Matthew 28:19–20\) or what sins they might be involved in. When Christians forget that we are saved by grace—when we start treating other people as pariahs because of their sins—we fail to follow the example of Jesus and we have forgotten that at one time we were in the same position. Titus 3:3–7 reminds us, “At one time we too were foolish, disobedient, deceived and enslaved by all kinds of passions and pleasures. We lived in malice and envy, being hated and hating one another. But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life.”
What is the importance of the land of Uz in the Bible?	Answer The land of Uz in the Bible is the homeland of [Job](life-Job.html), the righteous man whose faith was tested through great suffering: “In the land of Uz there lived a man whose name was Job. This man was blameless and upright; he feared God and shunned evil. He had seven sons and three daughters, and he owned seven thousand sheep, three thousand camels, five hundred yoke of oxen and five hundred donkeys, and had a large number of servants. He was the greatest man among all the people of the East” (Job 1:1–3\). The exact location of the land of Uz is uncertain. Besides the reference to Uz in the opening verse of the book of Job as the country in which Job lived, the land itself is mentioned only in two other passages of Scripture. Jeremiah 25:20 remarks on the “kings of the land of Uz” as being among many kings and officials being judged in the Lord’s wrath. Here the land of Uz is associated with Edom (verse 21\). In Lamentations the connection with Edom recurs: “Rejoice and be glad, Daughter Edom, you who live in the land of Uz. But to you also the cup will be passed; you will be drunk and stripped naked” (Lamentations 4:21\). The book of Job states that Job lived near the desert (Job 1:19\) but that the territory was fertile for farming and raising livestock (Job 1:3, 14; 42:12\). These verses also tell us that Job was the greatest of all “the people of the East” who lived in the land of Uz. And in Job 1:17 we read that Job’s homeland was vulnerable to Chaldean raiding parties. If we piece all these details together, the land of Uz appears to have been located to the east of the land of Israel and east of Edom in northern Arabia. The New American Commentary: Job suggests Wadi Sirhan, a two\-hundred\-mile\-long depression in the northernmost part of Saudi Arabia, as the most likely contender for being the land of Uz: “It is the catchment for the waters that run off Jebel Druz and is capable of supporting large herds of livestock such as Job had. . . . It was close enough to Edom to be occasionally linked with it, yet it was also within striking distance for Chaldean raiders” (vol. 11, p. 47\). Uz is also the name of three Old Testament figures. The first is the son of Aram and grandson of Shem (Genesis 10:22; 1 Chronicles 1:17\). The second is Abraham’s nephew, the son of Nahor and Milcah and brother of Buz (Genesis 22:21\). Finally, an Edomite living in Seir was named Uz. He was one of the sons of Dishan the Horite (Genesis 36:28; 1 Chronicles 1:42\). The connection between Edom and the land of Uz strongly suggests that Uz was inhabited by descendants of this Horite man from Seir. From him, the land of Uz most likely inherited its name.
What does the Bible say about corruption?	Answer Corruption is a state of decay, pollution, or incorrectness. In the Bible, corruption is one of the effects of sin that resulted from the fall of man. In the beginning, God created a perfect paradise, free of sickness, pain, and death. But when Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating the forbidden fruit, sin entered the world, spoiling its perfection. That sin also brought contamination and decay to Adam and Eve and to the human nature of every person born after that (Romans 5:12\). Thus, corruption in the Bible is the state of moral contamination and spiritual decay expressed through disobedience toward God. Corruption is closely related to [spiritual death](spiritual-death.html). God told Adam that, if he ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, he would “surely die” (Genesis 2:17\). Adam didn’t die a physical death that day but a spiritual one that involved separation from God (Ephesians 2:1–3\). By the time of Noah, the corruption of mankind had been amplified: “Now the earth was corrupt in God’s sight and was full of violence. God saw how corrupt the earth had become, for all the people on earth had corrupted their ways” (Genesis 6:11–12\). The Bible describes sinful humanity as corrupt: “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good. The LORD looks down from heaven on all mankind to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God. All have turned away, all have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one” (Psalm 14:1–3; see also Psalm 53:1–3; Isaiah 1:4\). In the Old Testament, corruption can refer to literal, physical decay (Job 17:14; Psalm 16:10\), but, most often, corruption is used figuratively for moral corruption and depravity (Exodus 32:7; Hosea 9:9\). The prophets boldly took a stand against moral decay among God’s people: “The sin of the house of Israel and Judah is extremely great; the land is full of murder, and the city is full of corruption” (Ezekiel 9:9, NET). The Bible teaches that the [consequence of sin](the-wages-of-sin-is-death.html) is death (Romans 6:23\). Living in a state of moral corruption brings about eternal separation from God: “Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on them” (John 3:36\). This wrath will eventually result in God’s judgment of sinners and their final, irreversible separation from Him (Matthew 25:41; 2 Thessalonians 1:7–9; Revelation 20:11–15\). The power of corruption is broken by the divine power of the gospel of Jesus Christ: “Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord. His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires” (2 Peter 1:2–4\). When we come to know Jesus Christ, we embark on a [personal relationship](personal-relationship-with-God.html) with Him. The more that relationship grows, the better we understand who Jesus is and what He’s done for us. We start to grasp what His divine power accomplished for us. One of Jesus’ promises to us is the empowering and purifying ministry of the Holy Spirit in the life of every believer (John 14:15–17; 16:7; Acts 1:4–5, 8\). The Holy Spirit empowers us to obey God, reversing the curse of corruption and making us partakers of God’s divine nature. The book of Galatians likens the process of spiritual development in the child of God to [sowing and reaping](sowing-and-reaping.html): “For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life” (Galatians 6:8, ESV). As the Holy Spirit undoes the effects of corruption and decay, we reap the rewards of eternal life. One glorious future day, the curse of corruption and decay will be lifted for all eternity: “For all creation is waiting eagerly for that future day when God will reveal who his children really are. Against its will, all creation was subjected to God’s curse. But with eager hope, the creation looks forward to the day when it will join God’s children in glorious freedom from death and decay” (Romans 8:19–21, NLT; see also Revelation 22:3\).
Who is Drusilla in the Bible?	Answer Drusilla was the youngest of three daughters born to Herod Agrippa I and is reported to have been very beautiful. Both [King Agrippa I](Herod-Agrippa-I.html) and his son [Agrippa II](Herod-Agrippa-II.html) were rulers in Israel during the first century. Drusilla is significant because of her interaction with the [apostle Paul](life-Paul.html) during one of his imprisonments. Drusilla, along with her husband at the time, Governor [Felix](Felix-in-the-Bible.html), were intrigued by Paul’s teaching about Jesus and wanted to hear more (Acts 24:24\). Drusilla came from a royal but dysfunctional family. Her father, Herod Agrippa I, was the grandson of [Herod the Great](Herod-the-Great.html), the king we read about in the Christmas story who ordered the slaughter of all baby boys in Bethlehem in an effort to destroy the Messiah (Matthew 2:1–15\). Drusilla’s older sister Bernice had a long and checkered sexual history, culminating in an incestuous relationship with their brother, Agrippa II, whom we read about in Acts 25 and 26\. Drusilla was given in marriage at the age of fourteen to Azizus, king of Emeza. The historian [Josephus](Flavius-Josephus.html) implies that she was unhappy in this marriage and was later seduced by Felix with the help of a Cyprian sorcerer named Simon. Felix, the Roman governor of Judea, took Drusilla as his third wife, and they had a son, also named Agrippa. This son later died in an eruption of Mount Vesuvius in AD 79\. As a Jewess, Drusilla would probably have known about the [stoning of Stephen](stoning-of-Stephen.html), which happened before she was born (Acts 7:58–60\), and the martyrdom of [James](James-the-apostle.html) (Acts 12:2\) at the order of her own father. She was married to a man who was well acquainted with Christianity (Acts 24:22\). After Paul was arrested in Jerusalem, he was brought to Caesarea. Governor Felix heard the charges brought against him, and Paul presented the gospel as part of his defense, but Felix delayed giving a verdict. Some days later, Felix with his wife, Drusilla, summoned Paul for another hearing. There was no legal reason for Drusilla to be present at these hearings, so she must have been curious about what Paul had to say. Speaking before Felix and Drusilla, Paul “spoke about faith in Christ Jesus . . . righteousness, self\-control and the judgment to come” (Acts 24:24–25\). Luke records that the governor was afraid at Paul’s words and sent Paul back to his cell until a more “convenient” time (verse 25\). We are not told what Drusilla’s response was, but Paul’s preaching on self\-restraint and the coming judgment must have disturbed her, given her marital history and ungodly lifestyle. Paul gives us a good model for presenting truth to those who seem to be set against it. He boldly proclaimed the gospel without watering it down to please his audience. It is up to the messenger to deliver the message; what God does with the truth we speak is God’s business. The results are His. As Paul spoke to the court in Caesarea, Drusilla may have seemed to be as far from Christianity as a person can be, yet she was [drawn to the message](become-a-Christian.html). The gospel has power to reach even the hardest hearts when presented without shame or apology. Paul wrote in Romans 1:16, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile.” He proved his boldness concerning the gospel when he preached to Felix and Drusilla.
Who is Felix in the Bible?	Answer Antonius Felix was formerly a slave but was promoted by Claudius Caesar to the office of governor. The Roman historian [Tacitus](Tacitus.html) described Felix as “cruel, licentious, and base.” While in Judea, Felix was attracted to Drusilla, a daughter of [Herod Agrippa I](Herod-Agrippa-I.html). The fact that Drusilla was already married made no difference to Felix. He enticed her away from her husband, Azizus, and they later married. Felix was the governor of Judea and Samaria when the apostle Paul was arrested in Jerusalem for preaching the gospel (Acts 23:35\). Because a mob was planning to kill Paul before he could come to trial, the Roman commander hustled Paul away in the night, accompanied by two hundred soldiers, to Caesarea so that his case could be heard by Governor Felix (Acts 23:23–24\). When Paul arrived in Caesarea, Felix the governor read an explanatory letter from the Roman commander who had sent Paul there, asked what province Paul was from, and then postponed his hearing until Paul’s accusers could be present (Acts 23:33–35\). Five days later, a company arrived; it included Ananias the high priest, some Jewish elders, and a hired lawyer named Tertullus. Once the proceedings had begun, Tertullus and the Jewish leaders accused Paul of being a troublemaker who had attempted to desecrate the temple (Acts 24:5–6\). Given his turn to speak, Paul politely denied the charges against him. He also pointed out that his actual accusers, Jews from Asia, were not present and that he had not been found guilty of any crime before the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem (Acts 24:17–21\). Felix was well informed about this new sect of Jesus’ followers called the Way, and when he heard that Paul’s case involved questions of religion, he adjourned the hearing until the Roman commander who had arrested Paul could be present (Acts 24:22\). Paul’s words must have intrigued Felix, because a few days later he summoned Paul to hear more of his teaching. Felix and Drusilla both “listened to \[Paul] as he spoke about faith in Christ Jesus” (Acts 24:24\). But when conviction came through Paul’s words, Felix grew afraid and ordered him to stop talking. Although he gave Paul some freedom by allowing his friends to tend to his needs, Felix kept Paul in jail for two years, ostensibly waiting for a more “convenient” time (Acts 24:25\). In reality, Felix was hoping for a bribe from Paul, but one never came. When Felix was replaced as procurator, he left Paul in jail for his successor, [Porcius Festus](Porcius-Festus.html), to deal with. It could be that another reason Felix left Paul in jail was that he was reluctant to pronounce judgment on a man who was clearly innocent. Or possibly he did so to please Drusilla. A fear of political backlash from the Jews was also a factor (Acts 24:27\). Upon his loss of the governorship, Felix was summoned to Rome where certain of his former Jewish subjects accused him of cruelty and corruption. Felix was found guilty but was spared the death penalty. Felix is representative of many people who are intrigued by the gospel but recognize that surrendering to it means loss of status, power, or control of their own lives. Like Felix, many know on a deep level that what they are hearing is truth, yet their stubborn pride refuses to accept it. [Judas Iscariot](Judas-Iscariot.html) may have been one of those people. He was in close association with the Son of God for three years, witnessing miracles, healings, and other supernatural events. Yet in the end he chose to walk away. Mere exposure to truth does not necessarily enlighten the heart, and Felix is a good example of that (Ephesians 1:18; 1 Corinthians 1:18\).
What is the significance of the Negev in the Bible?	Answer The Negev is a hot, dry region in the southern part of Israel that receives less than eight inches of rainfall each year. The Negev Desert factors into the events of Abraham’s life and through the period of Israel’s wilderness wanderings. The area is also significant throughout the time of the united monarchy until the period of the [divided kingdom](Israel-Northern-Southern-kingdoms.html). Three of the Bible’s prophets mention the Negev as well. The name Negev means “dry land” in Hebrew, but the Bible sometimes uses the term to refer to the “south country,” or “south.” An alternate spelling for Negev in the Bible is Negeb. The King James Version regularly translates Negev as “the south,” whereas the New International Version (Negev) and English Standard Version (Negeb) normally use the name for the territory. Although no specific geographical boundaries define the Negev in the Bible, the region extends between [Beersheba](Beersheba-in-the-Bible.html) and [Kadesh Barnea](Kadesh-Barnea.html) from north to south, and from near the Mediterranean Sea to the Arabah Valley from west to east, an expanse of about 70 miles wide. In Bible times, the territory resembled an hourglass or figure eight turned on its side. On all but the west side, highlands and mountains border the Negev, but to the west it stretches to within a few miles of the Mediterranean coast. Today, the Negev is the largest region in the modern state of Israel and includes more territory than it did in ancient times. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, the total area of the Negev Desert covers about 4,700 square miles, “occupying almost half of Palestine west of the Jordan River and about 60 percent of Israeli territory under the 1949—67 boundaries.” Rather than a figure eight, current Negev is shaped like an inverted triangle. After God called Abraham, the patriarch set out in obedience, leaving his pagan country to go to the land of promise. In the initial part of his journey, Abraham traveled as far as the Negev (Genesis 12:4–9\). When a severe famine entered the land, Abraham left the Negev and went to Egypt (verse 10\). Later, after the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham returned to settle in the Negev (Genesis 20:1\). Abraham’s son Isaac was living in the south country of the Negev when he first met Rebekah (Genesis 24:62\). During much of the 40\-year wilderness wanderings, the Hebrew people camped around the oasis of Kadesh Barnea in the southern part of the Negev (Deuteronomy 1:19, 46\). The Negev was included in the lands the people of Israel were to possess (verse 7 and 34:1–3\). When the Israelites spied out the [Promised Land](Israel-land.html), Moses instructed the scouts to head northward through the hill country, starting in the southlands of the Negev (Numbers 13:17–20\). The seminomadic [Amalekites](Amalekites.html) also lived in the Negev (verse 29\). Joshua led the people of Israel in military conquest of the lands of the Negev, taking control away from its native inhabitants (Joshua 10:40; 11:16; 12:8\). Eventually, the region was allotted to the tribes of Judah and Simeon (Joshua 15; 19:1–9; Judges 1:9\). Ziklag, a city in the Negev, was given to David by Achish, the Philistine king of Gath. David had fled there when King Saul sought to harm him (1 Samuel 27:5–7\). Later, this same city in the “Negev of Caleb” was raided by Amalekite warriors (1 Samuel 30:1\). In the Bible, territories in this southern region are called the “Negev of Judah,” “Negev of the Kenites,” “Negev of the Jerahmeelites” (1 Samuel 27:10\), and the “Negev of the Kerethites” (1 Samuel 30:14\). With limited rainfall, the Negev Desert offered little opportunity for agriculture or economic development in biblical times. However, in northern areas of the Negev, some grain farming was done as well as raising of goats, sheep, and camels (1 Samuel 25:2; 1 Chronicles 4:38–41; 2 Chronicles 26:10\). Farmers of the Negev used terrace farming for the best use of the land. During the time of the kings, many small villages and fortifications were established in the Negev to guard the southern borders of Judah. Isaiah mentions the wild animals of the Negev in an oracle denouncing Judah’s reliance on Egypt, calling the territory “a land of hardship and distress” (Isaiah 30:6\). Jeremiah said that, if Israel were to keep the Sabbath, people would come from all around Jerusalem, including the Negev, to observe the holy day (Jeremiah 17:26\). And Obadiah prophesied about the inhabitants of the Negev after their time in exile: “People from the Negev will occupy the mountains of Esau, and people from the foothills will possess the land of the Philistines. They will occupy the fields of Ephraim and Samaria, and Benjamin will possess Gilead. This company of Israelite exiles who are in Canaan will possess the land as far as Zarephath; the exiles from Jerusalem who are in Sepharad will possess the towns of the Negev” (Obadiah 1:19–20\). After the fall of Jerusalem, at the time of the exile in 587 BC, the lands of the Negev fell under control of the [Edomites](Edomites.html). The territory supported few inhabitants until the arrival of the [Nabateans](Nabateans.html) in the last two centuries BC. The Nabateans rebuilt many settlements of the Negev and established new villages. Through careful water conservation, they became skilled at farming and pasturing in the dry region. The population of the Negev continued to grow until the Arab conquest in AD 632 but then diminished again until more recent times.
Who was Simon the Zealot?	Answer Simon the Zealot was one of Jesus’ disciples. Generally speaking, a zealot is anyone who fervently supports a particular cause. PETA, Greenpeace, and NOW might all be considered organizations that are filled with zealots. In the context of the New Testament, the [Zealots](Zealots-Bible.html) were a party zealous for Jewish independence and throwing off Roman rule. They hoped to accomplish this by inciting the people to rebellion, driving the Romans from Israel, and establishing a Mosaic theocracy. They were also known to target Jews who were sympathetic to Rome. Both Josephus and the Talmud took a negative view of the Zealots’ fanaticism. Simon the Zealot is mentioned four times in the New Testament, in places where the names of [the disciples](twelve-apostles-disciples-12.html) are listed, but beyond this no information about him is given (Matthew 10:4; Mark 3:18; Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13\). The KJV lists him as “Simon the Canaanite” in Matthew 10:4—the term Canaanite here being a political term, not a reference to a regional home. It is usually assumed that he is called “Simon the Zealot” because, when Jesus called him, he was a member of the Zealots’ political movement. If so, the continued use of the designation does not address whether or not he continued to be zealous for Jewish independence while he was a disciple. In any case, we can assume that his priorities changed as he submitted to Jesus’ teaching, which included “giving to Caesar what belongs to Caesar” (Matthew 22:21\), and an emphasis on the kingdom of God, which was not of this world and was not established by use of violence and the force of arms (John 18:36\). Simon would also have been informed by Jesus’ revealing that the temple would be destroyed and Jerusalem would be completely overrun by the Gentiles (Luke 21:5–6, 20–24\). Keeping the “nickname” of “the Zealot” may simply have been a way to distinguish him from the other Simon (who later came to be known as Peter) in Jesus’ group. Perhaps, in later years, he was known to be zealous for the gospel. Tradition says that Simon the Zealot preached the gospel in Persia and was ultimately killed for refusing to sacrifice to the sun god. It is interesting to note that Jesus called another disciple, Matthew, who was a tax collector (Matthew 9:9\) and who would have been in the employ of Rome directly or of the Jewish officials who ruled with Rome’s blessing. Matthew the [publican](publican-in-the-Bible.html) and Simon the Zealot were from opposite ends of the political spectrum. Because of their greater allegiance to Jesus, they were brothers and co\-workers for the gospel. It is unfortunate that today many believers seem to be more committed to a political party or a political viewpoint than to the Christ, the church, the gospel, and the Kingdom of God.
Who was James the son of Alphaeus?	Answer James, son of Alphaeus, was one of Jesus’ twelve apostles (Matthew 10:2–3\) and one of three people named James mentioned in the New Testament. He is distinguished from the other Jameses in the Bible by his father’s name. In Bible times, people did not have last names as we do in Western cultures. They were often identified by their fathers and grandfathers. For example, the other James of the twelve apostles is described as “[James](James-the-apostle.html) the son of Zebedee” (Mark 3:17\). A third [James](life-James.html) mentioned in Scripture was the brother of the Lord Jesus (Galatians 1:19\), a leader in the Jerusalem church (Acts 12:17; Galatians 2:9\), and the author of the [book of James](Book-of-James.html). James, son of Alphaeus, is also called “James the Less” (Mark 15:40\). The word less should be understood to mean “little” or “younger.” Some Bible versions call him “James the Younger,” but the word may also imply smallness of stature or a lesser importance. Other than being listed as a disciple, nothing else is known about James the son of Alphaeus. Mark 2:14 has an interesting detail that some connect with James son of Alphaeus: when Jesus calls [Matthew](Matthew-in-the-Bible.html) (Levi) to follow Him, Levi is described as “the son of Alphaeus.” Some scholars take this to mean that Matthew and James were brothers. This is unlikely, however, because Scripture elsewhere clearly identifies two sets of brothers who followed Jesus: Peter and Andrew (John 1:40\), and James and John (Mark 3:17\). No such link is ever drawn between Matthew and James. Other scholars believe that James’ father, Alphaeus, is the same man called Clopas, the husband of Mary, in John 19:25\. There is no way to be sure one way or the other. Tradition implies that it was James the Less who may have taken the gospel to Persia (modern Iran) and was martyred there. But other than that possibility, James the son of Alphaeus is the picture of obscure service. The lack of information about James the son of Alphaeus is a lesson in itself. This James was just as much an apostle as were Peter and John. He will sit on a throne in Jesus’ earthly kingdom (Matthew 19:28\) with as much authority and honor as the other apostles. His name will be engraved in a foundation of the walls of the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:14\). James will not be considered “less” in eternity because he was faithful to his calling on earth. James the son of Alphaeus can be an encouragement to those called to lives of obscurity. Our callings are just as sure, just as God\-honoring, but few will ever know our names on earth. There will be no billboards, Time articles, or headlines praising our efforts. Some toil for decades in remote regions of the world with little to show for it. Others serve quietly in their homes or neighborhoods and then die relatively unnoticed. But God notices. James the son of Alphaeus reminds us that God uses a different set of standards to choose His heroes. He honors faithfulness (Luke 18:8\), endurance (Matthew 24:13\), obedience (Matthew 7:21\), and sacrifice (Galatians 2:20\). Our only responsibility is obedience, not the results of that obedience. While some apostles wrote books of the Bible and others were featured regularly in the gospels, it appears that James the son of Alphaeus was quietly faithful to his Lord. For that, he will be equally honored with them for all eternity.
Who was Adah in the Bible?	Answer The Bible mentions two women named Adah. The first Adah was the wife of [Lamech](Lamech-in-the-Bible.html) and the mother of Jabal and Jubal (Genesis 4:19–20\). She is also the second woman named in the Bible, the first being Eve (Genesis 3:20\). The second Adah was one of three Canaanite women whom [Esau](Esau-in-the-Bible.html) took as wives (Genesis 36:2\). This Adah was the daughter of Elon the Hittite and became the mother of Esau’s firstborn son, Eliphaz (Genesis 36:15\). From Eliphaz came Amalek, the father of the [Amalekites](Amalekites.html), enemies of Israel (Numbers 14:45\). Usually, when the Bible mentions a woman’s name, it is because she was significant in the unfolding plan of God. In ancient patriarchal cultures, women were often viewed as little more than child\-bearing property owned by a husband. God often inspired human writers to include women’s names in genealogies, which elevated their status for all who would later read about them. The first Adah, the wife of Lamech, was noteworthy because she was the mother of Jabal, the ancestor of nomadic ranchers. Her other son mentioned, Jubal, was a musician, and his offspring were known for crafting and mastering musical instruments (Genesis 4:20\). Adah’s husband committed a murder, and he boasted to Adah of his deed (verses 23–24\) The second Adah, the wife of Esau, is significant because she, like Esau’s other wives, was from Canaan. This fact deeply distressed Esau’s parents, [Isaac](life-Isaac.html) and [Rebekah](Rebekah-in-the-Bible.html), who commanded their younger son Jacob, “Do not marry a Canaanite woman” (Genesis 28:60\). After Jacob stole Esau’s birthright, Rebekah knew she had to get Jacob away from his brother, so she used Esau’s Canaanite wives as an excuse: “Then Rebekah said to Isaac, ‘I’m disgusted with living because of these Hittite women. If Jacob takes a wife from among the women of this land, from Hittite women like these, my life will not be worth living’” (Genesis 27:46\). Adah and Esau’s other wives most likely introduced idolatry and pagan practices into Isaac’s and Rebekah’s lives. Isaac, the son of promise (Genesis 17:16, 19\), was to be the father of a great nation, a people set apart for the worship of the Lord (Genesis 22:17\). It was of utmost importance that his only other son, Jacob, did not marry into the Canaanite tribes but take a wife from among their own people. Jacob did, and he became the ancestor of the ten tribes of Israel (Genesis 35:11–12, 23–26\). Esau’s Adah represents the worldly contamination that compromise brings. Esau was weak in character and morals. He was willing to sell his godly heritage for a bowl of stew (Genesis 25:32–34\). And he married women like Adah who were outside the plan of God. That sin mirrored the sin of his grandfather Abraham, who also fathered a child outside the plan of God. That sin has caused untold damage in the world ever since (Genesis 16:3–4; 25:18\). And Adah’s sons and grandsons also became enemies of Jacob’s offspring. Adah should be a reminder to us that making friends with the world is never an option for the people of God (see James 4:4\).
Is it true that fear is a liar?	Answer A popular song by Zach Williams, “Fear Is a Liar,” personifies fear and assigns falsehood to it. Of course, [fear](Bible-fear.html) itself is non\-personal, but song lyrics and poetry often use personification to communicate a theme or make a point. In the case of Williams’ song, fear is referred to as a “he” who tells us various lies and who must be withstood. The chorus of “Fear Is a Liar” describes some of what fear does: Fear he is a liar He will take your breath Stop you in your steps Fear he is a liar He will rob your rest Steal your happiness Then Williams tells us what to do with fear and why: Cast your fear in the fire ʼCause fear he is a liar The claim that “fear is a liar” is broad, and we must ask, is all fear a liar? In other words, does all fear come from an evil source that should be rejected? No. There is a good type of fear (not addressed in Williams’ song) and a bad type of fear (that Williams is correct to take a stand against). We are rightfully [fearful of God](fear-God.html), and we are rightfully fearful of dangerous things (slick roads, rabid bats, the effects of alcohol abuse, etc.), in the sense that we exercise caution and apply wisdom. A man ignorant of rattlesnakes may traipse through the Arizona tobosa grass with no fear of being bitten, but he is being foolish; it is better to have respect or a healthy fear for what rattlesnake venom can do. The Bible warns us of the consequences of sin so that we develop a healthy fear of sinning. To understand the depth of God’s hatred toward sin and His intention to destroy it should be scary to everyone, including believers. There are situations in which fear is definitely not a liar; that is, sometimes we should be fearful and seek help or a way to escape the source of fear. For example, when a truck is coming straight toward you at 100 mph, it is not sinful to fear; in fact, that fear is a gift prompting you to avoid the truck and save your life. Similarly, when a sinner is afraid of hell, knowing it is not a place he wants to be, that fear is just, right, and biblical. Sometimes allowing a little fear is better than trying to alleviate all fear: the statement “[Hell](hell-real-eternal.html) is a real place of torment” may be fearful to some, but it is true; “There is no hell” may dispel fear, but it is a lie. So, not all fear is a deception. Fear is not always a “liar.” Of course, there are fears that have a demonic origin. The fear that God is not truly good is one such fear. When fear says that God has forgotten His children or turned His back on them, then it is a “liar,” because those statements directly contradict the promises of God. The truth is that perfect love casts out fear (1 John 4:18\), and the Bible repeatedly admonishes God’s people not to fear. Satan is the father of lies (John 8:44\) and the deceiver of the whole world (Revelation 12:9\). When we are told any lie, it is of Satan, who has no truth in him. The devil will try to dishearten us with lies, and unwarranted fear is one of his tools. While there are many fears that are lies used by Satan, there are also many fears used by godly men to try to turn people to God. God showed fearful and powerful signs to the Israelites so that they might turn to Him. Elijah called down fire from heaven so that Israel might turn from their false gods to the one true God. The apostle Paul sternly rebuked the Corinthians and threatened excommunication to those basking in unrepentant sin, hoping to prompt godly fear in them. The difference between warranted fear and unwarranted fear is important: when God uses fear, it is based in [truth](what-is-truth.html); but when the devil uses fear, it is based in lies. When Jesus spoke of hell in fearful ways, it was to show the truth about God’s punishment of sin. Hell is not a place we want to be, and fear of it is warranted. When Satan urges us to fear man rather than fear God, he is advancing the lie that we owe more respect to fellow human beings than we owe to God. The fear of man is unwarranted; it is a “liar” and lays a snare (Proverbs 29:25\). Other common lies the devil uses to instill fear in people include “Jesus’ death wasn’t enough to cover your sin,” “Even if you trust in Christ, you’re not good enough to be with God,” and “God doesn’t love you, and this tragedy proves it.” The fear induced by these statements could rightly be called a “liar,” because the fear is biblically unwarranted. Faith in God’s Word will dispel such fear. Our feelings should not decide whether something is of God or of the devil. For example, we cannot say, “This makes me feel scared, so it must be of the devil.” Rather, our discernment of right and wrong should be rooted firmly in the truth of God’s Word. We know that Jesus’ death was sufficient to cover our sins because God said so (Hebrews 10:10; John 3:16\). We know that we shouldn’t be scared to meet God because Christ gives us His righteousness (2 Corinthians 5:21\). We know that God will not stop loving us because nothing can ever separate us from the love of God in Christ (Romans 8:38–39\). Is fear a liar? Sometimes, it is. The devil will use fear rooted in deceit to try to get our eyes off the Author and Finisher of our salvation. Unwarranted fear is a liar. But not all fear is from the devil, and some fear is biblically warranted.
Why did God command the Israelites to completely destroy the Midianites in Numbers 31:17?	Answer Understanding and applying passages from the exodus and conquest of Canaan can be challenging. The passages about putting certain inhabitants to death are among the most difficult. Among those is Numbers 31\. God told Moses, “Take vengeance on the [Midianites](Midianites.html) for the Israelites” (Numbers 31:1\). The Israelites obediently armed themselves and attacked the Midianites, killing the men (verse 7\). Also, “the Israelites captured the Midianite women and children and took all the Midianite herds, flocks and goods as plunder” (verse 9\). When the troops returned to Moses, he was angry that they had not fully carried out the Lord’s vengeance (verse 14; cf. verse 3\). The Midianite women were those who had caused Israel to sin at [Baal Peor](Baal-Peor.html) (see Numbers 25\). So Moses commanded that the women be killed, and also “kill all the boys” (Numbers 31:17\). When we look at the command to kill the male Midianite children, there are two perspectives we might take. One is the more understandably temporal. During the timeframe in question, tribal warfare was rampant. It was highly likely that the male Midianite children would grow up and seek revenge for their fathers and grandfathers against Israel. Avenging the death of one’s father is a commonly accepted necessity in every culture and even in popular fiction—it’s what motivates Hamlet in Shakespeare’s classic play and what energizes Inigo Montoya in The Princess Bride. Further, the utterly disgusting depravity in which these Midianite boys had been raised is well documented. Regular behaviors among the Midianites included child sacrifice, cult prostitution, and bestiality. The divine prohibition of these acts was codified, and the acts were known to the Israelites (Leviticus 18:21, 23–24\). Male inhabitants carrying on the lineage of this culture would have been a perennial problem for Israel. The other perspective we should consider is the divine. Now, we cannot know the mind of God or comprehend the depths of His wisdom (Isaiah 55:8–9\). But we can know that, given the depravity of the Midianites, God’s command to kill the Midianite boys might have been an act of divine mercy. In His perfect knowledge—including His knowledge of what would happen in the lives of those young Midianites, had they lived—it’s possible that God brought them to Himself before they had the opportunity of choosing to reject Him. It is highly possible that, had these males grown to maturity, they would have embraced the wanton rebellion and idolatry of their fathers. From God’s perspective, it may have been better for them to die at a young age than to endure a life of depravity and the attending temporal (and eternal) consequences. In all this, we must remember that God is goodness. He is not simply a good moral agent like humans are commanded to be; He is not beholden to or measured by a standard outside of Himself. We cannot look at God’s actions as being in any moral category like human actions. God is not a man (Numbers 23:19\). The very nature of God is such that He cannot do evil. “The LORD is righteous in all his ways” (Psalm 145:17\). This is the point by which we must reconcile passages such as Numbers 31:17 with the likes of John 3:16\. Moreover, a major mistake we sometimes make is to think that our lives are our own. We are creatures, not the Creator. We could not exist for one moment without God’s willing our existence (Hebrews 1:3; Acts 17:28\). We should not think that God owes us anything, be it a long life, a life free of suffering, or anything else. God desires our ultimate good, which is everlasting union with Him (2 Peter 3:8–10\). Our ultimate good may not be realized in a long life or one devoid of pain and suffering. As strange as it may sound, the ultimate good of the Midianite males may not have come about without their being killed by the Israelites in warfare. This is “brass tacks” and gets to the root of whether one thinks that man was made in the image of God or whether one makes a god in the image of man. It is difficult to discuss these topics rationally because emotions often take over, and proclamations of “the innocence of children” grow loud. We sometimes hear things like “I could never believe in a God like that.” We are correct in the visceral reaction to children suffering and dying. At the same time, we must differentiate the cause and circumstance of the young Midianites’ deaths from current situations. Suffering today is not brought about by God’s people taking possession of their promised land against a morally depraved and militant people group. Also, we are profoundly incorrect when we start embracing notions like “if I were God, I certainly would not have done that.” God does not see human events as we do; He sees them as only God can. Thus, we have no basis by which to say that God would not have a humanly understandable, morally sufficient reason for commanding the death of children during the conquest of Canaan.
What is the Seventh Day Baptist Church?	Answer The Seventh Day Baptist Church is a denomination in the Baptist tradition that believes in the continuation of the Old Testament Sabbath command. Seventh Day Baptists meet on Saturday for worship and keep that day as a day of rest to honor God. As Baptists, they also practice [believers’ baptism](believers-baptism.html) by immersion, not infant baptism. Seventh Day Baptist churches are independent congregations but are affiliated with each other under a denominational structure and statement of beliefs. The Seventh Day Baptist Church traces its origin to the mid\-1600s’ Separatist movement in England. Recognizing that the basis for doctrine and practice is the Bible, some of those in the Separatist movement considered the keeping of the Sabbath as an inescapable conclusion and requirement for the Christian church. The first Seventh Day Baptist church in America began in 1671 when some traditional (i.e., Sunday worship) Baptists developed the conviction that worship should take place on the Sabbath day, and they withdrew from other Baptists. The statement of faith of the Seventh Day Baptist Church reveals an orthodox understanding of the Trinity, the Bible, and the redemptive work of Christ on the cross. Their understanding of salvation is Arminian in that they believe fallen man has the ability to choose to believe in Christ. Seventh Day Baptists hold that there exists a continuity between the Old and New Testaments regarding [Sabbath\-keeping](Sabbath-keeping.html). This is not a salvation\-related issue, and one’s view of the Sabbath is not necessarily a mark of orthodoxy. But it is a distinctive for the Seventh Day Baptist Church, as indicated by the name of the denomination. One possible matter of concern found in their statement of faith is in the introduction, which contains this statement: “Seventh Day Baptists consider liberty of thought under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to be essential to Christian belief and practice. Therefore we encourage the unhindered study and open discussion of Scripture. We uphold the individual’s freedom of conscience in seeking to determine and obey the will of God” ([Statement of Belief](http://seventhdaybaptist.org/about/statement-of-belief/), accessed January 22, 2019\). Any one Bible passage has only one true meaning. While there may be several possible applications, there can be only one correct interpretation. The proper application of sound exegetical and [hermeneutical principles](Biblical-hermeneutics.html) is important for those who propose to teach the meaning of the Bible. The Seventh Day Baptist Church’s statement that “liberty of thought” is essential to “Christian belief” raises questions: are there certain Christian beliefs that we are at liberty to dispense with? And how far should we take the “open discussion of Scripture” before common\-sense rules of interpretation intrude? Are personal beliefs and preferences to yield to [biblical exegesis](Biblical-exegesis.html)? In conclusion, the Seventh Day Baptist Church is orthodox in that their statement of faith appears to align with the basic creeds of historical Christianity. The issue of observing the Sabbath should not be a major issue (see Romans 14:5\), as long as it does not lead to [legalism](Bible-Christian-legalism.html). Of course, in any association or denomination, individual churches have unique differences, and the doctrine and practices of any church should be assessed according to what Scripture says.
What did Jesus mean when He spoke of making friends by worldly wealth (Luke 16:9)?	Answer In Luke 16:9 Jesus says, “I tell you, use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.” Other translations render the verse this way: “And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they may receive you into everlasting habitations” (KJV). “And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous wealth, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal dwellings” (ESV). “And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by how you use worldly wealth, so that when it runs out you will be welcomed into the eternal homes” (NET). Jesus’ statement about using “worldly wealth” to “gain friends” comes at the end of the parable of the unjust steward (Luke 16:1–8\). The thought of using “mammon” or “unrighteous wealth” to make friends in the world strikes us as improper, and Jesus’ promotion of such an idea seems odd, to say the least. To understand what Jesus means in verse 9, we must understand His point in the preceding story. First, the [parable of the unjust steward](parable-unjust-steward.html) is told for the benefit of the disciples. The parable is somewhat unorthodox, and the setting is unusual. In most of Jesus’ parables, the protagonist represents God, Christ, or some other positive character. In this parable all the characters are wicked—the steward and the man whose possessions he manages are both unsavory characters. Jesus is not exhorting us to emulate these characters’ behavior; rather, He is trying to teach a spiritual principle. In the parable a rich man calls his steward and informs him that he will be fired for mismanaging his master’s resources. The steward makes a move to provide for himself once he’s out of a job. He cuts some shrewd deals behind his master’s back: if you agree to shelter me when I am eventually put out, I will immediately reduce the debt you owe my master. When the master becomes aware of what the sly servant has done, he commends him for his “shrewdness.” In His application of the story, Jesus says, “For the sons of this world are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than the sons of light” (Luke 16:8\). Here, Jesus contrasts the “sons of the world” (i.e., unbelievers) and the “sons of light” (believers). Sadly, unbelievers tend to be wiser in the things of this world than believers are about the things of the world to come. The unjust steward cheated his master but in so doing made friends of his master’s debtors. Those people were later obligated to care for him once his livelihood ran out. Then comes Luke 16:9: “I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of unrighteous wealth, so that when it fails they may receive you into the eternal dwellings.” Jesus encourages His followers to be generous with their wealth in this life so that in the life to come their new friends will receive them “into eternal dwellings.” This corresponds to Jesus’ teaching in the [Sermon on the Mount](sermon-on-the-mount.html) to lay up treasures in heaven (Matthew 6:19–21\). In referring to “worldly wealth,” Jesus is not saying that believers should gain wealth dishonestly and then be generous with it. Worldly here means “having to do with life on earth.” In your earthly life, “make friends”; that is, bless others. Use the monetary resources you have to reach out to others. The result will be friendships that endure into eternity: the souls we reach in this world will welcome us into “eternal dwellings” someday. The principle Jesus teaches in Luke 16:9 is that everything we own should be used to further God’s kingdom. We are God’s stewards. Just as the unjust steward in the parable was “shrewd” in benefitting himself materially, so we should be “shrewd” in benefitting ourselves (and others) spiritually. We are to use the Master’s resources to further the Master’s goals. We have been entrusted with material possessions, and we are to use them for the eternal benefit of others. If God is our Master, then our wealth is at His disposal. The faithful steward whose Master is God will employ the wealth entrusted to him in building up the kingdom of God. The New Living Translation brings out this meaning well: “Here’s the lesson: Use your worldly resources to benefit others and make friends. Then, when your earthly possessions are gone, they will welcome you to an eternal home” (Luke 16:9\). When we give to missions, when we support our local church, when we give to charity in the name of Jesus, then we are using “unrighteous, worldly wealth” to build up the kingdom of God and lift up the name of Christ. We are being “shrewd” in our dealings in this world when our eyes are on the “eternal homes” we will one day inhabit with our “friends” in Christ.
What is the significance of Galilee in the Bible?	Answer Galilee is most notable for being the home of our Lord Jesus Christ. More specifically, Lower Galilee is where Jesus grew up and spent the better part of His earthly life and ministry. Galilee occupies the northernmost territory of the land of Israel. Lebanon borders it on the north, the [Jezreel Valley](Jezreel.html) on the south, the Upper Jordan River and Sea of Galilee on the east, and the Plain of Acre on the west. With the highest elevation in Israel, Galilee enjoys the coolest climate with abundant winter rains and numerous springs to keep the land well\-watered. The territory is divided into two sections—Upper and Lower Galilee—with a deep valley running between. Upper Galilee climbs to heights more than 3,000 feet above sea level, while Lower Galilee contains broad valleys with rich soil well\-suited to agriculture and farming. The first mention of Galilee in the Bible refers to the location of Kedesh, a city of refuge in the hill country of Naphtali (Joshua 20:7; 21:32; 1 Chronicles 6:76\). In the allotment of land among the tribes of Israel, Galilee is associated initially with the tribes of Naphtali, Asher, Issachar, and Zebulun (Joshua 19\). Later, the tribe of Dan moved to the outskirts of Upper Galilee (verses 40–48\). The name Galilee derives from two Hebrew words meaning “circuit” or “district.” The region has been called Galilee since at least the seventh century BC. In the Old Testament, Galilee lacked significance in the story of the Israelite people, but by New Testament times, the area came into the spotlight as it had grown into a major population center. Abundant streams flow from the northern highlands to supply the well\-watered and fertile terrain of Lower Galilee, making it the ideal setting for densely populated settlements. Also, the [Sea of Galilee](Sea-of-Galilee.html) is in Lower Galilee. As the only substantial freshwater lake in the region, the Sea of Galilee added a flourishing fishing industry to the region’s other lucrative commercial activities including the exportation of olives and grains. Upper Galilee is sometimes referred to as “Galilee of the Gentiles” in Scripture (Matthew 4:16\), probably because it hosted various non\-Jewish inhabitants, including Phoenicians, Syrians, and Sidonians. Jews living in other parts of Israel often looked askance at the Galileans as backward, unsophisticated people; sometimes their contempt for Galileans was recorded in Scripture (e.g., John 7:52\). Not helping matters was the fact that the Galileans had a distinctive dialect, readily discerned by the Judeans (Mark 14:70\). Jesus’ boyhood years were spent in Nazareth, a town in Lower Galilee. Most of the Gospel narratives are also set in Lower Galilee. With several major roadways of the Roman Empire crossing through Galilee, the land provided Jesus and His disciples with a strategic initial mission field to launch the gospel message into the world. Numerous recorded miracles of Jesus took place in Galilee (Matthew 4:23–25; 28:16; John 1:46; 7:41–42\). His first miracle—turning water into wine at the wedding in Cana (John 2:1, 11; 4:46\)—happened in Galilee. And from the shores of the Sea of Galilee, Jesus called the first of His disciples to become “[fishers of men](fishers-of-men.html)” (Mark 1:16\). Peter, Andrew, James, and John were all working as fishermen earning a living on the Sea of Galilee when Jesus called them up for service (Matthew 4:13–22\). More than 700 years before our Savior walked the land of Galilee, the prophet Isaiah foresaw the region as the gateway of salvation and peace for the nations through the preaching of Jesus Christ: “Nevertheless, there will be no more gloom for those who were in distress. In the past he humbled the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, but in the future he will honor Galilee of the nations, by the Way of the Sea, beyond the Jordan” (Isaiah 9:1\). We know the person spoken of here refers to Christ because this same passage is cited in Matthew 4:13–15 and applied to Jesus. The lands of Zebulun and Naphtali had been devastated by the [Assyrian army](Israel-conquered-by-Assyria.html) but were uniquely honored by the presence of the Messiah and His loving ministry, which brought light, joy, and salvation to the people of the world.
Who was Nabal in the Bible?	Answer Nabal is noteworthy for the brief interaction he had with David while David was on the run from [King Saul](life-Saul.html). The account of David and Nabal is found in 1 Samuel 25\. Nabal was from the clan of Caleb, and his name means “fool”—a fact that suggests Nabal may have been a nickname he earned by his “harsh and evil” behavior (verse 3, BSB). Nabal lived near the town of Maoen in the hill country of Judea and possessed thousands of sheep and goats that he pastured near Carmel. Nabal was extremely wealthy; however, his greatest asset was his beautiful and intelligent wife, [Abigail](Abigail-in-the-Bible.html). In his quest to stay one step ahead of the murderous Saul, [David](life-David.html) had acquired a significant number of men who traveled with him and believed in his destiny as the future king of Israel. They provided for themselves by defending farms and towns from raiders and thieves. It was common practice for a wealthy landowner to provide sustenance for the men who guarded his property. So Nabal should not have been surprised David requested provisions for his men from Nabal (1 Samuel 25:4–9\). An honest and noble man would have been glad to offer provisions to the brave men who had guarded his herdsmen, flocks, and shepherds for weeks. A young man in Nabal’s employ described David’s men as “a wall around us, both day and night, the whole time we were herding our sheep near them” (1 Samuel 25:16\). But Nabal was not an honest and noble man. He responded to David’s request with sneering arrogance and disdain: “Who is this fellow David?” Nabal asked David’s messengers. “Who does this son of Jesse think he is? There are lots of servants these days who run away from their masters. Should I take my bread and my water and my meat that I’ve slaughtered for my shearers and give it to a band of outlaws who come from who knows where?” (verses 10–11, NLT). Compounding the outrage of Nabal’s statement was the fact that, as an influential man in Israel, Nabal would have known who David was. The prophet Samuel had anointed David as the next king several years earlier, and news like that did not stay hidden in a tiny nation like Israel (1 Samuel 16:12–13\). But Nabal’s narcissism and arrogance made him send an insult to the future king of Israel. Nabal refused to deal fairly with David and closed his heart to any generosity. In response to Nabal’s surliness, David prepared his men for battle against Nabal’s household (1 Samuel 25:12–13\). In an act of grace and courage, Nabal’s wife, Abigail, intervened on her husband’s behalf. She sent a bounty of supplies to David’s camp without Nabal’s knowledge (verses 18–19\). Then she went to David personally, humbling herself and pleading for mercy. Her quick thinking saved Nabal and his estate from David’s retribution. Her gentle beauty and humble apologies calmed David, and he called off his planned retaliation (verse 35\). David’s dealings with Nabal were at an end, but the Lord was not finished with him. [Vengeance](revenge-vengeance.html) belongs to the Lord (Romans 12:19\). When Abigail returned home, her husband was holding a feast and was drunk. When Nabal sobered up the next morning, Abigail told him what she had done to appease David. Upon hearing the news, Nabal had a stroke or heart attack and lay paralyzed. He lingered for ten days, and then the Bible says that “the Lord struck Nabal and he died” (1 Samuel 25:38\). Rarely does the Bible use such terminology to indicate that a person’s death was the result of a direct act of God. But in Nabal’s case that was the truth. His ongoing, unrepentant wickedness, culminating in his open defiance of the Lord’s anointed, was judged by God. Nabal is an Old Testament example of the kind of person that Romans 1:28–32 describes: filled with wickedness, greed, insolence, and arrogance. Drunken, slandering, and hostile to those outside his circle, Nabal is the epitome of what God hates. Nabal’s fate should be a warning to us all. God will not be mocked (Galatians 6:7\). We reap what we sow. Galatians 6:8 says, “Whoever sows to please their flesh, from the flesh will reap destruction; whoever sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.” Nabal lived to please himself but at the end of his life had nothing that would count for eternity. In the final analysis, it is only God’s pleasure that matters. When we live to please the Lord, we benefit not only in this life but for all eternity (Matthew 6:19–20\).
What does it mean that Jesus Christ conquered death?	Answer Most obviously, the statement that Christ has conquered death refers to His [resurrection](resurrection-Christ-important.html). He who was dead is now alive (see Revelation 1:18\). These three words—Christ conquered death—define the most important difference between Christianity and all other religions. No other religious leader ever predicted his own death and resurrection (Matthew 16:21\), based his claims about himself and his teaching on that prediction (John 2:18 –22; Matthew 27:40\), and then kept that promise (Luke 24:6\). Jesus’ resurrection marks the first time in history that someone rose from the dead never to die again. Others who were resurrected eventually died a second time (see 1 Kings 17:17–24; 2 Kings 4:32–37; Mark 5:39–42; John 11:38–44\). Jesus’ resurrection was a true and total defeat of death. As the Holy Son of God, Jesus overcame death once and for all, as Peter explained: “It was impossible for death to keep its hold on him” (Acts 2:24\). The triumphant, risen Christ said, “I am the Living One; I was dead, and now look, I am alive for ever and ever! And I hold the keys of death and Hades” (Revelation 1:18\). Keys are a symbol of authority. Jesus is sovereign over death. Christ’s conquest of death was permanent and eternal. Christ conquered death because He was sinless. The curse upon mankind in the Garden of Eden, brought about by their sin, was plainly stated: “You will certainly die” (Genesis 2:17\). Ever since, we have seen the truth of Romans 6:23, “The wages of sin is death.” But Jesus Christ had no sin (1 Peter 2:22\); therefore, death had no power over Him. Jesus’ death was a voluntary sacrifice for our sin, and, given His sinless perfection, His resurrection logically followed. “I lay down my life,” Jesus said, “only to take it up again” (John 10:17\). The fact that Christ has conquered death has eternal consequences for us. The good news—the [gospel](what-is-the-gospel.html)—is grounded in Christ’s victory over death. Without the resurrection, there is no gospel; indeed, there is no hope for us at all: “If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins” (1 Corinthians 15:17\). But Christ has risen, and, as fellow conquerors with Him, Christians “have passed from death to life” (1 John 3:14\). Christ “has destroyed death and has brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Timothy 1:10\). The fact that Christ has conquered death means that believers have also been granted victory over death. We are “more than conquerors through him who loved us” (Romans 8:37\). Christ is “the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep” (1 Corinthians 15:20\), which means that Jesus’ resurrection is the first of many: believers who have “fallen asleep” (died) will be likewise resurrected. Jesus promised His followers, “Because I live, you also will live” (John 14:19\). The fact that Christ has conquered death is a fulfillment of prophecy. The psalmist predicted the Messiah would overcome death: “You will not abandon me to the realm of the dead, nor will you let your faithful one see decay” (Psalm 16:10\). Other prophets filled God’s people with the hope that the Lord would one day abolish death: “He will swallow up death forever. The Sovereign LORD will wipe away the tears from all faces” (Isaiah 25:8\), and “I will deliver this people from the power of the grave; I will redeem them from death. Where, O death, are your plagues? Where, O grave, is your destruction?” (Hosea 13:14; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:54–55\). Death is the devil’s most powerful, terrifying weapon against us. At the cross, Christ defeated Satan on behalf of us helpless sinners: “Now is the time for judgment on this world; now the prince of this world will be driven out” (John 12:31; cf. Colossians 2:15\). With the empty tomb, Christ destroyed the devil’s most powerful weapon, death. Satan, our accuser, is now powerless to condemn Christians. We will not share his fate (Revelation 12:9–11; 20:10, 14\). When Christ conquered death for us, He removed the “sting of death,” sin (1 Corinthians 15:56\)—that is, we will not be judged by God according to our sins; rather, we will stand before God robed in Christ’s own perfect righteousness. That is why believers in Christ “will not be hurt at all by the [second death](second-death.html)” (Revelation 2:11\), and “the second death has no power over them” (Revelation 20:6\). Christ has received our death penalty for sin and, through His death, has conquered death (Revelation 20:14\). Believers “are more than conquerors through him who loved us” (Romans 8:37\). What can separate us from the love of God in Christ? “Neither death nor life” (verse 38\). Christ has conquered death, and believers stand firm on Jesus’ words: “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me will live, even though he dies. And everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die” (John 11:25–26, BSB).
Why is eating dairy products and meat in the same meal considered not kosher?	Answer Observant Jews, in following the Mosaic Law, seek to obey the laws regarding food, primarily found in Leviticus chapter 11\. However, there is a common Jewish dietary practice that is not found in Leviticus 11 or anywhere else in the Hebrew Scriptures. Most observant Jews do not eat animal and dairy products together, or even in the same meal. They do not consider mixing dairy products and meat to be [kosher](Bible-foods.html)—cheeseburgers are off the menu. If the command not to mix meat with dairy is not found in the Hebrew Scriptures, where did it come from? The practice of avoiding dairy products in a meal with meat comes from Exodus 23:19, which reads, “Do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk.” The command does not overtly relate to dietary restrictions; rather, it prohibits cooking a certain type of meat a certain way. A normal reading of Exodus 23:19 seemingly allows for a young goat to be cooked in milk, as long as the milk is not from its own mother. Further, the command’s narrow scope would seem to allow for any other type of clean animal (besides a goat) to be cooked in its own mother’s milk. The command does not say anything about whether dairy and meat can be consumed in the same meal. So how can Exodus 23:19 be used to forbid dairy and meat being consumed together? The tendency in Jewish rabbinical tradition, over a period of thousands of years, was to expand the commands in the Mosaic Law to cover more activities. The purpose of such expansion was to insulate the Jews from possible violations of the law. So, if the law prescribed a ten\-foot fence, the rabbis made it a fifteen\-foot fence, just to be safe. As a result, the “young goat” in Exodus 23:19 was interpreted as “all meat” in Jewish tradition, and “its mother’s milk” became “any dairy product.” Consuming any type of meat with any dairy product in the same meal became a violation of the kosher laws. One rabbinic teaching even prohibits the use of the same knife to cut meat and cheese or the use of the same tablecloth to serve both. This treatment of God’s law is an example of what Jesus referred to when He rebuked the teachers of the law for “straining out a gnat but swallowing a camel” in Matthew 23:24\. Of course it is good to stay as far away from violating God’s law as possible. But to expand a law to the extent that it barely resembles the original statute cannot be justified. Eating meat and dairy in the same meal was not forbidden in the Mosaic Law. Deuteronomy 4:2 declares, “Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.” It was a direct violation of God’s law for the Jews to add a prohibition not directly stated or implied in the law. Whether a person eats a cheeseburger is not the issue. Followers of Jesus Christ are not under the law (Mark 7:19; Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23–25; Ephesians 2:15\). We have freedom in Christ, and that freedom extends to our diet (Galatians 5:1\). If people desire to obey the Old Covenant dietary laws or the expanded Jewish kosher laws, they are free to do so. The issue here is the fact that the Jewish expansion of “do not cook a young goat in its mother’s milk” into “do not eat any type of meat with any dairy product in the same meal” is a violation of God’s prohibition against adding to the Lord’s commands. So, what was the command of Exodus 23:19 truly prohibiting? Most likely, the rule had to do with keeping the Israelites free from [idolatry](idol-worship.html) and [superstition](superstitions.html). Several commentators conjecture that boiling a young goat in its mother’s milk was a pagan rite performed as part of a fertility spell. God wanted His people to have nothing to do with such wickedness. Other commentators point out that cooking a young goat in its own mother’s milk seems cruel, considering the goat is being cooked in the very thing that was intended to give it life.
What is the key to hearing God’s voice?	Answer Most people want to hear God’s voice when they are facing a decision. If only God would speak to them and tell them which choice to make or which direction to embark upon. Many people will claim to have heard God’s voice, saying, “God led me to do this,” when in fact it was simply their own thoughts and desires that led them in a particular direction. The primary way that God speaks to us today is through His revealed, written Word. When we want to hear God’s voice, the Bible is where we should look. Most of the will of God for our lives is already fully revealed in its pages, and it is simply a matter of our obedience to it. All of Scripture is the will of God, but there are a few places in Scripture that specifically use the term will of God, which may be especially interesting to a person who wants to hear God’s voice: • 1 Thessalonians 4:3: “It is God’s will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality.” • 1 Thessalonians 5:18: “Give thanks in all circumstances; for this is God’s will for you in Christ Jesus.” • 1 Peter 2:12–15: “Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us. Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people.” Other passages also let us hear God’s voice, even if they don’t use the phrase the will of God. But, just taking the three above passages, we know that a Christian should always give thanks in every circumstance, avoid sexual immorality, and live an exemplary life. If a Christian does not follow these clear dictates given directly by God through inspired Scripture, why should he or she expect to hear more information from God? If you want further direction from God, obey what He has already told you. A heart willing to listen and obey is the key to hearing from God. The primary way that a Christian hears God’s voice is through reading and studying Scripture and then obeying and applying what the Scripture says. People often rely upon “the leading of the Holy Spirit,” which is spoken of in Romans 8:14\. In context, the passage speaks of the Spirit’s leading us away from sinful activity and into a confidence in our relationship with God as Father. The Holy Spirit will never lead contrary to Scripture. If a person is considering having an affair, the Spirit will only lead in one direction—toward marital fidelity. The Spirit might very well bring a verse like 1 Thessalonians 4:3 to mind for the person being tempted. When the Spirit leads, He is not imparting “new” information as much as He is impressing on our hearts the truth God has already revealed in Scripture and applying it to our situation. If a person says, “God told me” or “The Spirit led me to do such and such,” and the action taken is contrary to Scripture, we can be sure the person is mistaken. We can also hear God’s voice as God speaks through other people. “Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed” (Proverbs 15:22\). Good counselors or advisers can help us see a situation with new eyes. Again, the Bible is key. Biblical preaching and biblically sound Christian material can be put in the “advisers” category. The Word of God is the control. If a bunch of counselors advise a person to do something contrary to Scripture, then they are all wrong, no matter what their credentials; however, if the advisers help an individual understand and apply Scripture, then they can be helpful. Godly advisers can often see areas that an individual is blind to. A group of advisers may discern that the person seeking to hear God’s voice concerning a particular plan is in reality seeking approval of his own personal agenda. Another way to hear God’s voice is to pray and ask for wisdom: “If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you” (James 1:5\). When a Christian is facing difficult circumstances and needs to hear from God, the Christian should ask for the wisdom that God promises to give. This wisdom will ultimately come from God, but it may come through the word of a friend; through a sermon, article, or book; or from the inner prompting of the Holy Spirit. Once again, the written Word of God is the standard by which all thoughts, actions, ideas, and feelings must be judged. In this day of self\-proclaimed prophets and the promotion of “new revelations” from God, people often mistake the voice of God for their own thoughts or the suggestions of other people. If you are hearing God’s voice, then the message will always be in accord with Scripture. We should all take great care not to misrepresent God. Instead of saying, “God told me this,” a better approach would be to say, “I think God may be saying this—what do you think?” People often want to hear a specific word from God when He has already spoken in a general sense. For instance, a person may be deliberating the choice of whether to take the family on a [short\-term mission trip](short-term-missions.html) or on a [vacation](Christian-vacation.html) to the beach. Perhaps a specific word from God is unnecessary. What is really called for is wisdom. Which trip will most benefit the family? Which trip will most benefit the kingdom of God? The family will benefit by building the kingdom. The kingdom will benefit from a strong family. Either one could be a good choice. Other factors such as expense and the current state of the family should be considered. (Are the kids selfish and entitled so they need to see how other people live? Has the family been under a lot of stress and needs to get away and relax? Are the costs comparable? If not, which can they afford?) If they go to the beach, they look for opportunities to share their faith and be an encouragement to other believers. If they go on the mission trip, they look for ways to build bonds with each other and enjoy themselves as a family. Both options are good. Neither is inherently sinful. In the end, the husband and wife come to some agreement and throw themselves into it wholeheartedly, trusting that, if the decision is wrong, God will somehow make it clear to them that they should do something different. How will He do this? Probably not through an audible voice but through a combination of circumstances, advice from other people, evaluation of their priorities based on God’s Word, and a lack of inner peace from the Holy Spirit.
What is a homily?	Answer The word homily has a Greek origin. Holilos is the word for “crowd” or “assembly.” The verb form (homilein) means “to address.” Also related is the Greek word homilia, which means “conversation.” So a homily has to do with speaking to an assembly. Today, the word homily is used to refer to a sermon or spiritual lesson. In modern seminaries, a course on [homiletics](homiletics.html) is a course on preaching. Generally speaking, a homily may be thought of as a sermon, but there are some different uses and nuances of the term. A sermon might be considered a broader term for an address that could include doctrinal teaching. The word homily is usually used to refer to a shorter message of a devotional, inspirational, or moral nature. In Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, and Lutheran services, the homily is a brief commentary to help the congregation understand the passage that has been read during the service. The word homily can also be used to denote a moralizing speech delivered by someone outside of a church service, in much the same way that the word sermon or preach can be used in other, non\-ecclesiastical settings. A college student might say something like, “I hate going home on break because my dad will preach a sermon to me about my long hair,” or, “My dad offered a homily on the importance of money management before sending me off to college.” In the final analysis, homily is a rather loose term. It is often used interchangeably with the word sermon. If a Roman Catholic attended a traditional Protestant service, he might refer to the sermon as the homily. In Protestant services, the preaching of the Word of God is usually the central event, and it is not uncommon for sermons to last at least 30 minutes; some may run for 45 minutes or even close to an hour. In Roman Catholic services, the celebration of the [Mass](Catholic-Mass.html) is the central event, and the shorter homily is simply one of many components of the service.
Why is Ezekiel called son of man if it is a title for Jesus?	Answer The term son of man is used variously in Scripture. Jesus is indeed referred to as the [Son of Man](Jesus-Son-of-Man.html) in the New Testament—88 times, to be exact. The term son of man is also found in the Old Testament. The [prophet Ezekiel](life-Ezekiel.html) is called “son of man” over 90 times. Thus, both Jesus and Ezekiel can rightly be called “son of man”; but there is something unique about the way the title is applied to Christ. In the gospels, Jesus often refers to Himself as the Son of Man (e.g., Matthew 16:27; Mark 14:21; Luke 7:34; John 3:13\). Jesus’ use of this title links Him to Daniel 7:13–14, a passage describing the coming Messiah: “There before me was one like a son of man, coming with the clouds of heaven. . . . He was given authority, glory and sovereign power; all peoples, nations and men of every language worshiped him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion that will not pass away, and his kingdom is one that will never be destroyed.” The teachers of the Law during Jesus’ time on earth would have readily understood Jesus’ meaning when He applied the title Son of Man to Himself. Jesus’ use of the phrase points to His exalted state as a person of the Godhead and the fact that He will fulfill Daniel’s prophecy. Further, only in the gospels do we find the term son of man associated with the definite article, the. Jesus always called Himself “the Son of Man,” as in the only one there is. In using the definite article, Jesus contrasts Himself with other personalities in the Bible associated with the same term. Ezekiel is never called “the son of man”; he is always just a “son of man,” as in one among many. Son of man is a rather common term in the Bible, and it simply means “man.” It emphasizes the humanity of a person. In the case of Ezekiel, who was often referred to as “son of man” (e.g., Ezekiel 2:1; 3:1; 4:1; 5:1\), God probably chose this manner of direct address to point up the contrast between the human condition of Ezekiel and the transcendent majesty of God. In the first chapter of his book, Ezekiel relates a vision he had of God’s glory—a scene full of [wheels](Ezekiel-wheels.html) and eyes and storms and fire and strange angelic creatures. In the first verse of the next chapter, God addresses Ezekiel as “son of man.” The prophet could not help but realize his own human frailty and limitations in the face of God’s unsurpassable glory. God is God, and Ezekiel is but a “son of man.” In Jesus’ case, the application of the title Son of Man also highlights the humanity of Christ. The difference is that He is the Son of Man; that is, He is the epitome of humanity. Jesus is the Sinless One, humanity perfected, the one to finally reconcile God and man.
What is the Acts of Thomas?	Answer The Acts of Thomas is a [pseudepigraphal](pseudepigrapha.html) work that supposedly explains the ministry of the apostle Thomas in India after Jesus’ ascension. The Acts of Thomas is one of several such writings, others of which focus on apostles such as Andrew, John, Paul, Barnabas, and Peter. These works are heavily influenced by [Gnosticism](Christian-gnosticism.html) and were not accepted by the early church. While occasional details within the books correspond to other traditions, most of their content is unsubstantiated. The Acts of Thomas is one of the few such writings to survive intact and in more than one copy. The Acts of Thomas endorses doctrines common to Gnostic writings but contrary to the New Testament. According to the fictional story related in the Acts of Thomas, the apostle Thomas convinces several married couples to become entirely celibate—this is in accordance with Gnostic rejection of all things material, especially the body. Jesus literally “sells” Thomas to a merchant, since he was originally unwilling to go to India, and then appears as Thomas’s identical twin. This bizarre episode seems to be a symbolic reference to the Gnostic idea that the material world is entirely separate from the spiritual. Similar Gnostic hallmarks in the Acts of Thomas are miraculous events that are noticeably more “theatrical” than those in the New Testament. These miracles also contradict teachings of the gospels and other passages of inspired Scripture. For example, in the Acts of Thomas, a murderer brings his victim back to life—from hell, no less—through his own prayers. The story includes donkeys that not only talk but perform exorcisms! Some details found in the Acts of Thomas are vaguely supported by other traditions or historical evidence. [Thomas’s travel to India](Thomas-India.html) and his death by spearing are referred to in other ancient texts. Historians note that there was an early, relatively large influence of Christianity in the Indian subcontinent after the resurrection of Christ. Also, cultural references in the Acts of Thomas are relatively accurate. That said, this work is dated to the early third century or possibly the very end of the second century. As with works such as the [Acts of Peter](Acts-of-Peter.html) and the [Acts of Paul and Thecla](Acts-of-Paul-and-Thecla.html), the Acts of Thomas was never accepted by the early church as inspired Scripture. At best, it informs our understanding of certain traditions—or legends—about Thomas.
What is the significance of Mount Carmel in the Bible?	Answer Rather than being a single mountain, Mount Carmel is actually a high, wooded mountain ridge. In the Bible, Mount Carmel is best known as the site of the [prophet Elijah’s](life-Elijah.html) dramatic showdown with 850 pagan prophets. Carmel means “vineyard,” “orchard,” or “garden” and reflects the fertile beauty of Mount Carmel’s picturesque slopes. The mountainous ridge starts on the Mediterranean coast in the northwest part of Israel at the south shore of the Bay of Acre. From there, the range runs southeast down to the plain of [Dothan](Dothan-in-the-Bible.html). Running along the northeast side of the ridge is the [Valley of Jezreel](Jezreel.html). At its highest point, Mount Carmel reaches over 1,700 feet above sea level. Most notably, Mount Carmel is the scene of a spectacular head\-to\-head confrontation between the false prophets of Baal and [Asherah](who-Asherah.html) and the One True God of Israel. The episode takes place during one of Israel’s worst times of crisis under King Ahab. To please his wife, [Jezebel, Ahab](Ahab-and-Jezebel.html) set up an altar to Baal at the top of Mount Carmel. [Baal](who-Baal.html), the favorite deity of Jezebel, was reputed to be the god of rain and vegetation. In 1 Kings 17:1–24, Elijah the Tishbite enters the story as an emissary of the Lord. The prophet confronts Ahab and predicts a drought in response to Ahab and Jezebel’s unholy devotion to Baal. When the end of the drought neared, to prove that the Lord God was the only true God, Elijah proposes a contest. All of Israel was summoned to Mount Carmel to witness the [confrontation](Elijah-prophets-Baal.html) between Elijah and the false prophets of Baal and Asherah (1 Kings 18:19\). The match would show whose god was able to send fire from heaven to consume their offerings. The prophets of Baal prayed all day and cut themselves violently to get Baal’s attention, but no one answered (verses 28–29\). By evening it was Elijah’s turn. He rebuilt the ruined altar of God that existed on Mount Carmel. He set the offering on top of the wood and then drenched the whole thing with water and prayed aloud: “LORD, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Israel, let it be known today that you are God in Israel and that I am your servant and have done all these things at your command. Answer me, LORD, answer me, so these people will know that you, LORD, are God, and that you are turning their hearts back again” (1 Kings 18:36–37\). God answered with a spectacular display of fire from heaven, consuming the offering, licking up the sodden wood as well as every drop of water that had been poured over the altar. Even the rocks of the altar were consumed. The people fell on their faces, proclaiming, “The Lord, he is God; the Lord, he is God” (1 Kings 18:39\). Elijah then ordered the people to execute the 850 false prophets according to the Mosaic Law (Deuteronomy 13\). It seems that the [prophet Elisha](life-Elisha.html) later used Mount Carmel as a home base (2 Kings 4:25\). From ancient times, Mount Carmel has been regarded as a holy place and a symbol of beauty and fertility. In the tribal divisions, Mount Carmel was part of the territory of (western) Manasseh. Like the region of upper Galilee, Mount Carmel received plentiful rainfall in biblical times, producing lush, beautiful forests and rich grasslands on the lower slopes suitable for grazing. Isaiah associates God’s glorious restoration of redeemed humanity with the “splendor of Carmel” (Isaiah 35:2\). Solomon compares the head of his beloved with the beauty and nobility of Mount Carmel (Song of Solomon 7:5\).
What is panendeism?	Answer In brief, panendeism is a combination of [pantheism](pantheism.html) and [deism](deism.html). Similar to pantheism, panendeism teaches that all of the natural universe is God. Similar to deism, panendeism teaches that God transcends the universe and is not involved in the running of the universe. So, panendeism is the belief in a god who contains the whole universe but who is also bigger than the universe and takes a “hands\-off” approach to the maintenance of creation. The word panendeism literally means “all in god.” Panendeism is also similar to [panentheism](panentheism.html), which is essentially a combination of [theism](what-is-a-theist.html) (God is the supreme being) and pantheism (God is everything). Panentheism claims that God is greater than the universe and that the universe is contained within God—in that belief, it agrees with panendeism. But panentheism also holds that God exerts a controlling effect on the universe; this opposes panendeism, which denies that God is involved. Basically, any deist who believes that the universe is a part (but not the whole) of god can be considered a panendeist. In panendeism the supreme being is seen as an all\-pervasive intellect, identified as the universe but also existing beyond the universe. Panendeism claims to base its teachings about God on the evidence of reason and science. Some panendeists have added numerous additional beliefs to their basic theology. The book The Supra\-Intelligent Design by the Society for the Alignment of Religion has this to say in its entry on panendeism: “Panendeism divests itself from the idea of an explicitly thinking God. Panendeism holds that there is an aspect of reality that is different from physical reality, extending into a non\-thinking (i.e., formless and changeless, implicit to reality) awareness realm—aware as a result of physical\-reality dependent self\-connecting self\-apprehension, which defines reflexive self\-awareness. Panendeism may be understood as panen\-pantheism, which adds a trans\-physical non\-thought\-hosting mathematical\-fabric\-sourcing awareness\-realm component to a pantheistic reality.” Of course, panendeism is unbiblical, just as pantheism and deism are. The Creator God has revealed Himself to mankind in the Bible, and here is some of what we know about Him in that revelation: 1\. God reveals Himself in nature (Psalm 19:1\) but is separate from nature. 2\. God is a personal being (Isaiah 46:9–10\). 3\. God is triune (Matthew 28:19\). 4\. God loving (1 John 4:9\) and is personally involved in His creation (Psalm 37:23; Proverbs 16:9\). Panendeism wrongly asserts that God is to be equated with His creation. The Bible says that God created that oak tree in your backyard but that the tree is not a part of God. God is present everywhere (Psalm 139:7–8\), but God is not everything. Panendeism impugns God as being impersonal and uninvolved. The Bible says that God is a personal being with a mind (Psalm 139:17\), emotions (Psalm 78:41\), and a will (1 Corinthians 1:1\); and that He is intimately involved in His creation, as shown in the [incarnation of Christ](incarnation-of-Christ.html).
What is the Acts of Peter?	Answer The Acts of Peter is one of several works that claim to describe the actions of the apostles after the resurrection of Jesus. Others ascribe history to John, Andrew, [Thomas](Acts-of-Thomas.html), [Paul](Acts-of-Paul-and-Thecla.html), Philip, Barnabas, and so forth. None of these books were accepted by the early church. Instead, they were considered [heresy](heresy-definition.html) by the early church fathers, since they taught aberrant doctrines. The Acts of Peter and similar works appear to have been written in the second and third centuries to promote [Gnosticism](Christian-gnosticism.html). The Acts of Peter is nothing more than an interesting fiction, not a narrative that can be accepted in the same way as inspired Scripture. At best, certain details in the Acts of Peter and other Gnostic writings support [traditions about the apostles](apostles-die.html), but nothing in them can be considered truly reliable. The Acts of Peter follows patterns typical of late apocryphal accounts of the apostles. It contains descriptions of miracles far “flashier” and more theatrical than those recorded in the biblical gospels or the book of Acts. The Acts of Peter was written no earlier than the end of the second century. This was well after the rest of the New Testament had been completed and distributed. The book also encourages themes common to Gnosticism such as a disdain for the body, sexuality, and all things material. One of the few noteworthy inclusions of the Acts of Peter is its reference to Peter’s unusual crucifixion. This text is among the earliest written accounts that Peter was crucified upside down. Passages mentioning Peter’s choice to be crucified in a different manner than Jesus are found in fragments of other ancient documents as well, but such writings are often found alone, separate from the other content included in the Acts of Peter. Historians believe written accounts of Peter’s crucifixion might have predated the apocryphal stories, but there is no other corroboration of the event available.
Is it ever appropriate to take a single verse of Scripture out of its context?	Answer Using a passage of Scripture out of [context](context-Bible.html) can lead to error and misunderstanding. But not always. Quoting a single verse of course lifts it out of context, but that doesn’t necessarily mean the verse is being misused. Some “out of context” verses reveal a stand\-alone truth; others require a consideration of their context in order to be properly interpreted and applied. Much of the rightness or wrongness of quoting a single verse depends on the speaker’s or writer’s intent. If a single verse, out of context, is used to imply something other than the biblical author’s intended meaning or to overlook the intent of the overall passage, then it is a dishonest use of that verse. But if quoting a single verse leaves intact the original meaning and respects the intent of the passage, then it is good and proper to quote the verse. Of course, verses can be misused even without bad intent, so we must be careful. An example of misusing a verse out of context is quoting Jesus’ words in Luke 12:19, “Take life easy; eat, drink and be merry,” and trying to pass it off as Jesus’ philosophy of life. The context, in which Jesus tells a [parable](parable-rich-fool.html), teaches the exact opposite of what those words suggest. As the storyteller, Jesus is putting words in the mouth of a foolish rich man, a character who receives judgment from God for living out that hedonistic philosophy. Another example of misusing a verse out of context is quoting the first part of Habakkuk 2:15 in order to condemn the act of giving someone alcohol: “Woe to him who gives drink to his neighbors.” In using this verse to say it is wrong to give a neighbor an alcoholic beverage, the person quoting the verse is twisting Scripture. The rest of the verse contains qualifiers: “Woe to him who gives drink to his neighbors, pouring it from the wineskin till they are drunk, so that he can gaze on their naked bodies!” (emphasis added). The sins here are drunkenness, voyeurism, lust, and sexual exploitation. Further, an examination of the context of Habakkuk 2:15 reveals the giving of alcohol to be a metaphor for the national sins of Babylon. In the two preceding examples, it’s obvious that certain verses (or portions of verses) cannot be made to stand alone and teach a lesson. A Bible student “who correctly handles the word of truth” will be careful to avoid such interpretative traps (2 Timothy 2:15\). But not all verses become warped upon being lifted from their contexts. There are instances in which we can use a single verse or even a part of a verse by itself and still do justice to the divine intent. For example, if we are trying to tell someone that salvation is a gift from GOD, we might use John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” This is definitely a stand\-alone verse. It clearly says what it says, and even a cursory understanding of the verse by itself leads one to believe in accordance with the context of John 3\. In summary, quoting a single Scripture “out of context” can be fine at times; other times, it is problematic. If our usage of a verse, out of context, suggests a different meaning from what the broader passage warrants, then it is wrong. Whenever we read or hear someone using a single verse in isolation, it’s good to plug that verse back into its original passage to see if it still fits with its designated interpretation.
What is the Epistle of Barnabas?	Answer Not to be confused with the [Gospel of Barnabas](gospel-of-Barnabas.html), the Epistle of Barnabas, also known as the Letter of Barnabas, is an early writing of Christianity, frequently mentioned by other church fathers. Although it is named for [Barnabas](life-Barnabas.html), an associate of Paul, the letter itself does not mention its author. Rather, this connection was made by commentators such as [Clement of Alexandria](Clement-of-Alexandria.html). This dates it somewhere in the late first to very early second century. The text gives insight into Old Testament Jewish laws and traditions, comparing and contrasting them with Christian practice under the New Covenant. The term gnosis, meaning “knowledge,” is used by the Epistle of Barnabas to describe its message. However, the content contradicts early heresies such as [Gnosticism](gnostic-definition.html), and it seems to reflect an orthodox, early understanding of the faith. At the same time, some writers criticized it for relying heavily on oral traditions about the Old Testament—the [Mishnah](Mishnah-midrash.html)—as well as use of [gematria](gematria.html) or [biblical numerology](Biblical-numerology.html). Early church fathers referenced the Epistle of Barnabas, including [Origen](Origen-of-Alexandria.html), who seemed to think it was an authentic writing of Barnabas. The text was included at the end of some early copies of the Bible, where it might have been considered as a reference. Most early Christians did not seem to consider it part of [inspired Scripture](canon-Bible.html); however, it was valued for its insights into Jewish theology. That perspective is best described as interpreting the Old Testament through the lens of early Christianity. Those explanations make up most of the letter. The last section of the Epistle of Barnabas describes a series of positive commands, followed by their opposites. These are contrasted as the Way of Light and the Way of Darkness, respectively. The Way of Light reflects a heavily Jewish understanding of Christian behavior and morals. This is followed by the Way of Darkness, also called the Way of the Black One, referring to Satan. While not a part of the canon of Scripture, the Epistle of Barnabas is still a valuable resource. Early church fathers recognized its usefulness, even as they agreed it was not divinely inspired. Whether or not the Epistle of Barnabas was actually written by Barnabas himself, modern believers can read it from the same cautious perspective.
What is the hidden manna mentioned in Revelation 2:17?	Answer In part of the Lord’s message to the church of Pergamum, we read, “Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches. To the one who is victorious, I will give some of the hidden manna” (Revelation 2:17\). The book of Revelation is an example of [apocalyptic literature](apocalyptic-literature.html), which features symbolism and sometimes bizarre imagery in its presentation of prophecy. The “hidden manna” mentioned in the letter to Pergamum is one example of such symbolism. Quite simply, the hidden manna is a symbolic picture of Jesus Christ. As the [manna](what-was-manna.html) of the Exodus sustained and strengthened the Israelites for the forty years of desert wanderings, so Jesus strengthens and sustains us spiritually as we walk through this life on our way to heaven. Jesus is the “manna” from heaven—the spiritual sustenance we need—and it is promised to us. Jesus Himself made the connection between the manna of Moses’ day and His own provision of salvation: “I am the bread of life. Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. . . . This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever” (John 6:48–51, 58\). The manna that sustained the Israelites was a foreshadowing of the sacrifice of Christ; the manna mentioned in Revelation 2:17 is another, symbolic reference to Christ. As a symbol, the hidden manna of Revelation 2:17 is not to be taken literally; in other words, Jesus is not speaking of something we literally eat. Rather, the [Bread of Life](bread-of-life.html) is something we “ingest” in another, non\-physical way. We receive the benefits of salvation by faith (John 1:12\). The manna is “hidden” in that it is given exclusively to believers in Christ. Only believers will reap the benefits of salvation. The unbelieving world that rejects Christ will never know the joy and satisfaction of faith in Him. The recipient of the hidden manna is specified in Revelation 2:17 as “the one who is victorious.” The overcomer is one who endures in his faith, despite trials and hardships. [Overcomers](Bible-overcomer.html) are followers of Christ who successfully resist the power and temptation of this world. An overcomer holds fast to faith in Christ until the end. He demonstrates complete dependence upon the Lord Jesus through thick and thin. First John 5:4–5 encourages us that all who are born again will overcome this world: “For whatever is born of God overcomes the world; and this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith. Who is the one who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?” As we seek to remain faithful to Jesus, living in light of His death, burial, and resurrection for forgiveness of sins, and resisting the temptations of the world, we are promised goodness. The hidden manna from heaven will be ours. Even if the world cannot understand how, we will be strengthened. We will be sustained.
When we confess our sins to God, how detailed do we need to be?	Answer Confession of sin to God is commanded in Scripture and part of living the Christian life (James 5:16; 1 John 1:9\). But when we confess our sins, how specific do we need to get? Doesn’t God already know all the details? It is true that God knows all the details of our sin. “You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. Before a word is on my tongue you, Lord, know it completely” (Psalm 139:3–4\). God knows absolutely everything about us, including the details of our sins and all that we have done. So, when we confess our sins to Him, we are not actually telling Him anything He does not already know. Even given God’s [omniscience](God-omniscient.html), a detailed confession of sin to God is appropriate. We don’t want to be like Adam, hiding among the trees of the garden, hoping to elude discovery (Genesis 3:8\). We would rather be like David when he said, “I acknowledged my sin to you and did not cover up my iniquity” (Psalm 32:5\). When God spoke to the guilty pair in Eden, He asked Adam, “Have you eaten from the tree that I commanded you not to eat from?” (Genesis 3:11\), and He asked Eve, “What is this you have done?” (verse 13\). Both questions demanded a specific answer. Generalities would not suffice. Neither should oversimplifications or sweeping generalities be sufficient in our prayers of confession. Whenever we speak with God alone in private [prayer](what-is-prayer.html), the communication should be detailed and intimate. We are sharing ourselves with Someone who cares more about us than anyone else cares. As we confess our sins, in detail, we are acknowledging our appreciation for the breadth of His forgiveness. We are conversing with the only Person who not only knows our life struggles, failings, and intents, but who has the divine power to transform us into becoming more like Him. As we acknowledge the details of our sin to God, we show Him that we have nothing to hide. We humbly admit that “everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account” (Hebrews 4:13\). In our confession we look to the One who alone has the power to completely forgive us of our sins and make us whole and acceptable in His sight. We need not fear God’s judgment. As we confess our sins, we know that Christ has already paid for them in full. He promises His forgiveness and the power to break sin’s control over us. Confessing the details of our sin to God is part of throwing off “everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles” so that we can “run with perseverance the race marked out for us” (Hebrews 12:1\). In a counseling session, the counselor will expect his client to be as open and honest as possible to enable the healing process. Dishonesty will only hamper the process. Jesus, the [Wonderful counselor](Wonderful-Counselor.html) (Isaiah 9:6\), deserves the same honesty and openness. He stands ready to listen and to guide. After all, our Lord was made “fully human in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people. Because he himself suffered when he was tempted, he is able to help those who are being tempted” (Hebrews 2:17–18\). Rather than praying generically, saying things such as “If I committed a sin today, please forgive me,” we should engage in some true soul\-searching and come to grips with what we’ve done. Prayers of a personal nature do not shrink back from a detailed confession of sin. A remorseful, repentant heart will not dread the revelation of its sin to God: “My sacrifice, O God, is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart you, God, will not despise” (Psalm 51:17\). And we remember that “the Lord is close to the brokenhearted and saves those who are crushed in spirit” (Psalm 34:18\). We can go to God with everything that is on our minds, confessing our sin honestly, and then know the freeing power of His forgiveness. Upon agreeing with God, we will find relief from guilty feelings and strengthen our walk as believers in Christ.
What is the Apocryphon of John?	Answer The Apocryphon of John was written sometime in the second century AD and was immediately considered [heretical](heresy-definition.html) by the early church. The text is typical of [Gnostic](Christian-gnosticism.html) religious beliefs, including a convoluted arrangement of spiritual beings and the claim that some people are gifted with special, secret knowledge. The Apocryphon of John claims—falsely—to be written by the [apostle John](life-John-Apostle.html). Supposedly, this book records a secret revelation given to John by Jesus. In it, the writer gives a dramatic, detailed account of what happened “behind the scenes” of creation, the fall of man, and the ministry of Jesus Christ. The work is sometimes referred to as the Secret Book of John. As a blatantly Gnostic text, the Apocryphon of John is of little use in understanding early Christian spirituality or culture. It does, however, give great insight into the beliefs of early Gnostics. Early church fathers such as [Irenaeus](Irenaeus-of-Lyons.html) cited the Apocryphon of John as part of their refutation of heresy. The underlying premise of the Apocryphon of John is the same as Gnostic spirituality in general. That is, certain people are given “true knowledge” in the form of secrets that only they can know. And physical things—especially the human body and sexuality—are fundamentally evil and opposed to that which is good. The result of such teachings is an elaborate [dualist](dualism.html) mythology that contradicts history, inspired Scripture, and Christian doctrine. According to the Apocryphon of John, Jesus appeared to John shortly after the crucifixion and explained the “true story” of all that had happened before. This tale claims there is a single perfect being—the Monad—who created a group of beings called Aeons. The first of these is a female entity called Barbelo, who works with the Monad to create beings such as Mind and Light. This “Light,” according to the Gnostic text, is Jesus. The Apocryphon of John continues by claiming one of these Aeons, the female Sophia, breaks the order of creation by forming something without a male spirit’s involvement. The result is a lesser group of spiritual beings called Archons, starting with the wicked Yaltabaoth. Since he is ugly, Yaltabaoth is hidden by Sophia and kept unaware of the existence of the Aeons. He creates an entire world of his own—the world in which we now live—and postures as the god of that creation. When Sophia admits her mistake to the Monad, he agrees to help as Sophia and others try to restore goodness to Yaltabaoth and his inferior creation. Their contact inspires Yaltabaoth’s attempt to create another class of being, reflecting his vague impression of the Monad. This being is Adam, the first man. Sophia then tricks Yaltabaoth into giving Adam the most crucial part of his spiritual essence. This makes the Archons angry, so they trap Adam in Eden. In the twisted, Gnostic version of Eden, presented in the Apocryphon of John, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is something legitimately good, but it is concealed by jealous spiritual forces led by Yaltabaoth. Accordingly, the text claims it was Jesus who led Adam to eat of the tree. Not to be outdone, Yaltabaoth tricks Adam and Eve—Eve was accidentally created by Yaltabaoth from Adam—into having sex and making more humans. By suppressing the knowledge of these newly born people, Yaltabaoth seeks to maintain control over an ignorant and imperfect world. In a series of conversational questions, John then asks Jesus about issues such as sin and salvation. Jesus’ response, per the Apocryphon of John, is to claim that His duty is to rouse people to knowledge. This false version of Jesus contacts people, and those who accept His special knowledge are saved from death. Clearly, the content of the Apocryphon of John contradicts the Bible and Christian teachings. It’s not surprising, therefore, that it was never considered part of [inspired Scripture](canon-Bible.html). On the contrary, early church fathers denounced it as blatant falsehood. Despite its claims, its late dating and unorthodox doctrine disqualify the Apocryphon of John from being written by the actual apostle John. Its most valuable use is as a tool for more fully understanding the claims of early Gnostics, particularly in the context of the second century.
What is doxastic voluntarism?	Answer Doxastic voluntarism, in short, is the idea that people willingly choose what they believe to be true. While the Bible indicates that each person is responsible for his or her own beliefs, it also suggests that some of what we believe is dependent on the work of God. Both of these doctrines have a partial connection to the two major interpretations of doxastic voluntarism. The question of whether or not a person “chooses” a belief can be separated into two distinct versions. The first form is direct doxastic voluntarism, which implies that a person directly and immediately chooses what he or she will believe. Under this scheme, a person would determine, “I choose to believe Fact X,” and then immediately accept Fact X as true. The second application is indirect doxastic voluntarism, which implies that a person chooses what beliefs he or she will subject to scrutiny and can voluntarily seek out experiences in order to test or change those beliefs. Neither of these concepts is the same as choosing to act as if some idea is true. The choice to act a certain way does not require being convinced of anything in particular. For the same reason, doxastic voluntarism does not require a person to act in any particular way on the basis of what he or she “believes.” Whether or not a person behaves in a way consistent with his or her beliefs is a separate question. Putting these points together, we distinguish between the intellectual “belief” being referred to by doxastic voluntarism and the spiritual “belief” referred to in the Bible. Scripture’s presentation of “belief” implies trust and faithfulness, whereas the doxastic concept is purely abstract. Philosophers generally reject the concept of direct doxastic voluntarism. The idea that one can simply “flip a switch” in order to accept an idea as true runs contrary to both experience and common sense. It would be tempting to argue that direct doxastic voluntarism is also unbiblical, based on the idea of predestination. Particularly according to [Reformed](reformed-theology.html) interpretations, the idea that a person has the power to believe or not believe, entirely on his own power, is false. However, keep in mind that these ideas deal in distinct meanings of the word belief. The Bible speaks of those who seem, intellectually, to accept certain ideas but do not express the submissive, [saving “belief”](believe-not-saved.html) relevant to spiritual matters (see James 2:19; Matthew 7:21–23\). In contrast, indirect doxastic voluntarism is more widely considered to be true. This interpretation implies that people cannot choose what they believe, but they can choose whether or not they will subject their beliefs to scrutiny. The most common analogy of this concept is that of learning to play a musical instrument. A person cannot simply “choose” to play a musical instrument well. However, he can choose to take lessons, knowing that will lead in the right direction. He can also choose which instruments to pursue and which to leave alone. Applied to choosing beliefs, a person can—indirectly—select what to believe through investigation and lack of investigation. Indirect doxastic voluntarism seems to fit well with the Bible’s approach to faith and (spiritual) belief. Scripture indicates that we are expected to scrutinize our own beliefs (2 Corinthians 13:5\), to investigate what we are told (Acts 17:11\), and to submit to the truth we find (John 5:39–40\). While the Bible suggests that saving faith requires an act of God (John 6:44\), it also indicates there is sufficient evidence in human experience for people to be held accountable for seeking the truth (Psalm 19:1; Matthew 7:7–8\). As a result, the Bible has an extremely rational basis for saying that all men are “without excuse” (Romans 1:18–20\). According to Scripture, people are responsible for what they believe, even if they cannot arbitrarily “choose” those beliefs. This, more or less, is exactly what indirect doxastic voluntarism implies. This conclusion, once again, should be taken with the understanding that Scripture distinguishes between what a person accepts in his or her mind versus what he or she trusts and acts on in the heart. The concepts are similar, but doxastic voluntarism does not refer to exactly the same thing as the Bible’s concept of “belief.” Only a minority of philosophers reject all forms of doxastic voluntarism. According to these opinions, intellectual beliefs are completely involuntary; even the choice to seek out information is an unintended consequence of a person’s pre\-existing state of mind. Rejection of doxastic voluntarism is more common among those who favor a strongly deterministic worldview. This approach could also be considered compatible with the more extreme versions of divine determinism, but this (again) is a minority view. Practically speaking, there is little value to such an approach, since human experience requires the assumption that we can and do change the opinions of others. Scripturally speaking, the two main interpretations of doxastic voluntarism have to be answered separately. Direct doxastic voluntarism is not as easily squared with the Bible as indirect doxastic voluntarism. The Bible suggests the ability of human beings to seek, search, and question and affirms our responsibility to do so. But the Bible does not suggest we have an unlimited control over our own minds; therefore, indirect doxastic voluntarism would appear to be the more biblically sound approach. A total rejection of doxastic voluntarism, to the point of absolute determinism, is not only scripturally weak but unlivable in practice.
What are the Odes of Solomon?	Answer The Odes of Solomon are a series of Christian hymns believed to have been written in the late first century AD. This collection is entirely separate from the [Psalms of Solomon](Psalms-of-Solomon.html), a group of 18 psalms composed sometime around 60 BC in response to the Roman invasion of Israel. The Odes of Solomon were not included in the canon of Scripture, nor were they considered divinely inspired by the early Christian church. Historians are unsure when or why the odes became associated with the name of Solomon, since the text itself does not claim him as the author. As with all hymns, the contents of the Odes of Solomon express cornerstone elements of faith. The poetic structure of the odes allows worshipers to more easily learn and remember the doctrines contained in them. Like any other extrabiblical material, there are details in these songs that are questionable and should be subject to scrutiny. Some have suggested that certain of the odes support [Gnostic](gnostic-definition.html) heresies, though Gnostic teaching is not explicit in the Odes of Solomon. Of particular interest is the way the Odes of Solomon depict the Trinity. Worship is directed to the Father, Son, and Spirit at various times. Rudimentary depictions of Trinitarian ideas are also found in these songs. This is a notable point, given that these works were composed around the same time as the canon of the New Testament was being completed. [Ignatius of Antioch](Ignatius-of-Antioch.html), who might have been a student of the [apostle John](life-John-Apostle.html), is believed to have quoted from the Odes of Solomon in his writings. This historical connection helps to explain the idea that [Trinitarian theology](trinitarianism.html) was not invented centuries after Christ; rather, it was a biblical doctrine that was codified in response to heresy.
What are the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles?	Answer In the late second century and early third centuries, [Gnostic](Christian-gnosticism.html) writers penned stories about the apostles. These stories are referred to today as the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles and include works such as [Acts of Peter](Acts-of-Peter.html), [Acts of Thomas](Acts-of-Thomas.html), and [Acts of Paul and Thecla](Acts-of-Paul-and-Thecla.html). Other texts supposedly contain information about apostles such as Barnabas, Matthias, Andrew, and John. None of these accounts were accepted as valid by the early church, primarily because of their false content, not to mention their extremely late dates of composition. The Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles generally follow established patterns of Gnostic writing. Their depictions of spirituality condemn all things material, especially the body, most particularly all forms of sexuality. Convincing others of the need for total celibacy is a recurring theme in these writings, but such a stance contradicts the teaching of the New Testament. Miracles occurring in the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles are [ostentatious](difference-miracles-magic.html): over\-the\-top, flashy, and almost comical. In the Acts of Thomas, for example, donkeys not only speak, but they also perform exorcisms. The Acts of Peter describes a battle against a flying magician and other actions more suited to a [Harry Potter](Harry-Potter-Christian.html) novel. In the Acts of Andrew, an apostle is crucified and yet preaches for three full days while hanging on the cross. The [Acts of John](Acts-of-John.html) describes the vindictive, supernatural collapsing of a pagan temple. In contrast, the miracles recorded in the gospels and the biblical Book of Acts are relatively subdued. “Real” miracles are not primarily about spectacle or petty revenge. In addition, miracles in the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles often blatantly contradict scriptural principles; for example, one miracle included in the Apocryphal Acts involves a murderer bringing his own victim back to life—from hell—by praying. Another one has Andrew miraculously causing an illegitimately conceived unborn child to be [aborted](is-abortion-murder.html). Or the destruction of a pagan temple in the Acts of John, a miracle intended to kill a hostile priest. Resurrections are common in these stories, as well, sometimes performed simply to ask the dead person questions. A useful aspect of the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles is their connection to other early Christian traditions. Broad points such as Thomas’s travel to India and Peter’s upside\-down crucifixion are echoed in these Gnostic writings. Such stories are considered for what they are: traditions, but not infallible histories. At best, the Apocryphal Acts provide perspective on legendary tales ascribed to the apostles. But since they are also filled with the words of false teachers, they should never be held in the same esteem as the actual, inspired Word of God.
What are the 613 commandments in the Old Testament Law?	Answer The number 613 is often cited as the number of commandments in the Old Testament Law; however, there is no verse in the Bible that gives 613 as the correct enumeration. There are other counts as well. There is no universal agreement among Jews or Christians that there are exactly 613 laws given by God through Moses. In any calculation of the number of commandments in the Mosaic Law, complications arise. For example, if a command occurs in Exodus and is then repeated in Deuteronomy, does that count as one commandment or two? Further, some commandments can be understood as clarifications of other commandments rather than additional commandments. There is some debate as to who first came up with 613 as the number of commandments. The Talmud points to Rabbi Simlai in the 3rd century AD as the originator. However, there is no record of Rabbi Simlai listing all 613 commandments. The most commonly accepted breakdown was done by [Maimonides](Maimonides.html) in the 12th century AD. Maimonides further divided the 613 commandments into positive, “do this” commandments, numbering 248, and negative, “do not do this” commandments, numbering 365\. Biblically speaking, whether or not 613 is the correct count is not that important. The [purpose of the Law](Mosaic-Law.html) was to point us to Christ. Galatians 3:24 says, “Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith” (NKJV). No one can perfectly obey all the commandments, no matter how many or few there are (Ecclesiastes 7:20; Romans 3:23\). In fact, no one can even perfectly obey the Ten Commandments. The Law makes our sinfulness evident (Romans 7:7\). God gave the Law to define sin and demonstrate our need for a Savior. Jesus is the only one who has perfectly obeyed the Law. Through His life, death, and resurrection, He fulfilled all of God’s righteous commands (Matthew 5:17–18\). For more information on how faith in Jesus saves us from the condemnation of the Law, please read our article “[What does it mean that Jesus saves?](Jesus-saves.html)” Below is a list of the 613 commandments found in the Old Testament Law. Note that some verses contain more than one command: 1\. Genesis 1:28 2\. Genesis 32:32 3\. Exodus 12:2 4\. Exodus 12:6 5\. Exodus 12:8 6\. Exodus 12:9 7\. Exodus 12:10 8\. Exodus 12:15 9\. Exodus 12:18 10\. Exodus 12:19 11\. Exodus 12:20 12\. Exodus 12:43 13\. Exodus 12:45 14\. Exodus 12:46 15\. Exodus 12:46 16\. Exodus 12:48 17\. Exodus 12:48 18\. Exodus 13:3 19\. Exodus 13:7 20\. Exodus 13:8 21\. Exodus 13:12 22\. Exodus 13:13 23\. Exodus 13:13 24\. Exodus 16:29 25\. Exodus 20:3 26\. Exodus 20:4 27\. Exodus 20:5 28\. Exodus 20:5 29\. Exodus 20:7 30\. Exodus 20:8 31\. Exodus 20:10 32\. Exodus 20:12 33\. Exodus 20:13 34\. Exodus 20:14 35\. Exodus 20:15 36\. Exodus 20:16 37\. Exodus 20:17 38\. Exodus 20:24 39\. Exodus 20:26 40\. Exodus 20:23 41\. Exodus 21:2 42\. Exodus 21:8 43\. Exodus 21:8 44\. Exodus 21:8 45\. Exodus 21:10 46\. Exodus 21:15 47\. Exodus 21:17 48\. Exodus 21:18 49\. Exodus 21:20 50\. Exodus 21:28 51\. Exodus 21:28 52\. Exodus 21:34 53\. Exodus 21:36 54\. Exodus 22:4 55\. Exodus 22:5 56\. Exodus 22:6 57\. Exodus 22:8 58\. Exodus 22:9 59\. Exodus 22:13 60\. Exodus 22:16–17 61\. Exodus 22:18 62\. Exodus 22:21 63\. Exodus 22:21 64\. Exodus 22:22 65\. Exodus 22:25 66\. Exodus 22:25 67\. Exodus 22:25 68\. Exodus 22:28 69\. Exodus 22:28 70\. Exodus 22:29 71\. Exodus 22:29 72\. Exodus 22:30 73\. Exodus 23:1 74\. Exodus 23:1 75\. Exodus 23:2 76\. Exodus 23:2 77\. Exodus 23:3 78\. Exodus 23:5 79\. Exodus 23:6 80\. Exodus 23:7 81\. Exodus 23:8 82\. Exodus 23:11 83\. Exodus 23:12 84\. Exodus 23:13 85\. Exodus 23:13 86\. Exodus 23:14 87\. Exodus 23:18 88\. Exodus 23:18 89\. Exodus 23:19 90\. Exodus 23:19 91\. Exodus 23:25 92\. Exodus 23:33 93\. Exodus 25:8 94\. Exodus 25:15 95\. Exodus 25:30 96\. Exodus 27:21 97\. Exodus 28:2 98\. Exodus 28:28 99\. Exodus 28:32 100\. Exodus 29:33 101\. Exodus 29:33 102\. Exodus 30:7 103\. Exodus 30:9 104\. Exodus 30:13 105\. Exodus 30:19 106\. Exodus 30:31 107\. Exodus 30:32 108\. Exodus 30:32 109\. Exodus 30:37 110\. Exodus 34:21 111\. Exodus 34:26 112\. Exodus 35:3 113\. Leviticus 1:3 114\. Leviticus 2:1 115\. Leviticus 2:11 116\. Leviticus 2:13 117\. Leviticus 2:13 118\. Leviticus 3:17 119\. Leviticus 3:17 120\. Leviticus 4:13–14 121\. Leviticus 4:27–28 122\. Leviticus 5:1 123\. Leviticus 5:7\-11 124\. Leviticus 5:8 125\. Leviticus 5:11 126\. Leviticus 5:11 127\. Leviticus 5:16 128\. Leviticus 5:17–18 129\. Leviticus 6:4–5 130\. Leviticus 6:6 131\. Leviticus 6:10 132\. Leviticus 6:13 133\. Leviticus 6:16 134\. Leviticus 6:18 135\. Leviticus 6:23 136\. Leviticus 6:3 137\. Leviticus 6:5 138\. Leviticus 6:5 139\. Leviticus 6:9 140\. Leviticus 7:1 141\. Leviticus 7:11 142\. Leviticus 7:17 143\. Leviticus 7:18 144\. Leviticus 7:19 145\. Leviticus 7:19 146\. Leviticus 7:20 147\. Leviticus 10:6 148\. Leviticus 10:6 149\. Leviticus 10:7 150\. Leviticus 10:9 151\. Leviticus 10:19 152\. Leviticus 11:2 153\. Leviticus 11:4 154\. Leviticus 11:9 155\. Leviticus 11:11 156\. Leviticus 11:13 157\. Leviticus 11:21 158\. Leviticus 11:29 159\. Leviticus 11:34 160\. Leviticus 11:39 161\. Leviticus 11:41 162\. Leviticus 11:42 163\. Leviticus 11:43 164\. Leviticus 11:44 165\. Leviticus 12:2 166\. Leviticus 12:3 167\. Leviticus 12:6 168\. Leviticus 13:12 169\. Leviticus 13:33 170\. Leviticus 13:45 171\. Leviticus 13:47 172\. Leviticus 14:2 173\. Leviticus 14:9 174\. Leviticus 14:10 175\. Leviticus 14:35 176\. Leviticus 15:3 177\. Leviticus 15:13–14 178\. Leviticus 15:16 179\. Leviticus 15:16 180\. Leviticus 15:19 181\. Leviticus 15:25 182\. Leviticus 15:28–29 183\. Leviticus 16:2 184\. Leviticus 16:3 185\. Leviticus 16:29 186\. Leviticus 17:4 187\. Leviticus 17:13 188\. Leviticus 18:6 189\. Leviticus 18:7 190\. Leviticus 18:7 191\. Leviticus 18:8 192\. Leviticus 18:9 193\. Leviticus 18:10 194\. Leviticus 18:10 195\. Leviticus 18:10 196\. Leviticus 18:11 197\. Leviticus 18:12 198\. Leviticus 18:13 199\. Leviticus 18:14 200\. Leviticus 18:14 201\. Leviticus 18:15 202\. Leviticus 18:16 203\. Leviticus 18:17 204\. Leviticus 18:17 205\. Leviticus 18:17 206\. Leviticus 18:18 207\. Leviticus 18:19 208\. Leviticus 18:20 209\. Leviticus 18:21 210\. Leviticus 18:22 211\. Leviticus 18:23 212\. Leviticus 18:23 213\. Leviticus 19:3 214\. Leviticus 19:4 215\. Leviticus 19:4 216\. Leviticus 19:8 217\. Leviticus 19:9 218\. Leviticus 19:9 219\. Leviticus 19:9 220\. Leviticus 19:10 221\. Leviticus 19:10 222\. Leviticus 19:10 223\. Leviticus 19:10 224\. Leviticus 19:10 225\. Leviticus 19:11 226\. Leviticus 19:11 227\. Leviticus 19:11 228\. Leviticus 19:12 229\. Leviticus 19:13 230\. Leviticus 19:13 231\. Leviticus 19:13 232\. Leviticus 19:14 233\. Leviticus 19:14 234\. Leviticus 19:15 235\. Leviticus 19:15 236\. Leviticus 19:15 237\. Leviticus 19:15 238\. Leviticus 19:16 239\. Leviticus 19:16 240\. Leviticus 19:17 241\. Leviticus 19:17 242\. Leviticus 19:17 243\. Leviticus 19:18 244\. Leviticus 19:18 245\. Leviticus 19:18 246\. Leviticus 19:19 247\. Leviticus 19:19 248\. Leviticus 19:23 249\. Leviticus 19:24 250\. Leviticus 19:26 251\. Leviticus 19:26 252\. Leviticus 19:27 253\. Leviticus 19:27 254\. Leviticus 19:28 255\. Leviticus 19:30 256\. Leviticus 19:31 257\. Leviticus 19:31 258\. Leviticus 19:32 259\. Leviticus 19:35 260\. Leviticus 19:36 261\. Leviticus 20:10 262\. Leviticus 20:14 263\. Leviticus 20:23 264\. Leviticus 21:1 265\. Leviticus 21:6 266\. Leviticus 21:7 267\. Leviticus 21:7 268\. Leviticus 21:7 269\. Leviticus 21:8 270\. Leviticus 21:11 271\. Leviticus 21:11 272\. Leviticus 21:13 273\. Leviticus 21:14 274\. Leviticus 21:14 275\. Leviticus 21:17 276\. Leviticus 21:18 277\. Leviticus 21:23 278\. Leviticus 22:2 279\. Leviticus 22:4 280\. Leviticus 22:10 281\. Leviticus 22:10 282\. Leviticus 22:12 283\. Leviticus 22:15 284\. Leviticus 22:20 285\. Leviticus 22:21 286\. Leviticus 22:21 287\. Leviticus 22:22 288\. Leviticus 22:22 289\. Leviticus 22:24 290\. Leviticus 22:24 291\. Leviticus 22:25 292\. Leviticus 22:27 293\. Leviticus 22:28 294\. Leviticus 22:30 295\. Leviticus 22:32 296\. Leviticus 22:32 297\. Leviticus 23:8 298\. Leviticus 23:8 299\. Leviticus 23:8 300\. Leviticus 23:8 301\. Leviticus 23:10 302\. Leviticus 23:14 303\. Leviticus 23:14 304\. Leviticus 23:14 305\. Leviticus 23:15 306\. Leviticus 23:18 307\. Leviticus 23:21 308\. Leviticus 23:21 309\. Leviticus 23:24 310\. Leviticus 23:25 311\. Leviticus 23:29 312\. Leviticus 23:31 313\. Leviticus 23:32 314\. Leviticus 23:35 315\. Leviticus 23:35 316\. Leviticus 23:36 317\. Leviticus 23:36 318\. Leviticus 23:40 319\. Leviticus 23:42 320\. Leviticus 25:4 321\. Leviticus 25:4 322\. Leviticus 25:5 323\. Leviticus 25:5 324\. Leviticus 25:8 325\. Leviticus 25:9 326\. Leviticus 25:10 327\. Leviticus 25:11 328\. Leviticus 25:11 329\. Leviticus 25:11 330\. Leviticus 25:14 331\. Leviticus 25:14 332\. Leviticus 25:17 333\. Leviticus 25:23 334\. Leviticus 25:24 335\. Leviticus 25:29 336\. Leviticus 25:34 337\. Leviticus 25:37 338\. Leviticus 25:39 339\. Leviticus 25:42 340\. Leviticus 25:43 341\. Leviticus 25:46 342\. Leviticus 25:53 343\. Leviticus 26:1 344\. Leviticus 27:2 345\. Leviticus 27:10 346\. Leviticus 27:10 347\. Leviticus 27:12–13 348\. Leviticus 27:14 349\. Leviticus 27:16 350\. Leviticus 27:26 351\. Leviticus 27:28 352\. Leviticus 27:28 353\. Leviticus 27:28 354\. Leviticus 27:32 355\. Leviticus 27:33 356\. Numbers 5:2 357\. Numbers 5:3 358\. Numbers 5:7 359\. Numbers 5:15 360\. Numbers 5:15 361\. Numbers 5:30 362\. Numbers 6:3 363\. Numbers 6:3 364\. Numbers 6:3 365\. Numbers 6:4 366\. Numbers 6:4 367\. Numbers 6:5 368\. Numbers 6:5 369\. Numbers 6:6 370\. Numbers 6:7 371\. Numbers 6:18 372\. Numbers 6:23 373\. Numbers 7:9 374\. Numbers 9:11 375\. Numbers 9:11 376\. Numbers 9:12 377\. Numbers 9:12 378\. Numbers 10:9 379\. Numbers 15:20 380\. Numbers 15:38 381\. Numbers 15:39 382\. Numbers 18:3 383\. Numbers 18:3 384\. Numbers 18:4 385\. Numbers 18:5 386\. Numbers 18:15 387\. Numbers 18:17 388\. Numbers 18:23 389\. Numbers 18:24 390\. Numbers 18:26 391\. Numbers 19:14 392\. Numbers 19:21 393\. Numbers 19:9 394\. Numbers 27:8 395\. Numbers 28:3 396\. Numbers 28:9–10 397\. Numbers 28:11–15 398\. Numbers 28:19 399\. Numbers 28:26 400\. Numbers 29:1 401\. Numbers 29:2 402\. Numbers 29:8 403\. Numbers 29:13 404\. Numbers 29:35 405\. Numbers 30:2 406\. Numbers 30:2 407\. Numbers 35:2 408\. Numbers 35:12 409\. Numbers 35:12 410\. Numbers 35:25 411\. Numbers 35:30 412\. Numbers 35:31 413\. Numbers 35:32 414\. Deuteronomy 1:17 415\. Deuteronomy 1:17 416\. Deuteronomy 5:18–22 417\. Deuteronomy 6:4 418\. Deuteronomy 6:5 419\. Deuteronomy 6:7 420\. Deuteronomy 6:7 421\. Deuteronomy 6:8 422\. Deuteronomy 6:8 423\. Deuteronomy 6:9 424\. Deuteronomy 6:16 425\. Deuteronomy 7:2 426\. Deuteronomy 7:2 427\. Deuteronomy 7:3 428\. Deuteronomy 7:25 429\. Deuteronomy 7:26 430\. Deuteronomy 8:10 431\. Deuteronomy 10:19 432\. Deuteronomy 10:20 433\. Deuteronomy 10:20 434\. Deuteronomy 10:20 435\. Deuteronomy 12:2 436\. Deuteronomy 12:4 437\. Deuteronomy 12:5–6 438\. Deuteronomy 12:11 439\. Deuteronomy 12:13 440\. Deuteronomy 12:15 441\. Deuteronomy 12:17 442\. Deuteronomy 12:17 443\. Deuteronomy 12:17 444\. Deuteronomy 12:17 445\. Deuteronomy 12:17 446\. Deuteronomy 12:17 447\. Deuteronomy 12:17 448\. Deuteronomy 12:17 449\. Deuteronomy 12:19 450\. Deuteronomy 12:21 451\. Deuteronomy 12:23 452\. Deuteronomy 12:26 453\. Deuteronomy 12:32 454\. Deuteronomy 12:32 455\. Deuteronomy 13:4 456\. Deuteronomy 13:8 457\. Deuteronomy 13:8 458\. Deuteronomy 13:8 459\. Deuteronomy 13:8 460\. Deuteronomy 13:8 461\. Deuteronomy 13:11 462\. Deuteronomy 13:15 463\. Deuteronomy 13:16 464\. Deuteronomy 13:16 465\. Deuteronomy 13:17 466\. Deuteronomy 14:1 467\. Deuteronomy 14:1 468\. Deuteronomy 14:3 469\. Deuteronomy 14:11 470\. Deuteronomy 14:19 471\. Deuteronomy 14:21 472\. Deuteronomy 14:22 473\. Deuteronomy 14:28 474\. Deuteronomy 15:2 475\. Deuteronomy 15:3 476\. Deuteronomy 15:3 477\. Deuteronomy 15:7 478\. Deuteronomy 15:9 479\. Deuteronomy 15:11 480\. Deuteronomy 15:13 481\. Deuteronomy 15:14 482\. Deuteronomy 15:19 483\. Deuteronomy 15:19 484\. Deuteronomy 16:3 485\. Deuteronomy 16:4 486\. Deuteronomy 16:14 487\. Deuteronomy 16:16 488\. Deuteronomy 16:16 489\. Deuteronomy 16:18 490\. Deuteronomy 16:21 491\. Deuteronomy 16:22 492\. Deuteronomy 17:1 493\. Deuteronomy 17:11 494\. Deuteronomy 17:11 495\. Deuteronomy 17:15 496\. Deuteronomy 17:15 497\. Deuteronomy 17:16 498\. Deuteronomy 17:16 499\. Deuteronomy 17:17 500\. Deuteronomy 17:17 501\. Deuteronomy 17:18 502\. Deuteronomy 18:1 503\. Deuteronomy 18:2 504\. Deuteronomy 18:3 505\. Deuteronomy 18:4 506\. Deuteronomy 18:4 507\. Deuteronomy 18:6–8 508\. Deuteronomy 18:10 509\. Deuteronomy 18:10 510\. Deuteronomy 18:11 511\. Deuteronomy 18:11 512\. Deuteronomy 18:11 513\. Deuteronomy 18:11 514\. Deuteronomy 18:15 515\. Deuteronomy 18:20 516\. Deuteronomy 18:20 517\. Deuteronomy 18:22 518\. Deuteronomy 19:3 519\. Deuteronomy 19:13 520\. Deuteronomy 19:14 521\. Deuteronomy 19:15 522\. Deuteronomy 19:19 523\. Deuteronomy 20:2 524\. Deuteronomy 20:3 525\. Deuteronomy 20:10 526\. Deuteronomy 20:16 527\. Deuteronomy 20:17 528\. Deuteronomy 20:19 529\. Deuteronomy 21:4 530\. Deuteronomy 21:4 531\. Deuteronomy 21:11 532\. Deuteronomy 21:14 533\. Deuteronomy 21:14 534\. Deuteronomy 21:20 535\. Deuteronomy 21:22 536\. Deuteronomy 21:23 537\. Deuteronomy 21:23 538\. Deuteronomy 22:1 539\. Deuteronomy 22:3 540\. Deuteronomy 22:4 541\. Deuteronomy 22:4 542\. Deuteronomy 22:5 543\. Deuteronomy 22:5 544\. Deuteronomy 22:6 545\. Deuteronomy 22:7 546\. Deuteronomy 22:8 547\. Deuteronomy 22:8 548\. Deuteronomy 22:9 549\. Deuteronomy 22:9 550\. Deuteronomy 22:10 551\. Deuteronomy 22:11 552\. Deuteronomy 22:19 553\. Deuteronomy 22:19 554\. Deuteronomy 22:24 555\. Deuteronomy 22:26 556\. Deuteronomy 22:29 557\. Deuteronomy 22:29 558\. Deuteronomy 23:1 559\. Deuteronomy 23:2 560\. Deuteronomy 23:3 561\. Deuteronomy 23:6 562\. Deuteronomy 23:7–8 563\. Deuteronomy 23:7\-8 564\. Deuteronomy 23:10 565\. Deuteronomy 23:12 566\. Deuteronomy 23:13 567\. Deuteronomy 23:15 568\. Deuteronomy 23:16 569\. Deuteronomy 23:17 570\. Deuteronomy 23:18 571\. Deuteronomy 23:19 572\. Deuteronomy 23:20 573\. Deuteronomy 23:21 574\. Deuteronomy 23:23 575\. Deuteronomy 23:24 576\. Deuteronomy 23:24 577\. Deuteronomy 23:25 578\. Deuteronomy 24:1 579\. Deuteronomy 24:1 580\. Deuteronomy 24:4 581\. Deuteronomy 24:5 582\. Deuteronomy 24:5 583\. Deuteronomy 24:6 584\. Deuteronomy 24:8 585\. Deuteronomy 24:10 586\. Deuteronomy 24:12 587\. Deuteronomy 24:13 588\. Deuteronomy 24:15 589\. Deuteronomy 24:16 590\. Deuteronomy 24:17 591\. Deuteronomy 24:17 592\. Deuteronomy 24:19 593\. Deuteronomy 24:19 594\. Deuteronomy 25:2 595\. Deuteronomy 25:3 596\. Deuteronomy 25:4 597\. Deuteronomy 25:5 598\. Deuteronomy 25:5 599\. Deuteronomy 25:9 600\. Deuteronomy 25:12 601\. Deuteronomy 25:13 602\. Deuteronomy 25:17 603\. Deuteronomy 25:19 604\. Deuteronomy 25:19 605\. Deuteronomy 26:5 606\. Deuteronomy 26:13 607\. Deuteronomy 26:14 608\. Deuteronomy 26:14 609\. Deuteronomy 26:14 610\. Deuteronomy 28:9 611\. Deuteronomy 31:12 612\. Deuteronomy 31:19 613\. Deuteronomy 32:38
What does it mean to praise the Lord?	Answer Psalm 117:1–2 says, “Praise the LORD, all you nations; extol him, all you peoples. For great is his love toward us, and the faithfulness of the LORD endures forever. Praise the LORD.” Paul quotes this verse in Romans 15:8–13\. Praising the Lord is certainly something all people should do. So what exactly does it mean to praise Him? There are multiple words in Hebrew and Greek translated as “praise” in our English Bibles. In essence, to praise is to express adoration or approval. We praise the Lord for His traits, His works, and His character. Praise includes the acts of blessing, commending, honoring, thanking, celebrating, and rejoicing. We praise the Lord because He is worthy of all our praise. He is worthy of all adoration and approval. When David brought the ark of the covenant from Obed\-Edom’s house back to Jerusalem, “he appointed some of the Levites to minister before the ark of the Lord, to extol, thank, and praise the Lord, the God of Israel” (1 Chronicles 16:4\). In part they were to “give praise to the LORD, proclaim his name; make known among the nations what he has done. Sing to him, sing praise to him; tell of all his wonderful acts. . . . Remember the wonders he has done, his miracles, and the judgments he pronounced. . . . He remembers his covenant forever, the promise he made, for a thousand generations. . . . Sing to the LORD, all the earth; proclaim his salvation day after day. Declare his glory among the nations, his marvelous deeds among all peoples. For great is the LORD and most worthy of praise; he is to be feared above all gods. . . . Ascribe to the LORD, all you families of nations, ascribe to the LORD glory and strength. Ascribe to the LORD the glory due his name; bring an offering and come before him. Worship the LORD in the splendor of his holiness. . . . Let the heavens rejoice, let the earth be glad; let them say among the nations, ‘The LORD reigns!’ . . . Give thanks to the LORD, for he is good; his love endures forever. Cry out, ‘Save us, God our Savior; gather us and deliver us from the nations, that we may give thanks to your holy name, and glory in your praise.’ Praise be to the LORD, the God of Israel, from everlasting to everlasting” (1 Chronicles 16:8–36\). We see several important aspects of praising God in David’s instructions. Our praise for God helps make Him known among the nations. In praising God we extol His goodness to others. Praising the Lord involves remembering the things He has done. We praise God for His miracles as well as for His judgments. His mercy and His justice are both deserving of praise. Praising the Lord also involves remembering His faithfulness and His promises. We praise Him that He will keep all the promises He has made. We praise the Lord that His love is everlasting. All people, everywhere, should see that God is worthy of praise, based on who He is. Even nature is called upon to praise the Lord and proclaim that He reigns. We call upon God for salvation because only He can rescue us, and our response to His deliverance is to praise Him. God is to be praised “from everlasting to everlasting”; praising the Lord is not a one\-time event but something we continually do. Praise is a central part of [worshiping God](worship-God.html). David set aside a division of the Levites to praise the Lord with musical instruments in the future temple (1 Chronicles 23:1–5, 30\). Later, during the rebuilding of the temple, “when the builders laid the foundation of the temple of the LORD, the priests in their vestments and with trumpets, and the Levites (the sons of Asaph) with cymbals, took their places to praise the LORD, as prescribed by David king of Israel. With praise and thanksgiving they sang to the LORD: ‘He is good; his love toward Israel endures forever.’ And all the people gave a great shout of praise to the LORD, because the foundation of the house of the LORD was laid” (Ezra 3:10–11\). We praise the Lord for His grand plan of salvation, and Christian unity helps encourage praise: “Accept one another, then, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God. For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God’s truth, so that the promises made to the patriarchs might be confirmed and, moreover, that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. As it is written: ‘Therefore I will praise you among the Gentiles; I will sing the praises of your name.’ Again, it says, ‘Rejoice, you Gentiles, with his people.’ And again, ‘Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles; let all the peoples extol him’” (Romans 15:7–11\). We praise the Lord and in so doing follow Jesus’ example in praising the Father (Matthew 11:25\). In Ephesians 1 Paul writes, “Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (verse 3\). He then proceeds to give us many reasons to praise the Lord “who has blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual blessing in Christ.” Reasons for praising God include God’s election and sanctification (verse 4\), His adoption (verse 5\), His glorious grace (verse 6\), His redemption through the blood of Christ (verse 7\), His forgiveness (verse 7\), His gifts of wisdom and understanding (verse 8\), and His plan for the future (verse 10\). When our lives are filled with the righteousness of Christ, it redounds to the praise of the Lord. In Philippians 1:9–11 Paul prayed, “And this is my prayer: that your love may abound more and more in knowledge and depth of insight, so that you may be able to discern what is best and may be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ—to the glory and praise of God.” James 3:9–10 warns that we cannot both praise God and curse others. If we are to genuinely praise God, then our actions (and our words) should be in line with His righteous character. Our praise of the Lord is to be ongoing: “Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that openly profess his name” (Hebrews 13:15\). We “declare the praises of him who called \[us] out of darkness into his wonderful light” (1 Peter 2:9\). Whom do we praise? The Lord alone (Psalm 148:13\). How do we praise Him? With singing (Psalm 149:1\), with dancing (verse 2\), with musical instruments (Psalm 150:3\), with our words (Psalm 35:28\), with our actions (Colossians 3:17\), with our uprightness (Psalm 119:7\), and with all our hearts (Psalm 86:12\). When should we praise the Lord? All the time (Psalm 34:1\). We should express our adoration, approval, thanksgiving, and celebration to the One who created and redeemed us. “How good it is to sing praises to our God, how pleasant and fitting to praise him!” (Psalm 147:1\).
What are the Psalms of Solomon?	Answer The Psalms of Solomon is a collection of 18 psalms, likely written near the time of the Roman invasion of Israel, around 60 BC. Scholars are unsure as to why this collection is titled using the name of [Solomon](life-Solomon.html), who died many centuries prior to its composition. The subject matter is similar to that of Psalm 72, an actual part of inspired Scripture attributed to Solomon, so the title might be intended as a reference, not a claim of authorship. The Psalms of Solomon is unrelated to the [Odes of Solomon](Odes-of-Solomon.html), an explicitly Christian collection of worship songs written late in the first century AD. The Psalms of Solomon was written during the [intertestamental period](intertestamental-period.html) and was not considered to be inspired Scripture by either Jews or early Christians. However, the collection was mostly likely used in worship and for religious observances. Themes found in the Psalms of Solomon echo common assumptions about the Messiah, including an emphasis on earthly military victory and rescue from oppression. This work is the earliest known instance of the phrase [Son of David](Jesus-son-of-David.html) being used as an explicit title for the Messiah. As a collection of non\-inspired works, the Psalms of Solomon is not to be confused with actual Scripture. However, like other ancient writings, it sheds light on the culture surrounding Jesus’ earthly ministry. The Psalms of Solomon is the likely product of a defeated, oppressed people. Israel’s desire for freedom and liberation factors heavily into the Messianic expectations of the Jewish people during Jesus’ earthly ministry.
Did Jesus lie to His brothers in John 7:8–10?	Answer In John 7, Jesus is traveling through Galilee. Meanwhile, in Judea, the Jewish leaders were looking for a way to kill Him (John 7:1\). Then, “when the Jewish [Festival of Tabernacles](Feast-of-Tabernacles.html) was near, Jesus’ brothers said to him, ‘Leave Galilee and go to Judea, so that your disciples there may see the works you do. No one who wants to become a public figure acts in secret. Since you are doing these things, show yourself to the world’” (verses 2–4\). Jesus’ reply to His half\-brothers is curious: “My time is not yet here; for you any time will do. The world cannot hate you, but it hates me because I testify that its works are evil. You go to the festival. I am not going up to this festival, because my time has not yet fully come” (verses 6–8\). The Lord then stayed in Galilee for a while, but “after his brothers had left for the festival, he went also, not publicly, but in secret” (verse 10\). This passage is often used by skeptics to say that Jesus lied to His brothers—He said He was not going to the feast, but then He went anyway. Some cite this incident as evidence that Jesus was a mere human, not our sinless Savior as He claimed to be. They point out that the Bible forbids the sin of lying (Leviticus 19:11; Colossians 3:9\), that Jesus claimed to be without sin (John 8:46\), and that the Messiah would not lie (Isaiah 53:9\). If Jesus lied to His brothers about going to the festival, then He cannot be the Messiah, and the Bible is not God’s inerrant Word. Of course, the accusation that Jesus lied is a serious charge. Christians are called “believers” (John 4:41; Acts 1:15\). If Jesus told a lie to His half\-brothers, then how can we believe anything else He said? If Jesus is a liar, then how can He be the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6\)? The charge that Jesus lied to His half\-brothers makes the classic error of taking a verse or two out of context—cutting out all relevant verses before and after—in order to make Scripture say something it does not really say. To understand the meaning of Jesus’ words to His brothers, we’ll look at the immediate context, then the larger context of the event, and end with some logical conclusions about John 7:1–10 and the main lesson it teaches. First, we should mention that some old manuscripts of John’s Gospel have the word yet in John 7:8: “I am not yet going up to this festival” (emphasis added). If yet (or now) was part of the original text, as dozens of translations render it, there is obviously no lie—case closed. The word may or may not have been in John’s original text. But, since we don’t know for certain, relying on its absence makes for a weak argument in trying to tear down the Bible. As it turns out, it doesn’t matter whether yet was in that particular place or not, because Christ’s full statement—the context—has the same meaning with or without that word in verse 8\. The immediate context is Jesus’ response to His unbelieving brothers’ sarcastic taunts. As John mentions, His brothers were unbelievers at that time (John 7:5\). They were issuing a similar challenge as other nonbelievers (see John 10:24; Matthew 12:38; 27:40\) and even Satan (Matthew 4:3–6\). Jesus’ brothers told Him to go to Jerusalem, where the crowds were, and put Himself on public display. They were saying, in effect, “If You are who You say You are, prove it in the way we say you should.” Jesus’ response to His half\-brothers was clear: He was not going to the Feast of Tabernacles with them. Twice, Jesus uses the words not yet (John 7:6, 8\). Jesus then makes the point to His brothers that God’s timing is precise. Jesus’ actions are not based on whatever time they seem to think appropriate: “For you any time will do,” He tells them (verse 6\). The Messiah will accomplish God’s will in God’s time, not theirs: “My time has not yet fully come” (verse 8\). The larger context of this episode is John chapters 7 through 10\. Jesus indeed traveled to Jerusalem to teach and reveal more about His mission and identity. He made His public appearance halfway through the Feast of Tabernacles (John 7:14\). He then spent a lot of that visit condemning the religious leaders as liars and hypocrites. The problem for modern skeptics is that Jesus’ own brothers did not think He lied to them. His brothers understood exactly what Jesus had said. If they thought He had lied to them, they would have exposed Jesus as a lying hypocrite even as He was denouncing the Jewish leaders for being that very thing. Here is Jesus, in Jerusalem, publicly proclaiming to everyone, “If you hold to my teaching, . . . you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:31–32\), and His brothers do not object. Jesus’ own family—those who lived with Him, knew Him best, and were trying to stop Him because they thought He was crazy (Mark 3:21\)—did not take the opportunity during the Feast of Tabernacles to expose Him as a hypocritical fraud. If Jesus had lied to His brothers, it’s reasonable to assume that they would have spoken up in Jerusalem. The reality they did not argues for the fact that Jesus did not lie. Also, it would make no sense that the writer of this gospel, Christ’s devoted disciple, [John](life-John-Apostle.html), would make such an obvious mistake as to say that Jesus lied to His brothers. The apostle John always condemned lying in no uncertain terms (see 1 John 1:10; 2:4; 2:22; 4:20; 5:10\). His gospel introduces us to Jesus as “full of grace and truth” (John 1:14; cf. verse 17\), and he quotes Jesus complimenting Nathanael, “Here is an Israelite in whom there is no deceit” (John 1:47\). Later, Jesus tells a Samaritan woman that we must worship God in spirit and in truth (John 4:23–24\). It’s obvious that John did not consider Jesus’ response to His brothers in John 7 to be a lie. Could John have failed to realize that he recorded the Lord’s telling of a bald\-faced lie in the very same passage He is called a deceiver by His enemies (John 7:12, 47\)? Could John have possibly missed the irony that Jesus, a liar, publicly condemns His enemies as liars (John 8:44, 55\)? Of course not. The fact is that Jesus told no lie. John makes it perfectly clear that Jesus’ response to His brothers meant only that He was not going when His brothers thought He should go. The Lord was working on a different timetable, and He was not going to allow His brothers to dictate His actions. In summary, Jesus did not lie to His half\-brothers. He was making it clear to them that if or when He went to the festival was a matter of God’s exact timing and perfect plan, not their ignorant opinions. He knew His brothers would see Him at the festival and would have to think about what He told them more deeply when His exact hour had come, but not before (cf. John 7:30\). As followers of Christ, “we do not use deception, nor do we distort the word of God. On the contrary, by setting forth the truth plainly we commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God” (2 Corinthians 4:2\). God unfolds His plan for our lives in His own perfect timing (Psalm 116:3\-9; 2 Corinthians 6:2; Ephesians 1:3–12\) to conform us to His own glorious Son (Romans 8:28–30\), who is Truth Himself (John 14:6\).
What is the principle of double effect?	Answer Double effect is an application of [normative ethics](normative-ethics.html) used to determine the most ethical action when an act intended to help will also produce a morally harmful side effect. It is primarily used by Catholic theologians and bioethicists for medical treatments that may result in abortion or euthanasia and in discussions about just war strategies. The principle of double effect originated in [Thomas Aquinas’](Saint-Thomas-Aquinas.html) Summa Theologiae. Under Question 64, Murder, Article 7, Aquinas discusses the morality of self\-defense. He starts with Augustine’s conviction that killing in self\-defense, though legal, is unethical. Augustine believed that it is wrong to kill merely to live without fear of unwillingly losing something of value, including one’s life; that one should not value possessions more than moral integrity. Aquinas then lists other arguments against killing in self\-defense. One is that, if a person should not commit adultery in order to save his life, he certainly shouldn’t kill, since murder is worse than adultery. Another is that Romans 12:19 tells us not to seek revenge. The argument is that self\-defense is worse than revenge because it acts not in response to an evil but in anticipation of it. Aquinas then resolves that self\-defense is supported by [natural law](natural-law.html), but only if conditionally appropriate violence is used. If the intended victim’s response is disproportionate to the threat, and death ensues, then the act of self\-defense is immoral. It is unethical to take another’s life, but it is also unethical to so fear taking another’s life that you do not defend your own. Killing with intent is only moral when one is commissioned by an authority, as in the case of a soldier or an officer of the court. Later ethicists adapted Aquinas’ conviction about self\-preservation to cover all situations in which the act of bringing about a good may have a morally harmful side effect, particularly death. They arrived at four principles that characterize double effect: 1\. The act itself must be morally good or neutral; 2\. Although the agent may foresee morally grave harm, he must not desire it; 3\. The good result must arise because of the action, not the negative effect; 4\. The value of the good result must outweigh the harm of the negative effect. The principles of double effect encompass the main categories of normative ethics. An act may be identified as wrong or right using [deontology](deontology.html) and [Christian ethics](Christian-ethics.html). The desire of the agent reflects his character, which is addressed in [virtue ethics](virtue-ethics.html). The order and nature of the good and bad effects may be related to [ethical relativism](ethical-relativism.html). And the conviction that the good must outweigh the bad is an application of [consequentialism](consequentialism.html). Double effect can be applied to many different scenarios, but it is primarily used by medical professionals to determine if a treatment is ethical. Especially in Catholic hospitals, the two most common situations scrutinized involve abortion and euthanasia. As applied to euthanasia, the principle of double effect weighs the relieving of pain, which is good, against a possibly shortened lifespan, which is bad. Double effect determines that medication may be given only if the primary goal is to relieve pain and not to hasten death. The double effect framework is sometimes used to determine the extent of medical treatment. For example, if a woman has an ectopic pregnancy, it’s understood the baby will not live and the mother may not. It’s a simple procedure to remove the fetus early on, but that is technically an abortion. So a doctor may choose to remove the entire fallopian tube. The removal of the fallopian tube is usually unnecessary, but it allows the perspective that the death of the baby is not the cause of the mother’s survival but only a consequence. Double effect is also used in discussions of matters of war. It is deemed ethical to bomb a military installation or a strategic target, such as a bridge, even if civilians are present, because the death of civilians, although foreseen, is undesired. The bombing of civilians to demoralize the government into surrender is deemed unethical, however, because the good (demoralization) is a direct consequence of the bad (civilian casualties). In cases such as these, steps are often added to mitigate the harm, like notifying the civilians of the impending bombing before destroying the infrastructure. The trolley track switch, a traditional ethical dilemma, can also be analyzed using double effect. A trolley is barreling down a track, approaching a Y. Ahead stand five people who cannot move. Along an adjacent track stands one person. According to double effect, a bystander may throw the switch and divert the trolley so the one person dies rather than the five. The desire is to save the five people; the act is to switch the track. The death of the one person does not directly lead to the five being saved; it is a foreseen but undesired side effect, and one of proportionately less weight than the deaths of five people. The bystander may not, however, throw another person in front of the trolley to stop it. The crushed person would stop the trolley, but the saving of the five lives would be a direct result of the one person’s death and would therefore be unethical. Double effect can be used on a number of other issues. Is it ethical to use vaccinations to prevent life\-threatening disease if a handful of people will fall victim to conditions such as Guillain\-Barre syndrome? Is it ethical for a soldier to dive onto a live grenade if his death will directly save those around him? Is eminent domain ethical if a new dam will control flooding and provide electricity, even if several houses are destroyed? Is it right to cut off a hand trapped by a boulder if the alternative is to die of exposure? The principle of double effect is not an absolute tool. Acts, themselves, are not always right or wrong. And questions remain: can applying double effect contradict a living will? How much should the acting agent work to minimize the chance and extent of the harm? Double effect is useful in that it gives agents the opportunity to slow down and think about the consequences of their actions. It also gives peace to medical professionals faced with difficult decisions that do not have an obvious biblical answer. Of course, difficult decisions should always involve prayer and submission to the leading of the Holy Spirit. God’s good is infinitely greater than man’s consideration. As James 1:5 says, “If any of you lacks wisdom, you should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to you.”
What does it mean that God is not willing for any to perish, but that all should come to repentance?	Answer It is always important to study Bible verses in [context](context-Bible.html), and it is especially true with 2 Peter 3:9, which reads, “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us\-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (KJV). The second half of the verse, “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance,” is frequently used to argue against the doctrine of [election](elect-of-God.html). The context of 2 Peter 3:9 is a description of scoffers who doubt that Jesus is going to return to judge the world with fire (2 Peter 3:3–7\). The scoffers mock, “Where is this coming?” (verse 4\). In verses 5–6, Peter reminds his readers that God previously destroyed the world with the flood in Noah’s time. In verse 7, Peter informs his readers that the present heavens and earth will be destroyed with fire. Peter then responds to a question he knew was on his readers’ minds, namely, “what is taking God so long?” In verse 8, Peter tells his readers that God is above and beyond the concept of time. It may seem like we have been waiting a long time, but, to God, it has been a blink of an eye. Then, in verse 9, Peter explains why God has waited so long (in our view of time). It is God’s mercy that delays His judgment. God is waiting to give more people the opportunity to repent. Then, in the verses following verse 9, Peter encourages his readers to live holy lives in anticipation of the fact that Jesus will one day return. In context, 2 Peter 3:9 says that God is delaying His coming in judgment in order to give people further opportunities to repent. Some of the confusion regarding the meaning of 2 Peter 3:9 is the wording of the KJV translation: “not willing that any should perish.” Not willing makes it sound as if God does not allow any to perish. However, in 17th\-century English, willing carried more of an idea of desire than of volition. The modern English translations of 2 Peter 3:9 render the same phrase “not wanting” (NIV and CSB), “not wishing” (ESV and NASB), and “does not want” (NLT). In no sense does 2 Peter 3:9 contradict the idea that God elects certain people to salvation. First, in context, election is not at all what the verse is talking about. Second, to interpret “not willing that any should perish” as “does not allow any to perish” results in the false doctrine of [universalism](universalism.html). But God can “not desire” anyone to perish and still only elect some to salvation. There is nothing incongruous about that. God did not desire for sin to enter the world through the fall of Adam and Eve, yet He allowed it. In fact, it was part of His sovereign plan. God did not desire His only begotten Son to be betrayed, brutally tortured, and murdered, yet He allowed it. This, too, was part of God’s sovereign plan. In the same way, God does not desire anyone to perish. He desires all to come to repentance. At the same time, God recognizes that not everyone will come to repentance. It is undeniable that many will perish (Matthew 7:13–14\). Rather than being a contradiction to 2 Peter 3:9, God’s electing and drawing of some to salvation is evidence that He truly does not desire people to perish. Were it not for election and the effectual calling of God, everyone would perish (John 6:44; Romans 8:29–30\).
Why do we need to ask God to deliver us from evil?	Answer The request that God would “deliver us from evil” comes from the [Lord’s Prayer](Lords-prayer.html), recorded in Matthew 6:13 (ESV). The Lord’s Prayer is also recorded in Luke 11:2–4 but does not include this final request. The word for “evil” is translated differently in different versions. The KJV, ESV, and NASB translate the last term as “evil,” while the NIV and NKJV translate it as “the evil one.” The Greek term is literally rendered as “the evil.” Since the term is specific, many scholars believe that “the evil” is specific and personified, that is, the devil. “Deliver us from evil” is tied to the request immediately before it, “Lead us not into temptation” (Matthew 6:13\). This request also contains some difficulty. The word translated “temptation” can also be translated “hard testing” and doesn’t necessarily refer to a temptation to sin. Ultimately, the meaning of “Deliver us from evil” is not found in a dissection of the individual words but in the general direction of the clause. Satan is ultimately behind all evil, so it makes little difference whether we are to ask for deliverance from evil in general (sin) or from the evil one, specifically, since the two are related. Likewise, every time of “hard testing” is an opportunity to trust God or to compromise and yield to sinful temptation and thus to some extent come under the control of sin and the devil. In the Lord’s Prayer, we are instructed to pray that God will protect us from situations that would tempt us to sin. It is a request that sin never gain a foothold in our lives. Jesus taught His followers to pray, “Deliver us from evil,” because we cannot [resist the devil](resist-the-devil.html) in our own strength. The believer in Christ has been delivered from the penalty of sin (Romans 8:1\), but we are still in a daily battle against sin and the devil. We need to rely on the Holy Spirit to help us resist temptation and overcome sin in our lives. Praying “deliver us from evil” is a recognition of our own limited abilities and a means of asking for God to step in and help us. While we can pray for help to overcome temptation and sin, we can also pray that we will not be put in positions where we would face severe temptation. A man who is struggling with alcohol should avoid places where alcohol will be served, but he should also pray that he will not encounter any unexpected invitations to drink during the course of his day. A person who is struggling with lust should obviously avoid certain places and activities, but he can also pray that situations beyond his control do not present themselves to him. The prayer that God would deliver us from evil has a counterpart in the command and promise of James 4:7: “Resist the devil and he will flee from you.” This is prefaced by “submit yourselves to God.” If we were to face the devil in our own power, we would be overwhelmed. We can only resist temptation, avoid sin, and defeat the devil by a conscious reliance upon God’s power. Just as we need to ask for “daily bread” for our physical needs, we need to ask for “daily deliverance” for our spiritual needs.
What were the miracles of Jesus?	Answer A miracle of God is an extraordinary or unnatural event that reveals or confirms a specific message through a mighty work. Jesus performed plenty of miracles. All the miracles He did were to glorify God, help others, and prove that He was indeed who He said He was—the Son of God. When He calmed the storm in Matthew 8, for example, the disciples were astonished and they asked, “What kind of man is this? Even the winds and the waves obey him!” (verse 27\). The Gospels record many of the miracles that Jesus performed. Of course, many of the things that Jesus did could not have been recorded in such short works. John freely admits, “Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book…Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written” (John 20:30 and 21:25\). Different Gospels often record the same miracles, with each one giving slightly different details. Sometimes, it is impossible to know if a particular miracle recorded in the Gospels is simply one miracle recorded from different angles or if two separate miracles are being recorded. None of the Gospel writers are particularly concerned with strict chronology, and they sometimes do not give us all the details we might be interested to know. The miracles Jesus performed and listed below have been grouped into broad categories with accompanying references without attempting to determine which miracles are recorded multiple times and which may be unique to each of the Gospels: Miracles of Healing • Lepers cleansed: Matthew 8:1–4; Mark 1:41–45; Luke 5:12–14; 17:11–19 • Blind receive sight: Matthew 9:27–31; Mark 8:22–26; 10:46–52 Luke 18:35–43; John 9:1–38 • People are healed from a distance: Matthew 8:5–13; Luke 7:2–10; John 4:46–54 • Peter’s mother\-in\-law healed: Mark 1:29–31 • Paralyzed man healed: Matthew 9:1–8; Mark 2:1–12; Luke 5:17–26 • People touching Jesus’ clothing are healed: Matthew 9:20–23; 14:35–36; Mark 5:25–34; 6:53–56; Luke 8:43–48 • Various healings on the Sabbath: Mark 3:1–6; Luke 6:6–10; 13:10–17; 14:1–6; John 5:1–18 • Deaf and mute man healed: Mark 7:31–37 • Cut\-off ear is repaired: Luke 22:47–53 • Demons cast out (and specific physical ailments accompanying the demons healed): Matthew 9:32–33; 17:14–18; Mark 9:14–29; Luke 9:37–42 • Demons cast out (no specific physical ailments mentioned): Matthew 8:28–34; 15:21–28; Mark 1:23–27; 5:1–20; 7:24–30; Luke 4:31–37; 8:26–39 • Multitudes healed: Matthew 9:35; 15:29–31; Mark 1:32–34; 3:9–12; Luke 6:17–19 • The dead raised to life: Matthew 9:18–26; Mark 5:21–43; Luke 7:11\-17; 8:40–56; John 11:1–45 Other Miracles • Multitudes fed (food multiplies): Matthew 14:13–21; 15:32–39; Mark 6:33–44; 8:1–10; Luke 9:12–17; John 6:1–14 • Walks on water: Matthew 14:22–33 (Peter too); Mark 6:45–52; John 6:15–21 • Calms a storm: Matthew 8:22–25; Mark 4:35–41; Luke 8:22–25 • Fills nets with fish: Luke 5:1–11; John 21:1–14 • Peter catches fish with money in its mouth (for the temple tax): Matthew 17:24–27 • Turns water to wine: John 2:1–11 • Cursed tree withers: Matthew 21:18–22; Mark 11:12–25 From the list above, we see that the vast majority of miracles recorded in the Gospels were miracles of healing. While those who received the healing were relieved of their physical ailments, the stated purpose of the miracles is rarely ever the simple alleviation of physical suffering. The miracle of healing always points to a greater truth, namely, that Jesus is the Son of God with authority. When He casts out demons, His authority over them is emphasized. When He heals on the Sabbath, His authority as Lord of the Sabbath is emphasized. Likewise, many of the miracles emphasize Jesus’ authority over nature. There is no better way to study the miracles of Jesus than to read through the Gospels and make a list of each miracle and the explanation that is provided. (For instance, in John 2 we read of Jesus turning water into wine. That miracle did alleviate a potential embarrassment for the host and it did appease His mother who asked Him to get involved, but the primary result is recorded in verse 11: “What Jesus did here in Cana of Galilee was the first of the signs through which he revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him.”) Sometimes the purpose of a miracle is given directly, and sometimes it is recorded in the response of those who saw it. Jesus never performed miracles for the sake of putting on a show. Every miracle pointed to a greater truth. John especially emphasized this point by referring to Jesus’ miracles as “signs.” The feeding of the 5,000 is just one example. John 6 begins by saying that people were following Jesus because they saw the signs. One would think this is a good thing. Jesus goes on to feed the multitude, over 5,000 men plus women and children, with just five loaves and two fish. Then, He slipped away in the night. The next morning, the people went looking for Him. Jesus, however, is not impressed and confronts their selfish motives for seeking Him: “Very truly I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw the signs I performed but because you ate the loaves and had your fill” (John 6:26\). There is some irony here. They were seeking Jesus because they had a free meal as the result of a miracle. No doubt they thought that this was a pretty good arrangement. If Jesus would continue to feed them, all would be well. Jesus, however, says that they did not truly see the “sign.” They saw the miracle, yet they could not see past the loaves and fish. The “sign” Jesus performed signifies something greater. Although the multitudes saw and partook of the miracle, they missed the sign that was to point them to Jesus, the Bread of Life. Throughout the ministry of Jesus, many people saw His miracles as ends in themselves rather than pointing to something greater.
What is the significance of Judea in the Bible?	Answer Judea means “land of the Jews.” The territory of Judea, formerly called Judah, began to be referred to as “Judea” only after the [Babylonian captivity](Babylonian-captivity-exile.html). Most of the Jews who returned from exile were from the tribe of Judah. Since the territory of Judah was nearly all that remained of the northern and southern kingdoms at the time of the exile, the returning captives were called “Judeans,” and their homeland became known as Judea. The name Judea is first introduced in the Bible in the book of Ezra as a province of the [Persian Empire](Medo-Persian-empire.html): “Be it known unto the king, that we went into the province of Judea, to the house of the great God, which is builded with great stones, and timber is laid in the walls, and this work goeth fast on, and prospereth in their hands” (Ezra 5:8, KJV; see also Ezra 9:9\). Ancient Israel was divided into three main regions: [Galilee](Galilee-in-the-Bible.html) to the north, Samaria in the center, and Judah, later called Judea, to the south. The province of Judea, as distinguished from Galilee and Samaria, included the territories of the tribes of Judah, Benjamin, Dan, Simeon, and part of Ephraim. This area, known as the upper hill country, extended from Bethel in the north to Beth Zur in the south, and from Emmaus in the west to the Jordan River in the east. After the period of exile in Babylon, Judea proper comprised a relatively small region immediately surrounding the city of Jerusalem, an area much reduced from the former kingdom of Judah. However, at times in the Bible, Judea is applied in a broader political sense to mean all the territory occupied by the Jewish nation (Matthew 19:1; Luke 1:5; 4:44; 7:17; 23:5; Acts 10:37; 11:1, 29; 26:20\). Under the [Roman Empire](Roman-empire.html), Judea was part of the province of Syria. When Jesus was born, [Herod the Great](Herod-the-Great.html) was King of Judea (Luke 1:5\), although he ruled a much larger area. After Herod’s death and throughout Jesus’ lifetime, Judea was under the rule of Roman\-appointed procurators, or governors. Among these was Pontius Pilate, who governed at the time of Jesus’ death. During the days of the early church, [Herod Agrippa I](Herod-Agrippa-I.html) ruled over Judea. Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea (Matthew 2:1, 5, 6\) as foretold by the prophet (Micah 5:2\). [John the Baptist](life-John-Baptist.html) began his preaching ministry in the wilderness of Judea (Matthew 3:1\). Jesus frequently ministered in Judea (John 4:3; 11:7; Mark 10:1\), and people from Judea came to hear the Lord’s teachings and witness His miracles (Luke 5:17\). Even though Jesus encountered difficulties and persecution in Judea (John 4:1–3\), He commissioned His disciples to go and be witnesses in “Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth” (Acts 1:8\). Judea was among the nations represented at the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on Pentecost (Acts 2:5–11\). The apostle Paul also preached in Judea (Acts 26:20\), where many Christian churches were established (Acts 9:31; 1 Thessalonians 2:14\).
In what ways is sin a slippery slope?	Answer The idiom a slippery slope means that an action will quickly lead to a series of other actions that will lead to a downfall. The imagery is that of sliding down a steep bank and landing with a crash at the bottom. Someone may have begun a walk at the top of the embankment with no intention of sliding down the hill. But, once a foot ventures onto the slick side of the hill, the outcome is inevitable. The venture into sin can begin that way. The Bible warns us against playing with temptations because they are a slippery slope into sins we may never have planned to commit. James 1:13–15 says, “When tempted, no one should say, ‘God is tempting me.’ For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full\-grown, gives birth to death.” That is the Bible’s description of a slippery slope. Marijuana has been called a “gateway drug” because recreational use of it can become a slippery slope into [addiction](addiction-Christian.html) to other drugs. Some people enjoy using certain topics of conversation as slippery slopes into controversy. They toss a hot\-button topic at a group of people with passionate and opposing views and then watch the sparks fly. A pleasant conversation can slide quickly down the slippery slope into hurt feelings, rash words, and broken relationships. By its nature, sin is never satisfied. It demands more and more. Often, sin first presents itself as a pleasant suggestion. It never reveals the slippery slope from temptation to disaster. Most temptation begins by highlighting a fleshly need or desire, as the serpent did with Eve (Genesis 3\). It minimizes the possibility of that first action leading to another action and so descending a slippery slope. If we looked at the logical results of succumbing to the temptation, most of us would run the other way. This is why alcohol advertisements always feature the good time to be had with friends and demonstrate how fun it is to drink. Alcohol ads never show what happens when the parties are over, or few would buy the product. If tobacco companies practiced full disclosure, they would be honest about the slippery slope many tobacco users are on; instead, their advertising campaigns carefully avoid suggestions of addiction, lung cancer, and COPD. No matter how fun it is to dance along the top of the slippery slope, what happens at the bottom is never good. Several Bible characters stepped onto sin’s slippery slope and reaped disaster. [Samson](life-Samson.html), whose story is told in Judges 13—15, was chosen by God before birth to be a mighty judge over Israel. God blessed him with incredible strength that won the hearts of the nation. But Samson had a lust problem, and his compromise at various times became a slippery slope to tragedy. Because of his lust, he spent time with the wrong people, chasing the wrong women, and eventually lost both his eyes and his life. Samson began as a handsome young man interested in a girl, but the slippery slope of one compromise after another led him into grievous sin and the forfeiting of all God wanted to do through him. [David](life-David.html) is another man in Scripture who experienced sin’s slippery slope. He was the greatest king in Israel’s history because of God’s blessing upon him. Yet he stepped onto a slippery slope that would lead to adultery, murder, and heartache. Second Samuel 11:2 says, “One evening David got up from his bed and walked around on the roof of the palace. From the roof he saw a woman bathing. The woman was very beautiful.” At that point, David had an important choice to make. Would he continue looking at the beautiful woman bathing? Or would he avert his eyes from that scene and go back inside? David chose to gratify the lust of the flesh, and that put him on a slippery slope into a terrible scandal that ended with the death of Bathsheba’s husband, the death of her child, David’s agonized struggle with guilt (Psalm 32:3–4\), and continued trouble in David’s family. Sin advertises that it can meet our needs better than anything else. It insists that it is our friend, destined to make us happy. Satan will whisper anything into our listening hearts that will get us to put one foot on his slippery slope. [Gambling](gambling-sin.html) addictions begin with that first coin plunked in a slot machine. [Alcoholism](alcoholics-drunkards.html) begins with that first drink. Deception begins with that first white lie. When we’re caught in the slide down the slippery slope, our tempter is nowhere to be found. He will never throw us a rope. He promised freedom but brought chains instead. The best way to avoid the results of a slippery slope is to never step on it to begin with. “Make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires” (Romans 13:14, ESV). Once you’re on the slope, it’s very hard to get back to the top. Wise people know their areas of weakness and avoid the potential for them to be exploited. Recovering alcoholics stay far away from bars and parties where alcohol is offered. Overspenders cut up their credit cards and make themselves financially accountable to someone else. Teenagers who desire to remain [sexually pure](sexual-purity.html) don’t spend long hours alone with their dates. We make provision for the flesh when we place ourselves in situations that tempt us and then expect ourselves to be strong enough to resist the temptations that inevitably come. It’s foolish to rely on our weak flesh to deliver us, and it’s often the first step on the slippery slide to failure. Wisdom warns us about those slippery slopes, if we will attune our hearts to listen (1 Thessalonians 5:22; Psalm 119:101\).
What does it mean to come out from among them?	Answer Second Corinthians 6:17 says, “Therefore, come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord; do not touch any unclean thing, and I will welcome you” (CSB). The clause come out from among them is a reference to a passage in Isaiah. Isaiah 52:11 speaks of the Israelites who are returning from exile in Egypt. (When Jerusalem fell, many of the people were carried away to Babylon, but some of the people fled to Egypt, thinking they would be safe there. Jeremiah warned them not to do this, but many of them went to Egypt anyway, and they took Jeremiah with them against his will. See Jeremiah 42 – 43\.) In Isaiah 52, God is promising to call back to the Promised Land the descendants of those who went down to Egypt. The command to “come out from among them” is also an effective call. The people of Israel are commanded to forsake any idolatrous habits they may have picked up while in Egypt and to return to the Promised Land; at the same time, it is a promise that God will be the one to bring them back when the time is right. Paul quotes this passage from Isaiah in reference to the Corinthian church. He is taking familiar wording and giving it meaning in a fresh context. Just as the Israelites in exile were to put off any idolatry they may have picked up while living in Egypt, so the Corinthian believers are to lay aside the idolatry and sexual immorality that they were steeped in by virtue of living in Corinth. They must be separate from the sin of the world. Leading up to 2 Corinthians 6:17, Paul tells them, “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers” (verse 14\). We often apply this to a believer marrying an unbeliever, but it has a much wider application. In the context of the Corinthian church, it seems to have to do with participating in idolatry. As a further rationale for the prohibition against being yoked to unbelievers, Paul asks a series of rhetorical questions. The implied answer to all of these is a big NOTHING!: “What do righteousness and wickedness have in common?” (2 Corinthians 6:14\). “What fellowship can light have with darkness?” (verse 14\). “What harmony is there between Christ and [Belial](who-Belial.html) \[the devil]?” (verse 15\). “What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?” (verse 15\). “What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols?” (verse 16\). This final question gets to the heart of the matter. If there is no fellowship between the temple of God and idols, then the Christian should have nothing to do with idol worship: “For we are the temple of the living God” (2 Corinthians 6:16\). Then to further support the idea that Christians are the temple of God, Paul quotes from Leviticus 26:12, which is also alluded to in Jeremiah 32:38 and Ezekiel 37:27: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people” (2 Corinthians 6:16\). The temple of God is where God dwells, and He says He will dwell among His people, making them the temple. Since believers are in fact the temple of God, Paul concludes, “Come out from them and be separate. . . . Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you.” Christians are supposed to [separate themselves](Biblical-separation.html) from idol worship of any kind. The concept of “separation” became one of the major teachings of [fundamentalist Christianity](fundamentalism.html) in the United States in the 20th century. There was a lot of focus on “coming out and being separate” from the world in all sorts of ways, many of which may not have been warranted by Scripture. Many Christians were taught that they should separate from anything that looks at all like what “the world” was doing—attending movie theaters, playing cards, and dancing were commonly forbidden. The biblical admonition of 2 Corinthians 6:17 is not so all\-encompassing. Paul wants believers to be separate from [idol worship](idolatry-modern.html) in all its forms, but he never calls for a complete separation from pagan idol worshipers, whom they should attempt to win to Christ. Paul clarifies the matter of separation in 1 Corinthians 5:9–11: “I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.” Yes, the Lord wants His people to “come out from among them and be separate.” That means, first, that we should be separate from participation in sin. Second, we are to be separate from professing believers who are living in sin. Beyond that, Christians are called to not get involved in entangling relationships with unbelievers, which would lead to compromise (and thus being “yoked” with an unbeliever). Balancing that is the biblical understanding that we cannot completely remove ourselves from the world of unbelievers, as that would cause us to lose all influence. In the United States, if the 20th century was marked by believers being so separate from the world that there was not enough interaction with it, the 21st century may be marked by Christians being so involved with the world that it is hard to tell the difference between the two. Either way, evangelism is hampered. There must be a balance that cannot be summarized by a set of “dos and don’ts.” Every Christian has to decide if he or she is influencing the world or if the world is influencing him or her and then make choices accordingly.
How can a Christian avoid being a diva?	Answer The word diva is the feminine form of the Latin term divus, which meant “god.” In English, diva came to refer to any popular female performer, especially a singer, but has also come to mean “a vain, temperamental, and demanding person who has difficulty working well with others.” Christians, who are not to be vain, temperamental, or demanding, should not be divas in the latter sense. In our self\-absorbed culture, diva attitudes are almost encouraged. We’re bombarded with advertisements that tell us to “be all you can be.” We’re told that we “deserve the best” and that “nothing is too good” for us. Following such advice, men and women can become self\-focused, entitled, and difficult to work with. Unfortunately, Christians are just as prone to adopt this attitude as unbelievers. Yet being a diva is entirely at odds with the teachings of Christ. The diva attitude can show up when we don’t get our way, believe we deserve more than we are receiving, or disagree with a direction the leadership is going. Differences of opinion are necessary in healthy relationships, and the way we handle those differences can be either beneficial or counterproductive. Behaving like a diva is never honoring to God. Divas are often at the root of conflict, gossip, and even church splits. Divas create chaos in the body of Christ, work and social communities, or at home. Consider these examples: Betty is so upset that she was not asked to be the leader of women’s ministry that she starts attending another church where they appreciate her talents. Frank grouses about having to give up his front\-row parking spot to make way for handicapped parking. A couple decides to leave their family reunion because they’re annoyed by the presence of children. One thing all divas have in common is an elevated opinion of themselves. Divas are not a product of the 21st century. The early church had to put up with divas such as [Diotrephes](Diotrephes-in-the-Bible.html), whom John described as one “who loves to be first” (3 John 1:9\). Paul warned against being a diva in Romans 12:3: “Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment.” To have sober judgment, we must be willing to see ourselves the way God does. We should not compare ourselves with those around us but with the perfection of Jesus (2 Corinthians 10:12\). It’s hard to feel lofty when we “consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself” (Hebrews 12:3, ESV). It is His character that Christians are told to emulate. When we start to act like a diva, we should remember Christ’s humble servitude. Jesus “did not come to be served, but to serve” (Matthew 20:28\). How does a diva attitude compare with a servant attitude? • Divas are self\-focused; servants are others\-focused (Philippians 2:4\). • Divas are self\-important; servants seek to magnify the importance of Christ (John 3:30\). • Divas demand their rights; servants relinquish their rights to the safekeeping of the Lord (Galatians 2:20\). • Divas treat their opinions like godly convictions; servants recognize the difference between personal opinion and spiritual conviction (1 Corinthians 2:2\). • Divas justify their own sin while criticizing others; servants grieve over all sin and live in a state of ongoing repentance (Psalm 45:7\). Second Corinthians 10:18 says, “For it is not the one who commends himself who is approved, but the one whom the Lord commends.” Shedding a diva attitude requires that we demolish our “right” to be respected and admired and replace it with a desire to please the Lord. We must ask the Lord to show us our own sin the way He sees it. We can also make the choice to crucify our pride by volunteering for things that will gain us nothing. Someone overcoming a diva attitude may offer to vacuum after a youth ministry party, load groceries into the car of an elderly person, or pick up trash on a hiking trail. It’s even more profitable when the volunteering is done anonymously. Avoiding being a diva is related to what the Bible calls dying to the flesh (see Romans 6:8–14; Luke 9:23\). But, because killing our fleshly desires is painful, many Christians merely teach their flesh some manners. They assume they are living godly lives because they’re not involved in certain obvious sins—until the diva attitude starts showing. Their preference is overlooked when choosing a group activity, a restaurant stops serving their favorite dish, or their employer doesn’t go with their ideas, and the old petulant, fractious peevishness rears its ugly head. The diva has returned. Avoiding the diva mentality begins with recognizing our potential to be a diva. Pride is the foundation for a diva attitude, so the second step is confessing our pride to the Lord and asking His help in overcoming it. A third and difficult step is to consider ourselves [crucified with Christ](crucified-with-Christ.html) and seek humbling ways to serve others. Divas often mask their pride by choosing public acts of service for praise or flooding social media with [virtue signaling](virtue-signaling.html) and “humble brag” [selfies](selfie-culture.html). It’s better to volunteer for an unpopular task that will receive no attention. Peter gives some great advice on how to avoid being a diva: “All of you, clothe yourselves with humility toward one another, because, ‘God opposes the proud but shows favor to the humble’” (1 Peter 5:5; cf. Proverbs 3:34\).
Who was R.C. Sproul?	Answer Dr. Robert Charles Sproul (1939—2017\) was an American [Presbyterian](Presbyterians.html) pastor, theologian, author, [apologist](what-is-an-apologist.html), and Bible teacher. R.C. Sproul was born in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He attended Westminster College near Pittsburgh on a football scholarship. Although the school was affiliated with the Presbyterian Church (USA), he was not a believer when he enrolled. However, a fellow football player shared the gospel with him, and R.C. came to faith his freshman year. In 1960, a year before graduation, he married Vesta Voorhis, his childhood sweetheart. (At the time of his death, they had been married 57 years.) After graduation, Sproul attended Pittsburgh Theological Seminary where he was mentored by Dr. John Gerstner, who was a formative influence in his life. While in seminary, Sproul also pastored a Presbyterian church in Lyndora, Pennsylvania. After graduation, he pursued doctoral studies (and taught himself Dutch) at the Free University of Amsterdam under Dr. G.C. Berkhouwer. Upon returning to the United States in 1965, Sproul was ordained in the United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America (UPCUSA), although he would later transfer his ministerial credentials to the Presbyterian Church in America (PCA). (The UPCUSA had become known for its “progressive” policies such as the ordination of women and [ecumenism](ecumenism-ecumenical.html).) Instead of pastoring, Sproul taught briefly at three different schools: Westminster College, Gordon College, and Conwell Theological Seminary. While at Conwell, he taught Sunday school at Oreland Presbyterian Church just outside of Philadelphia. Then he pastored for two years at College Hill Presbyterian Church in Cincinnati, Ohio. In 1971, R.C. Sproul founded the Ligonier Valley Study Center in western Pennsylvania as a place where Christians could immerse themselves in biblical, theological, and philosophical study. This ministry has grown to be the largest [Reformed](reformed-theology.html) educational and discipleship ministry in the world. The ministry moved to a suburb of Orlando in 1984 and was renamed Ligonier Ministries. Under the auspices of Ligonier, Sproul published a daily devotional, Tabletalk; launched a radio teaching ministry, Renewing Your Mind; held annual conferences; and published books, audio, and video resources. R.C. Sproul’s first book was published in 1973, but he started to become more widely known through this 1985 book The Holiness of God, which is considered by many to be a modern Christian classic. With increasing exposure, Dr. Sproul became highly sought after as a speaker and visiting professor. He had the ability to make difficult theological concepts understandable to the average Christian. His theological approach was thoroughly [Calvinistic](calvinism.html), and the holiness and sovereignty of God was a dominant, recurrent theme in his teaching. After Sproul’s death, his teaching was summed up on the Ligonier website as “God is holy, and we are not. In between is the God\-man Jesus Christ and His perfect work of obedience and His atoning death on the cross.” R.C. Sproul was a staunch defender of biblical inerrancy and helped draft the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy. He was a critic of Roman Catholic theology and objected to the document Evangelicals and Catholics Together, which downplayed the key differences, such as justification by faith alone, between evangelicals and Catholics. Dr. Sproul served on the boards of the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy, Evangelism Explosion, and Prison Fellowship. In 1980, Sproul accepted a position as professor of theology and apologetics at Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi. He traveled there for a few months each year and taught a full load. When RTS opened an Orlando campus, he served as the Senior Chair of Systematic Theology from 1987 to 1995\. Sproul then served as Distinguished Professor of Systematic Theology and Apologetics at Knox Theological Seminary in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, from 1995 to 2004\. In 1997, he founded St. Andrews Chapel in Sanford, Florida (a suburb of Orlando), and in 2011 founded Reformation Bible College, also in Sanford. R.C. Sproul had struggled for years with COPD, and it was for that, in combination with the flu, that he was admitted to the hospital on December 2, 2017\. He died 12 days later at the age of 78\. In all, R.C. Sproul wrote more than 100 books as well as many articles for evangelical publications. Through his teaching ministry, he produced numerous audio and video lectures on subjects such as the history of philosophy, theology, Bible study, apologetics, intelligent design, and Christian living. R.C. Sproul, contrary to the “Presbyterian stereotype,” was neither grim nor somber. He was a passionate and enthusiastic teacher and follower of Christ. He loved to laugh and tell jokes, and he was an avid sports fan. He also wrote several children’s books, wrote over twenty hymns, and enjoyed painting. Upon the death of R.C. Sproul, long\-time friend John MacArthur tweeted, “Today my friend, co\-defender of the truth and theological giant is standing in the presence of our Lord whom he loved and served faithfully. R.C. Sproul has stood with me for decades in every major theological controversy and I will dearly miss him. There is no one like him.” R.C. Sproul was survived by his wife, two children, eleven grandchildren, and seven great\-grandchildren. At the time of his death, Ligonier Ministries reached more than two\-million people around the world each week through written publications, radio ministry, and audio and video teaching. Through a succession plan that was developed several years ago, Ligonier Ministries will continue, and Dr. Sproul can still be heard on hundreds of radio stations each week as well as through countless videos freely available online. While we had some strong disagreements with R.C. Sproul on non\-essential matters of the faith, such as [amillennialism](amillennialism.html) vs. [premillennialsm](premillennialism.html) and [infant baptism](infant-baptism.html), we believe that, overall, Dr. Sproul was a solid and trustworthy teacher of God’s Word. His teachings are well\-worth studying.
How can I stop being a grumpy Christian?	Answer Grumpiness characterizes some personality types more than it does others. Some people are born with sunny dispositions and always see the glass half full. Others seem to be grumpy from birth, seeing every glass nearly empty—and who drank it anyway? Unfortunately, even after some grumpy people become Christians, they bring their grumpiness with them. Since they have always been this way, they often believe grumpiness is an integral part of who they are rather than a flaw that needs to be changed. Other Christians may have been happy earlier in life but find themselves being grumpier as they get older. Reasons for grumpiness vary, but life does take its toll. For those who recognize that perpetual grumpiness is at odds with the joy of the Lord (Acts 13:52; Galatians 5:22; Romans 14:17\), there are some practical steps to change their attitude: 1\. Recognize that continual grumpiness is sin. Consider negative personality traits to be like barnacles on the hull of a boat. Barnacles are the bane of boat owners because the little crustaceans cluster by the thousands, increasing drag and decreasing a boat’s fuel efficiency. Barnacles are also notoriously difficult to remove. Sins of the personality, such as grumpiness, are like that. They attach themselves to our lives, weighing us down and keeping us from experiencing all that it means to “walk by the Spirit” (Galatians 5:16, 25\). The grumpy Christian needs to resist shrugging off the problem by saying things like, “That’s how I’ve always been” or “It’s too difficult to change.” Jesus paid too high a price to free us from our old ways for us to choose to remain enslaved (Romans 6:1–4\). 2\. Confess grumpiness as sin every time it manifests itself (1 John 1:9\). Grumpiness becomes a habit that others see more readily than we do; many grumpy Christians don’t even realize when they’re being grumpy. In order to overcome a grumpy mood, we must agree with God about it. Jesus was never grumpy or cross, despite all that He faced and the cross that He bore (see Luke 10:21\). Neither does grumpiness belong in the life of His followers (Romans 8:29\). When we begin taking note of the way we respond to certain situations, we can become aware of how we come across to others. If we develop the habit of confessing grumpiness as sin every time we notice it, we become even more sensitive to it, and we can ask God for help in changing our old ways. 3\. Thank the Lord for every good gift He has given (James 1:17\). A grateful heart is a happy heart. Grumpiness and [thanksgiving](giving-thanks-to-God.html) cannot co\-exist. Choose to “give thanks in all circumstances” (1 Thessalonians 5:18\). Perpetually grumpy people are so focused on what is not right that they overlook what is right. A grumpy Christian may be helped by starting a thankfulness journal. In the journal, record one thing each day that you can be grateful for. Then, when grumpiness sets in, change your focus by reading the journal and reminding yourself of God’s unending goodness. 4\. Take a breather. When you find yourself getting grumpy, take a break. Even if it’s just for a few seconds, giving yourself time to step back and reevaluate things is helpful. If you have the time, spend your break praying, reading the Bible, or listening to worshipful music that uplifts Christ. Eat a healthy snack. Find a mirror and check your facial expression. Smile. 5\. Identify the areas that contribute to grumpiness. Find the source of the grumpiness, and you can more directly deal with it. Often, grumpy people are attracted to information and people who encourage their grumpiness. They feast on negative news, seek the company of negative people, and listen to discouraging music. Overcoming an attitude of [negativity](Christian-negativity.html) requires that we stop feeding it. We have the responsibility to guard our hearts (Proverbs 4:23\). It helps to filter all entertainment and outside information through this sentence: “Does this lift up my heart in praise to God or pull it down into anger and depression?” A Christian prone to grumpiness can handle it in the same way we overcome any negative trait. We recognize it as sin, ask God’s help in changing, and take action to create a new normal. The reward is a happier outlook, a closer relationship with God, and [spiritual growth](spiritual-growth.html) that will benefit everyone around us.
How old was Jesus when He died?	Answer The Bible does not say how old Jesus was when He died. Further, the Bible does not give the date of Jesus’ birth or the date His death. This makes determining Jesus’ precise age when He died impossible. As a background, please read our articles on “[What year was Jesus Christ born?](what-year-was-Jesus-born.html)” and “[In what year did Jesus die?](what-year-did-Jesus-die.html)” By tracing the history recorded in the New Testament, especially the Gospel of Luke, and comparing it with Roman history, we conclude that Jesus was born between 6 and 4 BC, near to the time of King Herod’s death. In estimating the age of Jesus, we can split the difference and say He was born in 5 BC. Next, we need to determine the date of the start of Jesus’ ministry. Luke 3:1 says that [John the Baptist](life-John-Baptist.html) started preaching in the fifteenth year of Tiberius’s reign, which would be c. AD 28 or 29\. Jesus was probably baptized and began His ministry sometime in AD 29 when He was about 33 years old. And then we determine the date of the end of Jesus’ ministry. Based on the number of Passover feasts Jesus observed during His public ministry—three of which are mentioned in Scripture—He ministered for approximately [three and a half years](length-Jesus-ministry.html). That would place the end of Jesus’ ministry in AD 33\. So, it is likely that Jesus was crucified in AD 33\. (There is another theory that calculates the beginning of Jesus’ ministry differently, arriving at a crucifixion date of AD 30\. Both these dates fit the historical data we have that [Pontius Pilate](Pontius-Pilate.html) governed Judea from AD 26–36, and [Caiaphas](Caiaphas-in-the-Bible.html) the high priest was also in office until AD 36\.) Doing the math: 5 BC to 1 BC \= 4 years, and AD 1 to AD 33 \= 33 years, for a total of 37 years. Jesus was thus in His 30s when He was crucified. Depending on the exact date of His birth and the year He commenced His public ministry, Jesus was somewhere between 33 and 39 years old when He died. So, while it is impossible to be precise or dogmatic, the answer to the question “How old was Jesus when He died?” is “approximately 36 years old.”
Who was Korah in the Bible?	Answer The Bible introduces us to four people named Korah, but only one earned his place in infamy. The first is Korah, son of Esau and Oholibamah (Genesis 36:5, 14, 18; 1 Chronicles 1:35\); the second is Korah, son of Eliphas and grandson of Esau and Adah (Geneses 36:16\); the third is Korah, son of Hebron and a descendant of Caleb (1 Chronicles 2:43\); and, finally, there is Korah, son of Izhar, a Levite whose blatant rebellion against Moses and Aaron brought about his own demise as well as the deaths of everyone aligned with him (Numbers 16:1–40\). This fourth Korah, a contemporary of [Moses](life-Moses.html), is best known as the man who was swallowed alive by the earth along with his family and all his associates after they revolted against the authority of Moses and Aaron in the wilderness. Korah’s story illustrates a vital truth about the seriousness of sin and rebellion against God’s chosen leaders. The years of wilderness wanderings were fraught with episodes of murmuring, complaining, and rebellion by the Israelite people. Numbers 16 weaves together the stories of two of these uprisings against Moses and Aaron. The chief figure in the revolts is a subordinate Levite named Korah. Joining him are [Dathan](Dathan-in-the-Bible.html) and Abiram, two Hebrews from the tribe of Reuben, as well as 250 of the top leaders of Israel. Korah was the grandson of Kohath. As a Kohathite, Korah was one of those responsible for transporting the items within the tabernacle, including the ark of the covenant, from place to place (Numbers 3:27–32\). The Kohathites reported to Aaron’s son Eleazar, who oversaw the items in the [tabernacle](tabernacle-of-Moses.html). But Korah was not satisfied with his assigned service. He wanted to be a [priest](difference-priests-Levites.html). Jealous and resentful of his lower position, he questioned the claim of Aaron and his sons to be God’s only ordained mediators for the people. Korah argued that the entire community had an equal right to the priesthood. His power play not only challenged Moses and Aaron but God Himself, affronting the Lord’s divine authority to anoint whomever He chooses. The group that Korah led came to Moses and said, “You have gone too far! The whole community is holy, every one of them, and the Lord is with them. Why then do you set yourselves above the Lord’s assembly?” (Numbers 16:3\). When Moses heard Korah’s opposition, he fell facedown and said, “In the morning the LORD will show who belongs to him and who is holy, and he will have that person come near him” (verse 5\). Moses challenged Korah to a test, calling him and his followers to the sanctuary the next morning to offer incense before the Lord: “The man the LORD chooses will be the one who is holy. You Levites have gone too far!” (verse 7\). The rebels had accused Moses and Aaron of going too far with their assertion of authority, so Moses countered, saying Korah and the Levites had gone too far in their rebellion. At that time, Moses also reprimanded Korah for his ingratitude and grasping for power: “Isn’t it enough for you that the God of Israel has separated you from the rest of the Israelite community and brought you near himself to do the work at the Lord’s tabernacle and to stand before the community and minister to them? He has brought you and all your fellow Levites near himself, but now you are trying to get the priesthood too” (Numbers 16:9–10\). And he reminded Korah that his rebellion was not against Moses and Aaron, but “it is against the Lord that you and all your followers have banded together” (verse 11\). The next morning, the moment of truth arrived. Korah and his followers met Moses and Aaron at the entrance to the tabernacle, and the glory of the Lord appeared to all the people. The 250 Israelite leaders each had a censer, and they put coals and incense in them to offer before the Lord (Numbers 16:18\). God spoke, telling Moses He would destroy the whole congregation (verse 20\), but Moses and Aaron interceded, preventing the destruction of the entire camp (verse 22\). God then commanded that the rest of the assembly move away from Korah, Dathan and Abiram, and their tents. Moses pronounced a curse upon the rebels, and immediately “the ground under them split apart and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them and their households, and all those associated with Korah, together with their possessions. They went down alive into the realm of the dead, with everything they owned; the earth closed over them, and they perished and were gone from the community” (Numbers 16:31–33\). A fire then came out from the Lord and consumed the 250 leaders who had offered incense before the Lord (verse 35\). Regrettably, God’s severe judgment on Korah and his associates did not silence the people’s grumbling. As the Israelites continued in opposition to Moses, once more the Lord threatened to destroy the whole nation. But as before, the faithful intercession of Moses and Aaron saved the people again, although more than fourteen thousand Israelites died of a plague. Thus, the [rebellion of Korah](rebellion-of-Korah.html) was finally quelled (Numbers 16:41–50\). There are two postscripts to Korah’s tragic story. In the New Testament, the fate of Korah is used as a warning to false teachers who harass the church: “Woe to them! . . . They have been destroyed in Korah’s rebellion” (Jude 1:11\). On a happier note, the descendants of Korah found favor in God’s eyes. Seven generations after Korah died, the prophet Samuel arose from the line of Korah (1 Chronicles 6:31–38 and 1 Samuel 1:1, 20\). The Korahites later became doorkeepers and custodians for the tabernacle (1 Chronicles 9:19–21; 1 Chronicles 2\.) One group of Korahites (1 Chronicles 12:6\) joined King David in various military exploits and won the reputation of being expert warriors. And, during the time of King David, the [sons of Korah](sons-of-Korah.html) became the leaders in choral and orchestral music in the tabernacle. Among the biblical psalms, eleven are attributed to the sons of Korah: Psalms 42, 44—49, 84—85, and 87—88\.
What does it mean to be sober-minded?	Answer Several places in the New Testament speak of being sober\-minded (1 Peter 4:7; 5:8; Titus 2:2, 6; 1 Corinthians 15:34\). In 2 Timothy 4:5, Paul exhorts Timothy to be “sober\-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry” (ESV). The term sober\-minded literally means “free from intoxicating influences.” We speak of a person who is not [drunk with alcohol](is-getting-drunk-a-sin.html) or [high on drugs](sin-drugs.html) as being “sober.” His or her mind is not under the control of a dangerous outside force. More broadly, being sober\-minded means that we do not allow ourselves to be captivated by any type of influence that would lead us away from sound judgment. The sober\-minded individual is not “intoxicated,” figuratively speaking, and is therefore calm under pressure, [self\-controlled](fruit-Holy-Spirit-self-control.html) in all areas, and rational. Other translations of 2 Timothy 4:5 render Paul’s instruction to Timothy as “keep your head” (NIV), “keep a clear mind” (NLT), and “exercise self\-control” (CSB). One of the qualifications for an elder or church leader is that they and their wives be sober\-minded (1 Timothy 3:2, 11; Titus 1:8\). That is, they should live in reverential awe of their responsibility as representatives of Christ (2 Corinthians 5:20\). Peter warned that “the end of all things is at hand; therefore be self\-controlled and sober\-minded for the sake of your prayers” (1 Peter 4:7, ESV). Those who are sober\-minded will be alert to the need to pray and take the occasion to pray at opportune times. More often than not, we see the opposite of sober\-mindedness displayed in our world. Silliness, irresponsible choices, foolish experimentation with harmful substances or behaviors, and crude joking are in direct opposition to the command to be sober\-minded. Ephesians 5:3–4 lists some behaviors that conflict with sober\-minded living: “But among you there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people. Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place.” Then, in case someone should think this is a list of judgmental preferences, Paul goes on to write the following: “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. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of such things God’s wrath comes on those who are disobedient. Therefore do not be partners with them” (Ephesians 5:5–7\). Being sober\-minded does not mean living a sour, joyless existence. In fact, sober\-minded Christians are to be continually filled with the [joy](fruit-Holy-Spirit-joy.html) of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22; Acts 15:32; Romans 14:17\). Eliminating foolishness, frivolity, and mind\-numbing silliness from our lives allows us to focus on what is real, eternal, and inspiring. Jesus’ command to His sleepy\-headed disciples suggests the need for sober\-mindedness: “Watch and pray so that you will not fall into temptation” (Mark 14:38\). Ephesians 5:18 commands us to avoid being filled with wine, because that leads to debauchery, but rather to be continually filled with the Holy Spirit. This verse implies that we can only be one of those, but not both. It’s an either/or proposition. If we pursue drunkenness, we cannot also pursue God. If substances control us, we cannot also be controlled by the Holy Spirit. Sober\-minded people choose to abstain from practices that would lead them into sin. In Romans 13:12–14, Paul explains the urgency behind the frequent commands to be sober\-minded: “The night is nearly over; the day is almost here. So let us put aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. Let us behave decently, as in the daytime, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and [debauchery](debauchery.html), not in dissension and jealousy. Rather, clothe yourselves with the Lord Jesus Christ, and do not think about how to gratify the desires of the flesh.” And that is a good description of being sober\-minded.
What was inside the ark of the covenant?	Answer Interestingly, the most complete inventory of the contents of the [ark of the covenant](ark-of-the-covenant.html) is found in the New Testament: Hebrews 9:4 says that the Most Holy Place had “the gold\-covered ark of the covenant. This ark contained the gold jar of manna, Aaron’s staff that had budded, and the stone tablets of the covenant.” The stone tablets were those on which God had written the Ten Commandments. At various times in Israel’s history, it seems that various items were in the ark of the covenant. When God first gave Moses the instructions on building the ark, He said, “Put in the ark the tablets of the covenant law, which I will give you” (Exodus 25:16\). Sometime during the wilderness wanderings, God commanded that a container of [manna](what-was-manna.html) be added to the ark’s cargo: “Moses said to Aaron, ‘Take a jar and put an omer of manna in it. Then place it before the Lord to be kept for the generations to come.’ As the Lord commanded Moses, Aaron put the manna with the tablets of the covenant law, so that it might be preserved” (Exodus 16:33–34\). After the [rebellion of Korah](rebellion-of-Korah.html), God commanded the leader of each tribe of Israel to bring a staff to the tabernacle. The name of each leader was inscribed in his staff; the tribe of Levi bore Aaron’s name. God instructed that the staffs be placed in the tabernacle overnight. The next morning, [Aaron’s rod](Aaron-rod.html) “had not only sprouted but had budded, blossomed and produced almonds” (Numbers 17:8\) as a sign of God’s blessing on the Levitical priesthood. God then said, “Put back Aaron’s staff in front of the ark of the covenant law, to be kept as a sign to the rebellious” (verse 10\). So, by the time Israel reached the Promised Land, the ark was associated with the items mentioned in Hebrews 9:4: the stone tablets, the jar of manna, and the staff of Aaron. When [King Solomon’s temple](Solomon-first-temple.html) was finished, the king had the ark of the covenant, along with all the other furnishings of the tabernacle, brought to the new temple’s dedication. At that time, the biblical historian notes that “there was nothing in the ark except the two stone tablets that Moses had placed in it at Horeb” (1 Kings 8:9; cf. 2 Chronicles 5:10\). There are two possible ways to reconcile 1 Kings 8:9 with Hebrews 9:4\. One is that the ark in Moses’ time contained all three items mentioned in Hebrews but, by Solomon’s time hundreds of years later, only the stone tablets remained. The other items could have been removed in Eli’s time by the men of Beth Shemesh when “they looked into the ark of the Lord” (1 Samuel 6:19\). Before that, the ark was in the possession of the Philistines for a time, and they could have removed some of the ark’s contents. It could also be that Solomon himself had the manna and the staff removed from the ark and set nearby in the same room at the time of the temple’s dedication. Another possibility is that the jar of manna and Aaron’s staff were not usually inside the ark of the covenant, but rather beside it. God’s command in Exodus 16:33 was for Moses to place the manna “before the Lord” (ESV) or “in a sacred place before the Lord” (NLT). Similarly, the staff was to be placed “before the testimony” (Numbers 17:10, ESV) or “permanently before the Ark of the Covenant” (NLT). So, the manna and the staff were kept in the same place as the tablets of stone, but it’s possible they were not, strictly speaking, inside the ark. It is also quite possible that the jar of manna and Aaron’s staff were carried inside the ark every time the ark was moved. When the ark was at rest in the Most Holy Place, the manna and the staff were placed beside or in front of the ark. But, while the ark was in transit, the most practical place to carry the manna and the rod was inside the ark.
Who are the watcher angels / Grigori?	Answer The term Grigori is not found in Scripture. But watcher angels are mentioned in three verses of the Bible, each in a vision that King Nebuchadnezzar had (Daniel 4:13, 17, 23\). Not all translations use the term watcher angels. The ESV, CEV, and KJV speak of “a watcher” in Daniel 4:13, and the NASB calls it “an angelic watcher,” but the NIV simply calls this being “a messenger” from heaven. The NET says that Nebuchadnezzar sees “a sentinel.” These watcher angels are supernatural, celestial beings or “holy ones” who come down from heaven with authority to speak for God. The Hebrew word translated “watcher” in Daniel 4 comes from a root word meaning “wakeful one” and thus can mean “watcher,” “sentinel,” or “guardian.” The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia describes watcher angels as servants of God who “possess a certain joint authority to speak the decrees of God, and apparently form a heavenly council who listen to God’s word and then act as divine messengers to bring these commands and revelations to human beings” (vol. 4, p. 1024\). Noncanonical literature elaborates in detail regarding the watcher angels. According to the [books of Enoch](book-of-Enoch.html), watcher angels can be either fallen angels or holy angels. These watcher angels take a particular interest in the earthly affairs of human beings, “watching” them, and, at times, even interfering in or controlling situations that concern people. The fall of the watcher angels unfolds in the apocryphal book of 1 Enoch. Part of Enoch’s mission is to pronounce God’s judgment on the fallen watcher angels who supposedly dwelled in the fifth heaven where their fall took place. Grigori is the name Enoch assigns to these fallen watcher angels in the book of 2 Enoch. The English word Grigori is simply a transliteration of the Greek word for “watcher,” used in the Septuagint. According to the account, the watcher angels are sent down to earth to look after humans. They soon develop an unnatural lust for the beautiful women of earth. A large group of rebellious watchers, the Grigori, seduce the women of earth and impregnate them with a race of hybrid giants who violently raid the earth and threaten humanity. Another noncanonical book, [Jubilees](book-of-Jubilees.html), also speaks of heavenly watchers who violate their ordained nature by lusting after and having sexual relations with human women. The offspring of their unnatural unions are monstrous giants who corrupt the children of earth and prompt the flood of Noah’s time. These extrabiblical writings seem to provide an explanation for the creatures mentioned in Genesis 6:1–4 called [Nephilim](Nephilim.html). The Bible tells us that Nephilim were the result of sexual relations between “the sons of God” and “the daughters of men” (verse 2\). Much debate exists regarding the true identity and origin of the Nephilim. The only solid information we can gather from Scripture is that the Nephilim are the offspring of the sons of God and human women and are described as “heroes of old” and “men of renown” (verse 4\). Numbers 13:33 suggests that the Nephilim were a people of extraordinary size, possibly associating them with giants. Substantial debate also surrounds the nature of the “sons of God” who fathered the Nephilim. Were they fallen watcher angels or Grigori? Does the biblical book of Jude provide a clue: “And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day” (Jude 1:6\)? For now, we can only speculate. The Bible does not provide us with clear answers; therefore, we must be content with uncertainty. We are wise to be extra cautious about giving serious weight to the ideas found in extrabiblical sources. Nevertheless, Scripture does affirm the concept of heavenly beings who watch the earth (Ezekiel 1:15–20\) and are interested in the affairs of humans: “This Good News has been announced to you by those who preached in the power of the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. It is all so wonderful that even the angels are eagerly watching these things happen” (1 Peter 1:12, NLT). Since God’s purpose is to use the church to display His wisdom to rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms (Ephesians 3:10\), then the idea of attentive watcher angels or [guardians](guardian-angels.html) is biblically sound. Likewise, the Bible confirms the presence of angels who guard and protect humans: “The angel of the LORD encamps around those who fear him, and he delivers them” (Psalm 34:7; see also Matthew 18:10; Acts 12:9–15\).
What is dynamic equivalence in Bible translation?	Answer Dynamic equivalence is a method of Bible translation that seeks to reproduce the original text of Scripture using modern language and expression to communicate the message of the Bible. In translating a verse, dynamic equivalent translation is less concerned with providing an exact English word for each word of the original text as it is with communicating the basic message of that verse. Considering the original context, culture, figures of speech, and other effects on language, dynamic equivalence seeks for today’s Bible readers to understand the text in the same way (or with the closest similarity in meaning as possible) as those to whom it was first addressed. Of the myriad [Bible translations](Bible-versions.html), most tend to fall into one of two categories: literal equivalence and dynamic equivalence. Literal translations are basically word\-for\-word translations, providing each word of the original with an equivalent English word, as much as possible. Literal translations seek formal equivalence, a philosophy of translation that strives for a rendering of the original text that is as literal as possible. Examples of formal equivalence or literal translations are the English Standard Version ([ESV](English-Standard-Version-ESV.html)), New American Standard Bible ([NASB](New-American-Standard-Bible-NASB.html)), New King James Version ([NKJV](New-King-James-Version-NKJV.html)), King James Version ([KJV](King-James-Version-KJV.html)), New Revised Standard Version ([NRSV](New-Revised-Standard-Version-NRSV.html)), and Revised Standard Version ([RSV](Revised-Standard-Version-RSV.html)). Unlike literal (word\-for\-word) translations, a thought\-for\-thought, meaning\-driven method of translation is used to achieve dynamic equivalence. In recent years, the term functional equivalence has also been applied to dynamic or thought\-for\-thought translations. Rather than aiming for an exact rendering of the text, the dynamic or functional philosophy of translation focuses on communicating the broader meaning of the original text. Because it moves away from a formal, word\-for\-word method of translation, the dynamic equivalence method is naturally closer to paraphrasing. The goal is to reproduce the same dynamic impact the text had on its original audience. The New International Readers Version ([NIrV](New-International-Readers-Version-NIrV.html)), Revised English Bible ([REB](Revised-English-Bible-REB.html)), Good News Translation ([GNT](Good-News-Bible-GNB.html)), New Living Translation ([NLT](New-Living-Translation-NLT.html)), and Contemporary English Version ([CEV](Contemporary-English-Version-CEV.html)) are dynamic (or functional equivalence) translations. The goal of most Bible translators is to be as faithful as possible to the original meaning of the text (if not the original words) while using language that is as clearly understood and natural sounding to the modern reader as the original text was to the original readers. Neither method of translation is “better” than the other. The difference boils down to which language receives the deference—either the original language or the language of today’s recipients. Literal translations make the original language more transparent but can sound awkward to the modern ear and therefore require more clarification and explanation. Dynamic translations tend to be easier for modern readers to understand but may hide or lose some of the ancient elements of the text, such as cultural customs, wordplays, allusions, and figures of speech. While different in their approaches, both philosophies of translation endeavor to be faithful to the original text. Here are a couple examples of the difference between formal equivalence and dynamic equivalence in translation: John 3:16 Very literal: “For God did so love the world, that His Son—the only begotten—He gave, that every one who is believing in him may not perish, but may have life age\-during.” Young’s Literal Translation ([YLT](Youngs-Literal-Translation-YLT.html)) Formal equivalence: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” New King James Version (NKJV) Dynamic equivalence: “For this is how God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.” New Living Translation (NLT) Psalm 23:1 Formal equivalence: “The LORD is my shepherd, I shall not want.” New American Standard Bible (NASB) Dynamic equivalence: “The LORD is my shepherd; I have everything I need.” Good News Translation (GNT) A pitfall of the dynamic equivalence method of translation is that it leads to interpretive decisions that can sometimes miss the point of the original text and introduce foreign ideas. If the translators take too much liberty with the text, interpretive errors may prevent a faithful communication of God’s Word. Some subjectivity naturally exists within dynamic equivalence, allowing for widely varying versions of the same text. For example, consider the major differences between these two translations of 2 Corinthians 5:8, both using the dynamic equivalence method: “Yes, we are fully confident, and we would rather be away from these earthly bodies, for then we will be at home with the Lord.” NLT “There is no doubt that we live with a daring passion, but in the end we prefer to be done from this body so that we can be at home with the Lord.” [The Voice](The-Voice-translation.html) Idioms and other figures of speech that are unique to the culture provide the most vivid comparisons between dynamic equivalence and formal equivalence in translations. For example, when Moses throws the tree into the bitter waters of Marah in Exodus 15:25, the NASB, a literal translation, says that “the waters became sweet.” On the other hand, the dynamic NIV says that “the water became fit to drink.” What is literally “sweet” in the Hebrew language stays “sweet” in formal equivalence but becomes “fit to drink” in dynamic equivalence. Both translations are accurate in their own way. The water became potable, whether it is called “sweet” water or simply “fit to drink” water. A third philosophy of Bible translations seeks a combined approach, using word\-for\-word, literal translation whenever possible and a thought\-for\-thought, dynamic translation when necessary. This mixed method has also been called “optimal equivalence.” Proponents of this approach believe it produces the best balance of accuracy and readability. The New International Version ([NIV](New-International-Version-NIV.html)) is considered a combined translation, placing an emphasis on dynamic equivalence while at the same time consistently seeking formal equivalence. The New English Translation ([NET](New-English-Translation-NET.html)), Christian Standard Bible ([CSB](Christian-Standard-Bible-CSB.html)), and New Century Bible ([NCV](New-Century-Version-NCV.html)) are all combinations of formal and dynamic equivalence. A wise approach to Bible study and the reading of Scripture is to use a mix of several different translations including literal, dynamic, and combined translations. By comparing the texts against each other, serious Bible readers will best understand the true and full meaning of God’s Word.
What did Jesus mean when He said, “Peace, be still”?	Answer Jesus utters the words “Peace, be still” in Mark 4:39 in the King James and New King James Versions as well as the English Standard Version. The wording is slightly different in other versions: “Quiet! Be still” (New International Version) and “Hush, be still” (New American Standard Bible). Jesus’ command occurs near the end of Mark 4:35–41: “When evening had come, he said to them, ‘Let us go across to the other side.’ And leaving the crowd, they took him with them in the boat, just as he was. And other boats were with him. And a great windstorm arose, and the waves were breaking into the boat, so that the boat was already filling. But he was in the stern, asleep on the cushion. And they woke him and said to him, ‘Teacher, do you not care that we are perishing?’ And he awoke and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, ‘Peace! Be still!’ And the wind ceased, and there was a great calm. He said to them, ‘Why are you so afraid? Have you still no faith?’ And they were filled with great fear and said to one another, ‘Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey him?’” (ESV). “Peace, be still” is the command that Jesus used to [calm a nighttime storm](calming-the-storm.html) on the Sea of Galilee. The passage says that Jesus rebuked the storm—in other words, He told it to calm down in much the same way that a teacher might tell a classroom full of unruly students to calm down. The disciples were awestruck as the wind and waves actually obeyed! The authority Jesus showed gave them a clue as to who He really was. On a closer reading, we find that it was not only the storm that was raging, but the disciples also. Jesus was asleep in the boat, and the disquieted disciples were filled with consternation: “The disciples woke him and said to him, ‘Teacher, don’t you care if we drown?’” (Mark 4:38\). The disciples’ “raging” in the midst of the raging storm showed their lack of faith. Their question “Don’t you care?” was also an indignant affront to Jesus’ character. Of course Jesus cared for them. Jesus had said, “Let us go over to the other side,” so they should have known that they would make it. And He was with them, a fact that should have allayed fear. Before we come down too hard on the disciples, we need to remember that they were just growing into their faith. While they may have questioned Jesus’ care for them, at least they had the idea that He could do something about the problem. This shows that they knew He had some [extraordinary power](miracles-of-Jesus.html) and authority. If thirteen people are in a small boat in the middle of a raging storm, and twelve of them go to the thirteenth and say, “Please, do something about this storm,” that would indicate they felt the thirteenth man has some extraordinary abilities. Novelist Charles Dudley Warner quipped that “everybody talks about the weather, but nobody ever does anything about it.” Well, Jesus can actually do something about it, and He is the only one who can. After rebuking the storm, Jesus issues a rebuke to the disciples as well: “Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?” (Mark 4:40\). In essence, He was also saying “Peace, be still” to the disciples. “Calm down. I was always in complete control.” When we read the account of Jesus’ saying “Peace, be still” today, we need to remember that Jesus is always in control of our circumstances, and, when we trust Him, He will calm the raging inside our souls. When we find ourselves raging and tossing and turning on the inside, Philippians 4:6–7 tells us what to do: “Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.” While it is great to see the storm around us calm down, it is even more important that our souls are calm in the midst of the storm. God has not promised to bring peace to every storm, but He has promised to give us peace through any storm if we will trust Him to take care of us. The song “Sometimes He Calms the Storm” by Benton Kevin Stokes and Tony W. Wood beautifully communicate this truth: Sometimes He calms the storm With a whispered “Peace, be still.” He can settle any sea, But it doesn’t mean He will. Sometimes He holds us close And lets the wind and waves go wild; Sometimes He calms the storm, And other times He calms His child.
How should a Christian view the Mafia?	Answer The Mafia, also called the Mob, is an organized international body of criminals that uses ruthless methods to control much of the drug running, prostitution, and other crime throughout the United States and Europe. The word Mafia comes from a Sicilian adjective mafiusu, which means “bravado” or “swagger.” Some people are attracted to the money, influence, and risk associated with Mafia activities. The Mafia represents illicit power and wealth, and in some circles an invitation to join is considered an honor. Even though many Mafia fronts are legitimate businesses and may even have ties to charities, Christians should not knowingly be involved on any level with the Mafia. Originating in Sicily, the Italian Mafia migrated west and spawned the creation of an American Mafia. There are five primary Mafia “families” that control all organized crime. They are the Bonanno, Colombo, Gambino, Genovese, and Lucchese families, which rule primarily from New York and Chicago. Their activities include murder, extortion, [human trafficking](human-trafficking.html), corruption of public officials, [gambling](gambling-sin.html), infiltration of legitimate businesses, labor racketeering, loan sharking, tax fraud, and stock manipulation schemes. The Mafia is called “organized crime” because the infrastructure is highly advanced and fiercely protective of its holdings. Mafia wars are often the source of unsolved murders and even [gang activity](Bible-gangs.html). The Mafia is only a larger and more sophisticated street gang. The Mafia is the epitome of everything God despises: pride, murder, immorality, greed, lying, and wicked schemes. In fact, Proverbs 6:16–19 provides a fairly accurate sketch of the Mafia when it says, “There are six things the Lord hates, seven that are detestable to him: haughty eyes, a lying tongue, hands that shed innocent blood, a heart that devises wicked schemes, feet that are quick to rush into evil, a false witness who pours out lies and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.” That is an apt description of the Mafia’s activities. Christians are to live lives that are a direct contrast to those of Mafia members. The motivation of a Mafioso is money and power. Those lusts belong to our sinful nature and have no place in the life of a Christian (Romans 6:1–6\). When we see those sinful tendencies growing in our own lives, we are to crucify them, not cater to them (Galatians 2:20\). Jesus said, “No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.” Mafia members have essentially sold their souls to the devil, choosing money and power as their gods. They often have lightly religious influences, primarily Catholic, and may attend Mass or confession in an attempt to make themselves right with God. But Scripture is clear that religion cannot save anyone or make us right with God. The only hope for anyone’s soul is in surrendering to the lordship of Jesus Christ, forsaking his old life, and taking up his cross to follow Him (Luke 9:23; 14:26–27; Matthew 16:24–27\). Part of cross\-carrying is forsaking anything that displeases the Lord. Everything the Mafia represents displeases the Lord, so we should hate its activities the same way the Lord does (Psalm 97:10\).
Who was Oswald Chambers?	Answer Oswald Chambers (1874—1917\) was a Scottish evangelical Bible teacher and military chaplain. Some would describe Chambers as an evangelical mystic. He has become most well\-known through books of his teachings that were compiled and published by his wife after his death. His most well\-known book is the devotional classic My Utmost for His Highest. Oswald Chambers was born in 1874 in Aberdeen, Scotland, the son of a Baptist pastor. When he was 15, his family moved to London. There, he and his father went to hear [Charles Spurgeon](Charles-Haddon-Spurgeon.html) preach. Oswald was touched by the message, and, while walking home, he and his father stopped under a street lamp and Oswald gave his heart and life to Christ. Oswald grew as a believer and became involved in ministry to the poor, but he was a gifted artist and felt that God’s call for his life was in art. He attended the Royal College of Art in London and then the University of Edinburgh, Scotland. Although he enjoyed his studies, he was not content. Some friends suggested that he should enter the ministry, but he did not feel called and said that God would have to make it very clear if he was supposed to change course. Soon, his income from freelance illustrations dried up, and he began to experience financial hardship. One night he decided to spend the whole night in prayer, wrestling with God, to find direction. In the morning he felt called to ministry, and in the morning mail, he received a brochure for the Dunoon Theological Training College. Chambers left an internationally recognized and prestigious university to attend a Bible college with thirty students and one faculty member because that is what he thought God wanted him to do. The reaction of his friends was mixed. At Dunoon, the students lived and studied in the home of the principal, Rev. Duncan MacGregor, who was a mentor to the students as well as a teacher. MacGregor brought guest speakers and teachers to the school, and Chambers was especially touched by the teaching of F. B. Meyer who spoke about the necessity of being filled with the power of the Holy Spirit. Oswald felt that was missing in his life. This began a four\-year period of spiritual dryness and searching that he described as “hell on earth.” He was overcome by his own sinfulness and confessed that it was only the grace of God and the support of friends that got him through this time. Finally, at a service at Dunoon Baptist Church, he confessed before the whole church that he needed to be filled with the power of the Holy Spirit. This seems to have been a conscious act of yielding himself to God, and from that time Oswald began to have deeper experience of the power and presence of God, which was evident to others. He also seems to have embraced a form of [entire sanctification](entire-sanctification.html). He felt it was necessary for one to be totally committed to God, body, soul, and spirit, and that this level of commitment was subsequent to conversion and necessary for the believer to be fully used by God. There is no evidence that Chambers ever considered himself to have reached a state of “sinless perfection.” He explains it this way: “The mystery of sanctification is that the perfect qualities of Jesus Christ are imparted as a gift to me, not gradually, but instantly once I enter by faith into the realization that He ‘became for \[me] . . . sanctification. . . .’ Sanctification means nothing less than the holiness of Jesus becoming mine and being exhibited in my life. “The most wonderful secret of living a holy life does not lie in imitating Jesus, but in letting the perfect qualities of Jesus exhibit themselves in my human flesh. Sanctification is ‘Christ in you . . .’ (Colossians 1:27\). It is His wonderful life that is imparted to me in sanctification—imparted by faith as a sovereign gift of God’s grace. Am I willing for God to make sanctification as real in me as it is in His Word? “Sanctification means the impartation of the holy qualities of Jesus Christ to me. It is the gift of His patience, love, holiness, faith, purity, and godliness that is exhibited in and through every sanctified soul. Sanctification is not drawing from Jesus the power to be holy—it is drawing from Jesus the very holiness that was exhibited in Him, and that He now exhibits in me. Sanctification is an impartation, not an imitation. Imitation is something altogether different. The perfection of everything is in Jesus Christ, and the mystery of sanctification is that all the perfect qualities of Jesus are at my disposal. Consequently, I slowly but surely begin to live a life of inexpressible order, soundness, and holiness—‘. . . kept by the power of God . . .’ (1 Peter 1:5\).” (“Sanctification 2” from Utmost.org, accessed 2/14/19\) After spending nine years at Dunoon, Chambers left to preach and teach. He traveled to the United States and spent several months teaching at God’s Bible College in Cincinnati. From there, he traveled to Japan where he visited the Tokyo Bible School. Then he became a traveling teacher and ambassador for the Pentecostal League of Prayer. In 1908, while on a ship headed for the United States, Chambers met Gertrude Hobbs, and two years later they were married. He referred to her as “Beloved Disciple” or B.D., which became the nickname Biddy, by which she was known ever after. The couple spent a four\-month honeymoon in the United States teaching at “[holiness camps](Holiness-movement.html).” Chambers read and studied the Bible and other literature on a wide variety of subjects. He rarely spoke using notes, preferring to rely upon the Holy Spirit. Biddy, who had been trained as a court stenographer, began recording his messages using shorthand. Chambers had dreamed for years of starting a Bible college, and in 1911 he founded the Bible Training College in London. He leased a 19\-room house in London, which would house him and Biddy as well as twenty\-five students. Classes were held in the lecture rooms, and all ate together in the dining room where the students would question Chambers and further digest what he had been teaching them. In the evenings, Chambers gave lectures that were attended by non\-students, and he preached in local churches. Although busy, he began each morning with time in the Bible and prayer. In 1913 Chambers’ daughter, Kathleen, was born. In 1914 England entered World War I, and Chambers felt called to minister to the troops. In 1915 he traveled to Egypt as a YMCA chaplain for the troops stationed there. After a few months, his wife and daughter joined him in Cairo. There he taught the Bible and encouraged the troops, with hundreds of servicemen packing the sessions. Biddy assisted by recording her husband’s messages in shorthand and entertaining in their home. Each Sunday, she served tea to 700 troops. In October 1917, Chambers began to experience a decline in health but did not seek medical attention because he did not want to take resources away from injured troops. Finally, he was convinced to seek medical help and had to undergo emergency surgery for a ruptured appendix. He died on November 15, 1917, at the age of 43 from complications of the surgery. He was buried at the British Cemetery in Old Cairo with full military honors. His tombstone notes that he was the Superintendent of the YMCA, but at its foot, it summarizes his life: “A believer in Jesus Christ.” The first Christmas after her husband’s death, Biddy printed one of his sermons and sent it to some soldiers. The response was overwhelming. Soon after, she began doing this on a monthly basis until the demand was so large that the YMCA took over the task, mailing out 10,000 copies of a sermon each month. Biddy then began compiling and publishing books based on the shorthand transcriptions of Oswald’s messages, once again to great response. Biddy stayed in Egypt ministering until the war ended and the camp was shut down. Upon her return to England, Biddy made it her life’s work to get her husband’s words to the world. In all of this publishing activity, she never mentioned herself, and she supported herself by running a boarding house. By the time of her death in 1966, thirty books had been published. In 1927 she released a book of devotional readings, one for each day of the year. That book, My Utmost for His Highest, has never gone out of print since that time. It has sold over 10 million copies and has been translated into forty\-five languages. In his life, Oswald Chambers devoted his life to Christ and to selfless ministry to others. After his death, through the devoted work of his widow, Chambers continues to minister to people today.
What does it mean to pray, “Thy will be done”?	Answer “Thy will be done” is one of the requests in the [Lord’s Prayer](Lords-prayer.html). In part, Jesus taught His disciples to pray, “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:9–10\). Jesus Himself pleaded for God’s will to be done in the Garden of Gethsemane. Prior to His crucifixion, He prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will” (Matthew 26:39\). Jesus was committed to seeing God’s will accomplished, and the prayer “Thy will be done” was a theme of His life. Most simply, to pray, “Thy will be done,” is to ask God to do what He desires. Of course, we’re praying to the God who said, “Let there be light,” and there was light (Genesis 1:3\), so we know that His sovereign decree will be accomplished, whether or not we pray for it. But there is another aspect of [God’s will](Gods-will.html), which we call His “revealed” will or “preceptive” will. This is God’s “will” that He has revealed to us but that He does not force upon us. For example, it is God’s will that we speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15\) and that we not commit adultery (1 Corinthians 6:18\) or get drunk (Ephesians 5:18\). When we pray, “Thy will be done,” we are asking God to increase righteousness in the world, to bring more people to repentance, and to further the cause of the kingdom of His Son. When we pray, “Thy will be done,” we acknowledge God’s right to rule. We do not pray, “My will be done”; we pray, “Thy will be done.” Asking that God’s will be done is a demonstration of our trust that He knows what is best. It is a statement of submission to God’s ways and His plans. We ask for our will to be conformed to His. The Lord’s Prayer begins by acknowledging God as Father in heaven. Jesus then models petition, presenting three requests to the Father: 1\) That God would cause His name to be hallowed; in other words, as Albert Mohler explains, “that God would act in such a way that he visibly demonstrates his holiness and his glory” (The Prayer That Turns the World Upside Down: The Lord’s Prayer as a Manifesto for Revolution, p. 61\). 2\) That God would bring His kingdom to earth; that is, that the preaching of the gospel would convert sinners into saints who walk in the power of the Holy Spirit and that God would rid the world of evil and create the [new heavens and new earth](new-heavens-earth.html) where God will dwell with His people and there will be no more curse and no more death (see Revelation 21—22\). 3\) That God’s will would be done “on earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10\). In heaven, the angels perform God’s desire completely, joyfully, and immediately—what a world this would be if humans acted like that! As a point of clarification, “Thy will be done” is not an impassive prayer of resignation. Jesus’ prayer in Gethsemane was not passive or fatalistic in the least; He bared His heart before the Father and revealed His ultimate desire: for God’s will to be accomplished. Praying, “Thy will be done,” acknowledges that God has more knowledge than we do and that we trust His way is best. And it is a commitment to actively work to further the execution of God’s will. Romans 12:1–2 says, “Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship. Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.” Understanding who God is, we submit ourselves to Him and allow Him to transform us. The more we know God, the more readily our prayers will align with His will and we can truly pray, “Thy will be done.” We can approach God in confidence that “if we ask anything according to his will, he hears us” (1 John 5:14–15\). By faith, we know that praying, “Thy will be done,” is the best thing we can ask for. “Now to him who is able to do immeasurably more than all we ask or imagine, according to his power that is at work within us, to him be glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all generations, for ever and ever! Amen” (Ephesians 3:20–21\).
What does it mean to emasculate?	Answer To emasculate means to make something weaker, less vigorous, or less effective. More literally, emasculate means “to make a man feel less masculine.” In some instances in the Bible, the word implies surgical castration. Paul used the word emasculate in anger against false teachers who were infiltrating the churches of Galatia. Legalistic Jewish troublemakers had begun teaching that a man must be circumcised to be saved, and the new believers were frightened that they had missed some important teaching. Paul wrote in Galatians 5:12, “As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!” Paul is most likely alluding to an action, well\-known to the Galatians, performed by the pagan priests of Cybele. Those cultists, in honor of the goddess, literally castrated themselves; Paul thus associates legalism with paganism and says the legalists’ teaching of the necessity of circumcision was tantamount to idolatry and ritualistic mutilation. The world’s attack on masculinity is doing much to emasculate boys and men. Some push the idea that masculinity is to be equated with violence, insensitivity, and sexual aggressiveness. The solution often put forward is to emasculate males to make them more like females. Society may celebrate a unisex, gender\-fluid, emasculated ideology, but it is abhorrent to God, who created male and female (Genesis 1:27\). Masculinity was so important to God that, when He gave the law to the Israelites, He included references to men with disfigured genitals. Deuteronomy 23:1 says, “No one who has been emasculated by crushing or cutting may enter the assembly of the LORD.” While this seems harsh to us, the command demonstrates how seriously God takes masculinity and femininity. The castration of male slaves was common in ancient civilizations because emasculation made slaves more passive and less likely to revolt, as well as keeping them away from the master’s wives and concubines. Surgically emasculated men were called [eunuchs](eunuch-eunuchs.html) and are mentioned frequently in the Bible (e.g., Esther 2:3; Jeremiah 38:7; Acts 8:32, 39\). Jesus referred to three different types of eunuchs in His teaching about divorce (Matthew 19:12\). While there is no sin in being a eunuch, it is a sin to intentionally emasculate oneself in denial of God\-given masculinity.
What is the Wilderness of Sin?	Answer The Wilderness of Sin is a dry, sandy, wasteland in the southwestern part of the Sinai Peninsula—assuming that’s where [Mount Sinai](mount-Sinai.html) is located. The people of Israel entered the Wilderness of Sin not long after leaving Egypt on their journey to the Promised Land (Exodus 16:1\). The Wilderness of Sin is one of six wildernesses through which the Israelites traveled on their way to Canaan. The wildernesses include Shur, Etham, Sin, Sinai, Paran, and Zin. The Wilderness of Sin is sometimes confused with the Wilderness of Zin, a region on the northwestern side of the Sinai Peninsula. The Israelites traversed the Wilderness of Sin at the beginning of the exodus, arriving at the Wilderness of Sin “on the fifteenth day of the second month after they had come out of Egypt” (Exodus 16:1\). They did not enter the Wilderness of Zin until a year later. Located between the oasis of [Elim](Elim-in-the-Bible.html) and Mount Sinai, the Wilderness of Sin is mentioned only four times in the Bible, all in connection with the exodus from Egypt. Immediately upon arrival in the desolate Wilderness of Sin, the whole community of Israelites began to grumble and complain to Moses and Aaron about the lack of food: “If only we had died by the LORD’s hand in Egypt! There we sat around pots of meat and ate all the food we wanted, but you have brought us out into this desert to starve this entire assembly to death” (Exodus 16:3\). God heard their murmurings, for it was in the Wilderness of Sin that He first provided “bread from heaven” in the form of [manna](what-was-manna.html). The manna appeared each morning after the dew dried as “thin flakes like frost on the ground” (Exodus 16:14\). It was white, the color of coriander seed, and it tasted “like wafers made with honey” (verse 31\). Each person was to gather just what he or she needed for that day and a double portion on the day before the Sabbath (verses 16, 22\). The manna could be baked into cakes or boiled in pots (verse 23\). God also sent the Israelites quail in the Wilderness of Sin (verses 12–13\). In Exodus 17:1, the people of Israel set out from the Wilderness of Sin in stages, arriving next in Rephidim, where there was no water to drink. The people complained again, and God brought water from the rock (verses 2–7\). The only other mention of the Wilderness of Sin is in the book of Numbers as part of the journal Moses kept detailing the Israelite journey from Egypt to their campsite in Moab (Numbers 33:11–12\). The Wilderness of Sin is also called the Desert of Sin. The name Sin has no relation to the English word sin. It is merely the name of the region, although its similarity to the name Sinai and its proximity to Sinai suggest a possible connection. The area may have derived its name from the ancient moon god Sin who was worshiped by desert dwellers.
Who is my neighbor, biblically speaking?	Answer Many Christians talk about the importance of loving God and loving others, and rightly so. Jesus declared these to be the greatest commandments (Mark 12:28–34; see Deuteronomy 6:4–5 and Leviticus 19:18\). The idea that we are to love others is sometimes more specifically stated as the call to love one’s neighbor as oneself. “Who is my neighbor?” becomes a natural question to ask. The command to love one’s neighbor as oneself comes originally from Leviticus 19:18, which says, “Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the Lord.” The Jews of Jesus’ day would largely have understood their “neighbor” to be their fellow Israelites. But God has a broader definition in mind. Loving one’s neighbor is more than simply loving those who are like us and who can love us in return. Luke 10 records an incident in which a [scribe](scribes-Jesus.html), an expert on the Jewish law, tested Jesus about what he must do to inherit eternal life. Jesus turned the question back to the scribe (Luke 10:25–37\). The scribe responded with the command to love God with all of one’s being and to love one’s neighbor as himself. Jesus affirmed the response. But the scribe, wanting to justify himself, asked, “Who is my neighbor?” Jesus replied with the [Parable of the Good Samaritan](parable-Good-Samaritan.html). In the parable, a man traveling from Jerusalem to Jericho is attacked and left for dead on the side of the road. A priest walking by sees the man but passes on the other side of the road. The same happens when a Levite travels through. In essence, two Jews, both of whom were from the priestly line of Israelites and should have known and followed God’s law, failed to show love to their fellow Israelite in need. However, Jesus said, along came a [Samaritan](Samaritans.html), a person generally disdained by the Jews because of cultural and religious differences. And it was the Samaritan who stopped to help the injured man. He cared for the man’s wounds and paid for him to stay at an inn. In short, a person whom the Jews would have considered “unclean” and outside of God’s covenant demonstrated compassion for one who would have considered him an enemy. Jesus asked the scribe which of the three passersby was a neighbor to the injured man. “The expert in the law replied, ‘The one who had mercy on him.’ Jesus told him, ‘Go and do likewise’” (Luke 10:37\). Our neighbor is thus anyone in our proximity with whom we can share God’s love. We are called not only to love those who are similar to us or with whom we are comfortable, but all whom God places in our path. In fact, Jesus said, “I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matthew 5:44–48\). God shows love to all people (John 3:16–18; Romans 1:19–20; 2 Peter 3:9\). As His children (John 1:12\), we are called to do the same. It is important to understand what true love is. We love people by genuinely seeking what is best for them. Loving others does not mean agreeing with everything they say or do, nor does it mean acting in ways that always gain their approval. Loving our neighbors means attending to their needs—both physical and spiritual. We love our neighbors when we, like the Samaritan in Jesus’ parable, have compassion for them and help meet their needs as we are able. We love our neighbors best when we share God’s truth with them. Jesus alone can save (John 14:6; Acts 4:12\), and He alone can meet people’s every need. We love our neighbors, including our neighbors who seem like enemies to us, when we act toward them with a heart that first loves God. We love our neighbors out of an overflow of God’s love for us and as a way of demonstrating our love toward God (1 John 4:7–12; Colossians 4:5–6; 1 Peter 3:15–16\).
What is an acolyte?	Answer An acolyte is a non\-ordained person in the [Roman Catholic Church](Roman-Catholicism.html) who assists with the performance of worship services by lighting candles and carrying out other duties. The [Anglican Church](Anglicans.html) also has acolytes who assist their clergy in the various rituals of the service. The term acolyte derives from the Greek akolouthos, meaning “follower” or “attendant.” Formerly one of the minor orders of the Roman Catholic clergy, an acolyte was historically a candidate for the priesthood who assisted the priests and bishops in performing their tasks. Leadership offices in the Catholic Church are called “orders.” The major orders of the church are deacon, priest, and bishop, whereas the minor orders initially included lector (reader), porter (doorkeeper), exorcist, and acolyte. The minor orders of the clergy were established in the third century, probably by Pope Fabian, with acolyte as the highest minor order in which a man advanced toward ordination as a Catholic priest. As early as the third century, Roman Catholic bishops used acolytes as personal attendants and couriers who delivered their letters, messages, and gifts. By the Middle Ages, acolytes began to assume more liturgical duties, including the oversight of altar lights and [Eucharistic](Holy-Eucharist.html) elements. Today, an acolyte no longer must be a candidate for the priesthood. When Pope Paul VI reformed the orders of the church in 1972, lay people were allowed to become acolytes. The changes abolished the orders of exorcist and porter and made the positions of lector and acolyte “ministries” instead of “orders.” Acolyte is still first in rank of these two lesser ministries of the Roman Catholic Church. Currently, an acolyte’s duties include preparing the elements of the Eucharist, carrying processional crosses and candles, and lighting candles for the Mass. An acolyte may also distribute communion as an auxiliary minister in the Mass and to the sick. In the Catholic Church, the acolytes are men, but some acolyte tasks may be delegated to women. The Bible makes no mention of an order of acolyte. Scripture only identifies two offices of the church: elders (also called pastors or bishops) and deacons. Eastern Orthodox churches have never recognized an office of acolyte. The closest equivalent to an acolyte in Eastern churches is an altar server or altar boy. In Anglican and Episcopal churches, altar servers are often called acolytes. Methodist and Lutheran churches also use altar servers, acolytes, and crucifers to assist the clergy. In denominations that use altar servers and acolytes, the ministry can usually be performed by men, women, and children, although typically not younger than age ten.
Can a Christian worship God using music from a church with unbiblical teachings?	Answer Note – The worship of God involves our whole being and every act we perform. In this article, worship is used to refer to singing in a corporate worship service. There is nothing more important than sound teaching in a church. To many churchgoers, however, the type of [music](Bible-music.html) used in the service is often a high priority. Church leaders sometimes struggle with the task of choosing music that both appeals to the congregation and teaches sound doctrine. More and more often, complicating the issue, church leaders must decide whether to use songs that are finely crafted and theologically sound but come from a church or writer who holds unbiblical views. Many believers strongly believe that songs, even those with doctrinally sound lyrics, should not be used if the writer, composer, or parent ministry has unbiblical teachings. Those with such convictions should follow their conscience. If they feel the need to talk to the church leadership about the issue, they should do so in a spirit of gentleness and humility and seek answers with the goal of peacefully settling the matter. If the answer they receive from the decision\-makers is not acceptable to them, they may quietly submit to the outcome or quietly leave the church. Ephesians 5:19 says that, when we are filled with the Spirit, we will be “speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and songs from the Spirit.” Music is thus an important means of communication in the church. It should go without saying that any song whose lyrics contain false teaching should be rejected. The Spirit will not communicate falsehood. Beyond the doctrinal test, there are several possible complications in considering a song to use in worship: The songwriter has unbiblical beliefs. Horatio Spafford, the writer of “It is Well with my Soul,” didn’t believe in eternal hell or Satan. Francis of Assisi, who wrote “All Creatures of our God and King,” was Roman Catholic. Matthew Bridges, author of “Crown Him with Many Crowns,” converted to Roman Catholicism. Does this mean we must remove those songs from our hymnals? If the lyrics of the song are biblical, does the theological background of the writer matter? More recent controversies don’t usually involve hymns. There are several churches and music groups today who release powerful, even theologically sound worship songs but are known for promoting bad theology in their services and concerts. If the bad theology is not actually expressed in the lyrics of their songs, can we use those songs for our worship services? The songwriter has fallen into sin. What do we do with worship songs written by someone who comes out as a homosexual or who commits adultery and gets divorced? The sin of the composer does not change the quality of the song, but it might change the suitability of the song for use in a church service—depending on the associations the song creates in the minds of a congregation. The lyrics, properly understood, have an unbiblical interpretation. For example, some popular modern songs speak of the Holy Spirit “raining down.” Many Christians assume this is a metaphor, speaking of the nurturing and cleansing blessings the Holy Spirit gives in our day\-to\-day lives. Singers may not realize the songwriter intended something more literal: a fresh visitation of the Spirit who will bring new prophecies and signs and wonders. Which matters more: what the songwriter intended or what the singers intend? Using the song will support an organization teaching bad doctrine. One of the biggest arguments lately is that using a song produced by doctrinally flawed groups will support those churches or music groups and thus help spread their unbiblical beliefs. A popular song could draw people to investigate the church that originally produced it and introduce them to false teaching. In addition, the producing church or music group gets money whenever their songs are downloaded or performed and whenever their lyrics are publicly displayed. The concern becomes less about the song and more about boycotting an organization that doesn’t adhere to orthodox beliefs. Worship must be done [in spirit and in truth](worship-spirit-truth.html). It helps to go back to Jesus’ command that we worship “in spirit and truth” (John 4:23\). To worship “in spirit” means that we worship sincerely, with our whole heart. We can’t do this if the song reminds us of the unbiblical theology of the church or songwriter who produced the song. Also, our worship should be “in truth,” that is, based in a true biblical knowledge of God. Every element of our worship should be theologically sound. If a song’s lyrics reflect questionable or unclear theology, it’s foolishness to use those words to worship God; if we wouldn’t stand in front of the congregation and say it, we shouldn’t sing it. Regarding the choice of songs for worship, as in all things related to the ministry of a church, we should act in wisdom, grace, and humility. We need wisdom in choosing the best songs for our specific congregation and in determining the importance of secondary considerations such as the identity and character of the songwriters and composers. We need grace to avoid becoming judgmental and to help distinguish between personal preference and vital doctrinal matters. We need humility to live according to our convictions and at the same time live in peace with our fellow believers.
What does the Bible say about forgiveness?	Answer The Bible never gives a “dictionary” definition of [forgiveness](what-is-forgiveness.html), but it shows us many examples of it. The greatest of all examples is the forgiveness of God. Although the following passage does not use the word forgive, it describes the concept of God’s forgiveness perfectly: Psalm 103:8–12: The Lord is compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in love. He will not always accuse, nor will he harbor his anger forever; he does not treat us as our sins deserve or repay us according to our iniquities. For as high as the heavens are above the earth, so great is his love for those who fear him; as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us. It is important to note that forgiveness operates in the realm of sin. In the majority of the passages in the Bible that contain the word forgive or forgiveness, sin is mentioned. The following are typical examples: Genesis 50:17: I ask you to forgive your brothers the sins and the wrongs they committed in treating you so badly. Now please forgive the sins of the servants of the God of your father. Exodus 32:32: But now, please forgive their sin. Leviticus 4:35: In this way the priest will make atonement for them for the sin they have committed, and they will be forgiven. 1 Samuel 25:28: Please forgive your servant’s presumption. Matthew 12:31: And so I tell you, every kind of sin and slander can be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Spirit will not be forgiven. Luke 5:20: When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.” For a person to find true forgiveness, he or she must admit the sin. This is called confession. If a person tries to pass off sin as a mere mistake, human failing, or temporary lapse of judgment; or if he or she simply denies the sin altogether, it is a barrier to forgiveness. 1 John 1:8–10: If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness. If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word is not in us. God forgives sin, yet this does not mean that He simply “looks the other way” or “sweeps it under the rug.” The penalty for sin is death (Romans 6:23\), and that penalty must be paid. In the Old Testament, God allowed for a sacrificial animal to take the place of the sinner. Leviticus 5:15–16 says, “When anyone is unfaithful to the Lord by sinning unintentionally in regard to any of the Lord’s holy things, they are to bring to the Lord as a penalty a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value in silver, according to the sanctuary shekel. It is a guilt offering. They must make restitution for what they have failed to do in regard to the holy things, pay an additional penalty of a fifth of its value and give it all to the priest. The priest will make atonement for them with the ram as a guilt offering, and they will be forgiven.” The writer of Hebrews observes, “The law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Hebrews 9:22\). However, the blood of sacrificial animals did not actually pay for sin. It simply postponed the judgment until a better sacrifice could be offered to pay the full penalty of sin and make forgiveness possible. Hebrews 10 explains this in depth, but the following excerpts from that chapter outline the flow of the argument: The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves. For this reason it can never, by the same sacrifices repeated endlessly year after year, make perfect those who draw near to worship. Otherwise, would they not have stopped being offered? For the worshipers would have been cleansed once for all, and would no longer have felt guilty for their sins. But those sacrifices are an annual reminder of sins. It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins. (Hebrews 10:1–4\) Day after day every priest stands and performs his religious duties; again and again he offers the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But when this priest had offered for all time one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God. (Hebrews 10:11–12\) “This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds.” Then he adds: “Their sins and lawless acts I will remember no more.” And where these have been forgiven, sacrifice for sin is no longer necessary. (Hebrews 10:16–18\) In order for God to forgive us, Jesus gave Himself as the sacrifice for sin. Jesus alluded to that sacrifice at the Last Supper when He told His disciples, “This is my [blood of the covenant](blood-of-Christ.html), which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26:28\). After the resurrection, the apostles carried the message of forgiveness through Jesus Christ throughout the world, preaching to both Jews and Gentiles: Acts 10:43: All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name. Acts 13:38: Therefore, my friends, I want you to know that through Jesus the forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you. Ephesians 1:7: In \[Christ] we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace. So God forgives people on the basis of the sacrifice of Christ. The only requirement is that sinful people confess their sin, turn from it, and trust in Jesus Christ as Savior. Once a person has experienced the forgiveness of God, he or she is then able (and responsible) to forgive others. “Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you” (Colossians 3:13\). In fact, those who refuse to forgive betray the fact that they do not understand how much of their own sin they need to have forgiven. Christians should be willing to forgive people who have sinned against them. Every person has wronged God far more than they have been wronged by other people. Jesus illustrates the point in Matthew 18:21–35: Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but [seventy\-seven times](seventy-times-seven.html). “Therefore, the kingdom of heaven is like a king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. As he began the settlement, a man who owed him ten thousand bags of gold was brought to him. Since he was not able to pay, the master ordered that he and his wife and his children and all that he had be sold to repay the debt. “At this the servant fell on his knees before him. ‘Be patient with me,’ he begged, ‘and I will pay back everything.’ The servant’s master took pity on him, canceled the debt and let him go. “But when that servant went out, he found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred silver coins. He grabbed him and began to choke him. ‘Pay back what you owe me!’ he demanded. “His fellow servant fell to his knees and begged him, ‘Be patient with me, and I will pay it back.’ “But he refused. Instead, he went off and had the man thrown into prison until he could pay the debt. When the other servants saw what had happened, they were outraged and went and told their master everything that had happened. “Then the master called the servant in. ‘You wicked servant,’ he said, ‘I canceled all that debt of yours because you begged me to. Shouldn’t you have had mercy on your fellow servant just as I had on you?’ In anger his master handed him over to the jailers to be tortured, until he should pay back all he owed. “This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.” We often hear the phrase [forgive and forget](forgive-forget.html), and this can be misleading. As a rejoinder to this phrase, sometimes we hear, “I’ll forgive, but I will never forget.” To forgive and forget does not mean that a person who has been wronged develops some kind of sanctified amnesia. A person who has been abused will never forget that it happened. A person who has suffered from an adulterous spouse will always remember that experience. A parent who has had a child abducted will probably think about that crime every day he or she spends on earth. Yet, it is possible for each of these people who have been sinned against to forgive and also to forget, as long as the biblical definition of forget is in view. In the Bible, remembering and forgetting do not have to do with retention of information in the brain. In Genesis 8:1, after the flood, “God remembered Noah.” Does this imply that for a while God had forgotten about Noah, misplaced him among the flood waters, and then one day He remembered and thought He had better check on him? No, the biblical concept of remembering has to do with “choosing to act,” and forgetting means “refusing to act” on the basis of something. When the Bible says God “remembered” Noah, it means that God chose to act on Noah’s behalf and sent a wind to help the waters recede more rapidly. God promises that, under the New Covenant, “I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more” (Jeremiah 31:34; cf. Hebrews 8:12; 10:17\). God does not forget that people have sinned, but, when He forgives, He chooses not to act on the basis of those sins. It is similar to the sentiment expressed in 1 Corinthians 13:5 where “love keeps no record of wrongs.” In the phrase forgive and forget, the two terms are really synonyms. Both mean that the person who has forgiven will not continue to hold that sin against the wrongdoer or take it into account in future interactions. A person may remember that it happened, but he or she can choose not to act on it—that is biblical forgetting. Many wonder about forgiving people who have sinned but have not confessed, repented, or asked for forgiveness. Sometimes in court, the victims of a crime will get to speak to the perpetrator before the sentence is passed. Often the victims will tell how the crime has impacted them and ask the judge to impose the strictest sentence. But, on occasion, the victim will say to the perpetrator, “I forgive you.” Is this forgiveness valid if the convicted criminal has not confessed and asked for forgiveness? The answer is both “yes” and “no.” On one hand, the victim often forgives the criminal so that he or she will not be eaten up by hatred for the criminal. The forgiveness granted by the victim in court does not absolve the criminal from any legal penalties, so the state is still right to prosecute. On the other hand, God forgives people when they confess their sin and ask for forgiveness; forgiveness only comes through faith in Christ, which involves a spiritual transformation. In the courtroom example, even if the victim “forgives” the criminal, there can never be the establishment or restoration of a relationship unless the criminal confesses his sin and actually seeks forgiveness. The goal of biblical forgiveness is not only to benefit the victim but to restore the sinner. This cannot happen without the acknowledgment of sin on the sinner’s part. Therefore, in some cases the one who has been sinned against is right not to “let it go” until the sinner has asked for forgiveness. Good parents should be willing to forgive once their wayward child has confessed and asked for forgiveness, but they are right to withhold forgiveness until their child has taken the steps necessary to allow the reconciliation. It would be foolish for a father to simply forgive his teenage son for disobeying his rules (and the law) by drinking and driving if the son does not acknowledge that what he did was wrong. However, the father should be willing to forgive when the conditions are right. In some situations, granting unrequested forgiveness cheapens the concept and ignores the seriousness of the offense. A person should always be willing to forgive every time forgiveness is requested, as Jesus taught. It goes without saying that on some of those occasions the request may be insincere, or, even if sincere, the person will commit the same offense against us again at a later time. After all, isn’t this what we do to God, and isn’t that how He forgives us? In some cases the one who has been sinned against is right to simply “let it go,” even if forgiveness has not been requested, and in other cases the one sinned against needs to wait until the offending party has confessed and asked for forgiveness, so that the relationship can be restored. This is the principle behind [church discipline](church-discipline.html), as outlined in Matthew 18:15–17\. If the confrontation of the sinner brings about confession, then reconciliation and forgiveness are offered. If the confrontation is unsuccessful, excommunication from the church is the final result. As a general rule regarding petty slights and offenses in the family and in the church, a person should let them go—“[turn the other cheek](turn-other-cheek.html),” as Jesus put it (Matthew 5:39\). However, if the offense is such that turning the cheek is not possible, the offended party is obligated to go talk to the offender about it. Under no circumstance does one have the right to harbor [resentment](Bible-resentment.html), nurture [bitterness](Bible-bitterness.html), or [gossip](gossip-Bible.html) about the offense. Here are some questions to ponder in relation to forgiveness: • Have I confessed my sin and received God’s forgiveness? • Is there anyone whom I have sinned against and from whom I need to ask forgiveness? • Is there anyone who has sinned against me and has asked me for forgiveness, but I have refused to forgive? • Is there anyone I am holding a grudge against for past wrongs? • If there is an unresolved issue, will I simply “let it go,” or will I go talk to the offender about it? (Continuing to hold a grudge is not a biblical option!) • Would I be willing to forgive if the offender asked me for forgiveness?
What does the Bible say about littering?	Answer Littering is the leaving of trash or other discarded items in places where they do not belong for someone else to dispose of. The Bible does not mention littering and never says, “Thou shalt not litter.” At the same time, it is abundantly clear that littering is not good and that a believer should not be a “litterbug.” Litter destroys natural beauty and makes roadways, parks, and public places unsightly. It can also injure wildlife, as animals can be strangled, trapped, poisoned, and suffocated by human litter. Litter attracts rats and other vermin. Litter is unsanitary and can spread disease. Littering is an arrogant and irresponsible choice that shows a total disregard for others who must endure it or clean it up. When we toss a paper sack or empty soda can out the window of a moving car, we are pretending that it magically disappears. Out of sight, out of mind. But when we are in the car behind litterer, we have a different viewpoint. When we’ve looked forward to an outing in nature or a day at the park with children, litter mars the experience. When we visit a rose garden or picnic under a stately pine, the sight and smell of scattered, decomposing trash is offensive. In recent years, litter has become more dangerous, as it commonly contains discarded needles, condoms, and drug paraphernalia. Jesus’ [Golden Rule](Golden-Rule.html) applies to litterers. He said, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” (Matthew 7:12\). Imagine strangers coming onto your lawn and emptying their kitchen trash can and then walking away. Would we be okay with that? Would we joyfully wave goodbye to them as we started picking up their litter? Of course not. We don’t want to find other people’s trash where it doesn’t belong; therefore, we should not throw our trash where it doesn’t belong, either. Public parks, roadways, and nature trails do not belong to individuals but to everyone. So, if we throw trash there, we are littering on someone else’s property just as much as if we threw our trash in their front yard. Philippians 2:3–4 says, “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.” A person littering does not look out for the interests of others. Littering is a selfish act of short\-term convenience and the avoidance of responsibility. It is also illegal in all fifty states of the U.S. For all these reasons, the Bible stands against the practice of littering. As believers, we do more than shun the wrongdoing; we actively engage in righteous acts. Many churches and Christian groups regularly participate in neighborhood clean\-up days, join in picking up trash in parks, or volunteer for an Adopt A Highway or Sponsor A Highway litter removal program. Littering happens, but conscientious Christians will help to clean up the mess.
When did Mary die?	Answer The Bible last mentions [Mary](virgin-Mary.html), the mother of Jesus, when the Holy Spirit came upon her (and many others) on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:1–4\). After that, we hear nothing else about Mary in the Bible. Mary most likely lived out her remaining years in [John’s](life-John-Apostle.html) home, according to John 19:27\. We don’t know where exactly John lived. He may have had a home in Jerusalem or Ephesus. Some have suggested that, since it is probable that John oversaw many of the churches in Asia Minor, Mary moved to Ephesus with John and was part of the Ephesian church where Timothy pastored (1 Timothy 1:3\), but we cannot know for certain. One tradition says that Mary died in AD 43 and another in AD 48, but we have no way of confirming either date. Traditions and legends try to fill in more detail about what could have happened to Mary in the years that followed [Pentecost](day-Pentecost.html). One legend says that Mary never lived in Ephesus but resided in a small stone house built over a spring on a hill on the road outside Jerusalem. According to the legend, Mary’s house included a prayer chapel and an alcove in which she placed a cross. Behind her house, per the legend, Mary erected memorial stones marking various [stations of the cross](stations-of-the-cross.html). Another legend says that [Joseph of Arimathea](Joseph-of-Arimathea.html), sometime after Jesus’ crucifixion, took Mary to Glastonbury in southern England. There she lived out her remaining days and was buried—along with the [Holy Grail](holy-grail.html). None of these legends are corroborated by any historical evidence. In the early 1800s, Catholic mystic Catherine Emmerich had a vision in which she claimed to have seen Mary’s final minutes. In her vision, Catherine describes the apostles’ presence at Mary’s deathbed, Peter’s administering of [the Mass](Holy-Eucharist.html) and [extreme unction](extreme-unction.html) to Mary, her death (at the same hour as Jesus had died), her spirit’s ascension into heaven (accompanied by many souls released from [purgatory](purgatory.html)), her burial, and her body’s [assumption](Assumption-Mary.html) the following night. We have absolutely no reason to believe anything that Catherine Emmerich claims to have seen in her extra\-biblical (and very Catholic) visions. In the end, we must accept the fact that we do not have any information concerning Mary’s later life or her death. The focus of the Bible is Jesus’ death and resurrection and His continuing work in the world through the Holy Spirit. Mary’s story, although more than incidental to the story of Christ, is subordinate.
What does hallowed be thy name in the Lord’s Prayer mean?	Answer The [Lord’s Prayer](Lords-prayer.html), recorded in Matthew 6, begins with, “Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name” (Matthew 6:9\). To hallow something is to make it holy or separate it or sanctify it. Jesus taught His followers to pray that God the Father would “hallow” His name. Significantly, this request comes first. It is of primary importance for God to hallow His name. In what way do we want God to hallow His name? In what way is His name to be set apart or made holy? One writer explains it this way: “When Jesus petitions God to hallow his name, he is asking that God act in such a way that he visibly demonstrates his holiness and his glory” (Albert Mohler in The Prayer That Turns the World Upside Down: The Lord’s Prayer as a Manifesto for Revolution, p. 61\). God demonstrates His holiness in the world by creating a holy people who will call on His name, proclaim the gospel, and accomplish good works (Ephesians 2:10\). No one likes to have his or her name forgotten, misspelled, or mispronounced. Our names are part of our identity and individual worth. We value having a “good name,” that is, a blameless reputation. In a similar way, God’s name speaks of His identity, His character, and His actions. When David says, “He guides me along the right paths for his name’s sake,” he is referring to God’s action of hallowing His name in the way He guides us (Psalm 23:3; cf. Isaiah 48:9–11 and Ezekiel 20:14\). God’s name—His character and reputation—must be set apart as holy in this world, and that is what Jesus teaches us to pray for. The request “hallowed be your name” comes first in the Lord’s Prayer. Right away, Jesus removes the focus from us and turns our attention to God. It’s about Him, His holiness, and His work in the world. Jesus taught us to begin our prayers by recognizing the God to whom we pray. He is a loving Father who invites us into His presence. He genuinely cares for us. God is holy and worthy of all honor, and our first priority is to pray that the world would see how holy and glorious He is. On a different occasion, Jesus prayed for His followers: “My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of it. Sanctify them by the truth; your word is truth. As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. For them I sanctify myself, that they too may be truly sanctified” (John 17:15–19\). The word sanctify in [Jesus’ High Priestly Prayer](Jesus-high-priestly-prayer.html) is a translation of the same Greek word translated “hallowed” in Matthew 6:9\. Jesus prayed this specifically for His disciples, but also for those who would believe in Him through their message—meaning all who have put their faith in Jesus Christ (John 17:20\). As children of God (John 1:12\), we are called to be holy as He is holy (1 Peter 1:16\). First Peter 3:15 tells us to “in your hearts revere Christ as Lord.” Revere in this verse is another translation of the Greek word for “hallowed.” One of the ways in which we hallow God’s name is to recognize Jesus as Lord and live our lives to honor God. We incline our hearts toward Him, put our hope in Him, obey Him, and share about Him with others. May we follow Jesus’ model prayer, and may “hallowed be your name” be the true desire of our hearts.
What is a yokefellow in the Bible?	Answer A yokefellow is a close companion, co\-worker, or mate. The word is used only once in the New Testament, in Philippians 4:3\. The King James Version renders the verse this way: “And I entreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which labored with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and with other my fellow laborers, whose names are in the book of life.” Newer translations use words such as companion (NIV) or partner (NLT) instead of yokefellow. Since Paul does not identify his yokefellow by name, we can only speculate as to whom he entreats. Some suspect it was [Epaphroditus](Epaphroditus-in-the-Bible.html) or possibly [Luke](Luke-in-the-Bible.html). Since Paul never uses this term elsewhere in his letters to describe any of his other fellow laborers, we can assume it was addressed to someone with whom he had an especially strong bond. Whoever Paul’s yokefellow was, he understood the message. The origin of the word yokefellow helps us understand the meaning that goes beyond our English words companion or friend. A yokefellow is literally “one of two fellows in a yoke.” Paul uses the “yoke” metaphor in 2 Corinthians 6:14 when he warns Christians not to become “[unequally yoked](unequally-yoked.html) together with unbelievers” (BSB). A yoke was a heavy wooden frame that was fastened across the shoulders of horses or oxen, harnessing them to a wagon, plow, or cart. The animals pushed against the yoke as they moved forward, pulling the load behind them. Owners sought to yoke two animals of similar size and ability so they would pull evenly. Mismatched yokefellows resulted in overwork for the larger animal, which carried the greater portion of the load. Yokefellows struggling against each other also resulted in less work being done. A yokefellow must share equally in the common work. This idea of co\-laboring and one\-mindedness seems to be what Paul meant when he addressed his brother or sister in Philippi as a “yokefellow.” This was a person who worked to accomplish the apostle’s goals in the Philippian church. Paul and the yokefellow were harnessed together in service to the Lord, yearning, praying, and suffering for the souls of men and women. This person was obviously a “close companion,” as most Bible versions have it, but a yokefellow would have been a step beyond that. Companions can support us, pray for us, and encourage us, but a yokefellow is in the trenches with us. A yokefellow is ready to labor alongside us. A yokefellow feels our pain, suffers when we suffer, and rejoices when we rejoice (Romans 12:15\). This sharing of life goals is one reason Paul also warns us not to become yokefellows with unbelievers. We will not be pulling in the same direction. We have different masters and listen to different voices. It is vitally important that Christians, especially those involved in ministry, have a yokefellow or two who help carry the load. [Loneliness](loneliness.html) and [burnout](Bible-burnout.html) are constant threats to those God has called into His service. But, as Elijah learned at his point of burnout, he was not alone (1 Kings 19:14–18\). God had already selected a yokefellow for him named Elisha. When Jesus sent out the disciples to minister, He did not send them out alone. He sent them two by two, yokefellows who could keep each other encouraged and on track (Mark 6:7\). When we take the time to cultivate deep spiritual friendships with those who understand our calling, we find that yokefellows help us fulfill all God has given us to do.
What does it mean that without vision the people perish?	Answer The King James Version of Proverbs 29:18 says, “Where there is no vision, the people perish: but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.” Some have used this verse to emphasize the importance of vision in [leadership](Christian-leadership.html). Without a long\-term plan—without a vision—people are doomed to wander aimlessly. Of course, it is true that having an idea of where one is headed helps in getting there. Proverbs 29:18 is not talking about having a business or ministry vision. Other translations of the Bible help clarify the point of Proverbs 29:18 for modern readers. The NIV puts it this way: “Where there is no revelation, people cast off restraint; but blessed is the one who heeds wisdom’s instruction.” The ESV has, “Where there is no prophetic vision the people cast off restraint, but blessed is he who keeps the law.” The “vision” in this verse refers to a divine communication as from a [dream](dreams-visions-Bible.html), revelation, or prophecy. The same Hebrew word used in Proverbs 29:18 is found in 1 Samuel 3:1 in the context of the rarity of the word of the Lord and the infrequency of prophetic visions. It is also used to introduce the prophetic books of Isaiah and Obadiah and several of the visions of Daniel. Lack of vision, then, is a lack of God’s revelatory word. Proverbs 29:18 says that “the people perish” where there is no vision. The word translated “perish” or “cast off restraint” in the original means “to loosen” and thus “to expose or uncover.” The same Hebrew word is used in Exodus 32:25 during the golden calf incident: “Moses saw that the people were running wild and that Aaron had let them get out of control and so become a laughingstock to their enemies” (emphasis added). It is also used in Leviticus regarding uncovering one’s head or letting one’s hair hang loose (Leviticus 10:6; 13:45; 21:10\). Other proverbs use the same word to denote “ignoring” or “neglecting” instruction (Proverbs 1:25; 8:33; 13:18; 15:32\) and “avoiding” the path of the wicked (Proverbs 4:15\). With this we understand that, without the Word of God, people are “loose”; that is, they go their own way. They live without restraint. Ultimately, living in such a way will lead to death because to ignore God’s way is to ignore the way of life (Romans 6:23\). So what is the remedy to such lethal waywardness? The next part of Proverbs 29:18 tells us: “Blessed is the one who heeds wisdom’s instruction.” We are blessed when we keep God’s directives. Psalm 19 elaborates on the perfection and trustworthiness of God’s Word. His precepts “are right, giving joy to the heart. The commands of the LORD are radiant, giving light to the eyes” (Psalm 19:8\). David, the psalmist here, goes on to describe God’s decrees as “more precious than gold” and “sweeter than honey” (verse 10\). He writes, “By them your servant is warned; in keeping them there is great reward” (verse 11\). Lest anyone be confused, this is not a call to [legalism](Bible-Christian-legalism.html). Life is not found in our ability to obey a list of dos and don’ts. Within Psalm 19 we see indications of relationship with God. David talks about the fear of the Lord being pure (verse 9\), he calls himself God’s servant (verse 13\), and he calls God his “LORD, my Rock and my Redeemer” (verse 14\). When Jesus named the greatest commandment, He referred to the command to love God (Mark 12:28–34\). Our obedience to God and our keeping of His Word flow from a relationship in which we are loved by God and we love Him in return (1 John 4:7–10\). Hebrews 1:1–2 says, “In the past God spoke to our ancestors through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son, whom he appointed heir of all things, and through whom also he made the universe.” Jesus has come into the world as the [living Word](Jesus-Bible-Word-God.html) of God (John 1:1, 14\). God has also given us the written Word, the Bible. When we fail to read God’s Word and live it out in our lives, we become people “without vision.” When we ignore God’s Word, we begin to live without restraint to our own peril. Conversely, when we heed God’s Word, we are blessed. Jesus said, “As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you. Now remain in my love. If you keep my commands, you will remain in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commands and remain in his love. I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and that your joy may be complete” (John 15:9–11\). God has given us His Word, and He calls us to be faithful to it. In keeping God’s Word, we will find joy in Him.
What does the Bible say about adultery?	Answer The word adultery is etymologically related to the word adulterate, which means “to render something poorer in quality by adding another substance.” Adultery is the adulteration of marriage by the addition of a third person. Adultery is voluntary sexual activity between a married person and someone other than his or her spouse. The Bible begins its teaching on marriage with the pattern of Adam and Eve: one man and one woman, husband and wife, united by God (Genesis 2:24, Mark 10:7–9\). Adultery is forbidden by the [seventh commandment](you-shall-not-commit-adultery.html): “You shall not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:14\). The fact that the prohibition is simply stated with no explanation indicates that the meaning of adultery was well understood at the time Moses gave the law. Scripture is consistent in the prohibition against adultery. In spite of the clarity of the original pattern of marriage and the prohibition against adultery, sinful humanity has developed ways to attempt to blur the lines of morality. [Polygamy](polygamy.html) is one way the prohibition against adultery has been to some extent circumvented. Polygamy is not technically adultery, although it does adulterate God’s original plan for marriage. In the Old Testament, polygamy was allowed by God but never endorsed by Him. Polygamy was not considered adultery because, although a third person (or perhaps a fourth, fifth, etc.) was added to the marriage, the additional women were legally included in the marriage. A polygamist who engaged in sexual activity with someone other than his legal wives was still committing adultery. Since polygamy is generally illegal in modern countries today, no third person can be legally added to a marriage. Divorce and [remarriage](remarriage-adultery.html) is another way that the prohibition against adultery has been circumvented. If a married man has an affair, he is committing adultery. However, if he divorces his wife and marries the other woman, then he maintains his “legal” footing. In most modern societies, this has become the norm. Jesus puts both of these “strategies” to rest: “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery” (Luke 16:18\). And, “Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another woman commits adultery against her. And if she divorces her husband and marries another man, she commits adultery” (Mark 10:11–12\). According to Jesus, divorce does not circumvent the prohibition against adultery. If a married man sees another woman, desires her sexually, divorces his wife, and marries the other woman, he still commits adultery. Since the marriage bond is intended to last a lifetime, divorce does not release one from the responsibility to be faithful to the original spouse. (On a related note, we recognize that in some cases Scripture allows divorce, and, when divorce is allowed, remarriage is also allowed without being considered adulterous.) Jesus carried the prohibition against adultery even further than the Mosaic Law: “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:27–28\). So, even if a man tries to “legally” avoid adultery by seeking divorce, he is already guilty because of the lust in his heart that drove him to such measures. If a man “legally” brings another woman into the marriage, making it a polygamous marriage, he is still guilty of adultery because of the lust in his heart that motivated him to marry another wife. Even if a man or woman simply indulges in lustful thoughts (pornography is especially problematic), then he or she is committing adultery even if no extramarital physical contact ever takes place. This explanation by Jesus avoids all of the nuances about “how far is too far” with someone other than a spouse, and it avoids the need to define what “sex” really is. Lust, not sex, is the threshold of adultery. Proverbs 6 gives some stern warnings against committing adultery, giving “correction and instruction . . . keeping you from your neighbor’s wife” (verses 23–24\). Solomon says, “Do not lust in your heart after her beauty or let her captivate you with her eyes. . . . Another man’s wife preys on your very life. Can a man scoop fire into his lap without his clothes being burned? Can a man walk on hot coals without his feet being scorched? So is he who sleeps with another man’s wife; no one who touches her will go unpunished” (verses 25–29\). Adultery is deadly serious and brings God’s consequences. “A man who commits adultery has no sense; whoever does so destroys himself” (Proverbs 6:32; cf. 1 Corinthians 6:18 and Hebrews 13:4\). A person who lives in unrepentant adultery gives evidence that he or she has not truly come to know Christ. But adultery is not unforgiveable, either. Any sin that a Christian commits can be forgiven when the Christian repents, and any sin committed by an unbeliever can be forgiven when that person comes to Christ in faith. “Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers . . . will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God” (1 Corinthians 6:9–11\). Notice that in the Corinthian church there were former adulterers, but they had been washed clean from their sin, sanctified, and justified.
What is the meaning of importunity?	Answer Importunity is urgent persistence. An importunate person is one who persists in asking for something to the point of being troublesome. Jesus once posed a [scenario](parable-persistent-neighbor.html): suppose a man goes to a friend’s house at night and asks for some loaves of bread to feed an unexpected guest. The friend refuses, saying his family is already asleep and he doesn’t want to wake them. But the man doesn’t give up; he keeps knocking on the door. Finally, Jesus says, “Though he will not rise and give him, because he is his friend, yet because of his importunity he will rise and give him as many as he needeth” (Luke 11:8, KJV). This was Jesus’ way of illustrating the need for persistent—even importunate—prayer, prayer that could qualify as blatant begging or, as the NIV has it, shows “shameless audacity.” Although the word importunity is not used in Luke 18:1–8, the principle of persistent prayer is taught there as well. It was because of the widow’s shameless begging that the wicked judge finally relented and gave her justice. The widow refused to take “no” for an answer and kept badgering the judge beyond the place where most people would stop. Jesus’ advocacy of importunity challenges our understanding of prayer. It would seem to us that importunity in prayer is not necessary, since God has already heard our prayers (Psalm 34:17; 69:33; 1 John 5:14\). Yet Jesus says that the Father wants our prayers to be persistent. Importunity reveals sincerity and heartfelt desire. The Bible also speaks of importunity in Proverbs 6:3\. In the context of a person trying to free himself from a rash vow or foolish obligation, Scripture says, “Do this then, my son, and deliver yourself; / Since you have come into the hand of your neighbor, / Go, [humble yourself](how-to-humble-yourself.html), and importune your neighbor” (NASB). Other Bible translations say we should “plead urgently,” “press your plea,” and “beg” to free ourselves from foolish vows. Importunity may have value to the Lord because of the [humility](Bible-humility.html) required to have that trait. When we pray with importunity, we have abandoned any thought that we can help ourselves. Like the widow in Jesus’ parable, we throw ourselves on the mercy of God, the true Judge, and plead from a place of desperation. Importunity is the type of begging a mother would do with a kidnapper who is threatening her child. She will plead earnestly and shamelessly—whatever it takes to free her child. She has left behind any attempts to rescue him by herself. The situation is beyond her, but giving up is not an option. So she pleads with importunity. When we pray that way, we demonstrate the kind of faith that moves mountains (Mark 11:23\). Jesus applauded the importunity of a Canaanite woman in Mathew 15:22–28\. The woman refused to take Jesus’ first, rather [off\-putting answer](Canaanite-woman-dog.html). In a manner of speaking, she “[wrestled with the Lord](Jacob-wrestling-with-God.html)” until He granted her petition (see Genesis 32:24–28\). God honors this kind of wrestling with Him because it is rooted in faith—and Jesus commends the woman’s great faith in verse 28\. If we do not believe He can or will do what we ask, we give up and turn away. Faith prompts importunity. Proper importunate prayers are those that are just, honorable, and within God’s plan for us. When we pray with importunity, in His will, He promises to hear and answer (1 John 5:14–16; John 16:23–24\). God created us for relationship and fellowship with Him. Importunate prayers require that we stay at His feet, pleading our case and basking in His presence. Praying with importunity keeps our focus on God and not on our ability to resolve the situation. When we seek Him with all our hearts, He promises that we will find Him (Jeremiah 29:13\).
How should a Christian act toward a friend who comes out of the closet (as gay or trans)?	Answer As Christians living in today’s culture, it is increasingly likely that we will have some friends come out of the closet as “gay” or “trans,” and we need to respond appropriately. We must realize certain facts about God and the human sin nature so that we will have a proper perspective toward others, including friends who come out of the closet. As Christians, we recognize that all people need love and grace, including friends who come out of the closet. And, as Christians, we are [ambassadors](ambassador-for-Christ.html) for Christ (2 Corinthians 5:20\). Through Christ, we have a relationship with the living God. We have the hope of eternal life, and we can share the offer of eternal life with others. Our response to a friend who comes out of the closet as gay or trans differs depending on whether the friend claims to be a Christian. First, we’ll consider what the Bible would have us do when an unbelieving friend comes out: We should not cut ties with unsaved friends who come out of the closet as gay. Jesus freely associated with sinners, including prostitutes and the pariahs of His society (see Luke 5:30; 7:34\). So, Jesus’ response to (as yet) unrepentant sinners was to reach out to them and share the love of God with them. Following our Lord’s example, we should reach out to friends who come out. We should talk about their experiences, hopes, dreams, fears, etc. We should listen even as we point to Christ. We should avoid making assumptions. Our unsaved friends who come out as gay should know beyond a doubt that we love them. Of course, love is not synonymous with approval of wrong actions. Friends who come out of the closet as gay should understand that we share the Bible’s position on [homosexuality](homosexuality-Bible.html), viz., that homosexual behavior is sinful (see Romans 1:26–27\). In all our conversations, we should follow Peter’s command: “In your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience” (1 Peter 3:15–16\). So, we are to present the truth about God, sin, and salvation, and we make the presentation with “gentleness and respect.” Above all, we honor the Lord Jesus Christ. In Jesus’ encounter with the [woman at the well](woman-at-the-well.html), He modeled godliness in His method, His manner, and His message (John 4:1–42\). The Samaritan woman Jesus addressed was not homosexual, but she was guilty of another sexual sin: she had married five husbands and was currently living with a man to whom she was not married. Jesus entered into dialogue with her, connecting with her “at the level of their shared humanity” (www.focusonthefamily.com/family\-qa/interacting\-with\-a\-gay\-identified\-friend, accessed 1/24/24\), asking her for a drink (verse 7\). He goes on to discuss her situation, pointing out her need for living water and a relationship with the Messiah. As a result of their conversation, an entire Samaritan village was evangelized, and many came to faith in Christ (verses 39–42\). Like Jesus, we should strive for godliness in method, manner, and message. When an unbelieving friend comes out as gay, we should use our relationship with that friend as a basis to show true care and concern. We should remember that he or she is a person, not a project. As we preserve the relationship, we can build trust. In the Holy Spirit’s own time, the door will be open for deeper conversations. Those deeper conversations with friends who come out of the closet may involve a discussion of the difference between gay attraction, gay identification, and gay behavior. Gay attraction (homosexual feelings) may not be a choice but rather a temptation causing a struggle. Gay identification (making peace with the feelings) and gay behavior (engaging in homosexual sex), on the other hand, are choices one makes. Our friends struggling in this area should know that feelings do not have to lead to either identification or behavior. Second, we’ll consider what the Bible would have us do when a friend who is a professed believer comes out: In the case of a person who claims to be a Christian coming out of the closet, the New Testament gives this guideline: “You must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people” (1 Corinthians 5:11\). John Piper calls this “holy ostracism” and comments further: “This \[verse] is describing a person who, without any sense that his Christianity is being imperiled, or his soul, is acting out homosexual desire in sexually active ways” (www.desiringgod.org/interviews/how\-should\-christian\-friends\-respond\-to\-a\-friend\-who\-has\-entered\-a\-homosexual\-relationship\-and\-moved\-to\-a\-church\-that\-accepts\-it, accessed 1/24/24\). So, when a person claiming to be a Christian chooses to live one of several specific sinful lifestyles—Paul lists six sins—the rest of the church is to withhold fellowship from that person. It does not suggest rudeness, discourtesy, or incivility. “Holy ostracism” communicates that the level of fellowship has changed. Believers are to avoid doing anything that would imply that they regard the sinning person as a Christian brother or sister. As long as the friend claims to be both a practicing Christian and a practicing gay person, there’s no hanging out together. Spending free time with each other is a thing of the past. The reason for the “holy ostracism” should be clearly and lovingly communicated to the friend. The goal is to bring about repentance and reconciliation. In any case, when a friend comes out of the closet, we should pray earnestly, consistently, and in faith. Pray “in the hope that God may grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 2:25\). Be filled with the Holy Spirit and exhibit the [fruit of the Spirit](fruit-of-the-Holy-Spirit.html). “Revere Christ as Lord” (1 Peter 3:15\). And take care that your “conversation \[is] always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone” (Colossians 4:6\).
What does it mean that Esther was appointed “for such a time as this”?	Answer [Esther](life-Esther.html) was a Jewish maiden who was taken into the royal court of [King Xerxes](Xerxes-in-the-Bible.html) and eventually chosen to be queen of Persia. She was integral in delivering the Jews from destruction, an event celebrated in the [Feast of Purim](Feast-of-Purim.html). The Bible makes it clear that Esther was placed in her influential position “for such a time as this”—God’s purpose was accomplished through Esther in the perilous time in which she lived. Esther had been one of the “beautiful young virgins” from whom King Xerxes could select a new queen (Esther 2:2\). Esther had been orphaned as a child, and her cousin, [Mordecai](Mordecai-in-the-Bible.html), cared for her. In adherence to Mordecai’s instructions, Esther did not reveal to anyone that she was a Jew. In time, Esther won the favor of King Xerxes, and he crowned her queen (Esther 2:17\). Sometime later, Xerxes gave [Haman the Agagite](Haman-the-Agagite.html) great honor and commanded the officials at his gate to kneel in Haman’s presence and pay him homage. Mordecai, who worked in the gate, refused to do so. This so enraged Haman that he sought to destroy all of Mordecai’s people—the Jews—and obtained the king’s permission to carry out the genocide (Esther 3\). When the edict against the Jews was issued, Mordecai mourned in sackcloth and ashes. Queen Esther, as yet unaware of the plot against her people, heard about her cousin’s mourning and sent a eunuch in her service, named Hathak, to inquire the reason for Mordecai’s sorrow. Mordecai gave Hathak a copy of the edict and asked him to tell Esther to go to King Xerxes and beg for mercy on behalf of her people. Esther was reluctant to approach the king, because it was against the law to come before the king’s presence uninvited—on pain of death. The eunuch reported Esther’s response to Mordecai. Then Mordecai sent word back: “Do not think that because you are in the king’s house you alone of all the Jews will escape. For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place, but you and your father’s family will perish. And who knows but that you have come to your royal position for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:13–14\). Mordecai, in urging Esther to take action, points her to a higher purpose: “Who knows whether you have not attained royalty for such a time as this?” (Esther 4:14, NASB). He frames it as a possibility for her to consider: could it be that God has placed Esther in her royal position precisely because of the clear and present danger the Jews are in? It was just such a time—a time of crisis, a time of existential threat—that the Jews needed her. It was no accident that Esther became queen of Persia; she was there for a reason. Mordecai was right. Esther was indeed on the throne “for such a time as this,” and she became God’s instrument of deliverance for the Jews in Persia. Sometimes we miss the importance of Esther’s obedience in God’s plan. Mordecai presented Esther with a choice. She could choose to recognize her providential placing in the royal court and opt to risk her own life in an effort to save her people. Or she could choose to remain silent, try to protect herself, and hope for the best. Either way, Mordecai knew that God would rescue His people. Esther chose the path of joy and blessing when she agreed to play her role in God’s plan. We serve the God who “works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will” (Ephesians 1:11\). As the experience of Esther shows, God uses people in fulfilling His purpose. No matter what the situation, God has His instruments of deliverance and victory. “For such a time as this,” God has at the ready brave, committed, obedient individuals who will step out in faith and accomplish His work. In ancient Persia, Haman was doing the devil’s work, but there was Esther to counter it. God had set the board, and He moved His queen to checkmate the enemy. “He changes times and seasons; he deposes kings and raises up others” (Daniel 2:21\). We, like Esther, have meaningful choices to make. We may not have as much power and influence as Esther had, but God has still placed us where He wants us to be “for such a time as this.” We are not here by accident. We have a God\-given circle of influence. We cannot stand idly by while injustice occurs. We must pay attention to what’s happening around us and seek God’s direction in how He wants to use us. He has placed us in the time, the position, and the place He wants us to be. And He invites us to confidently join in His work. In Esther’s day, the duty to save a nation fell to her, and God had given her all she needed to accomplish the task. God has done the same for us, whatever the task He assigns, and He will use us in “such a time as this.”

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.