Update 341

"The Goal" and "Let There Be Light"

On Saturday, April 26, 2008, is the Last Day of Unleavened Bread. Dave Harris will give the sermon in the morning, titled, “The Goal.” Norbert Link will give the sermon in the afternoon, titled, “Let There Be Light!”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 9:00 am and 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 11:00 am and 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Back to top

Whom Are We To Believe?

by Norbert Link

In a recent StandingWatch program, I discussed the error of the transubstantiation dogma, which holds that during the “Eucharist,” the bread and the wine change into the very body and blood of Jesus Christ (see StandingWatch, Google Video and YouTube). I showed from the Bible the utter absurdity of that belief. Knowing fully well how controversial this subject is, I was not too surprised when some viewers expressed very strongly their disagreement with the program. After all, I read several years ago a discussion by a Catholic priest, stating that the dogma of the transubstantiation is the most important difference between the Catholic and the Protestant Church (which does not believe it), currently preventing total unification of the two denominations.

The “arguments,” especially those sent in to YouTube and supportive of Catholic teaching, were quite interesting. One viewer wrote:

“For 2,000 years the Catholic Church has always believed in Christ’s real presence in the Eucharist. This has only been rejected during the past 500 years by the Protestants (who get their name from their protest of the Catholic Church which Christ established as His Church on Earth, ‘One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism’ -see Bible)…”

Another viewer stated:

“Jesus said to him in reply, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven… Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven’ Matt 16:18.”

I began to wonder–do those “arguments” convince anyone? Sadly, many accept them, reasoning as follows: The Pope is Peter’s successor (which he is not), and so, whatever he “binds” on earth is bound in heaven. If he declares that the bread and the wine change into the body and blood of Christ–regardless of how unbiblical this assertion may be–it is “bound” and has to be believed. And since–allegedly–the Catholic Church has believed this for 2,000 years, it has to be true.

Of course, we should know that none of these arguments are correct. Christ did not give ANY MAN the license to change or abolish God’s law, or to teach something which is contradicted in Scripture. The early Christian Church did NOT believe in the dogma of the transubstantiation for Biblical reasons; see our recent Q&A on this question.

But the real issue runs much deeper. The core of the matter affects all of us. And that profound truism is simply this: NO MAN has the right to add to or to delete from Biblical teaching. Christ said that we worship Him IN VAIN when we teach or believe as doctrines the commandments of men. He said that we are spiritually blind if we do away with the commandments of God so that we can uphold our own tradition.

We should not be fooled by nice-sounding statements in the press, as reported by USA Today on April 19, that the “Pope urges all Christians to ‘hold fast’ to scripture.” That is NOT what the pope said. The article itself clarified that the pope said that “our actions” must be “consistent with Scripture and TRADITION.”

But what about “tradition”? 

When Catholics and Protestants claim that we must uphold the “tradition” of worshipping on Sunday–even though the Bible clearly commands us to “remember the SABBATH day to keep IT holy”–we are reminded of Christ’s stern warning not to worship Him in vain. When people replace the worship of God on His annual Holy Days with the tradition of worshipping Him on humanly devised holidays which originated in paganism, then they are told by Christ that they worship God in vain. And NO MAN can do away with that condemnation of our Lord and Savior!

The Pharisees at the time of Jesus followed their tradition of placing heavy burdens on the people–by adding restrictions and injunctions which were not found in Scripture. Christ condemned them for that. Today is not much different. We are told by religious leaders to do this and not to do that–but are those instructions based on the Holy Bible? If they are NOT, we are NOT bound to obey–in fact, we may be instructed by GOD, NOT to obey.

Most people don’t think that far. They are content with what “their” church or “their” minister might teach them. But this is NOT sufficient in the eyes of God. We ourselves must be totally convinced in our own minds of WHAT we believe–and WHY. Our conviction must be based on God’s Word, and NOT on human tradition. After all, we are told to obey GOD rather than man. And IF we embrace and continue to follow God’s truth, then we WILL inherit the crown of righteousness when Christ returns–and NO MAN will be able to take that crown away from us.

Back to top

Food Rationing in the USA–and Around the World

The New York Sun reported on April 21:

“Many parts of America, long considered the breadbasket of the world, are now confronting a once unthinkable phenomenon: food rationing. Major retailers in New York, in areas of New England, and on the West Coast are limiting purchases of flour, rice, and cooking oil as demand outstrips supply. There are also anecdotal reports that some consumers are hoarding grain stocks…

“Spiking food prices have led to riots in recent weeks in Haiti, Indonesia, and several African nations. India recently banned export of all but the highest quality rice, and Vietnam blocked the signing of a new contract for foreign rice sales… For now, rice is available at Asian markets in California, though consumers have fewer choices when buying the largest bags…”

The Washington Times wrote on April 23:

“Farmers and food executives appealed fruitlessly to federal officials yesterday for regulatory steps to limit speculative buying that is helping to drive food prices higher. Meanwhile, some Americans are stocking up on staples such as rice, flour and oil in anticipation of high prices and shortages spreading from overseas. Their pleas did not find a sympathetic audience at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), where regulators said high prices are mostly the result of soaring world demand for grains combined with high fuel prices and drought-induced shortages in many countries… Costco and other grocery stores in California reported a run on rice, which has forced them to set limits on how many sacks of rice each customer can buy. Filipinos in Canada are scooping up all the rice they can find and shipping it to relatives in the Philippines, which is suffering a severe shortage that is leaving many people hungry…

“Food economists testifying at a daylong hearing of the commission said the doubling of rice and wheat prices in the past year is a result of strong income growth in China, India and other Asian countries, where people entering the middle class are buying more food and eating more meat. Farm animals consume a substantial share of the world’s grain… In addition, the diversion of one-third of the U.S. corn crop into making ethanol for vehicles has increased prices for corn and other staples such as soybeans and cotton as more acreage is set aside for ethanol production… “

Der Spiegel Online wrote on April 23:

“Vast amounts of money are flooding the world’s commodities markets, driving up prices of staple foods like wheat and rice. Biofuels and droughts can’t fully explain the recent food crisis — hedge funds and small investors bear some responsibility for global hunger…

“Jim Rogers, the former business partner of legendary financier and philanthropist George Soros, is perhaps the best-known investor in broad-based commodity funds… now Rogers… is warning: ‘Unless something happens soon, we will see people not getting any food at all, at any price. This is the sort of thing we read about in history books, but now I’m afraid that it could happen again.'”

CNN added on April 24:

“Retail chain Sam’s Club will limit the sale of large quantities of rice amid a dramatic increase in the global price of rice…  Sam’s Club — a division of Wal-Mart Stores Inc. — has 593 wholesale locations in the United States and more than 100 abroad, in countries such as Brazil, Canada, China and Mexico. Food prices have soared worldwide in recent months, leading to violence in some developing countries. ‘In just two months,’ World Bank President Robert Zoellick said this month, ‘rice prices have skyrocketed to near historical levels, rising by around 75 percent globally and more in some markets, with more likely to come.'”

The Los Angeles Times stated on April 24:

“This week, Costco said it had seen sales of flour, rice and some cooking oils leap. Some Costco stores already have held customers to just two bags of rice a day, but the chain doesn’t plan to limit sales nationwide. By midafternoon Wednesday, the Costco in Alhambra — which had not placed limits on purchases — said it had run out of rice… Prices for many foods, including beer, bread, coffee, pizza and rice, are rising rapidly as the nation contends with its worst bout of food inflation since 1990. The cost of groceries is climbing at an annual rate of about 5% this year.”

“Japan’s Hunger Becomes a Dire Warning for Other Nations”

The age.com.au wrote on April 21:

“Japan’s acute butter shortage, which has confounded bakeries, restaurants and now families across the country, is the latest unforeseen result of the global agricultural commodities crisis… A 130% rise in the global cost of wheat in the past year… has forced the Government to hit flour millers with three rounds of stiff mark-ups. The latest — a 30% increase this month — has given rise to speculation that Japan, which relies on imports for 90% of its annual wheat consumption, is no longer on the brink of a food crisis, but has fallen off the cliff. According to one government poll, 80% of Japanese are frightened about what the future holds for their food supply. Last week, as the prices of wheat and barley continued their relentless climb, the Japanese Government discovered it had exhausted its ¥230 billion ($A2.37 billion) budget for the grains with two months remaining. It was forced to call on an emergency ¥55 billion reserve to ensure it could continue feeding the nation.”

Effect of Weak U.S. Dollar on Europe

The Telegraph wrote on April 19:

“Jean-Claude Juncker, the EU’s ‘Mr Euro’, has given the clearest warning to date that the world authorities may take action to halt the collapse of the dollar… Mr Juncker, who doubles as Luxembourg premier and chair of eurozone financiers, told the Luxembourg press that he had been invited to the White House last week just before the G7 at the urgent request of President George Bush. The two leaders discussed the dangers of rising ‘protectionism’ in Europe. Mr Juncker warned that matters could get out of hand unless America took steps to halt the slide in the dollar…

“David Woo, currency chief at Barclays Capital, said the Europeans and Americans are talking past each other… Washington is happy to watch the dollar slide… While Germany and Holland have prospered under the strong euro, most of southern Europe and Ireland is in trouble… The European Commission’s economists fear that the loss of competitiveness against Germany over the last decade may have passed the point of no return.”

German Viewpoint on American Presidential Election

Der Spiegel Online reported on April 23 about the elections in Pennsylvania, as follows:

“Democratic voters just can’t make up their minds between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. In Pennsylvania, they denied him victory but spared her defeat. It will be the job of the superdelegates to commit political murder — but will it mean suicide for the party? After the confetti has been shaken out of the hair and the party balloons have deflated, what is left from Tuesday’s election night is a disturbing message: There is nothing to celebrate.

“The winner is the loser. But the loser is not the winner. Clinton’s victory was not big enough to snatch the nomination from Obama. But neither was his star power enough to woo the voters in the center… He was handed a defeat when he needed a victory, and she secured a victory when only an improbable triumph would have helped her. Barring a miracle, Clinton’s role at the Democratic Party convention in Denver in August will be limited to guest speaker. But Obama will go into the actual presidential election badly damaged…

“Obama’s chances of a successful run for the White House are anything but rosy… The party seems to be cursed in this primary season, as if Obama’s supporters and Clinton’s fans had sealed a diabolical pact. They refuse him victory but spare her defeat. But this game is approaching its terrible end. The superdelegates, who are independent from the party base, will have to commit a political murder in the coming months. Will it be Obama or Clinton? For the party, the decision could amount to political suicide.”

Flu Vaccines Rarely Effective

Foodconsumer.org reported on April 20:

“If you got [a] flu shot and still came down with the flu symptoms like fever, cough and running nose, you should not be alone. A study released last week by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said the effectiveness of this year’s vaccine was estimated at only 44 percent, The New York Times reported. What’s gone wrong with the vaccine then?  According to the Times, what makes it so hard for a vaccine to effectively prevent the flu is that the virus changes from year to year and experts would have to GUESS what forms of virus will be circulating for the next flu season based on the current year… this year they guessed it wrong and made many recipients miserable…

“In an article published in 2004 by the Center for Medical Consumers, which is a not-for-profit organization that does not accept any funding from the drug industry, Maryann Napoli, the staff writer for the Center, explains why flu vaccine is rarely effective. It is commonly known that flu viruses change from year to year… But what is not as commonly known is that the vaccine is more likely to be effective against the type that causes fewer than 15 percent of all flu cases…

“Flu vaccine has proved to be a controversial issue.  Critics said that the recommendation for the vaccine is not justified based on both the severity of the flu and the efficacy of the vaccine. Official reports project that deaths from the flu can be as many as 36,000 a year.  But critics said that the death toll includes both deaths from the flu and pneumonia. The actual number of [deaths] for any given year may not exceed 300.”

Pope: “Hold Fast to Scripture… and Tradition!”

On April 19, USA Today published an article with the headline, “Pope urges all Christians to ‘hold fast’ to scripture.” However, the article itself clarified that the pope did not just refer to “scripture.” It was stated:

“Pope Benedict XVI met with leaders of other Christian faiths on Friday evening, telling them that only by ‘holding fast’ to sound doctrinal teaching can they confront secular ideology and the individualism that ‘undermines or even rejects transcendent truth.’… the pope talked about… unity in belief in the Holy Trinity — God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit… Benedict warned of the damage done when people give up on the fractured voices of Christianity and turn instead to beliefs that are not always based on scripture and tradition. The pope also criticized Christian communities that bypass unified action ‘choosing instead to function according to the idea of “local options'”— a phrase often invoked by those who want to reform church teachings even if the wider church won’t follow. He warned against actions that are ‘not always consonant with … Scripture and Tradition,’…”

The Austrian Internet publication, News Online, reported that the pope challenged interpretations especially in Protestant churches, stating that individual belief systems and interpretations “must not be allowed” to sabotage the gospel.

Orthodox and Catholic Churches Are Allies

The Catholic News Agency, CNA, reported on April 24:

“Bishop Hilarion, the Russian Orthodox Bishop of Vienna and Austria, has said in an interview that the Orthodox and Catholic Churches are allies who could form a strategic alliance to defend Christian values… The bishop said that ‘romantic ecumenism,’ which he said characterizes the World Council of Churches and the Conference of European Churches, is not viable.  He said that many Protestants have created a ‘light version of Christianity, without apostolic succession, without sacraments, without strict dogmatic teaching and what is also important they don’t require sticking to Christian moral norms.’… He said this version of Christianity had stopped recognizing centuries-old sins, and now even promotes them.

“Bishop Hilarion’s statement comes just days after Pope Benedict addressed an ecumenical gathering in New York where he also denounced versions of Christianity that contradict apostolic teachings. At the gathering of about 300 people, the Pope said that Christian churches which change their beliefs by so-called ‘prophetic actions,’ often use a method of interpretation that is inconsistent with Scripture and Tradition…

“[He] added that this causes those interested in Christianity to become ‘understandably confused about the Gospel message itself’ because they see Christians splintering and disagreeing about the beliefs of the faith…  Bishop Hilarion said a joint Orthodox-Catholic ‘front’ is necessary to oppose both the challenges of secularism and dialogue with other world religions.  Bilateral, strategic partnerships between the two Churches, he thought, would be the best way to achieve this. ‘I don’t mean union, administrative merger or compromise in theological teaching, I mean strategical partnership,’ said Bishop Hilarion, who is also the Russian Orthodox Church Representative to European International Organizations.”

Pope Backs U.S. Catholic Clergy

Even though he showed sympathy for sexual abuse victims of Catholic priests, Pope Benedict XVI “has offered support to America’s clergy during his visit,” according to an article in The Associated Press of April 19. The article continued:

“He said priests who had done nothing wrong had been unfairly tarred by the crisis. More than 4,000 clergy have been accused of molesting minors in the U.S. since 1950. Abuse-related costs have surpassed $2 billion in that period, with much of the payouts in just the last six years. But most of the recent claims concern wrongdoing that occurred decades ago. At the height of the scandal, which erupted in 2002 with the case of one predator in the Archdiocese of Boston, the shame was so intense that some priests took off their clergy collars before going out in public. Benedict compared their suffering to ‘Christ in his Passion.'”

Strange “Image” Appears in Florida Hospital

Coinciding with the Pope’s visit in the USA, a bizarre report emerged about an unexplained image in a hospital in Florida. Local6.com stated on April 15:

“A crowd inside the Florida Hospital Medical Complex in Orlando snapped photos of the image apparently showing the profile of Jesus Christ crying… Cruzada, who was one of several viewers to send an e-mail about the image to Local6.com, said his ex-wife was recently diagnosed with stage-3 cancer. ‘This was just a sign for me to not worry about what is going on in my life and that everything else is under control,’ Cruzada said. ‘It was an enlightening experience.’… A viewer said the image caused ‘a commotion’ in the hallway near the prayer garden. The hospital is calling it an unexplained image. An official said as long as the image makes people feel good, that is all that matters… Witnesses said after a few hours, the image vanished.”

manifestation

If the above picture is not just a hoax, but “real,” then it most certainly would not portray the face of Christ, but might be described as a “lying wonder.” We can expect more and more of such “manifestations” or better “apparitions” to occur in the near future. For more information, please read our free booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord.”

“Sarkozy Has Lost All Credibility on Human Rights”

Der Spiegel Online reported on April 23 about German reactions to French President Sarkozy’s latest course of conduct towards China. The magazine stated:

“The left-wing Die Tageszeitung writes: ‘A few calls for a boycott of a French supermarket in China were enough to cause President Nicolas Sarkozy’s commitment to human rights to falter badly. … Naturally it’s easy to talk about freedom when there are no important economic interests at stake. But if it is about civil rights in the giant market that is China, then it is considerably more difficult to stick to big principles.’…  The left-leaning Berliner Zeitung writes: ‘… Sarkozy has maneuvered himself into a position of weakness, where it is now possible to blackmail him… Money matters more than the Olympic honor. What an abysmal overture to France’s leadership of Europe.'”

New EU Treaty Good for Europe?

Der Spiegel Online reported on April 24:

“The German parliament has voted by a large majority in favor of the European Union Reform Treaty… The ratification process in Germany will not be complete until the upper house of parliament, the Bundesrat, passes it on May 23. Then President Horst Köhler will have to sign it.

“During the two-hour debate before the vote, German Chancellor Angela Merkel described the Reform Treaty as a ‘great project.’ She said that the agreement was a ‘solid basis’ for overcoming stalemate and blockades. ‘The new treaty is good for Europe.’ The treaty in its current form was negotiated during Germany’s EU presidency last year, and was agreed to by all EU nations last October in Lisbon.

“It is due to come into force on January 1, 2009 after formal ratification by all 27 member states. Ireland is the only country that is holding a referendum on the treaty.”

California’s Battle With Spanking

CNSNews reported on April 18:

“The issue of spanking has again surfaced in California, where members of the California Assembly’s Public Safety Committee voted 5-2 on Tuesday to advance a bill that would define the use of switches or paddles to be child abuse and subject anyone convicted under the statute to face a possible year in jail. The bill, AB 2943, is sponsored by Assemblywoman Sally Lieber (D-Mountain View), the same lawmaker who made national headlines last year for her proposal to totally ban spanking in California, even in people’s homes…

“This year, however, Lieber is quietly proposing a bill that would continue to allow spanking with the hand for children older than three but would ban parents from using ‘implements’ to punish children. Lieber defines ‘implements’ as ‘sticks, rods, switches, electrical cords, belts, brooms, or shoes.’

“Pro-family conservative groups are up in arms, saying the bill would criminalize wooden spoons and rolled-up newspapers. ‘AB 2943 will result in good parents being arrested, handcuffed, and charged with criminal child abuse,’ said Randy Thomasson, president of the Campaign for Children and Families (CCF), a California-based pro-family conservative organization.

“Outraged parents, like Sacramento-area mom Sarah Berke, gave lawmakers an earful at a public hearing held Tuesday before the vote. ‘As someone dead-set against the evil of child abuse, I also have a strong faith that calls on me to correct misbehavior and rebellion when it occurs,’ Berke said. ‘This means a spanking once in a while. My faith and moral beliefs teach me to “train up a child in the way he should go”‘… Using a wooden spoon in a medicinal, loving manner to discipline, she said, is not child abuse…

“The nation’s leading researchers who have studied spanking – professors Robert Larzelere and Murray Straus – are split on the question of whether all corporal punishment should be banned. But both… agree on one thing: Spanking in itself is not child abuse.”

Back to top

Please explain Christ's sayings in Matthew 23:8-10.

Let us read the entire context of Christ’s sayings. Christ introduced the topic in reference to the scribes and the Pharisees (verse 2), but His application of His words were obviously much broader. He said, beginning in verse 6:

“They love the best places at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, greetings in the marketplaces, and to be called by men, ‘Rabbi, Rabbi.’ But you, do not be called ‘Rabbi’; for One is your Teacher [Leader], the Christ, and you are all brethren. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. And do not be called teachers [better: masters or leaders]; for One is your Teacher, the Christ. But he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted.”

Many of those commentaries which discuss this passage–and which don’t just ignore it–conclude that these passages deny hierarchical government in the church. They conclude that Christ was teaching that all brethren are “equal” in the sense that they can decide for themselves what to do, where to worship, and whom to follow. This is, however, not what Christ was saying. It is very clear, from other passages, that there is a difference in ranks and functions in the Church of God–both in regard to the relationship between ordained ministers, deacons and members, and in regard to ministers among themselves (compare Ephesians 4:11-16; 1 Corinthians 12:28-29).

What Christ was addressing, however, was the danger of becoming proud, by accepting lofty and inappropriate religious titles. For instance, the word “Rabbi” means, “my great one” (“The New Bible Commentary–Revised”). Christ emphasized the fact that even though He bestowed on His ministry certain functions and responsibilities toward “feeding” the flock, the ministers are to understand that they are not in any way “better” than others; in fact, that they are to look at others “better” than themselves [compare Philippians 2:3]; that it is God who has given them such responsibilities; that they don’t “deserve” or are “entitled” to such functions, and that they are “nothing” in comparison with God the Father and Jesus Christ.

Far too many ministers, including those in some Church of God organizations, have allowed themselves to become proud and to be filled with self-aggrandizement–whether or not they accept lofty religious titles–and Christ warns that this kind of an attitude will cause their ultimate downfall. Christ specifically said that ministers are not to exercise “lordship” over the flock [Luke 22:24-26; compare 1 Peter 5:3]; and that they must not accept “superior” religious designations and titles which are reserved for God–including titles such as “the Anointed One,” “the Lawgiver” “the Prophet,” “Doctor of Divinity,” “His Holiness,” “Father” or even “Holy Father.” The title “Reverend” should not be used by God’s ministers, either, as the Bible uses this word ONLY in reference to God (compare Psalm 111:9, Authorized Version). The same is true for the term, “Holy Father,” which is exclusively used for God (compare John 17:11).

We need to note too, that Christ told His disciples not to BE called “Rabbi” or “Master,” but He went a step further and instructed them not to EVEN CALL another human being “our Father.”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible states the following:

“Christ’s ministers must not affect the name of Rabbi or Master… to covet or accept the honour which they have that are in kings’ palaces… They must not assume the authority and dominion implied in those names; they must not be magisterial, nor domineer over their brethren, or over God’s heritage, as if they had dominion over the faith of Christians: what they received of the Lord, all must receive from them; but in other things they must not make their opinions and wills a rule and standard to all other people, to be admitted with an implicit obedience… Christ is our Master, our Teacher, our Guide… the great Prophet, whom we must hear, and be ruled and overruled by; whose word must be an oracle and a law to us… And if he only be our Master, then for his ministers to set up for dictators, and to pretend to a supremacy and an infallibility, is a daring usurpation of that honour of Christ which he will not give to another…

“The fathers of our flesh must be called fathers, and as such we must give them [respect]; but God only must be allowed as the Father of our spirits… Our religion must not… depend upon, any man… Paul calls himself a Father to those whose conversion he had been an instrument of [1 Corinthians 4:15; Philemon 1:10] but he uses that [expression] to denote… affection… God is our Father… the Father of all lights [James 1:17], that one Father, from whom are all things, and we in him [Ephesians 4:6].”

Regarding Paul’s reference to himself as a “father,” we need to understand that he was strictly talking about the fact that GOD used him as an instrument to proclaim the truth and to teach and nourish those who listened. This spiritual “father-child” relationship is also expressed in other passages in Scripture, such as Philippians 2:22; 1 Thessalonians 2:11; and 1 Peter 5:13. As can be easily seen from these passages, the word “father” is used affectionately–and NOT in any way as a religious TITLE of superiority.

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible adds:

“‘And call no man your Father’… This does not, of course, forbid us to apply the term to our real father. Religion requires all proper honor to be shown to [him, Exodus 20:12; Matthew 15:4; Ephesians 6:1-3]. But the word ‘father’ also denotes ‘authority, eminence, superiority…’ In this sense it is used here. In this sense it belongs eminently to God, and it is not right to give it to people… Only God has supreme authority… Christ taught them that the source of all life and truth was God, and they ought not to seek or receive a title which properly belongs to [Him].”

Vincent’s Word Studies add the thought that the word “Father” is “Aimed at those who combed the title Abba, or Father. Compare the title Papa – Pope.”

In conclusion, we are to be careful what religious titles to use, or to accept. The safest way would be to use those titles which the Bible specifically mentions and applies approvingly to God’s ministers and deacons (compare passages such as 1 Corinthians 12:28-29; Ephesians 4:11-16; 1 Timothy 3:1-2, 8-13; and Titus 2:5-7). Let us not go “beyond what is written” (1 Corinthians 4:6; New International Version), because if we do, including applying and embracing titles which only belong to God, we may “wander beyond the teaching of Christ [and] leave God behind” (2 John 9, Living Bible).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Back to top

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new StandingWatch program (#165) has been posted on StandingWatch, Google Video and YouTube. It is titled,  “‘Holy Father’ and ‘Holy Mass’–But What Does the Bible Say?” In the program, Norbert Link discusses the fact that while visiting the USA, Pope Benedict XVI has been referred to repeatedly as the “Holy Father” or “Your Holiness.” But are these spiritual titles appropriate, according to Jesus’ words, as recorded in the Bible? Also, what do the Holy Scriptures say about the “Holy Mass,” the “Eucharist” or the “Communion”? Did Jesus command His disciples to partake of the bread and wine at any time of their choice? And did He teach that these symbols change into His literal body and blood? The Biblical answers might SHOCK you.

The following video-recorded sermons by Norbert Link have been posted on Google Video:

BIBLE STUDY: The Power of the Tongue  (April 1, 2006)

BIBLE STUDY: Anger and Wrath   (April 20, 2008)

The following video-recorded sermon by Edwin Pope has been posted on Google Video:

BIBLE STUDY: Does Your Life Reflect Christ? (September 10, 2005)

We are in the process of reprinting our booklet, “Europe in Prophecy,” for an upcoming advertising campaign in Great Britain. This will be our third printing of the booklet.

The printing of our newest booklet, “Is That in the Bible? Man’s Holidays or God’s Holy Days” has been completed, and we should be able to send out copies within the next two weeks by mail.

Back to top


How This Work is Financed

This Update is an official publication by the ministry of the Church of the Eternal God in the United States of America; the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada; and the Global Church of God in the United Kingdom.

Editorial Team: Norbert Link, Dave Harris, Rene Messier, Brian Gale, Margaret Adair, Johanna Link, Eric Rank, Michael Link, Anna Link, Kalon Mitchell, Manuela Mitchell, Dawn Thompson

Technical Team: Eric Rank, Shana Rank

Our activities and literature, including booklets, weekly updates, sermons on CD, and video and audio broadcasts, are provided free of charge. They are made possible by the tithes, offerings and contributions of Church members and others who have elected to support this Work.

While we do not solicit the general public for funds, contributions are gratefully welcomed and are tax-deductible in the U.S. and Canada.

Donations should be sent to the following addresses:

United States: Church of the Eternal God, P.O. Box 270519, San Diego, CA 92198

Canada: Church of God, ACF, Box 1480, Summerland, B.C. V0H 1Z0

United Kingdom: Global Church of God, PO Box 44, MABLETHORPE, LN12 9AN, United Kingdom

Anger and Wrath

We are living today in an incredibly angry society. Although there is righteous indignation, our anger is caused most of the times by Satan, the destroyer. And still, we are told that God Himself will pour out His wrath over disobedient and rebellious mankind in the future. How can we reconcile these seeming contradictions? WHY does God tell us that we must overcome anger and wrath? And HOW can we do it?
Play Video

Download Audio 

“Holy Father” and “Holy Mass”–But What Does the Bible Say? — StandingWatch #165

While visiting the USA, Pope Benedict XVI has been referred to repeatedly as the “Holy Father” or “Your Holiness.” But are these spiritual titles appropriate, according to Jesus’ words, as recorded in the Bible? Also, what do the Holy Scriptures say about the “Holy Mass,” the “Eucharist” or the “Communion”? Did Jesus command His disciples to partake of the bread and wine at any time of their choice? And did He teach that these symbols change into His literal body and blood? The Biblical answers might SHOCK you.

View this now on StandingWatch or GoogleVideo or YouTube.

Current Events

Berlusconi’s Comeback in Italy–“Real Danger for Europe”?

Silvio Berlusconi won Italy’s general elections by an unexpectedly wide margin, claiming the prime minister’s office for the third time.

Der Spiegel Online wrote on April 10:

“[Last] weekend’s elections in Italy [marked] billionaire Silvio Berlusconi’s return to power in what [is] his third term in office. But rarely have Italian voters been so weary of their politicians — and rarely has there been so little hope of any real change…

“Europe can start getting used to the idea of a third term for this billionaire politician, who was never able to see a difference between his own interests and the common good. No one outside Italy’s borders is likely to understand this — or, for that matter, anything that happens in politics in this magnificent country [of Italy]. It is a country that is both an esthetic superpower and the site of burning piles of garbage in Naples. And it is a country whose business executives working abroad, for companies like BMW and the German financial giant HypoVereinsbank, celebrate successes, while its most profitable business organization at home is the Mafia…

“In no other European country except the Vatican is the political class so heavily influenced by old people… Berlusconi’s list of senators… includes Giuseppe Ciarrapico, 74, a bankrupt dealmaker with a criminal record — and a man who publicly declared that he has ‘never denied’ his fascist sympathies… There are currently 24 convicted Italian criminals who hold seats in the Italian or European parliaments. Their crimes include tax evasion, perjury, corruption, violating explosives laws and incitement to murder… For those who think that all politicians are liars, Berlusconi would have to be the cream of the crop… Why on earth would anyone want to vote for this man?… Berlusconi may be a joke to the rest of the world, but not in [Italy]. No one here is interested in the litigation still pending against the godfather, in cases involving the bribing of witnesses and tax evasion on a grand scale. And the past charges of financial misstatement, corruption of television staff and senators? No problem, say his supporters…”

After his stunning victory, AFP reported on April 15:

“Praise and criticism began pouring in on Tuesday, with US President George W. Bush saying he was eager to work again [with] Berlusconi who was one of Bush’s strongest European allies, notably in the run-up to the Iraq war… The Italian billionaire will be a precious ally to opponents of a strong euro and of European budgetary discipline, notably for French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who vowed to ‘deepen the traditional bond of friendship’ between their two countries. And Russian President Vladimir Putin will likely be the first to congratulate Berlusconi in person, with plans to stop in Italy on Thursday as part of one of the Russian leader’s final trips before he steps down on May 7, the Kremlin said. In Brussels, German euro MP Martin Schultz, head of the Socialists in the EU parliament, warned that Berlusconi’s alliance with the ‘extreme-right, openly xenophobic’ Northern League party, represented a ‘real danger for Italy and for Europe.'”

German Reaction to Berlusconi’s Victory

On April 15, 2008, Der Spiegel Online published excerpts from German newspapers, commenting on Berlusconi’s victory in Italy:

“The Financial Times Deutschland writes:

“‘The only people who can profit from this are Berlusconi and his clique. He lacks the political will to modernize the country — and that’s not only bad for Italy, but also for all of Europe. And it has to matter to the EU that the economy of one of its biggest member states, also a G-8 member, is declining… Growth rates are disastrous, productivity rates are pre-modern, the budget deficit is monstrous and those are all risk factors not just for the domestic market but also the euro zone. Berlusconi will never undertake the difficult reforms necessary to defuse the risks’…

“The business daily Handelsblatt writes:

“‘When Berlusconi takes power, Europe will have one less ally. Nicolas Sarkozy has already clearly shown that he is a skeptical European. And the question with Gordon Brown is how long he will be able to stay prime minister. Indeed, Angela Merkel will soon be getting lonely… Berlusconi… was very open about his true feelings about the EU in the past — indeed, the course his government took damaged Europe. Under the Italian EU presidency in 2003, a poorly prepared Berlusconi allowed the summit on the European constitution to run aground. His government was also fond of attacking the European common currency. When it came to foreign policy, too, Berlusconi had his own ideas. He saw the United States under President George W. Bush as his main ally. And as Berlin and Paris distanced themselves from Washington, Berlusconi joined Bush in the Iraq war and, by doing so, helped to divide the European Union. Besides, he was completely off the mark with his repeated demands to expand the EU to include Russia and Israel. … The outlook is grim for the European Union.’…

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:

“‘Italians have a weakness for patriarchs and comedians. Berlusconi is both. Scores voted for him almost out of spite — irrespective of their own misgivings and the lack of understanding the decision would be met with abroad. They follow him with the same spirit of self-deception as a circus audience watching a magician. The problem is: This magician’s performance could last five years. Other voters were neither enchanted nor naïve. They were simply pragmatic, voting with their pocket calculators in their heads. The calculator tells then that under a Prime Minister Berlusconi, they will have more money at their disposal than under Veltroni. They know from experience that Berlusconi is populist enough to give the gift of tax cuts to his people without second thought — even if he doesn’t have the budget for it. Of course, that can’t function in the long term, but many voters feel Italy doesn’t have much of a future anyway…'”

Merkel Pleads With Irish Voters to Back EU Constitution

The EUObserver wrote on April 15:

“German chancellor Angela Merkel has called on Irish voters to back the EU treaty… In a state visit to Ireland, the only country to hold a public poll on the treaty, Ms Merkel on Monday (14 April), said ‘To my mind, the Lisbon treaty offers the best preparation for Europe’s future. To the sceptics, I can only say that if everything remains as it is now, your concerns will definitely not be better addressed’…  Ms Merkel also reassured Ireland, as a small country, that it will have an equal seat at the EU table noting that the new majority voting system in the treaty ‘is actually more of a problem for the bigger states.’

“During her visit the Irish government was forced to contend with a story in the Irish Daily Mail which gives details of an email sent by a British official… According to the article, the email says that the Irish government had ruled out having a referendum in October although it would have been better procedurally because they were concerned about ‘unhelpful developments during the French presidency – particularly related to EU defence.’ The email noted that French president Sarkozy was considered ‘completely unpredictable.'”

Deutsche Welle added on April 14:

“German Chancellor Angela Merkel urged Irish voters Monday to allow the European Union to ‘continue to flourish’… ‘What I can say looking back not least on my own life is that unification and the creation of the EU is the best thing that has happened to Europe in its long history,’ Merkel told a forum of politicians and campaigners in Dublin… Ireland is the only one of the 27 EU member states holding a vote on the treaty, and rejection could in theory block it and plunge the union into fresh chaos…

“Merkel’s speech to the National Forum of Europe kicked off a pro-European assault on Ireland this week, with European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso visiting on Thursday to rally votes in favor of the treaty… A poll published Monday showed that a vast majority of Irish voters remain undecided on the treaty and less than a third plan to vote at all… Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern has said he will [step] down in May to fight allegations of financial irregularities. His likely successor, current Foreign Minister Brian Cowen, has vowed to make securing a ‘Yes’ vote his first priority.”

The current developments in Italy and Ireland are very interesting, as they relate to a United Europe. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy – The Unfolding of End-Time Events

Most Europeans See China As Greatest Threat to World Stability

The EUObserver wrote on April 15:

“China’s image abroad has suffered a blow, with an opinion survey in the five largest EU states showing that most Europeans see Beijing as the greatest threat to world stability… 35 percent of Europeans – coming from Germany, France, the UK, Italy and Spain – labelled China a bigger threat than any other state… The most recent shift in public opinion is seen as a result of China’s crackdown on Tibetan protesters…

“The results of the… poll suggest that Italians have adopted the most critical stance towards China, with 47 percent singling out the country as the chief threat… The chart continues with France where 36 percent of people rank China as the biggest threat to world stability… Germany (35 percent) and the UK (27 percent) follow… Only the Spaniards continue to see the US as a bigger threat than China, attributing to the two powers 41 percent and 28 percent respectively.”

The Pope Visits the USA

CNN reported on April 14:

“The leader of the world’s 1 billion Roman Catholics has been to the White House only once in history. That changes this week, and President Bush is pulling out all the stops: driving out to a suburban military base to meet Pope Benedict XVI’s plane, bringing a giant audience to the South Lawn and hosting a fancy East Room dinner. These are all firsts. Bush has never before given a visiting leader the honor of picking him up at the airport. In fact, no president has done so at Andrews Air Force Base, the typical landing spot for modern leaders…

“President Carter hosted the first White House [visit] by a pope. Pope John Paul II was greeted at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington by Vice President Walter Mondale… There are more than 64 million reasons for this. Catholics number nearly one-quarter of the U.S. population, making them a desirable constituency for politicians to court… The Vatican — seat of a government as well as a religious headquarters — has an interest, too…”

The Pope “Ashamed” of Sexual Scandals–But Did He Go “Far Enough”?

The Associated Press reported on April 15:

“Pope Benedict XVI said Tuesday he was ‘deeply ashamed’ of the clergy sexual abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church and will work to keep pedophiles out of the priesthood, addressing the toughest issue facing the American church as he began his first papal trip to the United States… Benedict said, ‘It is difficult for me to understand how it was possible that priests betray in this way their mission … to these children’… [In a subsequent article of April 16, The Associated Press reported that the pope “told the nation’s bishops that the scourge of clergy sex abuse had sometimes been ‘very badly handled.'”]

“Abuse victims’ advocates said Benedict’s comments on the scandal did not go far enough. Peter Isely, a board member of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said… there should be penalties for church leaders who fail to discipline predatory priests. ‘It’s easy and tempting to continually focus on the pedophile priests themselves,’ Isely said. ‘It’s harder but crucial to focus on the broader problem — complicity in the rest of the church hierarchy.’

“Jason Berry, a New Orleans writer who first drew national attention to clergy sex abuse in the 1980s, said the root of the problem is that the Vatican doesn’t punish bishops who shelter offenders. ‘Until the church creates a genuine system of justice to redress these wrongs the abuse crisis will continue,’ said Berry…

“Although a few bishops accused of molestation have stepped down, no bishop has been disciplined for failing to keep abusive clergy away from children. Cardinal Bernard Law resigned as archbishop of Boston in 2002 after church files were made public showing he and other church leaders had allowed accused clergy to continue in public ministry.”

German Reaction to Pope’s “Apology”

On April 17, 2008, Der Spiegel Online published excerpts from German newspapers, commenting on the pope’s “apology” regarding the sexual scandals within the Catholic Church:

“Even before the airplane carrying Pope Benedict XVI on his first visit to the US as pontiff touched down in Washington, the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger had addressed the issue which has done untold damage to the Catholic Church in the US. The pope told reporters he was ‘deeply ashamed’ of the child sex abuse scandal that had rocked the US Catholic Church… The child sex abuse scandal in the US Catholic Church first came to light in 2002. Since then the church has paid out $2 billion in compensation settlements to victims…

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes… ‘The pope cannot speak about human rights at the United Nations if the victims of sexual abuse are denied justice. The pope cannot appeal for global social justice, the protection of the family, human and unborn life, if inside his church human rights are being disregarded, the victims overlooked and their stories of suffering ignored. Those who appeal to the world’s conscience have to examine their own consciences first. They must be able to admit their own guilt; they must know they speak as sinners.’

“The left-wing Die Tageszeitung writes that for the 65 million Catholics in the US, the pope’s visit is either a long-awaited chance to heal the wounds of the past or the final rejection of the church… Although Pope Benedict already apologized for the child abuse cases on his flight over to Washington, that will not be enough if he wants to convince and reconcile the faithful. But that is something the Catholic Church desperately needs to do, as it is the only large church in the US to lose members.'”

Bush and Pope Pray Together

Reuters reported on April 16:

“Pope Benedict and U.S. President George W. Bush and his wife Laura prayed together in the White House on Wednesday, the Vatican said… Bush is a Methodist. Both he and the Roman Catholic pope have said that the traditional family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman, is under threat.”

Zenit added on April 15:

“A White House spokeswoman said President George Bush plans to tell Benedict XVI that millions of Americans have been praying for his visit and that their hearts are open to his message… [The spokeswoman] also confirmed that Bush is interested in the Pope’s work to establish interreligious dialogue…”

The Associated Press reported on April 16 that “The German-born pope began his first full day in America with a visit to the White House, where a South Lawn crowd of more than 13,500 sang ‘Happy Birthday’ [the pope turned 81 on April 16] and President Bush said that the first papal White House visit in 29 years was a reminder for Americans to ‘distinguish between simple right and wrong.'” He also referred to the pope repeatedly in his public speech as “Holy Father.”

In regard to that religious title, you might want to read Jesus’ words in Matthew 23:9: “Do not call anyone on earth your father [let alone, “holy father”]; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.”

Pope Warns Americans, Holds Unprecedented Mass and Meets with Non-Christian Leaders

Reuters reported on April 16:

“Pope Benedict tempered his praise for American religious tolerance on Wednesday with a warning that U.S. society can quietly undermine Catholicism by reducing all faiths to a lowest common denominator. Addressing the nation’s Catholic bishops, the German-born pope said the U.S. Church could not drop its guard against relativism just because faith plays a larger part in public life in the United States than it does in more secularized Europe.

“A strong individualist streak in American culture leads some Catholics ‘to pick and choose,’ following Church doctrines they like and ignoring others… While the Church teaches that the Eucharist is clearly the most important of its sacraments, only 25 percent of those polled thought so…”

Even though the term “Eucharist” is a misnomer, please make sure to read the Q&A in this Update, on the correct understanding of Christ’s sayings in Matthew 26:26-28, pertaining to the partaking of bread and wine.

AFP reported on April 17: “Tens of thousands flocked Thursday for the first Mass by Pope Benedict XVI on his US visit, hours after he chided Americans for a moral breakdown which he said fueled the church’s child sex abuse scandal… Benedict angered victim support groups by praising the bishops’ efforts to heal the wounds from the scandal.”

Reuters added on April 17 that the pope will “meet with leaders of five non-Christian religions… The inter-faith meeting… will bring Benedict together with 220 members of the Jewish, Muslim, Jain, Buddhist and Hindu religions.”

Putin Elected Leader of United Russia

Der Spiegel Online wrote on April 15:

“The pro-Kremlin United Russia party has loyally chosen Vladimir Putin as its new leader. But the outgoing president, who has vowed to reform the party, needs to compensate for his impending loss of power — even if it means depending on the party’s criminal elements.”

The article continued:

“After the party congress voted unanimously for Putin to become its party leader, without bothering with any kind of debate, Putin made his way back to the podium and promised he would do everything to ‘reinforce the authority of the party’ and to make Russia the fifth-largest economic power in the world… Putin can now use the party to push any laws through the Duma and to exert influence on the regional elite in the provinces. However, the outgoing president himself has stated that ‘all kinds of rogues’ have seized positions of power in the provinces, without the Moscow leadership doing anything about it.

“…it is the Kremlin’s policy of systematically leasing entire regions to what are virtually criminal gangs. In many places in the northern Caucasus, for example, central authority — as well as the United Russia party — is in the hands of people who are much more conversant with vote rigging and contract killing than they are with the rules of parliamentary democracy. In large swaths of Russia, the United Russia party acts as a bureaucratic and dictatorial party that has no qualms about strong-arming officials during elections and squandering state funds.”

Nightmare Scenario–“Now We Can Clone Children”

The Independent wrote on April 14:

“A new form of cloning has been developed that is easier to carry out than the technique used to create Dolly the sheep, raising fears that it may one day be used on human embryos to produce ‘designer’ babies. Scientists who used the procedure to create baby mice from the skin cells of adult animals have found it to be far more efficient than the Dolly technique, with fewer side effects, which makes it more acceptable for human use…

“The technique involves the genetic reprogramming of skin cells so they revert to an embryonic-like state. Last year, when the breakthrough was used on human skin cells for the first time, it was lauded by the Catholic Church and President George Bush as a morally acceptable way of producing embryonic stem cells without having to create or destroy human embryos. However, the same technique has already been used in another way to reproduce offspring of laboratory mice that are either full clones or genetic ‘chimeras’ of the adult mouse whose skin cells were reprogrammed…

“These offspring are chimeras – a genetic mix of two or more individuals – because some of their cells derive from the embryo and some from the skin cell. Technically, such a child would have three biological parents… Furthermore, studies on mice have shown that it is possible to produce fully cloned offspring that are 100 per cent genetically identical to the adult…

“However, Dr Lanza said that the mouse experiments his company had done demonstrated how easily the technology could be used to produce cloned or chimeric babies… This is not banned in many countries, where legislation has not kept pace with scientific developments… ‘At this point there are no laws or regulations for this kind of thing and the bizarre thing is that the Catholic Church and other traditional stem-cell opponents think this technology is great when in reality it could in the end become one of their biggest nightmares,’ he said. ‘It is quite possible that the real legacy of this whole new programming technology is that it will be introducing the era of designer babies. ‘So for instance if we had a few skin cells from Albert Einstein, or anyone else in the world, you could have a child that is say 10 per cent or 70 per cent Albert Einstein by just injecting a few of their cells into an embryo,’ he said.”

Germany Eases Stem Cell Restrictions

Deutsche Welle reported on April 11:

“After months of political negotiations, German lawmakers agreed to allow broader embryonic stem cell use. ‘The changes give German researchers the chance to stay competitive internationally,’ said Max Planck Institute President Peter Gruss… German scientists had pushed for Germany to reconsider a 2002 law which imposed strict limits on the use of embryonic stem cells in medical research. While the law banned all creation of stem cells in Germany, it did allow cells produced from abroad to be imported, but only if they had been created before Jan. 1, 2002. Scientists also had to show that the project had overwhelming significance and that no other research method could be used… Embryonic stem cells are prized by scientists for their ability to develop into any type of cell. This versatility has led scientists to trump stem cells as offering the potential to cure diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson’s and heart maladies.

“Yet in Germany, the use of embryonic stem cells makes many people uncomfortable on religious and ethical grounds. Stem cell research carries historic overtones of the Nazis’ genetic experiments linked to the creation of a master race. Traumatized by grisly experiments on humans under the Nazis and influenced by its Christian churches, Germany has agonized for a decade about the ethics of using the cells. Critics argue that a human life is sacrificed when an embryo is torn apart. Religious groups expressed unhappiness with the parliament’s decision.

“‘This is not a good day for the protection of life in Germany,’ said Munich Archbishop Reinhard Marx. Guenther Beckstein, Bavaria’s conservative premier, also said he thought the change would set a dangerous precedent. ‘My worry is that it will now become easier to further undermine the protection of unborn life,’ Beckstein said.”

Unusual Earthquake Activities Off Oregon Coast

The Associated Press reported on April 11:

“Scientists listening to underwater microphones have detected an unusual swarm of earthquakes off the central Oregon Coast. Scientists don’t know what the earthquakes mean, but they could be the result of magma rumbling underneath the Juan de Fuca Plate – away from the recognized earthquake faults off Oregon… There have been more than 600 quakes over the past 10 days in a basin 150 miles southwest of Newport. The biggest was magnitude 5.4 and two others were more than magnitude 5.0… It looks like what happens before a volcanic eruption, except there are no volcanoes in the area…”

Big Earthquake Certain to Occur in Southern California

The Associated Press reported on April 15:

“California faces an almost certain risk of being rocked by a strong earthquake by 2037, scientists said in the first statewide temblor forecast. New calculations reveal there is a 99.7 percent chance a magnitude 6.7 quake or larger will strike in the next 30 years. The odds of such an event are higher in Southern California than Northern California, 97 percent versus 93 percent…

“Scientists still cannot predict exactly where in the state such a quake will occur or when. But they say the analysis should be a wake-up call for residents to prepare for a natural disaster in earthquake country… ‘A big earthquake can happen tomorrow or it can happen 10 years from now,’ said Tom Jordan, director of the earthquake center, which is headquartered at the University of Southern California.”

Update 340

The People of God

On Friday evening, April 18, 2008, is Passover.

On the weekly Sabbath, April 19, 2008, Dave Harris will give the sermon, titled, “The People of God.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

On Saturday evening, April 19, 2008, is the Night to Be Much Observed.

On Sunday, April 20, 2008, is the First Day of Unleavened Bread. Rene Messier will give the sermon in the morning, titled, “Conformed to the Image of His Son.” Norbert Link will give the sermon in the afternoon, titled, “Anger and Wrath!”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 9:00 am and 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 11:00 am and 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Back to top

About Our Father’s Business

by Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

We are now entering a period of time that the world at large knows nothing about and, if it did, would probably not care about it anyway!

Joseph and Mary went to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover (Luke 2:41) and Jesus, when He was 12 years old, “went up [with his parents] to Jerusalem according to the custom of the feast” (verse 42). As they were returning, Jesus’ parents couldn’t find Him (verse 45). When they went back to Jerusalem, “they found Him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the teachers, both listening to them and asking them questions” (verse 46). When His parents asked Him about His whereabouts, He said to them, “Why did you seek Me? Did you not know that I must be about My Father’s business?” (verse 49).

Here was the Messiah, as a young boy, being about His Father’s business. At this same time of the year, but nearly 2,000 years later, can we say the same about our activities? The world has no concept about the true meaning of the Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread. They may seem foolishness to it, because we need spiritual understanding and discernment to comprehend their importance (compare 1 Corinthians 2:14). The world is guided and directed by “the prince of the power of the air” (Ephesians 2:2), who “has blinded” the minds of those not being called at this time (2 Corinthians 4:4). As a consequence, the world is doing its own thing. 

We must be different! And as we take the Passover on Friday evening,18th April, as required annually at this time of the year, and as we celebrate the Night To Be Much Observed the following evening (on April 19) and the seven Days of Unleavened Bread (from April 20 until and including April 26), we can be truly thankful for the unique and marvelous calling that God has given us–a calling that sets us apart from the world and its ways.  

We must never take our calling lightly, and we should truly rejoice in the knowledge and understanding that God has graciously granted to us, as we go “about our Father’s business.”

Back to top

Berlusconi’s Comeback in Italy–“Real Danger for Europe”?

Silvio Berlusconi won Italy’s general elections by an unexpectedly wide margin, claiming the prime minister’s office for the third time.

Der Spiegel Online wrote on April 10:

“[Last] weekend’s elections in Italy [marked] billionaire Silvio Berlusconi’s return to power in what [is] his third term in office. But rarely have Italian voters been so weary of their politicians — and rarely has there been so little hope of any real change…

“Europe can start getting used to the idea of a third term for this billionaire politician, who was never able to see a difference between his own interests and the common good. No one outside Italy’s borders is likely to understand this — or, for that matter, anything that happens in politics in this magnificent country [of Italy]. It is a country that is both an esthetic superpower and the site of burning piles of garbage in Naples. And it is a country whose business executives working abroad, for companies like BMW and the German financial giant HypoVereinsbank, celebrate successes, while its most profitable business organization at home is the Mafia…

“In no other European country except the Vatican is the political class so heavily influenced by old people… Berlusconi’s list of senators… includes Giuseppe Ciarrapico, 74, a bankrupt dealmaker with a criminal record — and a man who publicly declared that he has ‘never denied’ his fascist sympathies… There are currently 24 convicted Italian criminals who hold seats in the Italian or European parliaments. Their crimes include tax evasion, perjury, corruption, violating explosives laws and incitement to murder… For those who think that all politicians are liars, Berlusconi would have to be the cream of the crop… Why on earth would anyone want to vote for this man?… Berlusconi may be a joke to the rest of the world, but not in [Italy]. No one here is interested in the litigation still pending against the godfather, in cases involving the bribing of witnesses and tax evasion on a grand scale. And the past charges of financial misstatement, corruption of television staff and senators? No problem, say his supporters…”

After his stunning victory, AFP reported on April 15:

“Praise and criticism began pouring in on Tuesday, with US President George W. Bush saying he was eager to work again [with] Berlusconi who was one of Bush’s strongest European allies, notably in the run-up to the Iraq war… The Italian billionaire will be a precious ally to opponents of a strong euro and of European budgetary discipline, notably for French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who vowed to ‘deepen the traditional bond of friendship’ between their two countries. And Russian President Vladimir Putin will likely be the first to congratulate Berlusconi in person, with plans to stop in Italy on Thursday as part of one of the Russian leader’s final trips before he steps down on May 7, the Kremlin said. In Brussels, German euro MP Martin Schultz, head of the Socialists in the EU parliament, warned that Berlusconi’s alliance with the ‘extreme-right, openly xenophobic’ Northern League party, represented a ‘real danger for Italy and for Europe.'”

German Reaction to Berlusconi’s Victory

On April 15, 2008, Der Spiegel Online published excerpts from German newspapers, commenting on Berlusconi’s victory in Italy:

“The Financial Times Deutschland writes:

“‘The only people who can profit from this are Berlusconi and his clique. He lacks the political will to modernize the country — and that’s not only bad for Italy, but also for all of Europe. And it has to matter to the EU that the economy of one of its biggest member states, also a G-8 member, is declining… Growth rates are disastrous, productivity rates are pre-modern, the budget deficit is monstrous and those are all risk factors not just for the domestic market but also the euro zone. Berlusconi will never undertake the difficult reforms necessary to defuse the risks’…

“The business daily Handelsblatt writes:

“‘When Berlusconi takes power, Europe will have one less ally. Nicolas Sarkozy has already clearly shown that he is a skeptical European. And the question with Gordon Brown is how long he will be able to stay prime minister. Indeed, Angela Merkel will soon be getting lonely… Berlusconi… was very open about his true feelings about the EU in the past — indeed, the course his government took damaged Europe. Under the Italian EU presidency in 2003, a poorly prepared Berlusconi allowed the summit on the European constitution to run aground. His government was also fond of attacking the European common currency. When it came to foreign policy, too, Berlusconi had his own ideas. He saw the United States under President George W. Bush as his main ally. And as Berlin and Paris distanced themselves from Washington, Berlusconi joined Bush in the Iraq war and, by doing so, helped to divide the European Union. Besides, he was completely off the mark with his repeated demands to expand the EU to include Russia and Israel. … The outlook is grim for the European Union.’…

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes:

“‘Italians have a weakness for patriarchs and comedians. Berlusconi is both. Scores voted for him almost out of spite — irrespective of their own misgivings and the lack of understanding the decision would be met with abroad. They follow him with the same spirit of self-deception as a circus audience watching a magician. The problem is: This magician’s performance could last five years. Other voters were neither enchanted nor naïve. They were simply pragmatic, voting with their pocket calculators in their heads. The calculator tells then that under a Prime Minister Berlusconi, they will have more money at their disposal than under Veltroni. They know from experience that Berlusconi is populist enough to give the gift of tax cuts to his people without second thought — even if he doesn’t have the budget for it. Of course, that can’t function in the long term, but many voters feel Italy doesn’t have much of a future anyway…'”

Merkel Pleads With Irish Voters to Back EU Constitution

The EUObserver wrote on April 15:

“German chancellor Angela Merkel has called on Irish voters to back the EU treaty… In a state visit to Ireland, the only country to hold a public poll on the treaty, Ms Merkel on Monday (14 April), said ‘To my mind, the Lisbon treaty offers the best preparation for Europe’s future. To the sceptics, I can only say that if everything remains as it is now, your concerns will definitely not be better addressed’…  Ms Merkel also reassured Ireland, as a small country, that it will have an equal seat at the EU table noting that the new majority voting system in the treaty ‘is actually more of a problem for the bigger states.’

“During her visit the Irish government was forced to contend with a story in the Irish Daily Mail which gives details of an email sent by a British official… According to the article, the email says that the Irish government had ruled out having a referendum in October although it would have been better procedurally because they were concerned about ‘unhelpful developments during the French presidency – particularly related to EU defence.’ The email noted that French president Sarkozy was considered ‘completely unpredictable.'”

Deutsche Welle added on April 14:

“German Chancellor Angela Merkel urged Irish voters Monday to allow the European Union to ‘continue to flourish’… ‘What I can say looking back not least on my own life is that unification and the creation of the EU is the best thing that has happened to Europe in its long history,’ Merkel told a forum of politicians and campaigners in Dublin… Ireland is the only one of the 27 EU member states holding a vote on the treaty, and rejection could in theory block it and plunge the union into fresh chaos…

“Merkel’s speech to the National Forum of Europe kicked off a pro-European assault on Ireland this week, with European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso visiting on Thursday to rally votes in favor of the treaty… A poll published Monday showed that a vast majority of Irish voters remain undecided on the treaty and less than a third plan to vote at all… Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern has said he will [step] down in May to fight allegations of financial irregularities. His likely successor, current Foreign Minister Brian Cowen, has vowed to make securing a ‘Yes’ vote his first priority.”

The current developments in Italy and Ireland are very interesting, as they relate to a United Europe. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy – The Unfolding of End-Time Events

Most Europeans See China As Greatest Threat to World Stability

The EUObserver wrote on April 15:

“China’s image abroad has suffered a blow, with an opinion survey in the five largest EU states showing that most Europeans see Beijing as the greatest threat to world stability… 35 percent of Europeans – coming from Germany, France, the UK, Italy and Spain – labelled China a bigger threat than any other state… The most recent shift in public opinion is seen as a result of China’s crackdown on Tibetan protesters…

“The results of the… poll suggest that Italians have adopted the most critical stance towards China, with 47 percent singling out the country as the chief threat… The chart continues with France where 36 percent of people rank China as the biggest threat to world stability… Germany (35 percent) and the UK (27 percent) follow… Only the Spaniards continue to see the US as a bigger threat than China, attributing to the two powers 41 percent and 28 percent respectively.”

The Pope Visits the USA

CNN reported on April 14:

“The leader of the world’s 1 billion Roman Catholics has been to the White House only once in history. That changes this week, and President Bush is pulling out all the stops: driving out to a suburban military base to meet Pope Benedict XVI’s plane, bringing a giant audience to the South Lawn and hosting a fancy East Room dinner. These are all firsts. Bush has never before given a visiting leader the honor of picking him up at the airport. In fact, no president has done so at Andrews Air Force Base, the typical landing spot for modern leaders…

“President Carter hosted the first White House [visit] by a pope. Pope John Paul II was greeted at Andrews Air Force Base outside Washington by Vice President Walter Mondale… There are more than 64 million reasons for this. Catholics number nearly one-quarter of the U.S. population, making them a desirable constituency for politicians to court… The Vatican — seat of a government as well as a religious headquarters — has an interest, too…”

The Pope “Ashamed” of Sexual Scandals–But Did He Go “Far Enough”?

The Associated Press reported on April 15:

“Pope Benedict XVI said Tuesday he was ‘deeply ashamed’ of the clergy sexual abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church and will work to keep pedophiles out of the priesthood, addressing the toughest issue facing the American church as he began his first papal trip to the United States… Benedict said, ‘It is difficult for me to understand how it was possible that priests betray in this way their mission … to these children’… [In a subsequent article of April 16, The Associated Press reported that the pope “told the nation’s bishops that the scourge of clergy sex abuse had sometimes been ‘very badly handled.'”]

“Abuse victims’ advocates said Benedict’s comments on the scandal did not go far enough. Peter Isely, a board member of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, said… there should be penalties for church leaders who fail to discipline predatory priests. ‘It’s easy and tempting to continually focus on the pedophile priests themselves,’ Isely said. ‘It’s harder but crucial to focus on the broader problem — complicity in the rest of the church hierarchy.’

“Jason Berry, a New Orleans writer who first drew national attention to clergy sex abuse in the 1980s, said the root of the problem is that the Vatican doesn’t punish bishops who shelter offenders. ‘Until the church creates a genuine system of justice to redress these wrongs the abuse crisis will continue,’ said Berry…

“Although a few bishops accused of molestation have stepped down, no bishop has been disciplined for failing to keep abusive clergy away from children. Cardinal Bernard Law resigned as archbishop of Boston in 2002 after church files were made public showing he and other church leaders had allowed accused clergy to continue in public ministry.”

German Reaction to Pope’s “Apology”

On April 17, 2008, Der Spiegel Online published excerpts from German newspapers, commenting on the pope’s “apology” regarding the sexual scandals within the Catholic Church:

“Even before the airplane carrying Pope Benedict XVI on his first visit to the US as pontiff touched down in Washington, the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger had addressed the issue which has done untold damage to the Catholic Church in the US. The pope told reporters he was ‘deeply ashamed’ of the child sex abuse scandal that had rocked the US Catholic Church… The child sex abuse scandal in the US Catholic Church first came to light in 2002. Since then the church has paid out $2 billion in compensation settlements to victims…

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes… ‘The pope cannot speak about human rights at the United Nations if the victims of sexual abuse are denied justice. The pope cannot appeal for global social justice, the protection of the family, human and unborn life, if inside his church human rights are being disregarded, the victims overlooked and their stories of suffering ignored. Those who appeal to the world’s conscience have to examine their own consciences first. They must be able to admit their own guilt; they must know they speak as sinners.’

“The left-wing Die Tageszeitung writes that for the 65 million Catholics in the US, the pope’s visit is either a long-awaited chance to heal the wounds of the past or the final rejection of the church… Although Pope Benedict already apologized for the child abuse cases on his flight over to Washington, that will not be enough if he wants to convince and reconcile the faithful. But that is something the Catholic Church desperately needs to do, as it is the only large church in the US to lose members.'”

Bush and Pope Pray Together

Reuters reported on April 16:

“Pope Benedict and U.S. President George W. Bush and his wife Laura prayed together in the White House on Wednesday, the Vatican said… Bush is a Methodist. Both he and the Roman Catholic pope have said that the traditional family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman, is under threat.”

Zenit added on April 15:

“A White House spokeswoman said President George Bush plans to tell Benedict XVI that millions of Americans have been praying for his visit and that their hearts are open to his message… [The spokeswoman] also confirmed that Bush is interested in the Pope’s work to establish interreligious dialogue…”

The Associated Press reported on April 16 that “The German-born pope began his first full day in America with a visit to the White House, where a South Lawn crowd of more than 13,500 sang ‘Happy Birthday’ [the pope turned 81 on April 16] and President Bush said that the first papal White House visit in 29 years was a reminder for Americans to ‘distinguish between simple right and wrong.'” He also referred to the pope repeatedly in his public speech as “Holy Father.”

In regard to that religious title, you might want to read Jesus’ words in Matthew 23:9: “Do not call anyone on earth your father [let alone, “holy father”]; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven.”

Pope Warns Americans, Holds Unprecedented Mass and Meets with Non-Christian Leaders

Reuters reported on April 16:

“Pope Benedict tempered his praise for American religious tolerance on Wednesday with a warning that U.S. society can quietly undermine Catholicism by reducing all faiths to a lowest common denominator. Addressing the nation’s Catholic bishops, the German-born pope said the U.S. Church could not drop its guard against relativism just because faith plays a larger part in public life in the United States than it does in more secularized Europe.

“A strong individualist streak in American culture leads some Catholics ‘to pick and choose,’ following Church doctrines they like and ignoring others… While the Church teaches that the Eucharist is clearly the most important of its sacraments, only 25 percent of those polled thought so…”

Even though the term “Eucharist” is a misnomer, please make sure to read the Q&A in this Update, on the correct understanding of Christ’s sayings in Matthew 26:26-28, pertaining to the partaking of bread and wine.

AFP reported on April 17: “Tens of thousands flocked Thursday for the first Mass by Pope Benedict XVI on his US visit, hours after he chided Americans for a moral breakdown which he said fueled the church’s child sex abuse scandal… Benedict angered victim support groups by praising the bishops’ efforts to heal the wounds from the scandal.”

Reuters added on April 17 that the pope will “meet with leaders of five non-Christian religions… The inter-faith meeting… will bring Benedict together with 220 members of the Jewish, Muslim, Jain, Buddhist and Hindu religions.”

Putin Elected Leader of United Russia

Der Spiegel Online wrote on April 15:

“The pro-Kremlin United Russia party has loyally chosen Vladimir Putin as its new leader. But the outgoing president, who has vowed to reform the party, needs to compensate for his impending loss of power — even if it means depending on the party’s criminal elements.”

The article continued:

“After the party congress voted unanimously for Putin to become its party leader, without bothering with any kind of debate, Putin made his way back to the podium and promised he would do everything to ‘reinforce the authority of the party’ and to make Russia the fifth-largest economic power in the world… Putin can now use the party to push any laws through the Duma and to exert influence on the regional elite in the provinces. However, the outgoing president himself has stated that ‘all kinds of rogues’ have seized positions of power in the provinces, without the Moscow leadership doing anything about it.

“…it is the Kremlin’s policy of systematically leasing entire regions to what are virtually criminal gangs. In many places in the northern Caucasus, for example, central authority — as well as the United Russia party — is in the hands of people who are much more conversant with vote rigging and contract killing than they are with the rules of parliamentary democracy. In large swaths of Russia, the United Russia party acts as a bureaucratic and dictatorial party that has no qualms about strong-arming officials during elections and squandering state funds.”

Nightmare Scenario–“Now We Can Clone Children”

The Independent wrote on April 14:

“A new form of cloning has been developed that is easier to carry out than the technique used to create Dolly the sheep, raising fears that it may one day be used on human embryos to produce ‘designer’ babies. Scientists who used the procedure to create baby mice from the skin cells of adult animals have found it to be far more efficient than the Dolly technique, with fewer side effects, which makes it more acceptable for human use…

“The technique involves the genetic reprogramming of skin cells so they revert to an embryonic-like state. Last year, when the breakthrough was used on human skin cells for the first time, it was lauded by the Catholic Church and President George Bush as a morally acceptable way of producing embryonic stem cells without having to create or destroy human embryos. However, the same technique has already been used in another way to reproduce offspring of laboratory mice that are either full clones or genetic ‘chimeras’ of the adult mouse whose skin cells were reprogrammed…

“These offspring are chimeras – a genetic mix of two or more individuals – because some of their cells derive from the embryo and some from the skin cell. Technically, such a child would have three biological parents… Furthermore, studies on mice have shown that it is possible to produce fully cloned offspring that are 100 per cent genetically identical to the adult…

“However, Dr Lanza said that the mouse experiments his company had done demonstrated how easily the technology could be used to produce cloned or chimeric babies… This is not banned in many countries, where legislation has not kept pace with scientific developments… ‘At this point there are no laws or regulations for this kind of thing and the bizarre thing is that the Catholic Church and other traditional stem-cell opponents think this technology is great when in reality it could in the end become one of their biggest nightmares,’ he said. ‘It is quite possible that the real legacy of this whole new programming technology is that it will be introducing the era of designer babies. ‘So for instance if we had a few skin cells from Albert Einstein, or anyone else in the world, you could have a child that is say 10 per cent or 70 per cent Albert Einstein by just injecting a few of their cells into an embryo,’ he said.”

Germany Eases Stem Cell Restrictions

Deutsche Welle reported on April 11:

“After months of political negotiations, German lawmakers agreed to allow broader embryonic stem cell use. ‘The changes give German researchers the chance to stay competitive internationally,’ said Max Planck Institute President Peter Gruss… German scientists had pushed for Germany to reconsider a 2002 law which imposed strict limits on the use of embryonic stem cells in medical research. While the law banned all creation of stem cells in Germany, it did allow cells produced from abroad to be imported, but only if they had been created before Jan. 1, 2002. Scientists also had to show that the project had overwhelming significance and that no other research method could be used… Embryonic stem cells are prized by scientists for their ability to develop into any type of cell. This versatility has led scientists to trump stem cells as offering the potential to cure diseases such as diabetes, Parkinson’s and heart maladies.

“Yet in Germany, the use of embryonic stem cells makes many people uncomfortable on religious and ethical grounds. Stem cell research carries historic overtones of the Nazis’ genetic experiments linked to the creation of a master race. Traumatized by grisly experiments on humans under the Nazis and influenced by its Christian churches, Germany has agonized for a decade about the ethics of using the cells. Critics argue that a human life is sacrificed when an embryo is torn apart. Religious groups expressed unhappiness with the parliament’s decision.

“‘This is not a good day for the protection of life in Germany,’ said Munich Archbishop Reinhard Marx. Guenther Beckstein, Bavaria’s conservative premier, also said he thought the change would set a dangerous precedent. ‘My worry is that it will now become easier to further undermine the protection of unborn life,’ Beckstein said.”

Unusual Earthquake Activities Off Oregon Coast

The Associated Press reported on April 11:

“Scientists listening to underwater microphones have detected an unusual swarm of earthquakes off the central Oregon Coast. Scientists don’t know what the earthquakes mean, but they could be the result of magma rumbling underneath the Juan de Fuca Plate – away from the recognized earthquake faults off Oregon… There have been more than 600 quakes over the past 10 days in a basin 150 miles southwest of Newport. The biggest was magnitude 5.4 and two others were more than magnitude 5.0… It looks like what happens before a volcanic eruption, except there are no volcanoes in the area…”

Big Earthquake Certain to Occur in Southern California

The Associated Press reported on April 15:

“California faces an almost certain risk of being rocked by a strong earthquake by 2037, scientists said in the first statewide temblor forecast. New calculations reveal there is a 99.7 percent chance a magnitude 6.7 quake or larger will strike in the next 30 years. The odds of such an event are higher in Southern California than Northern California, 97 percent versus 93 percent…

“Scientists still cannot predict exactly where in the state such a quake will occur or when. But they say the analysis should be a wake-up call for residents to prepare for a natural disaster in earthquake country… ‘A big earthquake can happen tomorrow or it can happen 10 years from now,’ said Tom Jordan, director of the earthquake center, which is headquartered at the University of Southern California.”

Back to top

Would you please explain Christ's saying in Matthew 26:26-28? Didn't Jesus clearly say that the wine and bread "are" His blood and body; therefore, aren't those correct who believe in the dogma of "transubstantiation"–that is, that every time when we eat the sacrificial bread and drink the sacrificial wine, that bread and wine change into the body and blood of Christ?

First of all, we need to understand that the Bible commands God’s disciples to eat a piece of unleavened bread and drink a small portion of red wine ONCE a year–at the annual festival of Passover. When Jesus instituted the new symbols of bread and wine, replacing thereby the Old Testament Passover lamb, He did so during the evening of Passover (Matthew 26:18-20; compare Luke 22:11-20). Christ did not teach that we should partake of the symbols of bread and wine, in memory of His Sacrifice, any time we please. It is to be observed annually–once a year (compare Leviticus 23:4-5).

When Christ said that the bread and the wine “were” His flesh and blood, He used symbolic language. He had stated earlier that His disciples were to “eat His flesh” and “drink His blood” in order to have life and lasting fellowship with Him (compare John 6:53-55). Jesus used this kind of language to TEST His disciples. He knew fully well that at that time, none of His disciples would understand the meaning of His saying. But He wanted to find out how many would leave Him, and who would stay with Him, even though nobody understood what He was teaching them. Sadly, “many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can understand it’… From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more” (John 6:60, 66).

Jesus asked the twelve apostles whether they would also forsake Him. Peter did not understand Christ’s saying, either, but he knew who Christ was. And so, he answered for all of the twelve, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. Also we have come to believe and know that You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (John 6:68-69).

Christ’s sayings in John 6, and His words at the last Passover which He kept with His disciples as a human being, were to be understood symbolically. They were not to be understood to mean that at the moment when Christ gave the bread and the wine to His disciples–and at the moment when we partake today of the symbols of bread and wine at Passover–those symbols were or are “transforming” or “changing” into the actual body and blood of Jesus. The Roman Catholic dogma of the “transubstantiation,” which was also believed in and taught by Martin Luther, is in fact unbiblical.

The reasons for our conclusion are many, including the following:

1) First of all, Christ is no longer today a human being. He WAS God (John 1:1), BECAME man (John 1:14), and was CHANGED again into a God being–a life-giving Spirit being–at the time of His resurrection (1 Corinthians 15:45; Titus 2:13). Paul said that we do not know Jesus Christ any longer as a human being–“according to the flesh” (2 Corinthians 5:16). As a Spirit being, Christ does not have flesh and blood. Therefore, the wine and the bread could not possibly change today into the flesh and blood of Jesus.

2) We also read that Jesus was offered ONCE to bear the sins of many (Hebrews 9:28). His supreme Sacrifice was necessary, but also sufficient for the forgiveness of our sins. The claim that the bread and the wine change today–and have been changing for the last 2,000 years–into the body and blood of Christ would mean that Christ was and is being sacrificed again and again–every time when His disciples have been partaking of the symbols of bread and wine.

This concept is clearly contradicted by Scripture–in fact, the Bible contains a strong warning for those who attempt to sacrifice Christ again through their conduct or belief. We read in Hebrews 6:4-6: “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away, to renew them again to repentance, SINCE THEY CRUCIFY AGAIN FOR THEMSELVES THE SON OF GOD, AND PUT HIM TO AN OPEN SHAME.”

3) In addition, we are prohibited in God’s Word, the Bible, to consume any kind of blood (Acts 15:19-20, 28-29; 21:25; Leviticus 17:14). Therefore, the wine could not possibly change into the literal blood of Jesus, to be consumed by His disciples.

4) We should also note that when Christ spoke His words to His disciples, giving them the bread and the wine, He was a human being, and He–the human being–was present with His disciples. The bread and the wine were not “identical” with–but separate from His body; and they were not changed, in any way, to become (part of) His blood or body–as otherwise, Christ would have somehow “divided” Himself at that moment into eleven or twelve “components.”

Many commentaries have pointed out the utter absurdity of a belief in the dogma of “transubstantiation.”

a) Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible point out:

“It is not improbable that our Lord pointed to the broken bread, or laid his hands on it, as if he had said, ‘Lo, my body!’ or, ‘Behold my body!’ – ‘that which “represents” my broken body to you.’ This could not be intended to mean that that bread was literally his body. It was not. His body was then before them ‘living.’ And there is no greater absurdity than to imagine his ‘living body’ there changed at once to a ‘dead body,’ and then the bread to be changed into that dead body, and that all the while the ‘living’ body of Jesus was before them.

“Yet this is the absurd and impossible doctrine of the Roman Catholics, holding that the ‘bread’ and ‘wine’ were literally changed into the ‘body and blood’ of our Lord. The language employed by the Saviour was in accordance with a common mode of speaking among the Jews, and exactly similar to that used by Moses at the institution of the Passover [Exodus 12:11:] ‘It’ – that is, the lamb – ‘is the Lord’s Passover.’ That is, the lamb and the feast ‘represent’ the Lord’s ‘passing over’ the houses of the Israelites. It serves to remind you of it. It surely cannot be meant that that lamb was the literal ‘passing over’ their houses – a palpable absurdity – but that it represented it.

“So Paul and Luke say of the bread, ‘This is my body broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.’ This expresses the whole design of the sacramental bread. It is to call to ‘remembrance,’ in a vivid manner, the dying sufferings of our Lord. The sacred writers, moreover, often denote that one thing is represented by another by using the word is. See [Matthew 13:37:] ‘He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man’ – that is, represents the Son of man. [Genesis 41:26:] ‘the seven good kine [cows] are seven years’ – that is, ‘represent’ or signify seven years… The meaning of this important passage may be thus expressed: ‘As I give this broken bread to you to eat, so will I deliver my body to be afflicted and slain…'”

b) Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible adds the following:

“‘This is my body’ – Here it must be observed that Christ had nothing in his hands, at this time, but part of that unleavened bread which he and his disciples had been eating at supper, and therefore he could mean no more than this, viz. that the bread which he was now breaking represented his body, which, in the course of a few hours, was to be crucified for them. Common sense, unsophisticated with superstition and erroneous creeds, – and reason, unawed by the secular sword of sovereign authority, could not possibly take any other meaning than this plain, consistent, and rational one, out of these words.

“‘But,’ says a false and absurd creed, ‘Jesus meant, when he said, Hoc Est Corpus Meum, This is my body, and Hic Est Calix Sanguinis Mei, This is the chalice of my blood, that the bread and wine were substantially changed into his body, including flesh, blood, bones, yea, the whole Christ, in his immaculate humanity and adorable divinity!’ And, for denying this, what rivers of righteous blood have been shed by state persecutions and by religious wars! Well it may be asked, ‘Can any man of sense believe, that, when Christ took up that bread and broke it, it was his own body which he held in his own hands, and which [he] himself broke to pieces, and which he and his disciples ate?’…

“Besides, our Lord did not say, hoc est corpus meum, (this is my body), as he did not speak in the Latin tongue… let it be observed that, in the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Chaldeo-Syriac languages, as used in the Bible, there is no term which expresses to mean, signify, denote, though both the Greek and Latin abound with them: hence the Hebrews use a figure, and say, it is, for, it signifies… And following this Hebrew idiom, though the work is written in Greek, we find in [Revelation 1:20:] The seven stars Are (represent) the angels of the seven Churches: and the seven candlesticks Are (represent) the seven Churches. The same form of speech is used in a variety of places in the New Testament, where this sense must necessarily be given to the word…”

c) John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible agrees, adding the following observation:

“Now when he says, ‘this is my body’, he cannot mean, that that bread was his real body; or that it was changed and converted into the very substance of his body; but that it was an emblem and representation of his body, which was just ready to be offered up, once for all: in like manner, as the Jews in the eating of their passover used to say… of the unleavened bread, this is ‘the bread of affliction’, which our fathers ate in the land of Egypt. Not that they thought that was the selfsame bread, but that it resembled it, and was a representation of the affliction and distress their fathers were in at that time: to which some think our Lord here alludes: though rather, the reference is to the passover lamb, which is frequently, in Jewish writings, called ‘the body’ of the lamb…

“And now it is, as if Christ had said, you have had ‘the body’ of the lamb set before you, and have eaten of it, in commemoration of the deliverance out of Egypt, and as a type of me the true passover, quickly to be sacrificed; and this rite of eating the body of the paschal lamb is now to cease; and I do here by this bread, in an emblematical way, set before you ‘my body’, which is to be given to obtain spiritual deliverance, and eternal redemption for you; in remembrance of which, you, and all my followers in successive generations, are to take and eat of it, till I come.”

In conclusion, the Bible does NOT teach the dogma or doctrine of “transubstantiation.” Rightly understood, that unbiblical teaching changes, and actually denies the very meaning and essence of Christ’s Sacrifice.

The Sacrifice of Jesus Christ is of unspeakable importance for us. It is God’s greatest gift to mankind. We must never belittle it by partaking of the symbols of bread and wine in an unworthy manner (compare 1 Corinthians 11:27-29); or by partaking of the symbols more than once a year; or by doing so on any other occasion than the annual Passover; or by falsely believing and teaching that the symbols of bread and wine change into the very body and blood of Christ.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Back to top

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new StandingWatch program (#164) has been posted on StandingWatch, Google Video and YouTube It is titled, “Coming–The Great Depression?” In the program, Norbert Link discusses the fact that most Americans are worried about the economy. Many financial analysts and commentators around the world have similar fears. But what can YOU do in these times of recession and potential depression? How can you avoid going into debt, and how can you become debt-free? Does God, in His Word, the Bible, show you what you must do?

Norbert Link’s most recent video-recorded sermon, which was given on April 12, 2008, has been posted on Google Video. It is titled, “Bible Study–Paul’s Message to Corinth.”

Back to top

ONE Constant

by Shana Rank

As I sit and ponder some of life’s challenges and experiences, there has always been ONE constant–more constant than friendships or living conditions, more reliable than a paycheck or automobile, and more patient than a diligent teacher. God, of course, is that ONE constant.  A truth I take much courage in, is that God does not change.

I, on the other hand, am not always constant–with family, friendships, attitudes or even paying bills. God’s perfect mercy understands the ebb and flow of my life, and waits to see growth.  I must bear fruit, and my labor must be with a happy heart.

Even though I will never achieve perfect consistency–I can still try!  My constant faith in God will insure His support through all of my life’s adventures.

Back to top


How This Work is Financed

This Update is an official publication by the ministry of the Church of the Eternal God in the United States of America; the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada; and the Global Church of God in the United Kingdom.

Editorial Team: Norbert Link, Dave Harris, Rene Messier, Brian Gale, Margaret Adair, Johanna Link, Eric Rank, Michael Link, Anna Link, Kalon Mitchell, Manuela Mitchell, Dawn Thompson

Technical Team: Eric Rank, Shana Rank

Our activities and literature, including booklets, weekly updates, sermons on CD, and video and audio broadcasts, are provided free of charge. They are made possible by the tithes, offerings and contributions of Church members and others who have elected to support this Work.

While we do not solicit the general public for funds, contributions are gratefully welcomed and are tax-deductible in the U.S. and Canada.

Donations should be sent to the following addresses:

United States: Church of the Eternal God, P.O. Box 270519, San Diego, CA 92198

Canada: Church of God, ACF, Box 1480, Summerland, B.C. V0H 1Z0

United Kingdom: Global Church of God, PO Box 44, MABLETHORPE, LN12 9AN, United Kingdom

The Sacrificial System and the Tabernacle in the Wilderness

Viewable PDF
Printable PDF

To Request a FREE hard copy of this booklet, please write to: contact@eternalgod.org

Introduction

This booklet addresses a topic that might seem ancient, irrelevant and too boring to consider in our busy 21st century lifestyle. Why should we care about what the ancient Israelites did in the wilderness thousands of years ago? Why should we take the time to read about their sacrifices and their tabernacle? Besides, didn’t Jesus’ death abolish these ancient rites, so that there could not possibly be any importance attached to them, at least for true Christians, right?

Well, you just might be surprised!

The fact of the matter is, the sacrifices and the tabernacle in the wilderness have a very DEEP meaning for true Christians today! God was very specific—for good reason—when He instructed Moses and ancient Israel on the sacrificial system and the tabernacle in the wilderness, and their relevance for us today is NOT to be cast aside!

Be prepared now, for an astonishing journey through the pages of history, as well as the prophecies that point to events that are yet to be fulfilled, and you will begin to see the bigger picture of how the sacrificial system and the tabernacle in the wilderness are very relevant in YOUR life today!

Chapter 1—What Is the Sacrificial Offering System?

The sacrificial system is described in detail in the book of Leviticus. The Hebrew title of the book is, “And He Called.” The Jewish Talmud calls it the “Law of the Priests” and the “Law of the Offerings.” In the Greek Septuagint, it is called, “That Which Pertains to the Levites,” from which the Latin name “Leviticus” is derived.

The theme of the book is the admonition for God’s people to become “holy” (Leviticus 19:2; 20:26). The people of ancient Israel did not become a holy people at that time, but God says that they will become a holy people in the future (Isaiah 62:12). True Christians today are already called a holy people, a “holy [or “royal,” compare 1 Peter 2:9] priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God” (1 Peter 2:5).

Sacrifices—Past, Present and Future

The Bible reveals the correlation between the ancient sacrificial offering system described in the book of Leviticus and the way we worship today, as well as future worship in the Millennium.

Sacrifices Before Moses’ Time

The Bible reveals that offerings and sacrifices were already being given before the sacrificial system was established—long before the time of Moses.

Genesis 4:3–4 gives a report of offerings presented by Cain and Abel. They apparently knew of the custom of bringing various offerings from time to time; in this case, grain and burnt offerings. However, Cain apparently brought his sacrifice grudgingly, while Abel brought his offering willingly. We are told that God accepted the offering that Abel brought, but rejected Cain’s offering.

In Genesis 8:20, we have a report of Noah’s burnt offering, which was accepted by God. We also read that Job offered burnt offerings to God (Job 1:5), and that God commanded Job’s three friends to give a burnt offering (Job 42:8)

When dealing with the Old Testament sacrificial offering system under Moses, we must understand that it did not include wrong or unholy laws. The sacrificial system was enacted to deal with the sins of carnal people who had not received the Holy Spirit. God certainly would have preferred, of course, that people not sin at all (compare Jeremiah 7:21–23; Psalm 51:16–19). This still can be said of true Christians today. God wants us to not sin, so that we can then claim forgiveness through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

Sacrifices Under Christ and the Early New Testament Church

We find that the sacrificial offering system was administered during the time of Christ. Luke 2:22–24 tells us that Mary and Joseph gave burnt and sin offerings (compare Leviticus 12:1–8); and we read in Luke 5:12–14 that Jesus commanded a healed leper to give an offering. That particular offering included all types of sacrifices described within the sacrificial system; i.e., a grain offering, a sin offering, a burnt offering, a trespass offering and a subtype of the peace offering (compare Leviticus 14:10–13; all to be discussed below).

It is true, of course, that after the death of Christ, sacrifices were no longer necessary (compare Hebrews 10:1–10, specifically addressing burnt offerings). Hebrews 10:18 tells us that “there is no longer an offering for sin.” However, it was not prohibited to participate in the sacrificial offering system after Christ’s death. Jewish Christians sacrificed until the destruction of the temple in 70A.D.

We read in Acts 21:18–24 that Paul participated in the offering system. When following the “customs” of the Jews, he did the following: “Then Paul took the men, and the next day, having been purified with them, entered the temple to announce the expiration of the days of purification, at which time an offering should be made for each one of them” (verse 26).

It was of course not sinful for Paul to participate in these customs, although they were no longer required. Paul said that he became a Jew to the Jews in order to win some (1 Corinthians 9:20). And, although he had made it clear that circumcision was no longer required, he still circumcised Timothy, for the Jews’ sake, in order not to place a stumbling block before them (Acts 16:1–3). He did it not for the sake of the believing Jews—for he brought with them the decree of the apostles and elders to satisfy them that circumcision was no longer necessary—but rather for the sake of the unbelieving Jews who would not have allowed an uncircumcised person to teach in their synagogues.

Later, Paul wrote the letter to the Hebrews to show the Jewish Christians that they did not need a physical temple and that participation in the sacrificial offering system was no longer required.

It is important to understand that the sacrificial system was never enforced on Gentiles who became Christians (Acts 15:19–20). At the same time, they had to abstain from those things that had been part of a pagan offering system. As we explain in our booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound…”, on page 17, the four items to be avoided (idols, sexual immorality, strangled meat and blood) were all prohibitions listed in the context of the sacrificial system within the Law of Moses. So as to avoid any misunderstanding, the apostles and elders clarified to the Gentiles that these laws were still valid and binding on them.

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible explains it in this way:

“By the first, Pollutions of Idols, or, as it is in Acts 15:29, meats offered to idols, not only all idolatry was forbidden, but eating things offered in sacrifice to idols, knowing that they were thus offered, and joining with idolaters in their sacred feasts, which were always an incentive either to idolatry itself, or to the impure acts generally attendant on such festivals.

“By the second, Fornication, all uncleanness of every kind was prohibited; for [“porneia”] not only means fornication, but adultery, incestuous mixtures, and especially the prostitution which was so common at the idol temples, viz. in Cyprus, at the worship of Venus; and the shocking disorders exhibited in the Bacchanalia, Lupercalia, and several others.

“By the third, Things Strangled, we are to understand the flesh of those animals which were strangled for the purpose of keeping the blood in the body, as such animals were esteemed a greater delicacy.

“By the fourth, Blood, we are to understand, not only the thing itself… but also all cruelty, manslaughter, murder, etc., as some of the ancient fathers have understood it.”

As mentioned, even though the sacrificial system was not to be enforced on the Gentiles, Acts 15:19–20 shows that Gentiles were not prohibited from participating in it; but when they did, they had to do so in accordance with God’s instructions.

Sacrifices Before Christ’s Return and in the Millennium

God reveals to us that offerings will be given during the Millennium.

For instance, we read about the time of the Millennium in Ezekiel 43:18, 22, 27: “And He said to me, ‘Son of man, thus says the Lord God: “These are the ordinances for the altar on the day when it is made, for sacrificing burnt offerings on it… On the second day you shall offer a kid of the goats without blemish for a sin offering… When these days are over it shall be, on the eighth day and thereafter, that the priest shall offer your burnt offerings and your peace offerings on the altar…”’”

Another passage that describes the time of the Millennium is Ezekiel 44:15, 29–30. It refers to the offering of fat and blood, as well as grain offerings, sin offerings and trespass offerings. Describing the same time setting, Zechariah 14:21 says that “Everyone who sacrifices shall come” to the LORD’S house—a new Temple in Jerusalem.

From these Scriptures, we see clearly that burnt offerings, peace offerings, grain offerings, sin offerings and trespass offerings will be given in the Millennium.

We also understand that the Jews will give offerings again, for a while, just prior to the return of Jesus Christ. In Malachi 3:2–4, these offerings, which apparently may not be pleasing to God, are compared with the offerings that will be given in the Millennium, which WILL be pleasing to God.

Yes, in the future, sacrifices will be reinstated—at least on a temporary basis—but GOD will NOT reinstate the Old Testament sacrificial SYSTEM. That is, the sacrifices that will be given before Christ’s return (Daniel 12:11), and those given in the Millennium (compare Ezekiel 40:38–43, which describes the preparation of burnt offerings, sin offerings and trespass offerings during the Millennium), are not the same as those that were part of the old covenants with the nations of Israel and Judah. The New Testament tells us that the sacrifices—as part of the Old Testament system—are no longer valid. The Levites will still officiate over sacrifices, but these sacrifices will not be given pursuant to the same system that existed in the Old Testament, under Moses.

The Bible also indicates that, at the beginning of the Millennium, new moons will be kept in conjunction with the bringing of sacrifices (Ezekiel 45:17, 46:1, 3, 6; Isaiah 66:20–23). However, there is no Biblical injunction for us today that would compel us to either celebrate new moons or bring sacrifices.

It is important to understand that the millennial sacrifices will NOT be brought for the purpose of forgiveness of sin! Only Christ’s shed blood accomplished this—once and for all! But God introduced the sacrificial system to ancient Israel because Israel had sinned and the sacrifices served as a reminder of their sins. Apparently, for the same reason in the Millennium, sacrifices will be brought so that carnal, unconverted people can begin to appreciate the awesome purpose and meaning of Christ’s Sacrifice and how God looks at sin.

Animal sacrifices, especially, illustrate what sin does to us and others, as well as what Christ did for us. They teach us one reason for the suffering of innocent and righteous people: Even Jesus Christ suffered, although He was totally innocent. The killing of innocent animals points at the suffering and ultimate death of Jesus Christ.

Of necessity, there will be an ongoing physical priesthood serving throughout the Millennium in order to properly administer the sacrifices. The physical sacrifices extant at that time will be brought in Jerusalem—in a newly-built temple—and will be part of the new administration that God’s Kingdom will usher in.

What We Can Learn from the Sacrifices

We DO know that all five types of the Old Testament sacrifices will be given again in the future, after Christ has returned, and we DO understand that they hold a deep symbolic meaning. The ancient sacrifices pointed to Christ and what He would accomplish by sacrificing His own life. In this way, the sacrifices foreshadowed the substance, or essence, of the ultimate reality—Christ—the Savior. Most people in Old Testament times did not understand that, nor do many today understand this very important symbolism.

The sacrifices show us how careful and diligent the people had to be in following God’s detailed and specific instructions—to the letter—and even though most people did not understand the real meaning behind those instructions, they were still obligated to follow them, precisely.

The same can be said for our worship of God today. We may not know why God instructs us to do a certain thing or to avoid doing something. We may, in fact, think we know better. God’s command in a given situation may not sound “logical,” reasonable or convincing to us. But God does know what is best for us, and He requires that we follow Him—obeying Him exactly in every detail—whether we understand the reason for it or not.

Five Types of Offerings and What They Symbolize

There are only five types of offerings that God required: the burnt offering, the grain offering, the peace offering, the sin offering and the trespass offering. As we will show, they portray five steps in our reconciliation with God—actually picturing what Christ did for us and how we are to respond to Him.

Five Steps of Reconciliation

These five types of offerings are given here in brief summary form as they correlate to the five steps of reconciliation with God. We will discuss them in much more detail in the ensuing sections of this booklet.

The burnt offering foreshadows the first step toward our renewed contact or reconciliation with God—loving God. We are to strive to live sinless lives and to become living sacrifices, thus expressing our love toward God.

The grain offering foreshadows the second step of our reconciliation with God—loving our neighbor. We are to strive to live a sinless life toward our neighbor, thus expressing our love for our neighbor.

The peace offering foreshadows the third step of our reconciliation with God, and is what the name implies—peace. We express peace by having continual peaceful fellowship with God and with our neighbor.

The sin offering foreshadows the fourth step of our reconciliation with God—forgiveness of our sins. We can receive continual forgiveness of sin and our sinful nature through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

The trespass offering foreshadows the fifth step of our reconciliation with God—forgiveness of our sins and trespasses against our neighbor. Additionally, this offering requires some form of restitution in order to fully reconcile with our neighbor.

Our complete reconciliation with God is made possible through Christ’s Sacrifice for our sins and trespasses and our sinful nature, along with having Him continually living His life in us, thereby continually purifying us. But we have to do our part as well. We have to accept what Christ did for us in the past and what He is doing for us today, and we have to be willing participants in the process of becoming perfected.

The ancient sacrifices foreshadowed what Christ would do for us, and even though they are not required to be performed today, the significance of the symbolism contained in each type of sacrifice cannot be ignored by true Christians today. They show us—in symbolic and figurative ways—how we are to approach and respond to our God and our Savior—in appreciation and obedience—by living a sinless life, thus becoming a living sacrifice.

The Five Types of Offerings in Detail

The Burnt Offering

The burnt offering is described in Leviticus 1:1–17. For space limitations, we will not quote the entire passage, but we strongly recommend that you study this passage in your Bible before continuing to read this booklet. In doing so, you will gain a better understanding as we explain the details of the offering.

Purpose of the Burnt Offering

To bring about our reconciliation with God, by loving God; it foreshadowed the first step toward renewed contact with God.

The Kind of Sacrifice Offered

A male animal without blemish; i.e., a bull, a lamb, a goat or a dove.

What Was Offered?

The entire animal was burned.

Consumption

No one, not even the priests, ate anything from that animal.

Symbolism

It symbolized Christ.

The innocent, sinless Jesus Christ gave Himself as a sacrifice. Leviticus 1:2 shows that the burnt offering was a voluntary offering—as Christ gave His life for us voluntarily (John 10:17–18).

The animal sacrifice had to be without blemish (Leviticus 1:3)—as Christ was without blemish—without sin (compare 1 Peter 2:21–22).

The animal was a sweet-smelling aroma (Leviticus 1:9)—as it pleased God to give His only-begotten Son to die for us so that man could enter the Family of God and become an immortal Spirit being, AND it pleases God when He sees us respond to Christ’s Sacrifice.

All the animals that could be sacrificed symbolized Christ.

They included a bull (verses 3, 5), symbolizing strength (In Isaiah 34:6–7, the destruction of powerful Edom is pictured as a slaughter of wild oxen, young bulls and mighty bulls).

They also included a lamb or a goat (verse 10), which portrays acceptance of God’s Will without complaining (Isaiah 53:7), as well as persistence and strong leadership.

Another animal that could be sacrificed was a dove (verse 14), portraying innocence and sincerity (Matthew 10:16).

In addition, the burnt offering symbolized the true Christian, in whom Jesus Christ lives.

We are called living and holy sacrifices (Romans 12:1). We have to give our life as a living sacrifice to God. As the burnt offering was completely burned (Leviticus 1:9), so we must give ourselves completely and without reservation to God. As members of God’s Church, we have to become without blemish (Ephesians 5:25–27).

Gentiles to be a Sacrifice

In this context, let us also consider the following remarkable statement found in Romans 15:15–16, showing that converted Gentiles are also to be living sacrifices. The Authorized Version reads: “That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy [Spirit].”

Other translations render this passage as follows:

“…so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God” (New International Version); “…so that gentiles might become an acceptable offering” (New Jerusalem Bible); “…to offer the Gentiles to him as an acceptable sacrifice” (Revised English Bible); “…so that the Gentiles, when offered before him, may be an acceptable sacrifice” (Century Translations in Modern English).

Further Symbolism of the Burnt Offering

Before the burnt offering was sacrificed, it was cut into its pieces (Leviticus 1:6)—the head, the fat (verse 8), as well as its entrails and the legs, which also had to be washed (verse 9). They all were to be burned as well. But why did God insist on prior special “treatment” and emphasis? The reason is that the different “parts” represented something.

The head represents our thoughts and intellect (Isaiah 1:5–6 says that the whole head of Israel is sick).

The fat represents a blessed human being (Deuteronomy 31:20).

The entrails (The Authorized Version states: “inwards”) represent our feelings and motivation. Psalm 64:6 tells us that both the inward thought and the heart of man are deep. Jeremiah 31:33 says that God will put His law in the inward parts of the people (compare the Authorized Version).

The legs represent our walk—our way of living. In the Hebrew, as in the English, the words “legs” are used in the plural—referring to all of them—showing unity and coordination; one leg does not move to the left, while another leg moves to the right. The legs represent coordinated strength in our way of living. Compare Ephesians 4:1 (“walk worthy”); Ephesians 5:15 (“walk circumspectly as wise, not fools”); 1 Kings 18:21 (“how long do you limp on both sides?”, Luther Bible); Hebrews 12:12–13 (“make straight paths for your feet so that what is lame may… be healed”).

The legs had to be washed. The washing of our feelings and our walk represents our cleansing (compare Ephesians 5:25–26).

The person giving the offering had to lay his hand on the head of the animal (Leviticus 1:4), indicating his identification with the sacrifice. He had to kill it himself (verse 5), as he was responsible for and guilty of the death of Jesus Christ—as all of us are, individually and collectively. Isaiah 53:5 says that Christ was wounded—pierced through—for our transgressions, and Isaiah 53:8 says that He was stricken for the transgression of God’s people.

Meaning for Us Today

The sacrifice was burnt—as a complete and total burnt offering. Mark 9:49 says: “For everyone will be seasoned with fire, and every sacrifice will be seasoned with salt.”

We have to lead a sinless life, a life which is tested and found genuine through fire (compare 1 Peter 1:6–7; 4:12). Every part of a Christian—his thoughts, feelings and his deeds—must be subjected to God, as Christ was submissive to the Father. And, we must love God totally—before anything or anyone else (compare Matthew 22:37).

The burnt offering was a request to God to accept the fruit of the Holy Spirit, which is being produced in the life of a true Christian. We read in Romans 15:16 that the offering or sacrifice of the Gentile Christians is acceptable when sanctified through the Holy Spirit. We also read in 1 Peter 2:4–5, that we are to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. When Christ lives in us through the Holy Spirit, and when we follow His lead, then we are totally accepted by God, and even our death will be precious in His sight (Psalm 116:15; Isaiah 57:1–2).

To reiterate, the burnt offering symbolizes our love toward God. Our love toward God is summarized in the first four of God’s Ten Commandments.

The Grain Offering

The grain offering is described in Leviticus 2:1–16. Again, for reasons of limited space, we are not quoting the entire passage here; but please read the passage in your Bible before continuing, so that you can fully appreciate the connection between the past, the present and the future sacrifices.

The grain offering was sometimes given together with a drink offering (Leviticus 23:13). They constituted non-animal offerings, but they were sometimes given together with animal sacrifices (compare Numbers 15:2–12).

Purpose of the Grain Offering

It foreshadowed the second step toward our reconciliation with God, by loving our neighbor.

The Kind of Sacrifice Offered

Fine flour, oil, frankincense; unleavened cakes with oil; and salt.

What Was Offered?

Handful of fine flour with oil and frankincense (Leviticus 2:2).

Consumption

The priests ate the sacrifice.

Symbolism

It symbolized Christ.

Christ gives Himself as the true bread for man (compare John 6:48–51). Christ made clear that He is the Bread of Life.

The grain offering symbolizes Christ’s love towards us—His neighbors. This Godly love toward neighbor is summarized in the last six of the Ten Commandments. [As we mentioned, the first four commandments summarize our love toward God—symbolized in the burnt offering.] Therefore, the burnt offering and the grain offering are closely connected (Numbers 28:11–12; Judges 13:19; Ezra 7:17).

The Grain Offering symbolized also the individual Christian.

We have to symbolically “eat” Christ—the Bread of Life (compare John 6:48, 50). We have to live by every word of God that comes out of the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4).

We are reconciled to God—on a continual basis—if we love God AND our neighbor. 1 John 5:2 says that we know that we love the children of God when we love God and keep His commandments.
1 John 4:12 adds that if we love one another, God abides in us; and 1 John 4:20 says that if anyone says, I love God, and hates his brother, he is a liar; for he who does not love his brother, cannot love God, either.

As Christians, we are to love our neighbor (Matthew 22:39; Romans 13:9–10).

The grain offering is a sweet aroma to the Lord (Leviticus 2:2), as it is pleasing to God when we love our neighbor. Compare Ephesians 5:1–2: “Therefore be imitators of God as dear children. And walk in love, as Christ also has loved us and given Himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling aroma.”

Let us also take note of the symbolism of the different ingredients of the grain offerings.

The grain offering had to be mixed with oil (Leviticus 2:2–5), symbolizing the anointing with the Holy Spirit (compare Acts 10:38; Isaiah 61:1). We can only truly love our neighbor with Godly love, when, and as long as God’s Holy Spirit lives in us. Romans 5:5 tells us that the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit that God gave us.

The grain offering included frankincense (Leviticus 2:2)—but not honey (verse 11), as honey is perishable. Sweet incense or frankincense is symbolic for the prayers of the saints (compare Psalm 141:2; Revelation 5:8). Revelation 8:3 tells us that our prayers are offered with much incense upon the golden altar in front of the throne of God in heaven. In the context of the grain offering (picturing love toward neighbor), we see that our prayers need to express our love toward our neighbor.

We read that the Magi gave frankincense as a gift to the Christ Child (Matthew 2:11). This has been understood as a reference to Christ becoming our High Priest, who represents us before God the Father in heaven.

The grain offering included salt (Leviticus 2:13), indicating permanency and incorruption (compare Numbers 18:19). Our love toward our neighbor must be enduring and lasting.

Wine was another ingredient of the grain offering (compare Numbers 15:5 for the drink offering—a subtype of the grain offering). Wine represents the blood of Jesus Christ. As true Christians, we are instructed to partake of the Passover, once a year, by eating bread and drinking wine (compare John 6:53–54).

Normally no leaven was to be offered with the grain offering (Leviticus 2:4, 5, 11), as leaven is sometimes used in the Bible to symbolize sin (compare 1 Corinthians 5:7). Leaven was permitted to be offered in the context of the offering of the firstfruits—but not on the altar—to show that Christians, who are called “firstfruits” (James 1:18; Revelation 14:4) are not yet without sin. When leaven was offered, it was NOT a sweet-smelling aroma (Leviticus 2:12).

The Peace Offering

The Peace Offering is described in Leviticus 3:1–17; 7:11–18, 28–34. We again urge you to read these passages in your Bible before continuing, to gain the full benefit of what you are reading in this booklet.

The peace offering was divided into five different categories of offerings:

  • the Sacrifice of Thanksgiving (Leviticus 7:12–15)
  • the Sacrifice for a Vow (Leviticus 7:16–17)
  • the Sacrifice as a Voluntary or Freewill Offering (Leviticus 7:16–18)
  • the Sacrifice as a Heave Offering for the priest (Leviticus 7:14, 28–34)
  • the Sacrifice as a Wave Offering for the priest (Leviticus 7:28–34)

Purpose of the Peace Offering

It foreshadowed the third step toward our reconciliation with God, by having peaceful fellowship with God, as well as a peaceful meal with the priest and the one who brings the offering (“the offeror”).

A good relationship between the true ministry of God and the membership is important. This includes respect for the office of the ministry. The peace offering pictures the priest representing the entire community or “church,” when he [representing all the people] ate with the offeror.

We find a similar analogy in Matthew 18:17. In that passage, the word “church” refers to the ministry. After an unrepentant sinner refuses to listen to the offended brother or sister, as well as selected witnesses, it is the “church’s” responsibility—that is, the responsibility of the ministry, representing the church—to speak to the sinner, in a last ditch effort to show him or her the severity of his or her actions.

The Kind of Sacrifice Offered

Blameless male or female ox (Leviticus 3:1), lamb or goat (vv. 7, 12).

What Was Offered?

Only the fat which covers the entrails, the kidneys and the fatty lobe attached to the liver had to be burned to the LORD.

Consumption

The consumption of the unburned parts depended on the type of the offering:

The high priest received the breast during a wave offering (compare Leviticus 7:30).

The priests received the right thigh during a heave offering (compare Leviticus 7:33–34).

The rest was eaten by the offeror—the one who offered the animal. The peace offering constituted the ONLY OFFERING in which the offeror shared, by eating a portion of the sacrifice.

If the peace offering was a thanksgiving offering, it had to be eaten on the same day.

If the peace offering was a voluntary or free will offering, or a vow offering, it had to be eaten on the first or the second day.

Symbolism

Since God and the priest and the offeror participated in the consumption of the sacrifice, it symbolized our fellowship with God and our brethren (compare 1 John 1:3).

It was a sweet-smelling aroma (Leviticus 3:5), just as our true fellowship with God and our fellow brethren is pleasing to God. It is also very pleasing to God that we have become a part of His very Family—the Family of God. We read in 1 John 3:2 that we are already the children of God.

The peace offering symbolizes peace between God and man. In Isaiah 9:6–7; 53:5, we find the symbolism referring to Jesus Christ—our “Peace”—who will bring us peace; and in Psalm 133:1, we find the symbolism referring to Christians who live in peace with their brethren.

As mentioned, a thanksgiving offering had to be eaten on the same day—showing that we must not delay to give thanks to God for what He does for us (compare Hebrews 13:15–16).

A vow offering had to be eaten on the first or on the second day. This indicates that we should make careful consideration before we make a vow or a promise. Once we make it, we must keep it (compare Ecclesiastes 5:1–7).

The Sin Offering

The sin offering is described in Leviticus 4:1–35; 5:1–13. When reading these passages in your Bible, please note that the headline of Leviticus 5:1 is confusing in the New King James Bible, as it gives the impression that the trespass offering begins with Leviticus 5:1. This is false. The trespass offering does not start until Leviticus 5:14, compare the Luther Bible. Please note, too, that Leviticus 5:6 is poorly translated in the New King James Bible. Rather than saying, “he shall bring his trespass offering to the LORD,” it should read, “guilt offering.” Leviticus 5:6 is still talking about the “sin offering.”

Since the sin offering deals with sin, let us briefly mention what sin is. Basically, we find three Biblical definitions of sin:

1 John 3:4 tells us that “sin is lawlessness” or—as the Authorized Version has it—“the transgression of the law.”

Romans 14:23 tells us that “whatever is not from faith is sin.”

And James 4:17 tells us: “…to him who knows to do good and does not do it, to him it is sin.”

The sin offering includes, symbolically, all these aspects of sin.

Purpose of the Sin Offering

It constituted a sacrifice for a specific sin for which no restitution was possible. It foreshadowed the fourth step toward our permanent reconciliation with God, showing the importance of maintaining a peaceful relationship with God.

No restitution was possible in those kinds of sacrifices, symbolizing the fact that nothing we can do entitles us to the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ. We cannot earn our salvation. No restitution or payment, and no amount or degree of penance will make us clean in the sight of God (compare Proverbs 20:9).

The Kind of Sacrifice Offered

A young bull without blemish if a priest sins (Leviticus 4:3); a young bull if the congregation sins (Leviticus 4:14); a male kid of the goats without blemish if a ruler sins (verse 23); or a female kid of the goats or a female lamb without blemish if a common person sins (verses 27–28, 32).

If the common person cannot offer a kid of the goats or a lamb as a sacrifice, he is permitted to bring two turtledoves or two young pigeons (Leviticus 5:7). If he can’t even do that, he can bring a certain amount of flour (Leviticus 5:11).

These provisions ensured that EVERYBODY who has sinned was able to bring the sin offering.

Note Hebrews 9:22 in this context, which says that “ALMOST” all things are by the law purged or purified with blood. As was the case in Leviticus 5:11, in rare circumstances, atonement could be received without the shedding of blood (compare also Numbers 16:46; 31:50).

We might also note that the burnt and the grain offerings were sometimes given together with the sin offering (compare Numbers 28:11–15)—picturing the fact that sin is still in our lives, even after conversion, requiring the “revisiting” of the previous steps of establishing a permanent relationship and reconciliation with God.

What Was Offered?

The fat was burned on the altar; or in the case of flour, a handful was burned.

Consumption

Priests ate the sacrifice (including the flour as a grain offering, Leviticus 5:13); the one who gave the offering did not eat from it (Leviticus 6:25–26).

This shows the part that a priest or a minister has in the pronouncement of the forgiveness of sin. Only God forgives sin, but He uses His priests, prophets and ministers, at times, to make the fact clear to others that God forgave sins (compare 2 Samuel 12:13; John 20:22–23).

Symbolism

The sin offering symbolizes Christ who carries our sins. The animal [carcass] was burned outside the camp (compare Leviticus 4:11–12, 21). Christ was killed outside the City of Jerusalem (compare Hebrews 13:12–13). Sin will not enter the New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:27; 22:14–15).

The sin offering also symbolized the individual Christian. Christ died for our sins (compare 2 Corinthians 5:21), including our sinful nature (compare Romans 8:3–4; 7:18). We need to crucify our individual sins, as well as our human carnal nature (compare Galatians 5:16, 24). We must become dead to sin—not just individual sinful acts (compare Romans 6:10–11). We must die to sin and be cleansed from sin on a continual basis (compare 1 John 1:7–9).

The Trespass Offering

The trespass offering is described in Leviticus 5:14–19; 6:1–7; 7:1–17. Again, please carefully read these passages from your Bible before continuing.

Purpose of the Trespass Offering

It constituted a sacrifice for sin for which restitution WAS possible. It foreshadowed the fifth and final step toward our permanent reconciliation with God, showing the importance of maintaining a peaceful relationship with our neighbor.

The Kind of Sacrifice Offered

A ram without blemish (Leviticus 5:15).

What was Offered?

Only the fat, which was burned (Leviticus 7:3–5).

Consumption

The priest ate the sacrifice (Leviticus 7:7). The one who brought the sacrifice did not eat from it.

Again, this shows the role of the priest or minister in the pronouncement of forgiveness of sin, as well as regarding physical healing (compare James 5:14–16).

Symbolism

The sin offering is closely related to the trespass offering (compare Leviticus 7:7). The sin offering symbolized Jesus Christ’s ultimate Sacrifice. We read that Christ died for our sins and trespasses (2 Corinthians 5:19; Ephesians 2:1–5; Colossians 2:13). While sin many times describes an unlawful action against God, trespasses relate to unlawful conduct against our neighbor.

The trespass offering was made for individual sinful acts—not for the sinful nature per se. It was also necessary to eradicate or recompense for the consequences of trespasses (Leviticus 5:16). We should note, however, that even though restitution was made toward the wronged neighbor, God still required, in addition to that, the bringing of an offering—because when we trespass against our neighbor, we at the same time sin against God.

The trespass offering symbolized also the individual Christian. Christ’s Sacrifice is sufficient to forgive us our sins, our sinful nature and even the damage that we might have caused to others by our conduct (compare Hebrews 10:14). But we are still to go to our neighbor to bring about reconciliation with him, whether he has sinned against us or we have sinned against him, or even if we know that he thinks we did. Matthew 18:15 emphasizes the case when our brother sins against us, while Matthew 5:23–26 describes our responsibilities toward our brother when our brother has something against us; that is, when we have wronged him.

All Sacrifices Listed

A summary listing of these five sacrifices is also given in Leviticus 7:37–38 as follows: “This is the law of the burnt offering, the grain offering, the sin offering, the trespass offering, the consecrations [for the priests, as described in Leviticus 8:1 ff] and the sacrifice of the peace offering, which the Lord commanded Moses on Mount Sinai, on the day when He commanded the children of Israel to offer their offerings to the Lord in the wilderness of Sinai.”

It is interesting to note that God changes the order slightly in this summary, placing the sin and the trespass offering BEFORE the peace offering. He did not focus here on the necessary order of steps to establish permanent reconciliation with God, but He wanted to emphasize the ultimate goal of our Christian life—to obtain and maintain PEACE with God and our neighbor. We can only accomplish this when the peace of God lives in us.

The Five Steps of Reconciliation with God

In a brief recap of the five types of offerings, we can see how they correlate with the five steps toward our reconciliation with God. As previously mentioned, all Old Testament sacrifices point toward Christ. They picture what Christ did for us, what He is still doing for us today, and how we are to respond to Him. They picture reconciliation with God.

The Burnt Offering = The First Step toward our reconciliation or renewed contact with God.

Admonition: Strive to live a sinless life toward God; become a living sacrifice, out of love toward God

The Grain Offering = The Second Step toward our reconciliation with God.

Admonition: Strive to live a sinless life toward our neighbor, out of love toward our neighbor.

The Peace Offering = The Third Step toward our reconciliation with God.

Admonition: Have continued peaceful fellowship with God and our neighbor.

The Sin Offering = The Fourth Step toward our reconciliation with God.

Admonition: Obtain continued forgiveness of our sins against God and our sinful nature, through Jesus Christ.

The Trespass Offering = The Fifth Step toward our reconciliation with God.

Admonition: Obtain continued forgiveness of our individual sins and trespasses against our neighbor, through Christ, requiring restitution (by going to our neighbor).

Summary of the Symbolism of the Sacrificial System

Our permanent and enduring reconciliation with God is made possible only through Christ’s Sacrifice for our sins against God and neighbor, and our sinful nature, as well as His living in us and continually purifying us. But we have to do our part. We have to accept what Christ did for us in the past, and what He is doing for us now, and we have to be willing participants in the process of becoming more and more perfect.

The sacrifices foreshadowed what Christ would do for us. Even though they are no longer required to be given by us today, they have great symbolic meaning for us. They show, in figurative ways, how we are to respond to our great Savior, King and Lord. We are to appreciate and obey God’s Word; we are to be living sacrifices; and we are to become more and more perfect in developing the very character and mind of God.

Chapter 2—The Tabernacle in the Wilderness

As we saw in the first chapter, God was very specific in His instructions to the Israelites regarding the various types of sacrifices. We will see in this chapter that He was also very specific about where those sacrifices were to be brought. God did not want the Israelites to sacrifice just anywhere. Rather, they had to bring their offerings to a place that was designed specifically for that purpose—the tabernacle in the wilderness. And, like the sacrifices performed in it, the tabernacle in the wilderness also carries a very deep meaning for us today.

Those who like to be entertained by movies, have undoubtedly seen Steven Spielberg’s “Raiders of the Lost Ark.” If you have seen it, you may recall the climactic scene when the ark of the covenant was opened and evil persons were exterminated by some ghostly apparitions ascending from the ark. That, of course, was pure Hollywood fiction!

But what about the true ark of the covenant? What happened to it? Originally, it was placed in a big tent, referred to in Scripture as the Tabernacle. But the ark has been lost from sight. As is the case with Noah’s ark, there is wild speculation as to where it may be, and whether or not it is going to be found and excavated before, or after, Christ’s return. Some even claim that the ark of the covenant will be found before Christ’s return so as to motivate the Jews to begin again to bring sacrifices. That, of course, is pure speculation and is not backed by any Biblical evidence whatsoever.

What then, became of the ark of the covenant?

According to Jewish tradition (compare 2 Maccabees 2:1–8, Revised Standard Version), Jeremiah hid the ark, the tent and the altar of incense in a cave on the mountain where Moses was buried, and he then sealed the entrance. He told the people: “The place shall remain unknown until God gathers his people together again and shows his mercy. Then the Lord will disclose these things, and the glory of the Lord and the cloud will appear…” (verses 7–8).

But this “tradition” does not seem to square with Scripture. We read in Jeremiah 3:16 regarding the ark of the covenant at the time when God will gather His people: “’Then it shall come to pass, when you are multiplied and increased in the land in those days,’ says the LORD, ‘that they will say no more, ‘The ark of the covenant of the LORD.’ It shall not come to mind, nor shall they remember it, nor shall they visit it, nor shall it be made anymore.’”

Earthly Tabernacle

We read in Exodus 25:8–9 that the entire earthly tabernacle and its furnishings were to be made according to a pattern shown by God to Moses. The earthly tabernacle was to reflect and resemble a heavenly reality—a heavenly tabernacle (compare Acts 7:44–47; Hebrews 8:4–5; 9:1, 11, 23–24; Revelation 11:19; 15:5).

In the New Testament, Paul gives us the following summary of the tabernacle in the wilderness and its furnishings. We read in Hebrews 9:2–5: “For a tabernacle was prepared: the first part, in which was the lampstand, the table, and the showbread, which is called the sanctuary [holy place; literally, “holies”]; and behind the second veil, the part of the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of All, which had the golden censer and the ark of the covenant overlaid on all sides with gold, in which were the golden pot that had the manna, Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tablets of the covenant [the Ten Commandments]; and above it were the cherubim of glory overshadowing the mercy seat…”

The entire complex of the tabernacle in the wilderness consisted of the court, which was surrounded by a fence or an entrance curtain, and the tent.

The Israelite would enter the court after passing the fence. Before him, and between him and the tent, was the altar of burnt offering. Behind the altar, but before the tent, was the bronze laver or bronze basin, for the use of the priests who would carry out the sacrifice on the altar of burnt offering. It was a large ceremonial vessel for washing—restricted to only the priests. The Latin word lavatorium and our word “lavatory” are derived from the word, laver.

The priest would go into the tent through a veil. The tent itself was divided into the Holy Place, or Sanctuary, and the Holiest of All, which was also called the Holy of Holies.

The Sanctuary or Holy Place contained:

    The table of showbread, which stood at the right-hand or north side.

    The lampstand with seven arms, which stood to the left or south side.

    The altar of incense [which was placed before the second veil, which separated the Holy Place or Sanctuary from the Holy of Holies].

The Holy of Holies, also known as the Most Holy Place, contained:

    The ark with the mercy seat and the two cherubim (angelic beings).

    Later were added a golden pot with manna, Aaron’s rod that budded (compare Numbers 17:1–5), and, temporarily, the golden censor. In addition, the tablets of the covenant; that is, the Ten Commandments, were placed inside the chest or the ark of the covenant.

    The tabernacle was set up one year after Israel’s exodus from Egypt (Exodus 12:2), and nine months after Israel’s arrival at Mount Sinai (Exodus 19:1).

Specific Measurements Given

We read in Exodus 25:10 that the ark of the covenant was two and a half cubits in length, a cubit and a half was to be its width, and a cubit and a half its height.

A cubit was the length of a man’s arm from his elbow to his extended middle finger. The commonly accepted estimate for the cubit is 18 inches. The ark, then, would have been approximately 4 feet long and about 2-1/4 feet wide and high (exactly 3’9” x 2’3” x 2’3”).

The tabernacle tent took up 1/15th of the entire complex. The Holy Place measured 20 x 10 cubits; the Holy of Holies measured 5 x 5 cubits. The court measured 100 x 50 cubits (Ex. 27:18); or 150 feet x 75 feet, and was screened with linen curtains 7 ½ feet high.

In giving measurements in meters, the court, which was surrounded by a fence, would have been 50 x 25 meters.

The Tabernacle and the Temples

Once the tabernacle was finished, God filled it with His glory, as He also did when the temple of Solomon was built 500 years later, replacing the tabernacle. The ark of the covenant and some of the furnishings were placed in the temple (compare 1 Kings 8:4, 6–9). 1 Chronicles 9:23 refers to the temple as the “house of the tabernacle.” It also speaks of the temple as the house of the LORD, after the ark came to rest (compare 1 Chronicles 6:31). The temple was not just the successor to the tabernacle. The tabernacle, at least through its most important piece—the ark of the covenant—along with some other furniture, was actually located INSIDE the temple.

When Israel turned away from God, His glory and presence departed, and the temple was destroyed in 587 B.C. At that time, the tabernacle and its contents disappeared from the Bible. The temple was rebuilt—but the tabernacle was no longer in it—even though some items may have been.

For example, one of the candlesticks, which were later placed in Solomon’s temple, was taken and afterwards returned by the Babylonians. The candlestick in Herod’s temple might have been that candlestick that originated with the tabernacle in the wilderness. It was taken to Rome in 70 A.D., and nothing further is known about it.

Solomon’s Temple

When Solomon built a temple, following the instructions and the design of his father David, it was to represent a more permanent dwelling place for God—even though God does not dwell in temples made by human hands (compare Acts 7:47–50)—while the tabernacle was to represent a portable “temple.” God did not really dwell in either; it was merely a symbolic way of showing the “presence” of God. In that way, God will again “dwell” or “tabernacle” with man in the future (compare Leviticus 26:11; Revelation 21:3).

Solomon’s temple was patterned after the tabernacle in the wilderness. However, there were some distinctions: The tabernacle was exactly half the size of Solomon’s temple. The temple had a porch or “vestibule,” which the tabernacle did not have. Later, the temple built under Zerubbabel was patterned after Solomon’s temple. It had a porch as well, but it was only half that high. Under Herod, that temple was greatly remodeled, and the porch’s height was increased.

Details of Solomon’s Temple

The temple’s Most Holy Place or “inner sanctuary” (1 Kings 6:19; 8:6), which corresponded to the Most Holy Place of the tabernacle, was called also the “inner house” or “inner room” (1 Kings 6:27). The floors were made with the cedars of Lebanon (1 Kings 5:6; 6:16), and its walls and floor were overlaid with pure gold (1 Kings 6:20, 21, 30).

It contained two cherubim (1 Kings 6:23), corresponding to the two cherubim on top of the ark of the covenant of the tabernacle. Each had outspread wings, so that, since they stood side by side, the wings touched the wall on either side and met in the center of the room (1 Kings 6:24–28).

There were doors between it and the Holy Place, overlaid with gold (2 Chronicles 4:22); also a veil of blue, purple, crimson and fine linen (2 Chronicles 3:14), corresponding to the veil of the tabernacle, separating the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place. The Most Holy Place had no windows (1 Kings 8:12). It was considered the dwelling place of God, who must give us His light to see in darkness. In the Most Holy Place was placed the ark of the covenant.

The reason for the color scheme of the veil was symbolic. In Jewish tradition, blue represented the heavens, while red or crimson represented the earth. Purple, a combination of the two colors, represents a meeting of the heavens and the earth. Thus, purple can also be a representation of the Messiah in Jewish and Christian traditions. The only way into the Holy of Holies (God’s presence) was through the purple veil (Jesus Christ, the Messiah). Regardless, these colors were given by the inspiration of God, and all of God’s instructions had to be faithfully obeyed (compare 1 Chronicles 28:10–12).

As we will see, that veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom when Jesus died on the cross (compare Mark 15:38). According to the Jewish historian Josephus, that veil was four inches thick and was renewed every year. Horses tied to each side could not pull it apart. It barred all but the high priest from the presence of God—and even he could only enter it once a year—on the annual Holy Day of the Day of Atonement.

The Holy Place (compare 1 Kings 8:8–10) was also called the “greater house” or the “larger room” (2 Chronicles 3:5). It was of the same width and height as the Holy of Holies, but twice as long; thus the name “larger room.” Its walls were lined with cedar, on which were carved figures of cherubim, palm trees, and open flowers, which were overlaid with gold. Chains of gold marked it off from the Holy of Holies.

The porch, “vestibule” or entrance before the temple on the east was traditionally called the Ulam (1 Kings 6:3; 2 Chronicles 3:4). The length corresponded to the width of the temple (1 Kings 6:3). References to “Solomon’s porch” can be found in John 10:23; Acts 3:11; and Acts 5:12 (Authorized Version).

In the porch stood the two pillars Jachin and Boaz (1 Kings 7:21). These names, as the pillars themselves, were symbolic. The pillars did not support any part of the building. The names indicated strength and stability. Jachin means, “He shall establish,” and Boaz means, “in it is strength.” The names possibly conveyed the thought that God will establish in strength the temple and the true religion.

Chambers were built about the temple on the southern, western, and northern sides (1 Kings 6:5–6, 10). These formed a part of the building and were used for storage of the utensils of the tabernacle. They were probably one story high at first; two more may have been added later.

The inner court of the priests (2 Chronicles 4:9), called the “inner court” (1 Kings 6:36), was separated from the space beyond by a wall of three rows of hewn stone and a row of cedar beams (1 Kings 6:36). The tabernacle in the wilderness did not have such an inner court for the priests. The temple’s inner court of the priests contained the brazen Sea or the “Sea of cast bronze” (2 Chronicles 4:2–5, 10), and ten lavers of bronze (1 Kings 7:38, 39), corresponding to the bronze laver or basin of the tabernacle.

The brazen Sea stood on twelve oxen (1 Kings 7:25). Its purpose was to afford opportunity for the purification of the priests by immersion of the body. The ten lavers of bronze, each of which contained “forty baths” (1 Kings 7:38), rested on portable holders made of bronze, provided with wheels, and ornamented with figures of lions, cherubim, and palm trees.

In the tabernacle was no brazen Sea; rather, one bronze laver served the double purpose of washing the hands and feet of the priests as well as the parts of the sacrifices. But in the temple there were separate vessels provided for these tasks related to washings and the bringing of sacrifices. The brazen Sea held from 16 thousand to 20 thousand gallons of water.

According to 1 Kings 7:48–49, there stood in the Holy Place, before the Holy of Holies, the golden altar of incense and the table for showbread. This table was of gold, as were also five lampstands on each side of it, corresponding to the one golden lampstand of the tabernacle.

2 Chronicles 4:8 reveals that Solomon actually made ten golden tables of showbread and placed all of them in the Holy Place. But in spite of his initial dedication to God and His temple, he did not stay loyal and faithful to God, but allowed evil influences to persuade him to depart from Him.

The great court or outer court surrounded the whole temple (2 Chronicles 4:9), and corresponded to the courtyard of the tabernacle. Here the people assembled to worship God (Jeremiah 19:14; 26:2).

After the temple was built, Solomon dedicated it to the LORD by offering sacrifices in the courtyard or inner court of the priests. 1 Kings 8:63–64 reads: “And Solomon offered a sacrifice of peace offerings… On the same day the king consecrated the middle of the court that was in front of the house of the LORD; for there he offered burnt offerings, grain offerings, and the fat of the peace offerings, because the bronze altar that was before the LORD was too small to receive the burnt offerings, the grain offerings, and the fat of the peace offerings.”

The altar of burnt offerings was inadequate for the vast number of sacrifices given on this occasion. Therefore, Solomon set apart the middle of the court of the priests to bring sacrifices, apparently on an additional altar (compare 2 Kings 16:14).

We see, then, that the temple took over the function of the tabernacle.

The Millennial Temple

And so will the new temple at the time of the Millennium, which is described in the book of Ezekiel, beginning with the 40th chapter. Specifically mentioned are: a wall around the entire temple; eastern, northern and southern gateways; gate chambers; a vestibule of the gateway; an outer court with chambers; an inner court; tables on which to slay the offerings; an altar made of wood; chambers for the singers; a Sanctuary or Holy Place; and the Most Holy Place.

A Tour of the Original Tabernacle

Returning to the original tabernacle in the wilderness, we will begin our tour of the complex of the entire tabernacle, by commenting briefly on the concept of the tabernacle and its furnishings.

We read in Exodus 26:1: “Moreover you shall make the tabernacle with ten curtains…”

The tabernacle was actually a portable temple. The word “tabernacle” comes from the Latin, tabernaculum, meaning tent. The Hebrew word means “to settle down, to abide, to dwell, to live in a tent.” It describes a “dwelling place.” Sometimes it only refers to the tent. In other places, it means the tent with the surrounding courtyard.

In Exodus 26:6, we read: “… so it may be ONE tabernacle…” There was only to be one tabernacle, one altar, and one place of worship. God’s instructions were that Israel was to have only one place of sacrifice, and that this one place was in front of the tabernacle (compare Leviticus 17:1–5).

The high quality of the precious materials making up the tabernacle shows God’s greatness. The portable nature of the tabernacle shows God’s desire to be with His people as they traveled.

tabernacle

Symbolism

The tabernacle prefigured Jesus Christ and His ultimate sacrifice, who “tabernacled” or “dwelt” among men (compare John 1:14: “And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us…”).

God’s glory entered Herod’s temple in the person of Jesus Christ, who “tabernacled” among men. After Christ’s death, God’s glory departed from the temple, and it was destroyed. But His glory lives today in His Church.

This means that the tabernacle symbolizes Christ AND His Church.

The Church is a habitation of God—a dwelling place—through His Spirit (compare Ephesians 2:19–22). This includes each individual believer (compare 1 Corinthians 6:19). We might say, the Christian is a spiritual tabernacle. And so is the Church of God (compare Psalm 15:1).

The tabernacle had TEN curtains—not just one curtain (compare Exodus 26:1). This might represent the fact that at times, there may be in existence several Church organizations, and even several Church eras, but they are all ONE in that they all belong to the ONE true Church wherein the Holy Spirit dwells (Romans 8:8–9; Ephesians 4:4–6; 1 Corinthians 12:11–14). The ten curtains had to be of “fine woven linen” (Exodus 26:1), which is symbolic of the righteousness of the saints (Revelation 19:8). God JUDGES all of us individually, and He judges His Church—“ten” is the number of judgment. That is why God gave us His Ten Commandments, on the basis of which we will be judged.

The curtains were to be embroidered with cherubim—angelic beings—to confirm that the angels of God closely watch over or, in that sense, “pitch their tents” round about the Church.

The description of the tabernacle in Exodus 25 begins with the inside, according to God’s view, and moves to the outside. God begins from Himself, working outward toward man. Salvation is from the LORD. God must grant us salvation—we cannot get it through our own efforts, apart from God.

It also shows a movement from the more valuable to the less valuable products or material used—notice that God’s instructions has one move from the Most Holy Place to the Holy Place and finally to the outer area, as we will now do.

The Holy of Holies

We begin our tour of the tabernacle in the Holy of Holies, inside the tent:

The Ark of the Covenant

We are first introduced, in Exodus 25:10, to the Ark of the Covenant or of the Testimony.

ark of covenantIt was made of acacia wood. It was durable and resistant to disease and insects, making it the most suitable material for constructing the ark (Exodus 25:12–14). Rings of gold allowed the ark to be carried on poles. It was not to be picked up by hand or carted about (Exodus 25:16). Inside the ark or chest were the two tablets of the Ten Commandments, as well as Aaron’s rod. Then there was a special container in which were the manna, holy anointing oil and other objects of special meaning.

There are five names given to the ark in the Old Testament:

    The ark of the covenant, because it contained the two tablets of the law (Numbers 10:33).

    The ark of the testimony (Exodus 25:22), because God testified about Christ’s holiness and man’s sinfulness.

    The ark of God [or of the LORD], because it was the only visible throne of God (1 Samuel 3:1–4; 2 Samuel 6:9).

    The ark of Your [God’s] strength, because of God’s miracles associated with the ark (Psalm 132:8).

    The holy ark, because it was on top of the ark where God dwelt, between the two cherubim, and from where He spoke to Moses (2 Chronicles 35:3).

Symbolism

The ark of the covenant and its material—acacia wood and gold—are a type of the humanity and deity of Christ.

Since the tabernacle also represents the Christian in whom Christ lives, it shows that we, even though we are human, must be purified and become more and more as God is. Our faith, for instance, must be found more precious than gold.

Finally, Aaron’s rod is a symbol of the resurrection; that is, of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, as well as our future resurrection.

The Mercy Seat

Continuing in Exodus 25:17–18, we see a description of the “Mercy Seat”:

“You shall make a mercy seat of pure gold… And you shall make two cherubim of gold… at the two ends of the mercy seat.”

The term “mercy seat” is an English translation of a Hebrew noun, which means, “the place of propitiation.” It is derived from a verb, meaning, “to atone for,” “to cover over” or “to make propitiation.” The mercy seat was the lid for the ark of the covenant—that is, it was placed upon the ark—as well as the base on which the cherubim were to be placed. The ark, then, was the place where the mercy seat rested. It was the place where sins were covered—hence, the name “the place of propitiation.”

Exodus 25:20 continues: “And the cherubim shall stretch out their wings above, covering the mercy seat with their wings, and they shall face one another; the faces of the cherubim shall be toward the mercy seat.”

The mercy seat was overshadowed by two golden cherubim. These angelic beings were to protect the mercy seat, the ark and its contents; their outstretched wings were to provide a throne for God. Their faces were to be toward the mercy seat, bowed in adoration and humility before God.

Symbolism

The mercy seat was made of pure gold, which represents God’s throne, from which He reigns, and from which He forgives (Psalm 99:1–5, 8).

It also shows our potential—to rule as kings and priests with, and under Christ, ON THIS EARTH.

The Sanctuary

In our tour, we leave the Holy of Holies, pass through the inner veil, and enter the Sanctuary:

Table for the Showbread

The first furnishing that God describes within the Sanctuary is the Table for the Showbread. Exodus 25:23, 30 reads: “You shall also make a table of acacia wood… And you shall set the showbread on the table before Me always.”

The table was used to display twelve loaves of unleavened bread, in two rows with six loaves in each row (compare Leviticus 24:5–6). The loaves were changed every Sabbath and, having been consecrated, were eaten by the priests in the Sanctuary (Leviticus 24:9). The bread had to be there “always” (Exodus 25:30). It was known as holy bread (1 Samuel 21:4).

table showbreadFrankincense was placed on each row of bread, “that it may be on the bread for a memorial, an offering made by fire to the LORD” (Leviticus 24:7).

Also, there were cups associated with the table for the showbread, probably containing wine and oil (Exodus 25:29).

The table was to have rings and poles so that it could be transported properly (Exodus 25:26–27). The poles protected the holy object from being touched by human hands.

Symbolism

The showbread is a type of Christ—the Bread of God—who nourishes the Christian. It shows that God gives us physical AND spiritual food (John 6:11, 26–27, 33).

The twelve loaves represent the twelve tribes of Israel. As the Church of God is spiritual Israel today, the loaves represent our fellowship with God. They also symbolize our gratitude to God for our daily bread, without worries and doubts (compare Luke 11:3; Matthew 6:25–26, 33–34).

The Golden Lampstand

Next, we are introduced to the golden lampstand (“menorah”) inside the Sanctuary. Exodus 25:31 states: “You shall also make a lampstand of pure gold…”

lampstandAs verses 31 and 32 explain, all of the elements of the lampstand were to be hammered out of one solid piece of gold. One of the seven lamps was to be placed in the center, flanked by three branches on either side. Seven represents completion. It burned continually, and the priests had to tend it from evening until morning, but not during the day (compare Exodus 27:20–21).

Symbolism

The lampstand provided light for the ministering priests and typified Christ, the Light of the world (compare John 1:5; 8:12). Natural light was excluded from the tabernacle, as the natural mind does not receive the things of God. Christ enlightens us (compare Ephesians 1:15–18). He must give us His light of understanding (compare Ephesians 5:8–14).

The lampstand is also symbolic for the Church and, to an extent, its seven Church eras, which are referred to in Revelation 1:20 and described as seven “lampstands” or “candlesticks.” But there is an important difference between the ONE lampstand with seven arms, and the SEVEN different candlesticks of the Church in the book of Revelation—one, two or three of those candlesticks could be removed (compare Revelation 2:5), while others would still remain.

The lampstand of the tabernacle is also symbolic for the single Church member (compare Matthew 5:14–16). It signifies his light-bearing and witness through worship and right conduct (compare Philippians 2:14–15)

The Oil for the Lampstand

Exodus 27:20 continues to describe the oil for the lampstand, as follows:

“And you shall command the children of Israel that they bring you pure oil of pressed olives for the light, to cause the lamp to burn continually.”

The oil was obtained from olives that were beaten rather than crushed. It gave finer quality, burned more brightly and with less smoke.

It was so holy that—according to Jewish tradition and understanding—the people were strictly forbidden to copy it for personal use.

Symbolism

The oil symbolizes God’s Holy Spirit, which is unique. It cannot be copied. Either one has God’s Holy Spirit, or one does not have it (compare Matthew 25:1–4; Zechariah 4:2–6). It had to be renewed daily, in the morning and in the evening, based on Leviticus 24:3–4. Likewise, Christians must continually “stir up” God’s Holy Spirit—that is, they must make use of this power in their lives constantly (compare 2 Timothy 1:6).

The Altar of Incense

Another important feature within the Sanctuary, the altar of incense, is mentioned later, in Exodus 30:1: “You shall make an altar to burn incense on; you shall make it of acacia wood…”

Logically, this section concerning the altar of incense, should follow the description of the making of the table for the showbread and the golden lampstand, as they were all articles in use in the inner part of the Sanctuary.

incense altarThe reason why the description of the altar of incense comes out of order here may be connected with the fact that it follows the section concerning the inauguration of Aaron and his sons as priests (compare Exodus 28:1–43; 29:1–46). The burning of incense is now listed first among their priestly functions. And they are commanded not to offer “strange incense” (Exodus 30:9). But that is exactly what Aaron’s sons, Nadab and Abihu, did on the day of their inauguration (compare Leviticus 10:1–4). The order of commands concerning the incense altar here sets the stage for those coming events. And it establishes the extreme importance of precise obedience to the ritual commandments, especially by the priests.

The altar of incense stood before the curtain or veil that shut off the Holy of Holies (Exodus 30:6). Sweet-smelling incense was burned on it morning and evening when the priest tended the lamp (Exodus 30:7–8). It was so holy—as was the anointing oil—that the people were strictly forbidden to copy it for personal use.

It was made of acacia wood (as was the ark of the covenant and the table of the showbread). Rings and poles were used to carry the altar, signalizing the great respect that was demanded for the transportation of these holy furnishings.

Symbolism

Incense symbolizes our prayers (compare Revelation 5:8; Psalm141:2). We can have constant access to the Holy of Holies and the Sanctuary through our prayers (compare Hebrews 10:19, 22).

Aaron sacrificed twice a day. This symbolizes the need for our perpetual prayers (compare Revelation 8:3–5).

In addition, the altar of incense and its associated functions, including the ministering priest who burned incense on the altar of incense, symbolize Christ, our Intercessor (compare Hebrews 7:25).

The incense itself also represents Christ Himself, who prays on our behalf. We are praying to God the Father through Jesus Christ and in His name—that is, Christ Himself intervenes on our behalf before God the Father, explaining and communicating to the Father what we might have wanted to say, but could not or did not. Christ, the Lord (1 Chronicles 28:9), searches our hearts and understands all the intent of the thoughts. We read that we don’t know what we should pray for as we ought, but that Christ, the life-giving Spirit, makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered (compare Romans 8:26–27, 34; 2 Corinthians 3:17; 1 Corinthians15:45).

The Inner Veil

As we mentioned, when Aaron the priest went from the Holy of Holies to the Sanctuary or Holy Place, or vice versa, he had to pass through the “inner veil,” separating the Sanctuary from the Holy of Holies.

Exodus 26:33 says about the veil:

“And you shall hang the veil from the clasps. Then you shall bring the ark of the Testimony in there, behind the veil. The veil shall be a divider for you between the holy place and the Most Holy.”

The inner veil separated the Holy Place (which contained the altar of incense; the golden lampstand; and the table for the showbread) from the Holy of Holies (which, as we will recall, contained the ark of the covenant and the mercy seat; compare Exodus 26:34–35).

The inner veil was to hang from four pillars of acacia wood overlaid with gold (compare Exodus 26:32).

The priest entered the Holy Place each day to tend to the altar of incense, the golden lampstand, and the table for the showbread. But only the high priest (apart from Moses) could enter the Most Holy Place—and that only once a year, on the Day of Atonement (“the day of covering over”)—to make atonement for the sins of the nation as a whole (compare chapter 3 of this booklet).

Symbolism

The priests made the journey on behalf of the people, and therefore symbolized and represented the Church. Each Israelite felt the presence of God. The way of Israel was the way of the symbol—by entering the court, moving from the altar of burnt offering and the laver through the outer veil into the Sanctuary with its bread, lamp and incense, and then moving through the inner veil into the Most Holy Place with the law, mercy and atonement, to the ultimate presence with God.

The inner veil represents Jesus Christ. The Israelites had to cover the entire tabernacle when they transported it, as they did not have any access to God’s Holy Spirit. When Jesus died, the curtain in the temple, which had replaced the veil of the tabernacle—but which had maintained the same function and symbolism—tore from top to bottom (compare Mark 15:37–38). This figuratively pointed at our free access to God.

The inner veil is a type of Christ’s body, granting us access to God, the Holy of Holies, and God’s Holy Spirit, as this is clearly revealed in Hebrews 10:19–20: “Therefore, brethren, having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way which He consecrated for us, through the veil, that is, His flesh.”

Outside the Tent

In our tour, we now move from the Holy Place or Sanctuary to the area outside the tent. In doing so, we will adopt the reverse order from our own journey, and view as it would appear for the Israelite entering the tabernacle complex area:

The Court

Exodus 27:9 tells us that the Israelite would first enter the court: “You shall also make the court of the tabernacle. For the south side there shall be hangings for the court made of fine woven linen…”

Before the tabernacle or tent, there was to be a court or yard, enclosed with hangings of the finest linen that was used for tents.

Symbolism

This court was a type of the Church, enclosed and distinguished from the rest of the world. Exodus 27:10 explains that the court was supported by pillars, denoting the stability of the Church, hung with clean linen (compare again verse 9), which describes the righteousness of the saints (Revelation 19:8).

These were the courts David longed for and coveted to reside in (Psalm 84:1–2, 10), and into which the people of God were to enter with praise and thanksgiving (Psalm 100:4).

Yet, this court would contain but a few worshippers. The same is true for God’s Church today. God must call us into His Church. Nobody can come to Christ unless the Father draws him or her.

Exodus 27:17 says that “All the pillars around the court shall have hooks or bands of silver…” This shows that the court and its pillars also symbolize Jesus Christ. Psalm12:6 says that “The words of the LORD are pure words, Like silver tried in a furnace of earth, Purified seven times.” In God’s court or Church, we must uphold the words of God, which are pure words, like silver, which is tried and purified to completeness.

The Gate of the Court

The gate of the court (compare Exodus 27:16) points at Christ, through whom we have access to His Church (compare John 10:1, 7, 9). He is also our access to God the Father (John 6:44, 65).

We NEED the Church of God—we have to be IN the “court.” We cannot remain outside, or leave the court (compare Ephesians 4:11–16). Conversely, people who are outside the court are those who are not “in” the Church and who do not want to hear God’s truth.

But just being “in” the Church by attending Church services on and off is not enough. Rather, we must GROW in the knowledge of Jesus Christ and we must be following His lead. Notice the warning in Revelation 11:1–2, which seems to be addressing a literal temple still to be built in Jerusalem prior to Christ’s return, and, in a figurative way, those Church members who are not content to move from just being “in” the Church to a more perfect understanding of God’s truth.

The Altar of Burnt Offering

Once an Israelite had stepped into the court, he would first see the altar of burnt offering, as described in Exodus 27:1–2: “You shall make an altar of acacia wood… And you shall overlay it with bronze…”

burnt altarThe altar was made of wood covered with bronze in order to make it lightweight for transport and still fireproof. All the sacrifices within the sacrificial offering system were made on this altar.

It was the first thing that the people saw as they entered the tabernacle courtyard. The altar signified that all who entered were defiled by sin and could approach God only by way of sacrifice. The fire on the altar was never to go out (compare Leviticus 6:9, 13).

Symbolism

The brazen altar of burnt offering pictured Jesus Christ. That the fire on the altar never went out, shows that Christ’s supreme Sacrifice, which was given once and for all, still has permanent application, relevance and importance for us today, AND it will have that same importance for all eternity. Christ is still referred to as the LAMB throughout the book of Revelation, even after He has returned, and after the New Jerusalem has descended from heaven.

The brazen altar of burnt offering stood on a hill, which is symbolic for Christ, who died on the hill of Golgotha. Christ sanctified Himself for His Church, as their altar (John 17:19). Hebrews 13:10 tells us: “We have an altar from which those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat.” But today, Christ’s true disciples are allowed to eat from that altar—Jesus Christ.

The High Priest went on the Day of Atonement with a golden censer into the Holy of Holies, bringing incense and burning coals of fire from that altar (compare Leviticus 16:12–13; Hebrews 9:2–4).

Revelation 8:3 mentions a golden censer in heaven; and Ezekiel 28:14–16 mentions burning coals of fire or “fiery stones” in heaven as well (Please note that the quoted passage in Ezekiel 28 describes Lucifer’s fall from “the mountain of God” in heaven.) As the “earthly” burning coals of fire were taken from the altar of burnt offering, they symbolize the sufferings of Christ. The burnt offering symbolizes Jesus Christ, and He had to go through fiery trials of suffering.

The High Priest took the censer in his right hand, and the cup in his left, and went through the veil into the Most Holy Place. He typified Christ our High Priest, who, as we already saw, entered, through the veil, into the Holiest of All, with His body and His blood.

The Four Horns of the Altar

Exodus 27:2 specifically mentions four horns of the altar of burnt offering. These horns were used to bind the sacrificial animals to the altar (Psalm 118:27).

Symbolism

The horns stand for protection (compare 1 Kings 1:51) and for Christ (compare Psalm 18:2; Luke 1:68–71). When we give ourselves over to God’s physical and spiritual protection, we must do so completely—as helpless tied animals, patiently waiting for God’s rescue, without taking matters into our hands by violating His Law.

The Bronze Laver

Exodus 30:18 introduces the bronze laver. It stood behind the altar of burnt offering and before the tent. But why is it mentioned so late in chapter 30 and not already in Exodus 27, where the court and the altar of burnt offering are described? The answer may be the same as we gave when discussing the altar of incense within the Sanctuary, which was also introduced late.

laverThe bronze laver is mentioned after the consecration of the priests is described in Exodus 28 and 29. But before they could approach God, they needed to be purified, which was accomplished through the bronze laver.

It stood between the altar of burnt offering and the door of the tabernacle and was used for ritual cleansing of the priests (Exodus 30:19, 21). The priests washed their hands and feet—their hands because they had to handle holy items, and their feet because they had to walk in sacred places. This procedure reminds us of the footwashing ceremony at Passover time (compare John 13:1–17).

Symbolism

The bronze laver is symbolic for the cleansing Word of God, and for Christ, who cleanses us from the defilement of this world (compare Ephesians 5:25–26); as well as for baptism and for the Holy Spirit (compare Psalm 51:7; Titus 3:4–7). As mentioned, the laver was for Aaron and his sons, and the priests in succession, to wash their hands and feet. This shows that God’s ministers should be pure and holy in their lives, and that they should be examples to others. This also includes all Christians, who are future priests unto God (compare Revelation 20:6; Isaiah 61:6; 1 Peter 2:4–5).

The Tabernacle Completed According to Instructions

We saw that God gave Moses instructions for the building of the earthly tabernacle, patterned after the heavenly tabernacle. These instructions are contained in chapters 25–27 and 30 in the Book of Exodus. The construction of the tabernacle is described, beginning in Exodus 35. This description basically repeats all of the instructions that had already been recorded in previous chapters.

Why is everything repeated?

Here is the reason: Remember that, after God’s instructions for the building of the tabernacle, Israel sinned greatly by building the golden calf (compare Exodus 32). After that situation was rectified, the tabernacle was built—showing that our sins can be forgiven, and that they will not prevent God’s Will from being carried out, which is, to live WITH us and IN us.

Also, the narrative of the construction shows that the tabernacle was built exactly in the way God had commanded it (Exodus 40:16).

We find the following description of the completed tabernacle in the wilderness in Exodus 40:17–33:

“And it came to pass in the first month of the second year, on the first day of the month, that the tabernacle was raised up. So Moses raised up the tabernacle, fastened its sockets, set up its boards, put in its bars, and raised up its pillars. And he spread out the tent over the tabernacle and put the covering of the tent on top of it, as the LORD had commanded Moses.

“He took the Testimony [the tablets with the Ten Commandments] and put it into the ark [of the covenant], inserted the poles through the rings of the ark, and put the mercy seat on top of the ark. And he brought the ark into the tabernacle, hung up the veil of the covering, and partitioned off the ark of the Testimony, as the LORD had commanded Moses.

“He put the table [for the showbread] in the tabernacle of meeting, on the north side of the tabernacle, outside the veil; and he set the bread in order upon it before the LORD, as the LORD had commanded Moses. He put the lampstand in the tabernacle of meeting, across from the table, on the south side of the tabernacle; and he lit the lamps before the LORD, as the LORD had commanded Moses. He put the gold altar [of incense] in the tabernacle of meeting in front of the veil; and he burned sweet incense on it, as the LORD had commanded Moses. He hung up the screen at the door of the tabernacle.

“And he put the altar of burnt offering before the door of the tabernacle of the tent of meeting, and offered upon it the burnt offering and the grain offering, as the LORD had commanded Moses. He sat the laver between the tabernacle of meeting and the altar, and put water there for washing; and Moses, Aaron, and his sons would wash their hands and their feet with water from it. Whenever they went into the tabernacle of meeting, and when they came near the altar, they washed, as the LORD had commanded Moses.

“And he raised up the court all around the tabernacle and the altar, and hung up the screen of the court gate. So Moses finished the work.”

The Lesson for All Time–God Dwells with His People

We are told in Exodus 40:34 that the “cloud covered the tabernacle of meeting, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle.” This assured the people of God’s continuing presence, and it also showed them that God approved of what had been done.

In the past, God always abided with His people, as long as they let Him do so, never abandoning them to the chaos of the wilderness. God also is there for us today, and He will also dwell or “tabernacle” with His people in the future (Isaiah 4:3–6; Ezekiel 37:27; Revelation 21:3).

The book of Exodus starts with Israel in Egypt, and it ends with God dwelling with them. Converted Christians were once slaves of spiritual Egypt, but they were redeemed by their acceptance of Christ’s Sacrifice. Just as God continued to dwell with His people—ancient Israel—so God will continue to dwell with those in whom God’s Spirit resides.

Chapter 3—The Atonement Rituals

As mentioned before, the high priest was only allowed to enter the Most Holy Place of the tabernacle once a year, on the Day of Atonement. Elaborate rituals had to be carried out, before, during and after his entrance into The Most Holy Place, rituals that also have deeply symbolic meaning for us today (compare Exodus 30:10).

We find these rituals described in Leviticus, chapter 16:

In Leviticus 16:1, God emphasized the importance of following His instructions in exactly the way they were given, lest something bad should happen to those involved with the service of God: “Now the LORD spoke to Moses after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they offered profane fire before the LORD, and died.” It has been suggested that perhaps the two sons had entered the Most Holy Place in the process, which they were not allowed to do.

Leviticus 16:2 states that even Aaron, the high priest, was not allowed to enter the Most Holy Place at any time he wanted. He was only permitted to do so once a year—on the Day of Atonement.

Leviticus 16:3 emphasizes the necessary procedures to be carried out by Aaron. When he approached God at His mercy seat, he had to bring the blood of animals for a sin offering (a young bull) and a burnt offering (a ram). Actually, Aaron would not sacrifice these animals until later, as we will see.

Leviticus 16:4 clarifies that on this initial occasion on the Day of Atonement, Aaron was not to dress himself in splendid golden robes—he would do so later on that day—but first, he had to put on a plain dress of linen, like the common Levites would wear. This plain dress of linen showed humility—a humble character in the recognition of sin and guilt, and the need for forgiveness. That is why God commands us to humble ourselves on this day through FASTING.

Aaron also had to first wash his entire body with water, before putting on the linen. As he put the linen on for the purpose of a sacrificial function in front of God, even this plain linen had become holy, as verse 4 postulates: “These are holy garments.”

Leviticus 16:5 continues: “And he shall take from the congregation of the children of Israel two kids of the goats as a sin offering, and one ram as a burnt offering.” As we will see, especially the two goats for the sin offering had a very specific meaning. But notice, too, that in addition, a ram had to be offered as a burnt offering.

Leviticus 16:6 demands that Aaron offer the bull as a sin offering for himself and his house. As a sinful human being, Aaron had to offer the young bull (verse 3) as a SIN offering for himself, to receive atonement or forgiveness from God for himself and his house—the “house of Aaron,” the priests (compare Psalm 135:19). He did this on the altar of burnt offering, which stood in the courtyard, before the tent.

Leviticus 16:7 continues to state that, following the offering of the bull, Aaron proceeded to present the two goats for the sin offering (verse 5) at the entrance door to the tent, outside the tabernacle.

The Two Goats

Leviticus 16:8 describes a most crucial and pivotal procedure and ritual: “Then Aaron shall cast lots for the two goats: one lot for the LORD and the other lot for the scapegoat.” The English translation “for the scapegoat” is a very unfortunate translation. The Hebrew says, “for Azazel.”

Aaron placed one of the goats for the sin offering on his right hand and the other on his left. He cast into an urn two exactly similar pieces of gold. One piece was inscribed with the words “for the Lord,” and the other “for Azazel.” After having shaken them well together, he put both his hands into the box and took up a lot in each—he put the lot in his right hand on the head of the goat which stood on his right, and that in his left he placed on the other.

The key to the whole explanation lies in a correct understanding of the meaning of Azazel. This word does not occur elsewhere in the Old Testament. The Comprehensive Commentary states: “Spencer, after the oldest opinions of the Hebrews and Christians, thinks Azazel is the name of the Devil.” The One Volume Commentary adds: “Azazel is understood to be the name of one of those malignant demons.”

Hebrew lexicons derive the word from AZAL, which means “he removed or separated.” This is exactly what Satan or Lucifer did when he turned against God and became God’s adversary! Azazel is none other than Satan the Devil! Ancient Jewish literature knew the Devil by this name. It is, for example, spelled Azalzal and Azael in apocryphal literature.

William Gesenius wrote: “This name was used for that of an evil demon… The name Azazel … is also used by the Arabs as that of an evil demon” (Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon, page 617).

Stobart added: “The devil, named Eblis in the Koran, was once one of the archangels in heaven, and was called Azazil, but by disobedience fell” (J.W.H. Stobart, Islam and Its Founder, page 114).

Hermann Schultz wrote: “Azazel is … an Aramaic … name for an unclean and ungodlike power, which has its abode in the wilderness, in the accursed land outside the sacred bounds of the camp” (Old Testament Theology, translated by Paterson, 1892, vol. 1, page 405).

Watson stated: “The high priest … cast lots upon the two goats. One was to be for the Lord for a sin-offering. The other was for Azazel (the completely separate one, the evil spirit regarded as dwelling in the desert), to be sent away alive into the wilderness” (F. Watson, The Cambridge Compan­ion to the Bible, 1893, page 161.)

Another commentary wrote: “Azazel … was probably a demonic being…. Apocryphal Jewish works, composed in the last few centuries before the Christian era, tell of angels who were lured… into rebellion against God. In these writings, Azazel is one of the two leaders of the rebellion. And post [Talmudic] documents tell a similar story about two rebel angels, Uzza and Azzael—both variations of the name Azazel. These mythological stories, which must have been widely known, seem to confirm the essentially demonic character of the old biblical Azazel” (Union of American Hebrew Congrega­tions, The Torah-a Modern Commentary, page 859).

To summarize: Aaron cast lots to determine which goat was to be sacrificed “for the LORD,” and which goat was to symbolize Satan the devil—the “Azazel.”

Leviticus 16:9 continues to describe that Aaron was to offer the goat for the LORD as a sin offering.

Leviticus 16:10 explains, on the other hand, that the Azazel goat had to be presented alive before the LORD, to make atonement upon it, and to be sent alive, as the Azazel goat, into the wilderness.

Aaron Cleanses the Most Holy Place

Leviticus 16:11 shows that Aaron had to kill, for himself, the bull of the sin offering, which was mentioned in verses 3 and 6. He did so on the altar of burnt offering in the courtyard.

Leviticus 16:12 continues: “Then he shall take a censer full of burning coals of fire from the altar before the LORD, with his hands full of sweet incense beaten fine, and bring it inside the veil.”

Aaron went into the tent, into the Holy Place, took a censer full of burning coals of fire and incense from the altar—the altar of incense—and entered the Most Holy Place inside the veil which separated the Holy Place and the Most Holy Place.

Leviticus 16:13 emphasized that Aaron, now within the Most Holy Place, had to place the incense and the fiery coals before the mercy seat, which was on top of the ark of the covenant, so that the cloud of incense would cover the mercy seat. He had to do this so that he would not die.

As incense symbolizes the prayer of the righteous, this requirement shows us again the importance of prayer.

Leviticus 16:14 instructs that Aaron had to sprinkle some of the blood of the sacrificed bull on the mercy seat on the east side, and he had to sprinkle some of the blood seven times before the mercy seat. Seven designates completeness. He had to do this to purify himself to officiate, since he, as high priest, was to represent now THE High Priest—Jesus Christ (compare Hebrews 6:19–20; 7:26–28).

The Goat of the Sin Offering

Leviticus 16:15 continues: “Then he shall kill the goat of the sin offering, which is for the people, bring its blood inside the veil, do with that blood as he did with the blood of the bull, and sprinkle it on the mercy seat and before the mercy seat.”

Aaron went out of the tent and returned to the courtyard, where he killed the goat of the sin offering—the goat for the Lord—“which is for the people.” Thus, the sins of the people were carried by the goat, which died—as Jesus Christ died for us, carrying our sins.

Aaron Represents the Risen Christ

But Christ was resurrected and went to God’s throne in heaven as our High Priest. He entered the [spiritual] Most Holy Place of God the Father on our behalf (1 Peter 3:21–22).

And so, Aaron, the high priest, after he had slain the goat for the Lord, on behalf of the people, went back into the Most Holy Place, and sprinkled that blood on and before the mercy seat. He brought the blood of animals into the Most Holy Place, “for himself and for the people’s sins committed in ignorance” (Hebrews 9:7). In doing so, he represented and foreshadowed Jesus Christ, of whom it is said that “Not with the blood of bulls and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption” (Hebrews 9:12).

The slain goat represented the crucified Jesus. The high priest, by taking the blood of this slain goat into the veil to the mercy seat in the Holy of Holies symbolized Christ’s ascension to heaven. Aaron represented the work of the risen Christ for these last 1,900 years, who ascended to the right hand of God the Father, there interceding as our High Priest.

We see, then, that both the goat and the high priest represented Christ. The slain goat represented Christ’s death. Aaron, the high priest, represented the living, resurrected Christ. That is why he had to be symbolically cleaned so carefully before he could officiate.

Leviticus 16:16 continues: “So he shall make atonement for the Holy Place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, for all their sins; and so he shall do for the tabernacle of meeting which remains among them in the midst of their uncleanness.”

Atonement for the Entire Tabernacle

Aaron was to make atonement for the Holy Place and the entire tabernacle, because of the sins of the children of Israel. Even the altar, the tabernacle and the mercy seat were considered to be defiled by their presence among the carnal, sinning Israelites. This was the case because continually all through the year Israel’s sins were symbolically transferred to the tabernacle and its fixtures. Once a year, on the Day of Atonement, this load of guilt was purged from the nation in order that God might continue to dwell in Israel, because unrepented and unforgiven sin separates us from God (compare Isaiah 59:2).

Leviticus 16:17 teaches that no one was to be inside the tent when Aaron made atonement for himself, for his household and for the people.

Leviticus 16:18 continues: “And he shall go out to the altar that is before the LORD, and make atonement for it, and shall take some of the blood of the bull and some of the blood of the goat, and put it on the horns of the altar all around.”

Aaron had to leave the coals and incense burning in the Most Holy Place, go back out of the tent and make atonement for the altar of burnt offering. He placed some of the blood of the bull of the burnt offering (for himself) and of the goat of the sin offering (to the LORD—for the people) on the horns of the altar.

Leviticus 16:19 states that Aaron had to sprinkle some of the mixed blood of the goat and of the bull seven times on the altar, to cleanse and consecrate it from the uncleanness of the Israelites.

Again, we see that in God’s eyes, the whole tabernacle, including the area outside the tent, was stained by the sins of a guilty people, and that atonement had to be made in order that God would remain with them. The mingled blood of the two animals—the goat and the bull—being sprinkled on the horns of the altar of burnt offering, indicated that both the priests and the people needed atonement for their sins (compare Hebrews 9:22).

Christ’s Return to Earth

As we have seen, when Aaron went behind the veil into the Most Holy Place, he symbolized Christ ascending to God’s throne in heaven. The work he did in the Most Holy Place symbolized Christ’s work for more than 1,950 years. When Aaron came out, he symbolized Christ’s return to earth.

Continuing in Leviticus 16:20, we see that after having atoned for the Holy Place, the entire tabernacle and the altar, Aaron was to bring the Azazel goat—the goat representing Satan the devil.

Again, this aspect of the ceremony pictures the time when Christ has returned to the earth and will deal with Satan. Before the Millennium of Christ’s peaceful rule here on earth can start, Satan must be removed.

One meaning of the word “atonement,” according to Webster is, “to set at one.” God and the human race cannot be fully at one—in full agreement—as long as Satan is around and able to deceive mankind.

Christ paid for OUR part in every sin of which we repent. But He did not pay for Satan’s part in these sins. Satan deceives us to sin. Christ paid for our sins, but not for Satan’s deception and his sins. Satan is called a murderer from the beginning (John 8:44), as he was responsible for the death of Adam and Eve.

The Azazel Goat

Leviticus 16:21 explains that Aaron had to lay both his hands on the head of the Azazel goat; confess over it all the iniquities, sins and transgressions of the Israelites; put them on the head of the Azazel goat; and send it away alive into the wilderness by the hand of a suitable man.

Leviticus 16:22 continues to instruct that the Azazel goat, bearing all the iniquities of the Israelites, was to be let go alive in an uninhabited land—a wilderness. Modern Babylon, a city built on seven hills, and, at the same time, a description of a military, religious and economic system—symbolizing the end-time generation of this evil world—will become such a wilderness (compare Isaiah 13:19–22; Revelation 18:2).

The removal of Satan is described in Revelation 20:1–3: “Then I saw an angel coming down from heaven, having the key to the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. He [the angel, pictured by the suitable man who took the Azazel goat into the wilderness] laid hold of the dragon, that serpent of old, who is the Devil and Satan [pictured by the Azazel goat], and bound him for a thousand years; and cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal on him, so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished. [This is pictured by the fact that the Azazel goat was not killed, but placed alive in the wilderness, far away from the camp of Israel.]”

Aaron’s Golden Garments

Leviticus 16:23 states that Aaron had to go into the Holy Place, take off the linen garments and leave them there.

Leviticus 16:24 instructs Aaron to wash himself in a holy place and put on his golden garments.

The golden garments are described, for example, in Exodus 28:2, 4, where we read: “And you shall make holy garments for Aaron your brother… and these are the garments which they shall make: a breastplate, and an ephod, and a robe…”

More details of Aaron’s holy golden garments are given in Exodus 28: 6, 15, as follows: “And you shall make the breastplate of judgment, the work of an artist; after the manner of the ephod shall you make it: of gold, sky-blue, dark-red, and crimson dyed wool, and of twisted linen shall you make it.”

The uppermost holy garment was apron-like and was called the ephod. On top of the ephod there was the square breastplate, called the “breastplate of judgment” or “decision.” It had twelve precious stones, one stone representing each of the twelve tribes of Israel. The name of the corresponding tribe was engraved on each stone.

On the shoulders were two additional precious stones (compare Exodus 28:12). The names of the six eldest sons of Israel or Jacob were engraved on the stone upon the right shoulder, and the names of the six youngest sons were engraved on the stone upon the left shoulder.

The blue garment was called the robe, under which the high priest wore a fine white linen woven tunic. On his head was the fine white linen turban. Round the base of the turban was the crown of gold, which read: “Holy to the LORD.”

The symbolism attached to the high priest’s garments should not be overlooked. Jesus Christ, our High Priest, will be returning as our Judge and King, ushering in the righteousness of His Kingdom. Our names are written in heaven (Luke 10:20). When Christ returns, He will carry the names of converted Christians, showing that they have become part of His Priesthood and Kingship.

More Sacrifices

Leviticus 16:24 says that after Aaron had put on his golden garments, he was to “come out and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people, and make atonement for himself and for the people.”

The High Priest had to sacrifice more animals outside the tent—burnt offerings for himself and burnt offerings for the people—to make atonement for himself and the people. This would have included the offering of the ram, which was mentioned earlier in Leviticus 16:3. Some commentaries conclude that he actually offered two rams, one for himself, and one for the people. In addition, the offerings as prescribed in Numbers 29:7–11 were to be given at this time. They included a burnt offering of a bull, one ram and seven lambs; a grain offering of fine flour mixed with oil; a sin offering of one kid of the goats; “besides the sin offering for atonement, the regular burnt offering with its grain offering, and their drink offering” (verse 11).

Why did Aaron have to bring these offerings?

First, even though he had assumed the role of Jesus Christ, picturing His return to earth, he himself was not sinless.

Second, even though Christ’s converted disciples will be changed to spirit beings at the time of His return, there will still live human beings—over whom Christ and His disciples will rule—who will begin to accept Christ and His Sacrifice, and who will not be sinless. Christ’s Sacrifice will still have to be applied to them, as it does to us today.

Third, we will recall that sacrifices will be given again in the Millennium, and that human beings—not without sin—will officiate over those sacrifices (compare Ezekiel 43:18–27; 44:20–31).

Leviticus 16:25 instructs that the fat of the sin offering had to be burned on the altar of burnt offering.

Leviticus 16:26 continues to state that the man who had released the Azazel goat could return into the camp, only after he had washed his body.

Leviticus 16:27 instructs that the bull for the sin offering (which Aaron sacrificed earlier for himself) and the goat for the sin offering (the goat for the LORD, which Aaron had sacrificed earlier for the people) was to be carried outside the camp, to be burned outside the camp by a man. Hebrews 13:12–13 explains the figurative meaning of this provision: “Therefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered outside the gate. Therefore let us go forth to Him, outside the camp, bearing His reproach.”

Leviticus 16:28 continues that the man who had burned the bull and the goat could return to the camp, after he had washed his clothes and bathed his body.

Fasting on the Day of Atonement

Leviticus 16:29 shows that, on the Day of Atonement, all the people had to “afflict” their souls, or fast; and they were not permitted to do any work on that day. The passage states that this is “a statute forever for you.”

Leviticus 16:30 explains that on that day, Aaron the high priest made atonement for the people, to cleanse them from ALL their sins.

Leviticus 16:31 adds that this day is a “sabbath of solemn rest,” on which fasting is commanded, forever, to Israel. If we are God’s, then we all are spiritual Israelites (Romans 2:28, 29). And that means we MUST keep this Day of Atonement today.

Leviticus 16:32–33 clarifies that not only Aaron would have to perform the functions of high priest during the Day of Atonement, but also his successor—his son—would have to carry them out, showing that the rituals on the Day of Atonement were not to end after Aaron’s death.

Finally, Leviticus 16:34 emphasizes again that it was an everlasting statute to make atonement for the children of Israel—for all their sins—once a year. It was a commanded assembly, and the entire 16th chapter of the book of Leviticus was read on that day, together with Leviticus 23:27–32.

As we have seen in this chapter, the rituals on the Day of Atonement picture the death, resurrection and return of Jesus Christ, as well as His role as our merciful High Priest. What tremendous meaning was contained in those rituals—showing vital aspects of the master plan of God for mankind!

Conclusion

And so, we have reached the end of our journey through the pages of history, and have also caught a glimpse of what lies ahead. Far from being old and outdated, the symbolism contained in the sacrificial offering system, the tabernacle in the wilderness, and the rituals on the Day of Atonement are VERY relevant and of great spiritual importance for us today!

The sacrifices, the tabernacle and the Atonement rituals foreshadowed Christ and what He did, and still does, and will continue to do—but they also foreshadowed YOU and YOUR life. You CAN become—and can continue to be—a LIVING sacrifice and a spiritual tabernacle—a dwelling place for God in the wilderness of this world.

The question is: Do you really want to be that?

Paul's Message To Corinth

In the “First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians,” Paul had to deal with internal divisions amongst Church members at Corinth. His timeless message is as relevant for us today, as it was in the days of Paul. Where DO divisions come from, and HOW can they be solved?
Play Video

Download Audio 

Coming–The Great Depression? — StandingWatch #164

Most Americans are worried about the economy. Many financial analysts and commentators around the world have similar fears. What can YOU do in these times of recession and potential depression? How can you avoid going into debt, and how can you become debt-free? Does God, in His Word, the Bible, show you what you must do?

View this now on StandingWatch or Google Video or YouTube

Current Events

“NATO Summit Fails to Heal Deep Divisions”

On April 4, 2008, Der Spiegel Online reported the following:

“The smiles in Bucharest were little more than show. Politically, the NATO summit was a fiasco. The Western alliance remains deeply divided and faces an identity crisis… The allies didn’t even dare begin the urgent discussions about strategies and plans. They were afraid that by doing so they would no longer be able to conceal the deep division that cuts right across the defense alliance… Instead of just talking about expansion, NATO needs a new concept, a justification for its existence, a guiding vision behind which all members can gather…

“There are completely different conceptions of who is protecting whom against whom and by what means. The alliance is militarily bigger and more powerful than ever — yet politically weaker than it has ever been. There is a deep rift when it comes to all the important questions: On the one side the Americans and their friends in Eastern Europe, on the other the Germans, the French and their neighbors… It was Russia that dominated the meeting in Bucharest. Yet when outgoing President Vladmir Putin arrived in Romania on the last day of the summit, no one really wanted to debate with him.”

Deutsche Welle added on April 4:

“The big enlargement summit that NATO’s leading power and many new eastern European members had wished for has fallen through. Germany and France thwarted US plans and candidates Ukraine and Georgia were sent back to the waiting room. The conflict between the US and western European countries was openly talked about at the summit. That’s a new thing for NATO, since usually decisions are already made beforehand and everything happens according to plan.

“This time, however, the outgoing American president was stymied in his almost missionary expansion zeal. Another unusual aspect of the meeting in Bucharest was the fact that 25 NATO countries were unable to get Greece and Macedonia to agree on a compromise in the bizarre twist over Macedonia’s name. That’s why only Croatia and Albania were invited to become members. George W. Bush, the lame duck, didn’t manage to have his way against Greece, either…

“The summit’s surprise was German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s newly revived close cooperation. They obviously want to shift NATO’s focus towards Europe. France’s return to NATO’s military command structures in the coming year fits into that strategy. It now depends on who will win the race to the White House and what level of importance the new administration will place on the alliance.

“An overly confident Russian President Vladimir Putin has gained astonishing influence over NATO during his last years of neo-nationalistic foreign policy…

“In the short term, NATO will have to send even more troops to Afghanistan to get the security situation under control. The Germans will be called upon in the fall at the latest. In Bucharest, the chancellor cleverly managed to avert a debate on an expanded role for the German military in Afghanistan, but it cannot be avoided forever.”

Bush and Putin Say Farewell, Fail To Overcome Sharp Differences

The Associated Press reported April 6:

“President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to overcome sharp differences over a U.S. missile defense system, closing their seven-year relationship Sunday still far apart on an issue that has separated them from the beginning.

“‘Our fundamental attitude toward the American plan has not changed,’ Putin said at a news conference with Bush at his vacation house at this Black Sea resort. ‘We got a lot of way to go,’ Bush said… Putin said [his hand-picked successor, Dmitry] Medvedev would be in charge, and would represent Russia at the Group of Eight meeting of industrial democracies in July in Tokyo…

“At their 28th and presumably final meeting as heads of state, Bush and Putin sought to emphasize their good personal relations, praising each other extensively. But they also both acknowledged remaining strong disagreements… Putin called the U.S. missile plan – which envisions basing tracking radar sites in the Czech Republic and interceptors in Poland – the hardest of US-Russian differences to reconcile.”

Murder in the Name of Islam?

The Daily Mail wrote on April 4:

“A gang of British Muslims planned to blow up seven planes within hours in the biggest terrorist atrocity since 9/11, a court heard yesterday. Two thousand passengers would have died in the plot by eight fanatics working ‘in the name of Islam’, the jury was told [by the prosecution]. It could have involved up to 18 suicide bombers. And they were almost ready to strike. The jets they targeted would all have been bound from Heathrow to cities in the U.S. and Canada, it was claimed…
 
“The alleged plot was foiled on August 9, 2006 when two of the key gang members… were arrested by police in a town hall car park in Walthamstow, East London following several months of surveillance.  A series of arrests followed including… the alleged third key member of the plot, and led to chaos, cancellation and delays at airports across the UK as a huge security crackdown swung into operation.”

Now France Threatens China With Boycott of the Olympic Games

After Angela Merkel announced that she will not attend the Olympic Games in China, Nicolas Sarkozy followed suit and threatened to boycott the Games as well. AFP wrote on April 5:

“France stepped up the pressure on China Saturday over its handling of the Tibet crisis with a warning that President Nicolas Sarkozy may boycott the Olympic opening following fresh violence… Sarkozy will only attend the opening ceremony if China opens dialogue with exiled Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama and frees political prisoners… China must also end the ‘violence’ against Tibetans… all three conditions [are] ‘indispensable’…”

“Something is Rotten in the State of” Europe

Reuters reported on April 5:

“Trade unions protested over corporate greed and the ‘poverty wages’ of more than 30 million workers in Europe as politicians and central bankers meeting in Slovenia on Saturday urged wage restraint to combat inflation… Company profits have risen for more than a decade, but the share of wealth going into wages has shrunk and the divide has widened between those at the top and bottom…

“European Central Bank Governor Jean-Claude Trichet said that keeping a lid on labor costs would be ‘absolutely decisive’ in fighting inflation and that a five percent pay rise for German public sector employees in 2008 should not be copied elsewhere. ‘It would be an enormous mistake to imitate Germany,’ said Trichet, stressing that German public sector workers had gone without any pay rise in the past two years and that others had not shown such restraint. More unusually, the euro zone’s chief inflation-fighter got hearty support from politicians too who were at pains to say that the fight against inflation was the best way to defend people’s spending power.”

While European politicians and governmental leaders are giving themselves pay raises and other benefits on a continuing basis, “average workers” are refused such benefits “to fight inflation.” This incredible proposal is probably one of the more abominable testimonies of an incompetent and evil world ruled by Satan the devil. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Angels, Demons and the Spirit World.”

More Injustice in Europe–With Interesting Potential Consequences for the Superstate

The EUObserver wrote on April 4 about another outrageous decision of the EU Court, which flies in the face of social justice, equity and fairness, contradicting and overruling local German law:

“European trade unions have strongly criticised the latest EU court judgement on the right of member states to set minimum wages for foreign workers saying it is an ‘invitation to social dumping.’ The judgement, delivered on Thursday (3 April) by the bloc’s highest court, concerned a Polish subcontractor of German company Objekt und Bauregie which paid employees only 46.5% of the minimum wage prescribed by Lower Saxony for work on a public site. The court found in favour of the company on grounds of the freedom to provide services, one of the core principles of the EU’s internal market. It argued that Lower Saxony’s law on the awarding of public contracts, which states they may only be awarded to companies which promise to pay their employees the minimum wage for the sector concerned and promise to impose that obligation on sub-contractors, breached an EU law on the posting of workers to other member states…

“The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) said ‘this is another destructive and damaging judgement. [It] underlines the need for urgent action by the European authorities to confirm that the EU is not just an economic project but has as its main objective the improvement of living and working conditions of its populations’…

“Trade unions are still smarting from a recent EU court ruling in a Swedish case with similar implications. Known as the Laval case, the Luxembourg-based court in December found that Swedish unions cannot force a foreign company to observe local pay deals. ‘The EU must improve peoples living conditions, not reduce them. Politicians ought to put their feet down and clarify the rules to change the practice of the Court,’ said Wanja Lundby-Wedin, head of the Swedish Trade Union Confederation. ‘We want to see an open Europe, not a Europe that risks creating hostility towards foreigners and demands for closed borders,’ she continued…

“Meanwhile, Britain’s largest trade union Unite has said the ruling has implications for the construction of the London Olympics to be held in 2012, meaning the infrastructure may be built using workers who are paid very low wages. ‘This decision effectively means that foreign companies working here in the UK, or in any other European country, can flout domestic laws and collective agreements with regard to pay,’ said Derek Simpson, joint secretary general of Unite. ‘This is a recipe for disaster and, if applied here in the UK, will cause massive industrial unrest and threaten the delivery of major infrastructure projects including the Olympics site.'”

Unfortunately, it can be expected that the coming European Superstate WILL become hostile to foreigners. AND–that countries like Great Britain and perhaps Sweden will ultimately NOT be part of the prophesied ten nations or groups of nations which will RULE Europe, under the leadership of a powerful charismatic political personage. For more information, please read our free booklets, “Europe in Prophecy – The Unfolding of End-Time Events,” “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord,” and “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”

Worldwide Financial Crisis–USA and Britain Hit the Hardest

The Daily Mail wrote on April 10:

“The world is facing the biggest financial shock since the Great Depression, warns the International Monetary Fund. And the IMF warns that Britain could be the country hit hardest by the global credit crunch as it has bigger debts than anywhere else… Analysis by the IMF reveals British banks will lose more than £20bn from the international mortgage meltdown, equivalent to three per cent of gross domestic product (GDP). For the first time the IMF also predicts that the American economy is heading for recession and will shrink by 0.7 per cent this year, sending shock waves across the globe. American banks, which it was thought would be worst affected, will lose £72 billion, or 1.4 per cent of US GDP.

“Despite healthy growth in the Far East, it now believes there is a 25 per cent chance that the whole world could follow the Americans into recession. ‘The financial markets crisis that erupted in August 2007 has developed into the largest financial shock since the Great Depression,’ the report says. It estimates that the losses from American mortgages will reach $945billion (£500billion) – more than twice previous estimates. The U.S. housing collapse is far from over, with the fund economists expecting a further 10 per cent decline in 2008, on top of a similar fall in prices in the previous years. Such declines, it believes, are way beyond anything seen in the previous American experience.”

More American Airlines Shut Down

Airline Business wrote on April 7:

“More trees are falling in the forest that is the US airline industry, chopped by the ever sharper edge of the fuel price cleaver. The latest carriers to fold their wings and shut down are ATA Airlines and Skybus Airlines, both of which ceased operations in the first week of April. ATA lost a key charter contract, making futile its search for new funding to meet the demands of the pump. Skybus, which plans to file for Chapter 11 today, also blamed rising fuel prices and a slowing economy. The death of these two airlines comes just days after another carrier with a long history and a well-known name, Aloha Airlines, shut down suddenly. All have blamed the rising spire of oil prices as well as competitive pressures.”

In addition, as The Associated Press reported on April 10, “American Airlines canceled more than 900 flights Thursday to fix faulty wiring in hundreds of jets, marking the third straight day of mass groundings as company executives offered profuse apologies and travel vouchers to calm angry customers. Other carriers operating similar aircraft also left passengers scrambling for alternatives as they too canceled flights to inspect the wire bundles at the heart of a renewed safety crackdown by the Federal Aviation Administration.”

Family Breakdown in Great Britain

The Daily Mail reported on April 4:

“Family breakdown is a ‘cancer’ behind almost every evil affecting the country, a senior judge will declare today. Mr Justice Coleridge blames youth crime, child abuse, drug addiction and binge-drinking on the ‘meltdown’ of relations between parents and children. He warns that the collapse of the family unit is a threat to the nation as bad as terrorism, crime, drugs or global warming… The 58-year-old judge, who is married with three grown-up children, will say family breakdown is an epidemic affecting all levels of society from the Royal Family down. It is ‘on a scale, depth and breadth which few of us could have imagined even’ a decade ago. It is a never-ending carnival of human misery. A ceaseless river of human distress.

“‘I am not saying every broken family produces dysfunctional children but I am saying that almost every dysfunctional child is the product of a broken family… Families are the cells which make up the body of society. If the cells are unhealthy and undernourished, or at worse cancerous and growing haphazard and out of control, in the end the body succumbs… Single parents often do a fantastic job, but a great many, perhaps through no fault of their own, do not. A large number of families now consist of children being brought up by mothers who have children by a number of different fathers, none of whom take any part in their lives or support or upbringing… Almost all society’s ills can be traced directly to the collapse of family life. We all know it. Examine the background of almost every child in the care system or the youth justice system and you will discover a broken family.’… Latest figures show marriage rates at a historic low and divorce at a historic high.”

The Pope on Abortion and Divorce

AFP reported on April 5:

“Divorce and abortion are offences in the sight of God, Pope Benedict XVI charged Saturday, while calling on the Catholic Church to be merciful to those who had experienced such events. ‘The ethical judgement of the Church on divorce and abortion is clear and well-known,’ he told participants in a Catholic congress on marriage and the family. ‘They are serious offences… which violate human dignity, inflict deep injustice on human and social relations and offend God himself… Divorce and abortion are choices… which sometimes develop in difficult and dramatic circumstances… and are a source of profound suffering for those who take such decisions. They also affect innocent victims, the barely-conceived and unborn infant, the children caught up in divorces.'”

Hollywood Legend Charlton Heston Died

The Associated Press reported on April 6:

“Charlton Heston, who won the 1959 best actor Oscar as the chariot-racing ‘Ben-Hur’ and portrayed Moses, Michelangelo, El Cid and other heroic figures in movie epics of the ’50s and ’60s, has died. He was 84… Heston revealed in 2002 that he had symptoms consistent with Alzheimer’s disease, saying, ‘I must reconcile courage and surrender in equal measure’…

“The actor assumed the role of leader offscreen as well. He served as president of the Screen Actors Guild and chairman of the American Film Institute and marched in the civil rights movement of the 1950s. With age, he grew more conservative and campaigned for conservative candidates. In June 1998, Heston was elected president of the National Rifle Association, for which he had posed for ads holding a rifle… [In 2003] he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor. ‘The largeness of character that comes across the screen has also been seen throughout his life,’ President Bush said at the time…

“The Hestons’ newborn, Fraser Clarke Heston, played the role of the infant Moses in the film [“The Ten Commandments”]… He railed at suggestions the race [in “Ben Hur”] had been shot with a double…

“Charles’s parents divorced, and [his mother] married Chester Heston… [He called] himself Charlton Heston from his mother’s maiden name and his stepfather’s last name… In 1944 he married [a] drama student, Lydia Clarke… They had been married 64 years when he died.

“In [later] years, Heston drew as much publicity for his crusades as for his performances. In addition to his NRA work, he campaigned for Republican presidential and congressional candidates and against affirmative action. He resigned from Actors Equity, claiming the union’s refusal to allow a white actor to play a Eurasian role in ‘Miss Saigon’ was ‘obscenely racist.’ He attacked CNN’s telecasts from Baghdad as ‘sowing doubts’ about the allied effort in the 1990-91 Gulf War. At a Time Warner stockholders meeting, he castigated the company for releasing an Ice-T album that purportedly encouraged cop killing. Heston wrote… that he was proud of what he did ‘though now I’ll surely never be offered another film by Warners, nor get a good review in Time…'”

Update 339

Paul's Message to Corinth

On April 12, 2008, Norbert Link will give the sermon, titled, “Paul’s Message to Corinth.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Back to top

The Least That We Can Do

by

As we quickly approach Passover, we are once again reminded of the great sacrifice that Christ made. After divesting Himself of His Godhead, Jesus walked the earth as a righteous man, doing no wrong. For this He was rewarded with ridicule, abuses and ultimately death. Christ willingly did this so that we may have opportunity to have God’s ear when we go before Him on a daily basis, and as well as being offered the chance for salvation.

Having had such great possibilities laid at our feet, what are we willing to sacrifice in order to make the most of what we have been given?  Presently, we have not been asked to physically give up our life, but merely to be a LIVING SACRIFICE by means of SERVICE (Romans 12:1).

We read from our booklet “The Sacrificial System and the Tabernacle in the Wilderness“: “As the burnt offering was completely burned (Leviticus 1:9), so we must give ourselves completely and without reservation to God. As members of God’s Church, we have to become without blemish (Ephesians 5:25-27).”

We do this through the righteousness which is following God comprehensively and unconditionally with all of our ability (Mark 12:33; Proverbs 21:3; Hebrews 13:16; Romans 14:17-18).

When we contemplate the magnitude of what Christ did for us and contrast it with what we have been asked to do, surely we must come to the conclusion that it is the least that we can do.  Every time we choose right over wrong and God’s way over our way, we offer up our spiritual sacrifice (1 Peter 2:5).  Let us keep this in mind for this season, the rest of the year and the years that we have remaining, before the return of the One whose sacrifice made this all possible.

Back to top

“NATO Summit Fails to Heal Deep Divisions”

On April 4, 2008, Der Spiegel Online reported the following:

“The smiles in Bucharest were little more than show. Politically, the NATO summit was a fiasco. The Western alliance remains deeply divided and faces an identity crisis… The allies didn’t even dare begin the urgent discussions about strategies and plans. They were afraid that by doing so they would no longer be able to conceal the deep division that cuts right across the defense alliance… Instead of just talking about expansion, NATO needs a new concept, a justification for its existence, a guiding vision behind which all members can gather…

“There are completely different conceptions of who is protecting whom against whom and by what means. The alliance is militarily bigger and more powerful than ever — yet politically weaker than it has ever been. There is a deep rift when it comes to all the important questions: On the one side the Americans and their friends in Eastern Europe, on the other the Germans, the French and their neighbors… It was Russia that dominated the meeting in Bucharest. Yet when outgoing President Vladmir Putin arrived in Romania on the last day of the summit, no one really wanted to debate with him.”

Deutsche Welle added on April 4:

“The big enlargement summit that NATO’s leading power and many new eastern European members had wished for has fallen through. Germany and France thwarted US plans and candidates Ukraine and Georgia were sent back to the waiting room. The conflict between the US and western European countries was openly talked about at the summit. That’s a new thing for NATO, since usually decisions are already made beforehand and everything happens according to plan.

“This time, however, the outgoing American president was stymied in his almost missionary expansion zeal. Another unusual aspect of the meeting in Bucharest was the fact that 25 NATO countries were unable to get Greece and Macedonia to agree on a compromise in the bizarre twist over Macedonia’s name. That’s why only Croatia and Albania were invited to become members. George W. Bush, the lame duck, didn’t manage to have his way against Greece, either…

“The summit’s surprise was German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s newly revived close cooperation. They obviously want to shift NATO’s focus towards Europe. France’s return to NATO’s military command structures in the coming year fits into that strategy. It now depends on who will win the race to the White House and what level of importance the new administration will place on the alliance.

“An overly confident Russian President Vladimir Putin has gained astonishing influence over NATO during his last years of neo-nationalistic foreign policy…

“In the short term, NATO will have to send even more troops to Afghanistan to get the security situation under control. The Germans will be called upon in the fall at the latest. In Bucharest, the chancellor cleverly managed to avert a debate on an expanded role for the German military in Afghanistan, but it cannot be avoided forever.”

Bush and Putin Say Farewell, Fail To Overcome Sharp Differences

The Associated Press reported April 6:

“President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to overcome sharp differences over a U.S. missile defense system, closing their seven-year relationship Sunday still far apart on an issue that has separated them from the beginning.

“‘Our fundamental attitude toward the American plan has not changed,’ Putin said at a news conference with Bush at his vacation house at this Black Sea resort. ‘We got a lot of way to go,’ Bush said… Putin said [his hand-picked successor, Dmitry] Medvedev would be in charge, and would represent Russia at the Group of Eight meeting of industrial democracies in July in Tokyo…

“At their 28th and presumably final meeting as heads of state, Bush and Putin sought to emphasize their good personal relations, praising each other extensively. But they also both acknowledged remaining strong disagreements… Putin called the U.S. missile plan – which envisions basing tracking radar sites in the Czech Republic and interceptors in Poland – the hardest of US-Russian differences to reconcile.”

Murder in the Name of Islam?

The Daily Mail wrote on April 4:

“A gang of British Muslims planned to blow up seven planes within hours in the biggest terrorist atrocity since 9/11, a court heard yesterday. Two thousand passengers would have died in the plot by eight fanatics working ‘in the name of Islam’, the jury was told [by the prosecution]. It could have involved up to 18 suicide bombers. And they were almost ready to strike. The jets they targeted would all have been bound from Heathrow to cities in the U.S. and Canada, it was claimed…
 
“The alleged plot was foiled on August 9, 2006 when two of the key gang members… were arrested by police in a town hall car park in Walthamstow, East London following several months of surveillance.  A series of arrests followed including… the alleged third key member of the plot, and led to chaos, cancellation and delays at airports across the UK as a huge security crackdown swung into operation.”

Now France Threatens China With Boycott of the Olympic Games

After Angela Merkel announced that she will not attend the Olympic Games in China, Nicolas Sarkozy followed suit and threatened to boycott the Games as well. AFP wrote on April 5:

“France stepped up the pressure on China Saturday over its handling of the Tibet crisis with a warning that President Nicolas Sarkozy may boycott the Olympic opening following fresh violence… Sarkozy will only attend the opening ceremony if China opens dialogue with exiled Tibetan spiritual leader the Dalai Lama and frees political prisoners… China must also end the ‘violence’ against Tibetans… all three conditions [are] ‘indispensable’…”

“Something is Rotten in the State of” Europe

Reuters reported on April 5:

“Trade unions protested over corporate greed and the ‘poverty wages’ of more than 30 million workers in Europe as politicians and central bankers meeting in Slovenia on Saturday urged wage restraint to combat inflation… Company profits have risen for more than a decade, but the share of wealth going into wages has shrunk and the divide has widened between those at the top and bottom…

“European Central Bank Governor Jean-Claude Trichet said that keeping a lid on labor costs would be ‘absolutely decisive’ in fighting inflation and that a five percent pay rise for German public sector employees in 2008 should not be copied elsewhere. ‘It would be an enormous mistake to imitate Germany,’ said Trichet, stressing that German public sector workers had gone without any pay rise in the past two years and that others had not shown such restraint. More unusually, the euro zone’s chief inflation-fighter got hearty support from politicians too who were at pains to say that the fight against inflation was the best way to defend people’s spending power.”

While European politicians and governmental leaders are giving themselves pay raises and other benefits on a continuing basis, “average workers” are refused such benefits “to fight inflation.” This incredible proposal is probably one of the more abominable testimonies of an incompetent and evil world ruled by Satan the devil. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Angels, Demons and the Spirit World.”

More Injustice in Europe–With Interesting Potential Consequences for the Superstate

The EUObserver wrote on April 4 about another outrageous decision of the EU Court, which flies in the face of social justice, equity and fairness, contradicting and overruling local German law:

“European trade unions have strongly criticised the latest EU court judgement on the right of member states to set minimum wages for foreign workers saying it is an ‘invitation to social dumping.’ The judgement, delivered on Thursday (3 April) by the bloc’s highest court, concerned a Polish subcontractor of German company Objekt und Bauregie which paid employees only 46.5% of the minimum wage prescribed by Lower Saxony for work on a public site. The court found in favour of the company on grounds of the freedom to provide services, one of the core principles of the EU’s internal market. It argued that Lower Saxony’s law on the awarding of public contracts, which states they may only be awarded to companies which promise to pay their employees the minimum wage for the sector concerned and promise to impose that obligation on sub-contractors, breached an EU law on the posting of workers to other member states…

“The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) said ‘this is another destructive and damaging judgement. [It] underlines the need for urgent action by the European authorities to confirm that the EU is not just an economic project but has as its main objective the improvement of living and working conditions of its populations’…

“Trade unions are still smarting from a recent EU court ruling in a Swedish case with similar implications. Known as the Laval case, the Luxembourg-based court in December found that Swedish unions cannot force a foreign company to observe local pay deals. ‘The EU must improve peoples living conditions, not reduce them. Politicians ought to put their feet down and clarify the rules to change the practice of the Court,’ said Wanja Lundby-Wedin, head of the Swedish Trade Union Confederation. ‘We want to see an open Europe, not a Europe that risks creating hostility towards foreigners and demands for closed borders,’ she continued…

“Meanwhile, Britain’s largest trade union Unite has said the ruling has implications for the construction of the London Olympics to be held in 2012, meaning the infrastructure may be built using workers who are paid very low wages. ‘This decision effectively means that foreign companies working here in the UK, or in any other European country, can flout domestic laws and collective agreements with regard to pay,’ said Derek Simpson, joint secretary general of Unite. ‘This is a recipe for disaster and, if applied here in the UK, will cause massive industrial unrest and threaten the delivery of major infrastructure projects including the Olympics site.'”

Unfortunately, it can be expected that the coming European Superstate WILL become hostile to foreigners. AND–that countries like Great Britain and perhaps Sweden will ultimately NOT be part of the prophesied ten nations or groups of nations which will RULE Europe, under the leadership of a powerful charismatic political personage. For more information, please read our free booklets, “Europe in Prophecy – The Unfolding of End-Time Events,” “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord,” and “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”

Worldwide Financial Crisis–USA and Britain Hit the Hardest

The Daily Mail wrote on April 10:

“The world is facing the biggest financial shock since the Great Depression, warns the International Monetary Fund. And the IMF warns that Britain could be the country hit hardest by the global credit crunch as it has bigger debts than anywhere else… Analysis by the IMF reveals British banks will lose more than £20bn from the international mortgage meltdown, equivalent to three per cent of gross domestic product (GDP). For the first time the IMF also predicts that the American economy is heading for recession and will shrink by 0.7 per cent this year, sending shock waves across the globe. American banks, which it was thought would be worst affected, will lose £72 billion, or 1.4 per cent of US GDP.

“Despite healthy growth in the Far East, it now believes there is a 25 per cent chance that the whole world could follow the Americans into recession. ‘The financial markets crisis that erupted in August 2007 has developed into the largest financial shock since the Great Depression,’ the report says. It estimates that the losses from American mortgages will reach $945billion (£500billion) – more than twice previous estimates. The U.S. housing collapse is far from over, with the fund economists expecting a further 10 per cent decline in 2008, on top of a similar fall in prices in the previous years. Such declines, it believes, are way beyond anything seen in the previous American experience.”

More American Airlines Shut Down

Airline Business wrote on April 7:

“More trees are falling in the forest that is the US airline industry, chopped by the ever sharper edge of the fuel price cleaver. The latest carriers to fold their wings and shut down are ATA Airlines and Skybus Airlines, both of which ceased operations in the first week of April. ATA lost a key charter contract, making futile its search for new funding to meet the demands of the pump. Skybus, which plans to file for Chapter 11 today, also blamed rising fuel prices and a slowing economy. The death of these two airlines comes just days after another carrier with a long history and a well-known name, Aloha Airlines, shut down suddenly. All have blamed the rising spire of oil prices as well as competitive pressures.”

In addition, as The Associated Press reported on April 10, “American Airlines canceled more than 900 flights Thursday to fix faulty wiring in hundreds of jets, marking the third straight day of mass groundings as company executives offered profuse apologies and travel vouchers to calm angry customers. Other carriers operating similar aircraft also left passengers scrambling for alternatives as they too canceled flights to inspect the wire bundles at the heart of a renewed safety crackdown by the Federal Aviation Administration.”

Family Breakdown in Great Britain

The Daily Mail reported on April 4:

“Family breakdown is a ‘cancer’ behind almost every evil affecting the country, a senior judge will declare today. Mr Justice Coleridge blames youth crime, child abuse, drug addiction and binge-drinking on the ‘meltdown’ of relations between parents and children. He warns that the collapse of the family unit is a threat to the nation as bad as terrorism, crime, drugs or global warming… The 58-year-old judge, who is married with three grown-up children, will say family breakdown is an epidemic affecting all levels of society from the Royal Family down. It is ‘on a scale, depth and breadth which few of us could have imagined even’ a decade ago. It is a never-ending carnival of human misery. A ceaseless river of human distress.

“‘I am not saying every broken family produces dysfunctional children but I am saying that almost every dysfunctional child is the product of a broken family… Families are the cells which make up the body of society. If the cells are unhealthy and undernourished, or at worse cancerous and growing haphazard and out of control, in the end the body succumbs… Single parents often do a fantastic job, but a great many, perhaps through no fault of their own, do not. A large number of families now consist of children being brought up by mothers who have children by a number of different fathers, none of whom take any part in their lives or support or upbringing… Almost all society’s ills can be traced directly to the collapse of family life. We all know it. Examine the background of almost every child in the care system or the youth justice system and you will discover a broken family.’… Latest figures show marriage rates at a historic low and divorce at a historic high.”

The Pope on Abortion and Divorce

AFP reported on April 5:

“Divorce and abortion are offences in the sight of God, Pope Benedict XVI charged Saturday, while calling on the Catholic Church to be merciful to those who had experienced such events. ‘The ethical judgement of the Church on divorce and abortion is clear and well-known,’ he told participants in a Catholic congress on marriage and the family. ‘They are serious offences… which violate human dignity, inflict deep injustice on human and social relations and offend God himself… Divorce and abortion are choices… which sometimes develop in difficult and dramatic circumstances… and are a source of profound suffering for those who take such decisions. They also affect innocent victims, the barely-conceived and unborn infant, the children caught up in divorces.'”

Hollywood Legend Charlton Heston Died

The Associated Press reported on April 6:

“Charlton Heston, who won the 1959 best actor Oscar as the chariot-racing ‘Ben-Hur’ and portrayed Moses, Michelangelo, El Cid and other heroic figures in movie epics of the ’50s and ’60s, has died. He was 84… Heston revealed in 2002 that he had symptoms consistent with Alzheimer’s disease, saying, ‘I must reconcile courage and surrender in equal measure’…

“The actor assumed the role of leader offscreen as well. He served as president of the Screen Actors Guild and chairman of the American Film Institute and marched in the civil rights movement of the 1950s. With age, he grew more conservative and campaigned for conservative candidates. In June 1998, Heston was elected president of the National Rifle Association, for which he had posed for ads holding a rifle… [In 2003] he was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor. ‘The largeness of character that comes across the screen has also been seen throughout his life,’ President Bush said at the time…

“The Hestons’ newborn, Fraser Clarke Heston, played the role of the infant Moses in the film [“The Ten Commandments”]… He railed at suggestions the race [in “Ben Hur”] had been shot with a double…

“Charles’s parents divorced, and [his mother] married Chester Heston… [He called] himself Charlton Heston from his mother’s maiden name and his stepfather’s last name… In 1944 he married [a] drama student, Lydia Clarke… They had been married 64 years when he died.

“In [later] years, Heston drew as much publicity for his crusades as for his performances. In addition to his NRA work, he campaigned for Republican presidential and congressional candidates and against affirmative action. He resigned from Actors Equity, claiming the union’s refusal to allow a white actor to play a Eurasian role in ‘Miss Saigon’ was ‘obscenely racist.’ He attacked CNN’s telecasts from Baghdad as ‘sowing doubts’ about the allied effort in the 1990-91 Gulf War. At a Time Warner stockholders meeting, he castigated the company for releasing an Ice-T album that purportedly encouraged cop killing. Heston wrote… that he was proud of what he did ‘though now I’ll surely never be offered another film by Warners, nor get a good review in Time…'”

Back to top

Would you please explain Matthew 19:12. Does Jesus teach the concept of compulsory celibacy; that is, that ministers or priests must not marry?

When the disciples heard that marriage was for life, and that it can only be dissolved under very limited circumstances, they responded, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry” (Matthew 19:10). Jesus answered that “all cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given” (verse 11). He continued, in verse 12:

“For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”

Most commentaries are in agreement that Christ was not teaching “compulsory celibacy” for anyone. The Nelson Study Bible explains the meaning of the passage as follows:

“Jesus indicates [in verse 11] that remaining unmarried is only for a few people… Some people do not marry because they were born with no sex drive. Others do not marry because they are castrated. Still others forgo marriage for the sake of serving God. Some have been given the spiritual gift of celibacy in order to do this (see 1 Cor. 7:7).”

The Life Application Bible points out:

“Couples should decide against divorce from the start and build their marriage on mutual commitment. There are also… reasons for not marrying, one being to have more time to work for God’s kingdom… Some have physical limitations that prevent their marrying, while others choose not to marry because, in their particular situation, they can serve God better as single people. Jesus was not teaching us to avoid marriage because it is inconvenient or takes away our freedom. That would be selfishness.”

The Broadman Bible Commentary adds the following observations:

“The alternative to marriage is celibacy. Jesus made room for both as honorable and proper to discipleship. He warned, however, that the demands upon celibacy are high, just as they are upon marriage. Some are incapacitated for marriage because of physical impotence or impairment. They are those who are ‘eunuchs who have been so from birth,’ or those ‘who have been made eunuchs by men.’ In royal courts, especially, there were slaves who were made eunuchs through surgery so that they would not be a threat to their masters’ household. Those who ‘made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven’ are those who forego marriage with a view of life given more fully to the service of Christ.”

To interject, some have taken this statement literally [“there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake”]; apparently, Origin castrated himself in obeying this “supposed obligation.” This is, however, NOT what Christ meant. He had already mentioned the category of literal eunuchs who had become such “by men.” The third category of “eunuchs” for the sake of the kingdom of God deals with those who VOLUNTARILY forgo marriage. Christ did not imply that they ought to literally castrate themselves.

The Broadman Bible Commentary continues:

“As Jesus spoke of marriage and celibacy he did not say that one was morally higher than the other… Each is an honorable choice to be made on an individual basis… ”

Jesus did not teach supremacy of celibacy over marriage. At least some of the apostles were married, including Cephas or Peter, as well as the believing brothers of Jesus (compare 1 Corinthians 9:5). Paul adds in Hebrews 13:4 that “marriage is honorable among all.”

It is correct that Paul seems to be giving celibacy a preferred state over marriage in 1 Corinthians 7:1, 6-8, 32-33, 40. But we must realize the context–it is because of “the present distress” (verse 26), prompting Paul to say that even those who have wives should be as though they had none (verse 29). He said this because of the ensuing persecution, which would cause married couples “to have trouble in the flesh” (verse 28). Christ said, in Matthew 24:19: “But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days”–immediately preceding the Great Tribulation. He also stated in Luke 23:29: “For indeed the days are coming in which they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, wombs that never bore, and breasts which never nursed!'”

On the other hand, Paul did not teach that it was ever sinful to marry, even in times of great physical distress, and he added that for some, it was necessary to marry even then. He stated in 1 Corinthians 7:9, 28: “… if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion… if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned.”

To clarify, the Church of the Eternal God in the USA and its corporate affiliates in Canada and Great Britain do NOT advise to forgo marriage because of the soon-coming return of Jesus Christ. We simply don’t know the exact time of Christ’s return. At one time, many felt that Christ might return in the early 1970’s. Now, after more than 30 years, He still has not returned. If people had forgone marriage in the 1970’s because of their anticipation of Christ’s return, which will be preceded by the Great Tribulation, just imagine what they would have missed–including seeing their children and grandchildren growing up.

Proverbs 18:22 tells us that “He who finds a wife finds a GOOD thing, And obtains FAVOR from the LORD,” and God said at the beginning, after He had created man, that it was NOT GOOD for the man to be alone. He then made the woman to be the man’s companion and helpmate (Genesis 2:18). It is true that those who will, in the future, enter the Kingdom of God as immortal spirit beings, will not marry nor are given in marriage at that time (Matthew 22:30), but this is not to be applied today to mortal human beings on a physical level.

As can easily be seen from the very wording of Christ’s sayings in Matthew 19:12, He was not teaching that anyone MUST forgo marriage to enter the kingdom of heaven. He was clearly talking about a VOLUNTARY individual decision, without coercion from anyone. Biblical examples of those who decided for themselves, not to get married for the sake of the Kingdom of God, were Jesus Christ Himself, as well as John the Baptist. As a former Pharisee, Paul would have been married, but his wife apparently died, and he decided not to re-marry, but to remain a widower.

Since the Bible does not teach coerced celibacy, why is it, then, that the Catholic Church teaches compulsory celibacy for their priests–prohibiting them to get married?

An interesting explanation is given by James Hastings, in his “Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics,” Vol. 3, pages 272-273:

“Two influences contributed especially to the rise of sacerdotal celibacy… To the Gnostic…, ‘marriage and generation are from Satan… marriage [was pronounced] to be corruption and fornication.’… To these we must add the influence of the religion of Isis and the worship of Mithra… both of which were wide-spread throughout the Roman Empire and had a powerful following in the 1st and 2nd century. The former had its… tonsured men and women–emblematic of a higher purity. The latter had its grades of initiation and its companies of ascetics and virgins… Catholic Christians were not to be outdone by heretics and heathens in self-renunciation… the outcome was inevitable. The highest type of Christian was the celibate… Christian teachers praised virginity, and marriage came to be in their eyes only a secondary good for those who were unable to preserve continence… [Ultimately,] superiority of virginity or celibacy to the marital state [had become Catholic Church doctrine]. Anathemas [being accursed from Christ] were pronounced on all who held to the contrary. This remains the law of the Roman Catholic Church…”

As we can see, the Catholic Church came to teach mandatory celibacy for their priests in direct or indirect consequence of Gnostic teachings and the worship of Isis and Mithra. This teaching was not derived from Scripture. On the other hand, Protestants have mostly rejected the concept of compulsory celibacy. Hastings continues to explain, on page 275:

“The Protestants vigorously denounced clerical celibacy… Luther, as early as 1520, advocated allowing pastors their freedom in the matter, and denounced compulsory celibacy as the work of the devil… he said that the celibacy of the clergy was ‘a popish innovation against the eternal word of God’… Calvin… denounced the ‘vile celibacy’ of the priests and the interdiction of marriage to priests as contrary to the word of God and to all justice… Ulrich Zwingli… condemn[ed] vows of chastity… [The] Anglican Church… asserts that ‘Bishops, Priests, and Deacons are not commanded by God’s Law either to vow the state of single life or to abstain from marriage: therefore it is lawful for them, as for all other Christian men, to marry at their own discretion, as they shall judge…’

“The attitude of Protestants and Catholics has remained practically unchanged to the present time, and the subject is unlikely to be touched UNLESS A PROPOSAL FOR UNION BE MADE” (emphasis added).

As the fruits have shown over the centuries, coerced celibacy is a very bad concept. Some who wanted to become Catholic priests and were forced, as a consequence, to take the vow of celibacy, have either been having their “affairs” with unmarried women, including nuns or their “housekeepers,” or they have been having homosexual relationships, sometimes even with minors and altar boys. Human regulations and man-made restrictions, which go beyond or contradict the Word of God, bring forth unnecessary and avoidable pain and suffering. Compulsory mandatory celibacy is one of those wrong concepts, which is clearly not taught in the Bible.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Back to top

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new StandingWatch program (#163) has been posted on StandingWatch, Google Video and YouTube. It is titled, “Where Do Evil and Strife Come From?” In the program, Norbert Link asks the questions why is it so difficult for man to live in peace with his neighbor? Why is there so much violence and war in the world? Did God create man with an evil human nature? Are we incapable of doing good and overcoming evil? The Bible gives us answers to all of these questions, but are we willing to believe God and do what He says?

A new member letter by the ministry was written and sent out via mail. The letter gives a report of our conference and raises important questions regarding the Passover season and the Work of God.

Back to top


How This Work is Financed

This Update is an official publication by the ministry of the Church of the Eternal God in the United States of America; the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada; and the Global Church of God in the United Kingdom.

Editorial Team: Norbert Link, Dave Harris, Rene Messier, Brian Gale, Margaret Adair, Johanna Link, Eric Rank, Michael Link, Anna Link, Kalon Mitchell, Manuela Mitchell, Dawn Thompson

Technical Team: Eric Rank, Shana Rank

Our activities and literature, including booklets, weekly updates, sermons on CD, and video and audio broadcasts, are provided free of charge. They are made possible by the tithes, offerings and contributions of Church members and others who have elected to support this Work.

While we do not solicit the general public for funds, contributions are gratefully welcomed and are tax-deductible in the U.S. and Canada.

Donations should be sent to the following addresses:

United States: Church of the Eternal God, P.O. Box 270519, San Diego, CA 92198

Canada: Church of God, ACF, Box 1480, Summerland, B.C. V0H 1Z0

United Kingdom: Global Church of God, PO Box 44, MABLETHORPE, LN12 9AN, United Kingdom

©2024 Church of the Eternal God