We know from prophecy that just prior to the return of Jesus Christ, the ancient Roman Empire will be revived one more time in continental Europe. It will attack and destroy the modern descendants of the ancient houses of Israel and Judah, and it will be subsequently involved in warfare with other Gentile nations.

The last European revival will consist of ten nations or groups of nations who will give their power and authority to a charismatic political and military leader. This leader is referred to as the beast, the king of the North, and the king of Assyria, named King Jareb. He will be of German or Austrian descent, and he will work in conjunction with the leader of a worldwide religious power. That leader is called the false prophet, the man of sin and the prince of Tyre. The political, economic and military power which the “beast” represents, is also referred to as the “beast,” as well as the “Chaldeans”; and the religious power which the false prophet leads, as the “image of the beast” and as the “harlot” or fallen woman riding the beast. That harlot is also described as “Mystery, Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots,” and the entire political and religious system of the last revival of the Roman Empire is also referred to as (modern) Babylon.

To see the entire context of this passage, we are quoting God’s promise to ancient Israel in its entirety, as quoted in Exodus 34:22-24:

“(22) And you shall observe the Feast of Weeks of the firstfruits of wheat harvest [Pentecost], and the Feast of Ingathering at the year’s end [Feast of Tabernacles]. (23) Three times in a year all your men shall appear before the Lord, the LORD God of Israel [Three festival seasons—one in the spring, one in the summer and one in the autumn—are mentioned here, as one has to appear before God on every annual Holy Day: Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread as the first season in the spring; Pentecost as the second season in the summer; and the fall season, consisting of the Feast of Trumpets, the Day of Atonement, the Feast of Tabernacles and the Last Great Day]. (24) For I will cast out the nations before you and enlarge your borders; neither will any man covet your land when you go up to appear before the LORD your God three times in a year.”

First of all, it would be helpful to define what “unequally yoked” means.

A yoke was a wooden beam cross the shoulders of two animals, usually oxen or horses, which harnessed them to do some task better together than they could have attempted singly. The success of the operation, however, depended on the compatibility or suitability of the two animals to each other. As it says in Deuteronomy 22:10: “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey.”

Why? The differences in the internal temperaments and energies of the animals, and their external structures and sizes, as well as the fact that an ox does not tolerate the smell and breath of a donkey, would mean that the work would not be done very well, if it was done at all. The animals could well pull in different ways as well as in different directions. The yoke would become an irritation and a pain, a hindrance to each one instead of a help to both of them. Unnatural combinations lead to confusion and discord as does compromise with the world.  Apply these principles spiritually and we will quite clearly see the problems.

Although many people identify themselves as Christian, and that amounts to almost one-third of the world’s population, the Bible indicates that in “the last times” false Christianity would arise. In response to His disciples’ questions about the end of the age and when He would return, we have this prophetic warning:

“And Jesus answered and said to them: ‘Take heed that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, “I am the Christ,” and will deceive many’” (Matthew 24:4-5).

Deception began to work very quickly following the establishment of the Church of God. After only a few decades, JUDE wrote about the “faith”—that is, true Christianity—being under assault. His letter to the Church addresses the encroachment of men and doctrines opposing the truth:

Before we answer this question, we need to set forth some basic understanding regarding the concept of physical circumcision.

As we will see, in the Old Testament, physical circumcision was a type or forerunner of spiritual circumcision (as the animal sacrifices were instituted temporarily, pointing to the Sacrifice of Jesus Christ). Compare Deuteronomy 10:16; 30:6; Jeremiah 9:25-26; Jeremiah 4:4.

In the New Testament, it is emphasized time and again that true Christians must be circumcised spiritually… not physically; compare Colossians 2:11. This is the reason why Paul tells us, in 1 Corinthians 7:18-19: “Was anyone called while circumcised? Let him not become uncircumcised. Was anyone called while uncircumcised? Let him not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.”

Many denominations encourage their members to publicly “confess Jesus Christ.” Oftentimes, this proclamation is presented in the context of “finding the Lord” or of “being saved.” Along with this personal “witnessing” others are then encouraged to “accept Christ” in order that they, too, might be “saved.” A favorite Scripture for this approach is Romans 10:9:

“[T]hat if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.”

Indeed, this statement and others, such as John 3:16; 6:40; and 6:47, all point to necessary actions for salvation. But is professing Jesus Christ and merely appropriating His name all that God requires? Jesus addressed those who would falsely believe they were serving Him by using His name:

In a previous Q&A about Matthew 27:52, we stated that many saints who were raised at the time of Christ’s resurrection were raised to ordinary physical life, continuing, “The fact that the people who were raised appeared to many in the holy city implies that they had been contemporaries of the people who saw them.” Doesn’t this contradict our teaching that during the life of Jesus Christ here on earth as a human being, no one received the Holy Spirit? How could the saints then have been “contemporaries of the people who saw them”?

In our Q&A on Matthew 27:52, we explained:

“… the Bible includes numerous examples, prior to Christ’s death and resurrection, of dead people coming to life again. 2 Kings 13:21 relates the record of a dead person who ‘revived and stood on his feet,’ when the bones of Elisha touched him. Also, John 11:38-44 records the story of the resurrection of the dead Lazarus. We also read, in Luke 8:49-56, that Christ brought a dead girl back to life. In all these cases, however, we must realize that these were resurrections to temporary physical lives — not to eternal, immortal life. In the case of the young girl, we read that Christ commanded the parents ‘that she be given something to eat’ (verse 55) — indicating that this was a resurrection to physical life, as immortal beings have no need to eat physical food.

There are those who believe that Satan can influence us whilst we are asleep and others who think exactly the opposite.   What does the Bible have to say on this matter?   Where can we find Scriptural references that give us the answers?

To give you just one example of how wrong conclusions are reached, one commentator quoted Ephesians 6:12 where it states: “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.”   He said that Paul was making it very clear that this fight that we face daily in this world is not against flesh and blood (other human beings) but against demonic forces, such as fallen angels and demons. “It is in this spirit realm that every human being enters when they fall asleep that the battles truly begin” (our emphasis). It is difficult to see how such a conclusion could be reached.

Genesis 1:2-2:3 describe the re-creation of the surface of the earth, after a catastrophe caused the earth to become void and empty. God brought order into the chaos in six days, followed by the creation of the seventh day—the Sabbath. During the six days, God created those kinds of animals which are still in existence today; and He created man.  (For a full explanation of these events, please read our free booklets, “The Theory of Evolution–a Fairy Tale for Adults?“ and “Heavens and Earth… Before and After the First Man.”)

Some have proposed that the days mentioned in the above-quoted Scriptures were indefinite time periods of perhaps millions or billions of years. The underlying rationale might be that this would explain the existence of planet earth for a much longer time than just 6,000 years. However, this interpretation would be unnecessary, as the earth was created in the beginning (Genesis 1:1)… and the Bible does not tell us when that beginning was. It is only the re-recreation of the surface of the earth which occurred approximately 6,000 years ago.

This is an interesting question.

Today, many can use the arguments that as culture changes, God will go along with the flow and bend according to the particular dictates of man at any given time. They don’t phrase it that way of course, but that is how they view it.

In an article in April 2015 in the New York Times, a columnist wrote: “And homosexuality and Christianity don’t have to be in conflict in any church anywhere. That many Christians regard them as incompatible is understandable, an example not so much of hatred’s pull as of tradition’s sway. Beliefs ossified over centuries aren’t easily shaken.  But in the end, the continued view of gays, lesbians and bisexuals as sinners is a decision. It’s a choice. It prioritizes scattered passages of ancient texts over all that has been learned since — as if time had stood still, as if the advances of science and knowledge meant nothing. It disregards the degree to which all writings reflect the biases and blind spots of their authors, cultures and eras. It ignores the extent to which interpretation is subjective, debatable.”