Q&A – Page 68 – Church of the Eternal God

Can Satan heal?

August 13, 2010

The short answer is: Absolutely not. We will explain the reason for this conclusion in this and the next Q&A.

It is important to fully understand that Satan and his demons, as well as God’s holy angels, are not all-powerful. They can only do what God allows them to do. Even in the spiritual created realm, God has placed limitations, as far as power, authority and ability are concerned.

One example is when Gabriel appeared to Daniel to deliver to him a message from God. Gabriel struggled for three weeks to get past the prince of the kingdom of Persia, a very powerful demon. When the archangel Michael came to help, Gabriel was able to free himself from the demon and to reach Daniel. We read in Daniel 10:10-13, 20-21:

“Suddenly, a hand touched me, which made me tremble on my knees and on the palms of my hands. And he said to me, ‘O Daniel, man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak to you, and stand upright, for I have now been sent to you.’ While he was speaking this word to me, I stood trembling. Then he said to me, ‘Do not fear, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your heart to understand, and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard; and I have come because of your words. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days; and behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left alone there with the kings of Persia… And now I must return to fight the prince of Persia; and when I have gone forth, indeed the prince of Greece will come… No one upholds me against these, except Michael your prince.”

Should all of God's ministers forgo employment with the Church and refuse to accept any monetary support from the Church?

August 6, 2010

In our last Q&A, we wrote:

“Paul, in bringing the gospel to the Thessalonians, worked: ‘…nor did we eat anyone’s bread free of charge, but worked with labor and toil night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, not because we do not have authority, but to make ourselves an example of how you should follow us’ (2 Thessalonians 3:8-9).”

Does this mean that God’s true ministers, in following the perceived example of Paul, must not seek employment with the Church of God and that they must not seek to be remunerated or otherwise recompensed by the Church for their services?

This is not what Paul is stating in 2 Thessalonians 3:8-9; nor is it what was implied in our Q&A.

Rather, the Jamieson, Fausset and Brown commentary gives the following explanation:

“They preached gratuitously though they might have claimed maintenance from their converts… The Philippians did not regard it as a ‘burden’ to contribute to his support [Philippians 4:15-16], sending to him while he was in this very Thessalonica… Many Thessalonians, doubtless, would have felt it a privilege to contribute, but as he saw some idlers among them who would have made a pretext of his example to justify themselves, he waived his right.”

Acts 2:44 describes the beginning of the Church of God, and it states that everyone “had all things in common.” How does this apply, today?

July 30, 2010

As other Scriptures show, this event was unique to that time in the building of the Church of God; however, this example also reveals the type of commitment that may be needed when the necessity arises.

The context of this account happened surrounding the Day of Pentecost and then the immediate period of time subsequent—perhaps several weeks and months.

Let’s first take a look at the account as recorded in Acts 2:42-47:

“And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart…”

Please explain the passage in Habakkuk 1:5

July 23, 2010

Even though most scholars feel that the prophet Habakkuk ministered during the “death throes” of the ancient nation of Judah–just prior to their Babylonian captivity–nothing is known about the prophet, including his age or his family.

It is clear, however, that Habakkuk’s writings are not limited to the time of ancient Judah. Rather, the book of Habakkuk is a prophecy about our times today. For instance, we read in Habakkuk 2:1-3:

“I will stand my watch And set myself on the rampart, And watch to see what He will say to me, And what I will answer when I am corrected. Then the LORD answered me and said: ‘Write the vision And make it plain on tablets, That he may run who reads it. For the vision is yet for an appointed time; But AT THE END it will speak, and it will not lie. Though it tarries, wait for it; Because it will surely come, It will not tarry.”

Did the Father really forsake Christ?

July 16, 2010

When Jesus was dying a terrible death on the cross, He cried out, just before He died, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (Matthew 27:46). Did He really mean it? Did the Father forsake Him at that moment? If so, why? And if not, why would Jesus have uttered those words?

Some, not understanding the significance and deep meaning of Christ’s words, say that He just shouted out these words to fulfill a prophecy from Psalm 22:1. They contend that Jesus repeated the words written down by David in the Old Testament, just to show that He was the Messiah.

Even though Jesus had inspired David to pen down these words, which WERE pointing at the time of His crucifixion, this does not mean that they are not to be understood quite literally, and that the Father did not in fact forsake Jesus at that moment. If He did not, then both the prophecy written down in the book of Psalms, referring to Christ, and Christ’s words, while hanging on the cross, would constitute a lie. If the Father did not forsake Christ at that moment, then Christ was saying something which did not occur–and no “interpretation” to the contrary could do away with the fact that Jesus would have lied at that moment.

Does God suffer because of man?

July 9, 2010

Even though this might be difficult for us to understand, God does indeed suffer and experience mental pain when He sees that we suffer. Every loving father or brother would feel mental anguish when he observes that his children or brethren suffer innocently or because they go the wrong way and inflict pain upon themselves […]

Was the harlot Rahab, mentioned in the book of Joshua, the same person who is mentioned in Matthew 1:5, as being an ancestor of Jesus Christ?

July 2, 2010

The answer is yes. She was that very same person. And this is significant, as we will see.

To begin with, we should mention that Christ’s genealogy, as set forth in Matthew 1:1-17, is different, to an extent, from the genealogy as set forth in Luke 3:23-38. The reason is that the genealogy in Matthew “is traced through Joseph, Jesus’ legal (though not natural) father, and it establishes His claim and right to the throne of David (1:6). The genealogy in Luke 3:23-38 is evidently that of Mary…” (compare Ryrie Study Bible).

There can be no doubt that the woman Rahab, who is described in the book of Joshua as protecting and rescuing the Israelite spies in the city of Jericho, was a harlot (see our Q&A on this topic).

In that above-mentioned Q&A, we are also saying that “Rahab later married Salmon and brought forth Boaz. Boaz married Ruth and brought forth Obed. Obed, in turn, brought forth Jesse, the father of David (compare Matthew 1:5-6). David became the forefather of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and of Mary herself… “

We also said:

Why did Sarah lie?

June 25, 2010July 13, 2016

Sarah, the wife of Abraham, is described in Scripture as a faithful and righteous woman (Isaiah 51:1-2; Hebrews 11:11; 1 Peter 3:5-6). Still, we read that she broke the ninth commandment and lied on several occasions. There are mainly two different sets of circumstances, inducing Sarah to lie.

Sarah’s first lie is recorded in Genesis 18. God appeared with two angels to Abraham and Sarah and promised them that they would have a son within a year. Genesis 18:11-15 states:

“Now Abraham and Sarah were old, well advanced in age; and Sarah had passed the age of childbearing. Therefore Sarah laughed within herself, saying, ‘After I have grown old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?’ And the LORD said to Abraham, ‘Why did Sarah laugh, saying, “Shall I surely bear a child, since I am old?” Is anything too hard for the LORD? At the appointed time I will return to you, according to the time of life, and Sarah shall have a son.’ But Sarah denied it, saying, ‘I did not laugh,’ for she was afraid. And He said, ‘No, but you did laugh!'”

Does Revelation 3:12 mean that there will be nothing to do in the Kingdom of God when it says “and he shall go out no more”?

June 18, 2010

Let us read what this verse says: “He who overcomes, I will make him a pillar in the temple of My God, and he shall go out no more. I will write on him the name of My God and the name of the city of My God, the New Jerusalem, which comes down out of heaven from My God. And I will write on him My new name.”

Does this mean that we will be looking into the face of God for eternity or strumming on harps with no constructive work to do?

First of all, it is critical to show that work is something that is important to God. We read in Genesis 2:2 that “on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done.” In John 5:17 we read: “But Jesus answered them, ‘My Father has been working until now, and I have been working.’” Luke 13:14 also tells us that Jesus said: “There are six days on which men ought to work…”

Can you shed some light on the significance of a "red heifer" to be born prior to the coming of the Messiah?

June 11, 2010

Let us first of all understand that there is nothing in the Bible demanding a red heifer to be born prior to the return of Jesus Christ. It is true, however, that some Jews and Christians have attached an end-time application to the ancient Old Testament ritual of the killing of a red heifer for purposes of purification. As will be explained herein, this ritual is no longer in force. But some Jews and Christians believe that the ritual must be applied today, as a prerequisite for the commencement of sacrifices and the building of a third temple, and they expect a red heifer soon to be born. (In fact, when conducting a Yahoo search on the Internet, one receives about 280,000 results for “red heifer.”).

To obtain a better understanding as to the rationale behind this expectation, let us first review the rituals pertaining to the red heifer, as described in Numbers 19.