Christian Living

Is there any validity to the claim that we can only be saved if we accept Jesus Christ as our Savior?

Although the biblical answer to this question is highly controversial, the Bible teaches very clearly that there is no other way to eternal salvation than through Jesus Christ. Non-christian religions reject this claim outright, and even many Christian organizations and denominations feel uncomfortable about this and think that they must apologize for the Scriptures and offer “alternatives,” such as, “as long as we follow our conscience,” or, “as long as we believe in someone or something,” we are or will be saved.

Since we are not interested in humanly devised fables and interpretations, let us focus strictly on the clear teaching of the Bible.

First of all, we are taught that salvation belongs to the God of the BIBLE, and that we can only receive salvation FROM HIM (Revelation 7:9-10; 19:1). It is God the Father who is the “SAVIOR of ALL MEN, especially of those who believe” (1 Timothy 4:10).

The biblical teaching is equally clear that God the Father saves us THROUGH HIS SON, JESUS CHRIST, and that no one can come to Christ unless the Father calls and draws such a person to Jesus (compare John 6:44, 65).

We read Christ’s own words in John 3:16-17–including the famous golden verse of the Bible: “For God [the Father] so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes IN HIM should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world THROUGH HIM might be SAVED.”

Notice, too, this passage in 1 John 4:14: “And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent the Son AS SAVIOR of the world.” Titus 2:13 confirms that Jesus Christ is “our great God and Savior.”

But don’t all of these passages only mean that Jesus is just ONE OF SEVERAL Saviors? Couldn’t there be additional “saviors” as well, such as Mohammed, Buddha, Krishna, or any of the other human beings who are considered as “saviors” by millions of people all over the world?

The biblical answer is that Jesus is the ONLY (potential) Savior for ALL of mankind. However, if and as long as we don’t accept Him as our Savior, we CANNOT be saved!

Notice the inspired words of Peter, as recorded in Acts 4:12: “NOR IS THERE SALVATION IN ANY OTHER, for there is NO OTHER NAME UNDER HEAVEN GIVEN AMONG MEN BY WHICH WE MUST BE SAVED.” Peter is clearly referring in this context to Jesus Christ of Nazareth, who was crucified and whom God the Father raised from the dead (compare Acts 4:10).

Jesus Himself confirmed that salvation can only be obtained through Him ALONE. He said in John 10:1, 9: “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door, but climbs up some other way, the same is a thief and a robber… I am the door. If anyone enters BY ME, HE WILL BE SAVED, and will go in and out and find pasture.”

He reiterated the same teaching in John 14:6: “Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father EXCEPT THROUGH ME.'”

According to the Bible, there is only ONE Mediator between God and men. This Mediator is not Moses, nor the “Virgin Mary,” nor Mohammed nor any other human being (whether still alive or dead and in the grave), but this Mediator is Jesus Christ. He is the ONLY Personage who has died and was resurrected to eternal life; who went to heaven; and who functions now as our LIVING and merciful High Priest.

1 Timothy 2:5 explains: “For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Jesus Christ.”

Hebrews 7:24-25 adds: “But He, because He continues forever, has an unchangeable priesthood. Therefore He is also able to SAVE to the uttermost those who come to God THROUGH HIM, since He always lives to make intercession for them.”

It is therefore absolutely necessary to believe in Jesus as our ONLY Savior, in order to be saved. Notice Acts 16:30-31: “And he brought them out [the Philippian jailer brought Paul and Silas out of prison] and said, ‘Sirs, what must I do to be saved?’ So they said, ‘Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.'”

But just theoretically and intellectually “believing” on or in Christ is not enough. We cannot expect to inherit salvation if we “believe” in Christ, but continue to disobey Him. What is required is obedient or living faith, not dead faith (compare James 2:14-17).

We read in Hebrews 5:9: “And having been perfected, He became the AUTHOR of eternal salvation to all who OBEY HIM.”

We also read in John 3:36, in the Revised Standard Version: “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not OBEY the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.”

But what about those who died, without ever having heard of Jesus Christ, let alone having embraced the Christian faith and Jesus as their only Savior? Are they lost? Absolutely not! The surprising answer, giving real hope and meaning to the plan of God for ALL of mankind, is discussed in chapter 22 (“The Resurrections”) of our free booklet, “Is That in the Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation!”

The Bible is clear on the issue of how to obtain salvation. However unpopular, controversial, explosive and “offensive” that teaching may be to some, we must not apologize for it or be ashamed of it, by choosing not to speak of it, when asked, or by trying to alter it in any way.

Luke 9:26 quotes Christ’s words, as follows: “For whoever is ashamed of ME AND MY WORDS, of him the Son of Man will be ashamed when He comes in His own glory, and in His Father’s, and of the holy angels.”

Paul was not ashamed of the gospel of Christ. He knew that part and parcel of the good news, which Jesus Christ brought and taught, was the truth that it is ONLY through Christ that man can have salvation and eternal life. Paul wrote in Romans 1:16: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God TO SALVATION for everyone who believes…”

If the true biblical teaching offends others –including those who teach that “their” particular god is a way or even the only way to salvation–and if it prompts them to persecute true Christians for what they believe, then so be it. It is better to suffer for righteousness’ sake than to be ashamed of God’s words and to deny the Father and Jesus Christ (2 Peter 2:1; 1 John 2:22-23; Jude 4; Revelation 3:8)

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

What is your position on the death penalty?

We find in the ninth chapter of the book of Genesis that, following the great flood by which God wiped out all existing mankind, save Noah and his family, God made a covenant with Noah. In that covenant, God emphasized the sanctity of human life.

Genesis 9:5-6 reads: “Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning… from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man’s blood By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man.”

Later, after God had brought the Israelites out of Egyptian slavery, He instructed the leaders of the nation of Israel that capital punishment was to be carried out for a variety of crimes, including murder, kidnapping, adultery and rape (Exodus 21:12, 16, and Deuteronomy 22:13-27). Moses was also commanded to put to death anyone who cursed their father or mother (Leviticus 20:9).

God’s people in New Testament times acknowledged the authority of civil governments to carry out the death penalty. In Acts 25:11, Paul at his trial before Festus gave recognition to the death penalty when he said: “For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying….”

Paul tells us in Romans 13:1-5: “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience sake.”

1 Peter 2:13 also emphasizes: “Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.”

Christ Himself acknowledged that Pilate’s authority to crucify and to release Him was “given” him “from above” (John 19:11)–but He also stressed that Pilate’s actions towards Him were a miscarriage of divine and even human justice. Once again this shows that God has given permission to human rulers to carry out capital punishment, but since God is not ruling this world, there is no guarantee that the execution of those convicted of crimes is fair and just and in accordance with God’s and even man’s laws.

Man is not born with spiritual discernment, and therefore, errors in judgment can, and have been made, and guilt wrongly established. In theory, modern justice is carried out under the premise that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and in many jurisdictions, the prosecution must show beyond a reasonable doubt that he or she committed the offense. If there is reasonable doubt, the person must be acquitted. In practice, due to news coverage ahead of a trial and because of other factors, the accused is oftentimes presumed guilty and is called upon to prove his innocence.

Capital punishment in the United Kingdom was abandoned in 1998, the last hanging taking place in 1964, prior to capital punishment being abolished for murder in 1969. There were several unsuccessful attempts to reinstate capital punishment for killing police officers. Capital punishment in America is still somewhat active in a number of States, although some have repealed the death penalty. In other countries the execution of criminals by their governments is still much in effect including beheadings, firing squads, stoning and hanging.

Even though God permits civil rulers to execute convicted criminals, this does not mean that the true Church of God should get involved in the political debate of the pros and cons of capital punishment. Regarding the woman caught in the act of adultery–a capital sin under God’s law, and for which Moses had been commanded by God that both the adulterer and the adulteress should be stoned (John 8:5; Leviticus 20:10)–Christ refused to condemn the woman. Although not condoning the sin, He recognized the hypocrisy of those who demanded the death penalty (for instance, they only presented the woman caught in the very act of adultery, but not the man), but He advised the woman “to sin no more,” and the woman’s life was spared (John 8:10-11).

Even in Old Testament times, judicial safeguards were built into God’s law to provide for the rights of the accused in order to prevent injustices, i.e. guilt had to be firmly established; circumstantial evidence was not sufficient, and at least two witnesses were required to establish guilt. False witnesses were themselves subject to death. Difficult cases could be sent, on appeal, for judicial review. Once rightly convicted, however–and since the nation of Israel was at that time a theocracy, God would see to it that no innocent person would be wrongly convicted—the death penalty was mandatory, and it was swift and sure. By contrast, today’s punishment in a number of cases is slow and unsure and often subject to long-winded and sometimes even mandatory appeals. In these cases the administration of justice is seen to be lax, ineffective and devoid of what victims perceive as adequate justice and appropriate sentences.

Eventually, following Christ’s Return, the administration of justice, including capital punishment, will be rendered by God’s saints as Kings, Priests and Judges. It will be meted out fairly and equitably.

In the meantime, God’s Church is to have no part in administering man’s “justice” and the death penalty, and Church members are not to serve as judges or jurors. The following quote is from a position paper by the Global Church of God in a special edition, dated February 1999: “…if the State is not fulfilling its obligations, it is not up to the individual to take to himself the State’s authority which was conferred by God Himself. It is not for the individual to ‘execute wrath on him who practices evil.’ For Christians this is even more so as we are not to be the ruling executives, legislators or judges of the civil government. Paul explained this in 2 Corinthians 3. Though the administration of ‘the letter’ which kills (v6) is from God—and a civil authority that administers it is even ‘God’s minister’ of this particular function (Romans 13:4)—true Christians are to administer only ‘life’ through the administration of the Spirit.”

Lead Writers: Bill Koeneke and Norbert Link

What are the biblical principles regarding hair length and dress for men and women?

In last week’s Q&A, we addressed some general principles regarding the kinds of clothing and style that should be worn. We emphasized the importance of right balance and modesty.

Paul also instructed the Church of God regarding the length of hair that both men and women should wear:

“Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering. But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God” (1 Corinthians 11:13-16).

We can derive from these guidelines that men and women should appear differently in hairstyles. God permits differences in length of hair, and we note that varieties occur in hair color and texture among people. Some men will wear very short hair while others will have fuller styles; the same might be true, to an extent, for women. The key for falling within the guidelines instituted by God in His Word is for men to avoid having female type hairstyles and for women to maintain a proper length to serve as a covering and as an unmistakable woman-like appearance.

We discussed the issue of hair style in a previous Q&A. We are quoting the following pertinent portions:

“In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul sets forth the timeless principles of proper hairstyle and hair length for men and women. After explaining in 1 Corinthians 11:3 that the Head of Christ is God the Father, the Head of a man is Christ, and the head of the woman (wife) is the man (husband), Paul continues: ‘(verse 4) Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. (verse 5) But every woman who prays or prophecies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. (verse 6) For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered…’

“The context of the Scripture discusses the length of hair — not the wearing of a veil or of a hat (There is, however, nothing wrong in God’s eyes for a woman to wear a veil or a hat, if she so desires, following the culture of her upbringing). We read that a woman should wear long hair, which is given to her ‘as a covering’ [1 Corinthians 11:15] or, as some translations render this, ‘as a veil’…

“We read that a woman should have ‘long hair’ as a covering, as distinguished from an ‘uncovered’ head, a ‘shaved’ head, or a ‘shorn’ head. A ‘shorn’ head pictures very short hair. One might think of the analogy of a ‘shorn’ sheep… A ‘shaved’ head describes a bald head. In contrast, a woman should wear ‘long hair’…

“At the same time, we are told that a man is not to wear ‘long hair,’ and that even nature teaches us that wearing long hair is a ‘dishonor’ to a man.”

On this subject, we note and utterly reject the false image that has been promoted as the likeness of Jesus Christ. Not only does this contradict the teaching by Paul against men having long, feminine appearing hair, it violates the clear command against making any image representative of God as found in the Ten Commandments!

Some teach that Jesus was a Nazirite and that He was therefore permitted to wear long hair. This teaching is false. We have addressed this issue in much detail in a previous Q&A. The following excerpts should be helpful in this context:

“Jesus was called a Nazarene, because He lived and grew up in the city of Nazareth. He was not a ‘Nazirite.’ The sixth chapter of the book of Numbers describes the law of the ‘Nazirites.’ Those who took the vow of a Nazirite did not cut their hair, but they were also prohibited from drinking any wine or touching a dead body (Numbers 6:4-6). Christ, however, did drink wine (Luke 22:14-18; Matthew 11:19), and He did touch dead bodies (Luke 8:51-55).

“If Christ had been a Nazirite, He would have broken His vow and thereby violated one of God’s laws. But He said that He had kept His Father’s commandments (John 15:10), including all ritual laws still in force and effect at His time, and we read that He never sinned. The Bible defines sin, however, as the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4, Authorized Version). Therefore, Christ could NOT have been a Nazirite.

“Christ was a Jew, and He looked like an ordinary Jewish man, without special beauty in appearance (compare Isaiah 53:2). Judas had to identify Him to others with a kiss. He was able to escape on occasion, by mingling with the crowd and going ‘through the midst of them’ (Luke 4:30; John 8:59). Apart from the Bible, archeology and history also confirm as well that the Jews at the time of Christ did not wear long hair. Christ, therefore, did not either–otherwise, He would have stood out in a crowd, and a special identification through Judas would not have been necessary.”

In reviewing hair length and hair style of men and women, we conclude, based on biblical principles, that one should be able to determine the gender of a person at first sight. To put it bluntly: A man should look like a man, and a woman should look like a woman. The difference should be recognizable based on outward appearance. When the length or style of hair, all by itself, does not allow to make that determination, then the particular hair style or hair length would need to be modified.

In addition, we must consider more of what God specifically instructs concerning how we ought to wear our hair, and how we ought to dress.

Our hair style should be “normal.” It should be viewed by the overwhelming majority of society as “acceptable,” rather than as outlandish. Somebody who colors his or her hair in such a way that he or she looks like a circus clown places him- or herself within the fringes of society. During the Hippie-culture of the 1960s, young men would wear long hair, but this was never accepted by the majority of our Western society. Parents might have grudgingly “given in” to their “rebellious” sons, but they never liked it. Today, a man with long hair is normally looked upon as “different.” The types of hairstyle propagated today by the MTV generation, with hair sticking out like that of a porcupine, or uncombed, giving a sloppy appearance, or hair which is just too long for a man, is simply not in line with how a Christian man should appear in public. This would also include wearing an uncultivated beard or not shaving for several days (unless it is for the purpose of wearing a well-trimmed acceptable beard).

Regarding dress, in Deuteronomy 22:5, we have this admonition: “’A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the Lord your God.’”

In recent years the design of clothing worn by women has come to include the wearing of pants and pantsuits. While some believe that this type of apparel crosses the line and violates God’s instructions, the designs of these types of garments are, for the most part, gender-specific. That is, women’s pantsuits are designed for the female anatomy. However, even in this circumstance, care must be taken to purchase appropriate garments that clearly compliment a feminine appearance.

Further questions have arisen concerning whether these kinds of pantsuits should be worn in services conducted by the Church of God. In the spirit of what God states in Deuteronomy 22, verse 5, we find no reason to recommend that pantsuits not be worn—specifically, because they are designed for women and not men. However, it would not be advisable to wear pantsuits in Church services all the time, to the exclusion of wearing appropriate dresses. We might note that in ancient times the apparel of men and women had similar looks, but they had unique characteristics that identified with the gender of the wearer.

Regarding men, in our Western world, this would include wearing a suit and a tie for Church services (or a nice combination of jacket, tie and pants). In other parts of the world, different attire might be appropriate, but it is always important that it is in line with the desire to honor God and our fellow brethren by how we dress. Attending Church services in jeans and open shirt is disrespectful to God and simply not acceptable in His eyes.

We are addressing those who are members of the Church of God, and we are specifically offering guidelines to help us all set a right example. However, as in all matters of Christian growth, we must be patient with each other–particularly with those who are new to the faith (compare James 2:1-9).

Finally, we have this instruction from the Word of God:

“Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering; bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do. But above all these things put on love, which is the bond of perfection. And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body; and be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him” (Colossians 3:12-17).

Lead Writers: Norbert Link and Dave Harris

Does the Bible have anything to say about the way men and women should dress?

In fact, the Bible presents some very specific guidelines for the kinds of clothing and style that should be worn. In this Q&A, we are addressing the topic in a more general way. Subsequent Q&A’s will address this topic, and related topics, in more detail.

While some may consider the Bible as being archaic, with little relevance for our day, quite the opposite is true! At the very outset, God gave man responsibility to care for the earthly realm (Compare Genesis 1:26-28). In particular, Adam was told to “tend and keep” the specially prepared Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:15).

Mankind was given stewardship to govern the earth under God’s sovereignty. The record of Genesis shows that through the deception of Satan, Eve disobeyed God and Adam then followed her lead (Compare Genesis 3; also, 2 Corinthians 11:3 and 1 Timothy 2:14). In their rebellion, Adam and Eve decided that their nakedness in the privacy of their home was evil, and they hid themselves from God as a consequence (Compare Genesis 3:7-11).

While Adam and Eve fabricated coverings for themselves out of fig leaves (verse 7), God clothed them with much higher quality “tunics of skin” (verse 21).

In a letter to Timothy, the apostle Paul gave instructions about proper dress, and what he wrote was to be further taught to the Church of God throughout its existence. Giving specific guidelines for women, Paul states: “… in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation [margin: “discretion”], not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works” (1 Timothy 2:9-10).

As we shall see from other principles in the Bible, the emphasis taught by Paul was that women show a reflection of “godliness” in their manner of dressing. However, this is not a prohibition against well-presented hairstyles, the wearing of jewelry or having quality clothing. Rather, it is a matter of emphasis and of attitude on the part of Christian women.

Peter adds this perspective in his instruction to wives, showing that this type of presentation was acceptable, but should not be the most important aspect: “Do not let your adornment be merely outward—arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel—rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God” (1 Peter 3:3-4).

An emphasis on very showy clothing of both men and women was evidently a problem in the first generation of the Church of God. James specifically warned that the brethren should not show favoritism to those who were “better dressed”:

“My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality. For if there should come into your assembly a man with gold rings, in fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes, and you pay attention to the one wearing the fine clothes and say to him, ‘You sit here in a good place,’ and say to the poor man, ‘You stand there,’ or, ‘Sit here at my footstool,’ have you not shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?” (James 2:1-4).

Jesus challenged those of His day about their attitude concerning the appearance of John the Baptist: “‘But what did you go out to see? A man clothed in soft garments? Indeed those who are gorgeously appareled and live in luxury are in kings’ courts’” (Luke 7:25).

We see that wearing certain kinds of clothing can create perceptions in others. True followers of Jesus Christ must look beyond these superficial aspects. This teaching does not preclude dressing the very best we can with what we can legitimately afford. In a poetic, song-like outpouring of how much God loved His chosen city of Jerusalem, an analogy of a bride and wife is presented. Note how God represents the adorning of His love:

“‘Then I washed you in water; yes, I thoroughly washed off your blood, and I anointed you with oil. I clothed you in embroidered cloth and gave you sandals of badger skin; I clothed you with fine linen and covered you with silk. I adorned you with ornaments, put bracelets on your wrists, and a chain on your neck. And I put a jewel in your nose, earrings in your ears, and a beautiful crown on your head. Thus you were adorned with gold and silver, and your clothing was of fine linen, silk, and embroidered cloth. You ate pastry of fine flour, honey, and oil. You were exceedingly beautiful, and succeeded to royalty. Your fame went out among the nations because of your beauty, for it was perfect through My splendor which I had bestowed on you,’ says the Lord God” (Ezekiel 16:9-14).

When God gave instructions for the creation of “holy garments” for the priests of Israel, He specifically wanted them made “‘for GLORY and for BEAUTY’” (Exodus 28:2).

Jesus Christ gives us this perspective in Matthew 6:25-33:

“‘Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature? So why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? Therefore do not worry, saying, “What shall we eat?” or “What shall we drink?” or “What shall we wear?” For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you.’”

All of what we have been examining from examples found in God’s Word point to the ingredient of BALANCE in the matter of how men and women dress in terms of quality.

Regarding how both men and women dress when attending Church services, we find a meaningful example in the time when the children of Israel were commanded to wash their clothes in advance of appearing before God (Compare Exodus 19:10,14). Likewise, the priests were to wash themselves when appearing before God (Compare Exodus 30:19-20); and, they were to wear special clothing (Compare Exodus 28).

It has been the practice of the Church of God to recognize that we are appearing before God when we assemble for Sabbath services along with other special commanded assemblies as given by God. As such, we do recommend that each person present himself or herself in the best apparel they have available. The foremost idea is to specially prepare to appear before God to honor HIM! In the parable of the wedding feast, the guest who did not have on a wedding garment was removed from the feast (Matthew 22:1-14).

While it is evident that members of God’s Church have typically tried to find the middle ground of the customs of the society they live in, we also find that God takes great exception to the self-absorbed and self-willed practices of people who lose all restraint. This applies to inappropriate sloppy appearance, as well as to the over-emphasis on wealth and riches. A case in point for the latter is this stern prophecy that is finding its fulfillment in our day:

“Moreover the Lord says: ‘Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, And walk with outstretched necks And wanton eyes, Walking and mincing as they go, Making a jingling with their feet, Therefore the Lord will strike with a scab The crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, And the Lord will uncover their secret parts.’ In that day the Lord will take away the finery: The jingling anklets, the scarves, and the crescents; The pendants, the bracelets, and the veils; The headdresses, the leg ornaments, and the headbands; The perfume boxes, the charms, and the rings; The nose jewels, the festal apparel, and the mantles; The outer garments, the purses, and the mirrors; The fine linen, the turbans, and the robes. And so it shall be: Instead of a sweet smell there will be a stench; Instead of a sash, a rope; Instead of well-set hair, baldness; Instead of a rich robe, a girding of sackcloth; And branding instead of beauty’” (Isaiah 3:16-24).

We must take these warnings to heart! Our responsibility is to dress modestly and yet to dress with quality garments that reflect our honoring of God. In the letter to Titus, Paul encourages the teaching of “sound doctrine” (Titus 2:1). Among his recommendations is that the older members set an example for and teach the younger members. Using this key to developing a balanced approach to the way men and women dress can also find application in the Church of God in our time.

Finally, when it does come to questions about our personal dress, remember—we are called the body of Christ (Compare Romans 12:5; 1 Corinthians 12:27).

Let us who have been chosen to become a part of the bride of Christ EDIFY the Church of God by how we present ourselves before God and by the example we uphold for one another in even our manner of dress (Compare Revelation 19:7-9).

Lead Writers: Dave Harris and Norbert Link

Why do some Christians eat fish on "Good Friday"?

It is a Catholic custom to abstain from eating meat on “Good Friday” and to eat fish instead. Where did this custom originate?

First, let us examine the precise nature of this custom.

We are quoting from an Internet Website:

“Prior to reforms in the [Catholic] Church in the 1960s, Catholics were expected to refrain from consuming meat on all Fridays throughout the year and in advance of certain holy days. However, in 1966, Pope Paul VI limited the number of days that required fasting and abstinence and allowed local bishops to modify certain details. In the U.S. it is still expected that all Fridays are [days] observed with abstinence, but one may be permitted to replace abstaining from meat with another form of penitence or by performing some spiritual act. During Lent [which lasts for forty days, beginning with “Ash Wednesday” and ending with “Holy Saturday,” preceding “Easter Sunday”], which is the most penitential season of the year, the obligation to abstain from meat may not be substituted.

“It is common practice for Catholics to substitute fish for meat in their Friday meals. In Islam and Judaism, as well as Christianity, fish is not regarded as meat, thus the popular custom of fish fries throughout Lent… As a result of this identification of ‘meat’ based upon its behavioral characteristics, all manner of animals, including shellfish, beavers, and alligators, are classified as ‘fish’ for the purposes of dietary laws… Pope Pius XII granted American Catholics a dispensation from abstinence on the Friday after Thanksgiving to allow them to consume the leftovers from the day before.”

Another Website quotes the Catholic Code of Canon Law 1250, 1251, as follows:

“‘The penitential days and times in the universal Church are every Friday of the whole year and the season of Lent. Abstinence from meat, or from some other food as determined by the Episcopal Conference, is to be observed on all Fridays, unless a solemnity should fall on a Friday. Abstinence and fasting are to be observed on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday’… The application of this precept varies from country to country. For example, American bishops allow individual Catholics to substitute another penance if they could not abstain from meat.”

The Catholic publication, “The New Question Box,” 1988, states on page 367:

“In most places in the United States today, Catholics over 14 years of age must abstain from meat (and soup or gravy made from meat) on Ash Wednesday and all Fridays of Lent. On two days–Ash Wednesday and Good Friday–those over 18 and under 59 should fast. This means only one full meal, and only liquids like milk and fruit juices between meals.”

The idea of fasting during Lent stems from the concept that Christians would have committed sinful practices during Carnival (ending with “Ash Wednesday”) and needed therefore to repent or give penance during the subsequent time until Easter.

The reason for “fasting” on Good Friday is explained by “The New Question Box” in the sense that “Friday commemorated the day of Jesus’ death.”

However, as we explain in our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–a Great Mystery,” Christ was NOT crucified on Friday. Further, spiritual fasting, according to the Bible, is observed quite differently than how it is taught by the Catholic Church. For more information on that important issue, please read our free booklet, “The Meaning of God’s Fall Holy Days,” Chapter 2–The Day of Atonement, beginning with page 17.

The real origins of Catholic “fasting” during Lent, including on Good Friday, and the custom to eat fish instead, especially on Good Friday, are to be found in antiquity.

Alexander Hislop writes in “The Two Babylons,” on pages 104-106:

“The forty days’ abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess (Astarte or Ishtar)… Such a Lent of forty days was observed in Egypt… Among the Pagans this Lent seems to have been an indispensable preliminary to the great annual festival in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz, which was celebrated by alternate weeping and rejoicing [compare Ezekiel 8:13-14]… [T]o conciliate the Pagans to nominal Christianity, Rome, pursuing its usual policy, took measures to get the Christian and Pagan festivals amalgamated… Originally, even in Rome, Lent, with the preceding revelries of the Carnival, was entirely unknown.”

Ralph Woodrow writes in “Babylon, Mystery Religion,” copyright 1981, on pages 142 and 143:

“… each Friday, many Catholics abstain from meat–substituting fish in its place–supposedly in remembrance of the Friday crucifixion. Roman Catholics in the United States are no longer required by their church to abstain from meat on Fridays (as formerly)–except during Lent–nevertheless many still follow the custom of fish on Friday.

“Certainly, the Scriptures never associate fish with Friday. On the other hand, the word ‘Friday’ comes from the name of ‘Freya,’ who was regarded as the goddess of peace, joy, and FERTILITY, the symbol of her fertility being the FISH. From very early times the fish was a symbol of fertility among the Chinese, Assyrians, Phoenicians, the Babylonians, and others. The word ‘fish’ comes from ‘dag’ which implies increase or fertility…

“The goddess of sexual fertility among the Romans was called Venus… Friday was regarded as her sacred day because it was believed that the planet Venus ruled the first hour of Friday and this was called dies Veneris. And… the fish was also regarded as being sacred to her…

“The fish was regarded as sacred to Ashtoreth… In ancient Egypt, Isis was sometimes represented with a fish on her head… Considering that Friday was named after the goddess of sexual fertility, Friday being her sacred day, and the fish her symbol, it seems like more than a mere coincidence that Catholics have been taught that Friday is a day of abstinence from meat, a day to eat fish!”

But there is even more historical evidence for the custom of eating fish on Friday–especially on “Good Friday,” when Christ ALLEGEDLY was killed–according to Roman Catholic tradition, that is.

Woodrow explains, on pages 84 and 85, the following about the fishgod DAGON:

“Dagon was actually but a mystery form of the false Babylonian ‘savior.’ The name Dagon comes from ‘dag’ (a word commonly translated ‘fish’ in the Bible) and means fishgod. Though it originated in the paganism of Babylon, Dagon worship became especially popular among the heathenistic Philistines…

“Layard, in Babylon and Nineveh, explains that ‘the head of the fish [depicted as being worn by the fishgod Dagon on Mesopotamian sculptures] formed a mitre…’ A famous painting by Moretto shows St. Ambrose (in the sixteenth century) wearing a mitre shaped like the head of a fish.”

Woodrow also shows in his book pictures of Pope Paul VI, wearing the fish-shaped mitre.

To summarize, the Catholic custom to eat fish on Good Friday is not Scriptural. It is clearly derived from pagan customs and concepts and is also connected with the wrong teaching that Christ was crucified on a Friday–which He was not.

Of course, it would not be wrong to eat fish on any day of the week–including on a Friday–as long as it is not done with the false idea that eating fish on “Good Friday” honors God or Christ in any way. As Paul explained, we could even eat meat sacrificed to idols–as idols are nothing–as long as we don’t do it “with consciousness of the idol” (1 Corinthians 8:7), thereby giving a wrong impression that we agree with the correctness of those pagan customs, or by defiling the conscience of others (compare verses 10, 12; 1 Corinthians 10:28-29).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Are Christians subject to the command to not wear mixed fabrics as specified in Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:11?

As a first step in answering this puzzling question, we must understand that all of God’s commandments were given for the good of mankind! King David extolled God and continually praised Him for His Way: “…For all Your commandments are righteousness” (Psalm 119:172).

Very specifically, God chose the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, for a unique relationship with Him. Note what He offered to Israel:

“‘Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. And you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation…’” (Exodus 19:5-6).

As a part of the covenants (binding agreements) God made with His nation Israel, He included the laws written in the Ten Commandments along with other statutes and judgments by which to administer His government. Some of these had a very specific application for the time and especially for the conduct of the “holy nation” of Israel, even though their overall application was not limited to ancient times.

Let’s consider the sin of adultery as a case in point. One of the overarching commandments of God as found in the Ten Commandments is, “‘You shall not commit adultery’” (Exodus 20:14). The penalty for such a transgression was for the offenders to be put to death (Compare Leviticus 20:10). In establishing the way to administer this law in Israel, God showed that this kind of immoral act was to be dealt with very severely, and He explained the reason: “‘…So you shall put away the evil from among you’” (Compare Deuteronomy 22:21, 22, 24).

Laws concerning agriculture, health practices, public policies and much more were to be administered by the leaders of Israel under God’s direct guidance. Among these is the law concerning mixed fabrics. Here is what is stated:

“‘You shall keep My statutes. You shall not let your livestock breed with another kind. You shall not sow your field with mixed seed. Nor shall a garment of mixed linen and wool come upon you’” (Leviticus 19:19).

“You shall not wear a garment of different sorts, such as wool and linen mixed together’” (Deuteronomy 22:11).

In the context of these statutes, we see from Leviticus 19:19 that God very specifically drew lines of separation—i.e., for livestock, for planting and for garments—clothing made, in this case, from an animal by-product and that made from plant derivatives. Also, in the context of Deuteronomy 22, verses 9 and 10 further elaborate the command by God to keep like things together.

In His recreation of life on the earth, God established plants and animals of tremendous variety, and of these, the Word of God states that each was to reproduce “‘according to its kind’” (Compare Genesis 1:11-12, 21, 24-25).

To quote from our booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound…”:

“Let us briefly review a few examples of Old Testament laws, which are clearly still binding today, as neither the letter, nor spiritual principles of the New Testament, nor any ritual character of such laws would indicate otherwise.

“For instance, Deuteronomy 22:5 prohibits cross-dressing. A man is not to wear women’s clothes and vice versa. This law deals with transvestism.

“Deuteronomy 22:9 forbids sowing a vineyard with different kinds of seed. The principle is to plant seeds together that will each continue to reproduce after its own kind, in order to avoid substandard products or hybrids. There is nothing wrong, then, with planting peas or beans among corn, or planting two pasture grasses together. On the other hand, cucumbers should not be planted with watermelons because they will cross and produce a perversion. Likewise, various members of the muskmelon and cantaloupe family should not be planted near pumpkins or certain types of squash, as they will mix.

“Finally, Deuteronomy 22:11 prohibits, correctly translated, the wearing of a garment ‘of different sorts, wool and linen mixed together.’ [The words, ‘such as’ have been added and do not appear in the original Hebrew.] Leviticus 19:19 contains the same prohibition. Wool is an animal product, while linen is a plant product. Such products should not be combined, as an improper blend, as they produce clothes of lesser quality.”

From the standpoint of practicality, mixing wool and linen together for the purpose of clothing degrades the quality. [From a spiritual or symbolic standpoint, wool is very warm on our bodies, but linen is cold. A combination of the two would result in wearing something which gives a “luke-warm” effect, compare Revelation 3:15-16].

Wool and linen both have unique characteristics in clothing and can each be crafted into garments of extremely high quality. As we consider this statute from God, let us also remember that He created the sheep and the flax plant with the knowledge that they would serve as a source of clothing. What He stipulates in both Leviticus and Deuteronomy is the proper use.

At the time of Israel’s emergence as God’s nation, cloth was made from raw materials that were spun into threads and woven on looms. Historical references cite silk, hemp, camel hair and goat hair, while cotton seemed less of a commodity in that part of the world. Animal skins were also commonly processed for clothing. With all of these choices available, God specifically limited the co-mingling of the threads of wool and linen to create garments worn by the people of Israel.

However, we also see that God commanded that special holy garments be made for Aaron and his sons “‘…for glory and for beauty’” (Compare Exodus 28:1-4). This priestly clothing was made according to God’s instructions:

“‘They shall take the gold, blue, purple, and scarlet thread, and the fine linen, and they shall make the ephod of gold, blue, purple, and scarlet thread, and fine woven linen, artistically worked’” (Exodus 28:5-6). NOTE: The italicized word thread is also rendered as material by the NASB and yarns by the TANAKH.

The variety of materials used in preparation for the Tabernacle and for the clothing to be worn by Aaron and his sons is also described in Exodus 35, verses 20 to 29. Additionally, in Exodus 39, further description of the materials is given. Please note that gold was also woven into these priestly garments as stated in verse 3.

While the exact appearance is not known, copies have been constructed in modern times—especially by organizations in Israel who seek to re-establish Temple worship. From these we see that both animal and plant materials were used for these garments that were only to be made for or worn by the priests of God. It is evident that the construction involved layers of clothing and unique appliqués.

Today, we might consider the wearing of a wool suit coat over a cotton shirt adorned by a silk tie as an example of wearing diverse clothing that each are made of pure materials BUT NOT MIXED TOGETHER IN THEIR FABRICATION. As we saw from the accounts in Exodus, though, the interweaving of some materials—such as gold—was allowed.

In recent times different materials have been developed for making clothing.

Nylon, Polyester, Spandex, and Acrylic are examples of petroleum-based synthetic materials that now make up some of our apparel; also, Rayon (or Viscose) is a cellulose-based semi-synthetic fiber made from wood pulp. Oftentimes these may be used with natural fibers—either as blends or as supporting parts.

As we are not to mix together animal and plant products, it would appear that linen (a plant product) should not be mixed together with an animal product. However, this prohibition does not apply to artificial products, so that combinations such as linen or wool with synthetic and semi-synthetic materials would not be problematic.

How then do we actually apply the restrictions in our apparel as commanded by God? Let’s consider the context of these rules. Understand that these statutes were given to the NATION of Israel that had the totally unique relationship of God’s direct rule through His appointed servants. However, God rejected both Israel and Judah because of their rebellion and their refusal to live by His laws.

When Jesus came as representative of God’s Kingdom and its future establishment on the earth, His disciples wanted to know if He would “‘…at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?’” (Acts 1:6).

That did not nor has it yet happened!

Consider the example of the woman caught in adultery. When the scribes and Pharisees brought her before Jesus, they said, “‘Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?’” (John 8:5).When the accusers left without condemning her, Jesus said, “‘Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more’” (John 8:11).

At that time, Jesus did not enforce the PENALTY of God’s laws as given to the nation of Israel; However, He did UPHOLD THE LAW by admonishing the woman not to sin—which is the breaking of God’s law (Compare 1 John 3:4).

In the future, when God’s Kingdom is established on the earth, God’s laws will be used to govern the earth. Penalties will be exacted (Compare Zechariah 13:3).

In addition, we find that priestly clothing is again specified for the future in the restored Temple of God:

“‘And it shall be, whenever they enter the gates of the inner court, that they shall put on linen garments; no wool shall come upon them while they minister within the gates of the inner court or within the house. They shall have linen turbans on their heads and linen trousers on their bodies; they shall not clothe themselves with anything that causes sweat. When they go out to the outer court, to the outer court to the people, they shall take off their garments in which they have ministered, leave them in the holy chambers, and put on other garments; and in their holy garments they shall not sanctify the people’” (Ezekiel 44:17-19).

We see then, that God’s statutes, as well as its penalties, will be used to govern His future Kingdom, but how are we Christians to look upon the administration of God’s government NOW?

Christians are to abide by the laws of the Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, unless the New Testament shows clearly, by letter or in the spirit, that certain Old Testament laws are no longer binding. For example, the New Testament shows that physical circumcision is no longer necessary.

We find an example in the issue of circumcision that arose as uncircumcised Gentiles were being converted to Christianity. Circumcision was strictly enforced among the Israelites; however, note how James and the other elders responded to the Gentile converts:

“‘They wrote this letter by them: The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings. Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law”–to whom we gave no such commandment–it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell’” (Acts 15:23-29).

Paul further shows the application of God’s laws in the deeper, spiritual sense. Using the principle of Deuteronomy 22:10 as a basis, he taught the Church of God, “Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 6:14).

Christians today are not to carry out the physical penalties of the Old Testament (such as stoning) against others.

On the other hand, no New Testament passage indicates that those Old Testament laws, as set forth in Leviticus 19:19 or Deuteronomy 22:11, are no longer binding.

We should all make diligent effort to apply the spirit of the administrative statutes and judgments given to the nation of Israel. We need to take steps to avoid the inferior quality of blended fabrics used for clothing—including that of wool mixed with linen.

Lead Writers: Dave Harris and Norbert Link

Would you please explain James 1:14-15?

The passage reads:

“But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.”

When and how does sin start? Does death only await us when sin is “full-grown”?

Vincent’s Word Studies explains that the terms “drawn away” and “enticed” “are metaphors from hunting and fishing.” It continues: “Drawn away, as beasts are enticed from a safecovert into a place beset with snares. Note the present participle, as indicating the progress of the temptation: ‘is being drawn away.’ Enticed– As a fish with bait. Also the present participle.”

We see, then, that a PROGRESSION is described.

In addition, the ORIGIN of sinful conduct is not mainly external, but INTERNAL. The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown explains:

“Every man, when tempted, is so [tempted] through being drawn away of… his own lust [or, desire]. The cause of sin is in ourselves. Even Satan’s suggestions do not endanger us before they are made our own. Each one has his own peculiar (so the Greek) lust, arising from his own temperament and habit… drawn away [describes] the beginning step in temptation: drawn away from truth and virtue. Enticed [means] literally, ‘taken with a bait,’ as fish are. The further progress: the man allowing himself… to be enticed to evil… ‘Lust’ [or ‘desire’] is here personified as the harlot that allures the man…

“The guilty union is committed by the will embracing the temptress. ‘Lust,’ the harlot, then, ‘brings forth sin,’ namely, of that kind to which the temptation inclines. Then the particular sin… ‘when it is completed, brings forth death,’ with which it was all along pregnant…”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible gives the following additional explanation, showing that the sin in the heart becomes manifest for all to see:

“… the fountain or source of all temptation is in man himself. It is true that external inducements to sin may be placed before him, but they would have no force if there was not something in himself to which they corresponded, and over which they might have power. There must be some ‘lust’; some desire; some inclination; something which is unsatisfied now… The original propensity may not be wrong, but may be perfectly harmless – as in the case of the desire of food… The error, the fault, the sin, is, not restraining the indulgence where we are commanded to do it, either in regard to the objects sought, or in regard to the degree of indulgence. ‘And enticed’ [actually means] Entrapped, caught; that is, he is seized by this power, and held fast; or he is led along and beguiled, until he falls into sin, as in a snare that springs suddenly upon him… Without doubt, the apostle traces the whole evil of temptation, which some falsely ascribed to God, to the sinful desires of the human heart…

“The whole passage, with the words and figures which are used, show that the idea in the apostle’s mind was that of an enticing harlot… The meaning is, when the desire which we have naturally is quickened, or made to act, the result is that sin is produced… In the mere desire of good, of happiness, of food, of raiment, there is no sin; it becomes sin when indulged in an improper manner, and when it leads us to seek that which is forbidden – to invade the rights of others, or in any way to violate the laws of God…

“‘It bringeth forth sin’ [means that:] The result is sin – OPEN, actual sin. When that which is conceived in the heart is matured, it is SEEN to be sin. The design of all this is to show that sin is not to be traced to God, but to man himself…

“There are, first, our natural propensities; those which we have as men… Such Adam had in innocence; such the Saviour had; and such are to be regarded as in no respect in themselves sinful and wrong. Yet they may, in our case, as they did in Adam, lead us to sin, because, under their strong influence, we may be led to desire that which is forbidden, or which belongs to another… And sin, when it is finished bringeth forth death…”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible alludes to the fact that James has the progression of sin in mind, which, through habitual conduct, may lead to committing the unforgivable or unpardonable sin:

“Every man is tempted (in an ill sense) when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. In other scriptures the devil is called the tempter, and other things may sometimes concur to tempt us; but neither the devil nor any other person or thing is to be blamed so as to excuse ourselves…

“The method of sin in its proceeding [is described:] First it draws away, then entices. As holiness consists of two parts – forsaking that which is evil and cleaving to that which is good, so these two things, reversed, are the two parts of sin. The heart is carried from that which is good, and enticed to cleave to that which is evil…

“Then, when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin; that is, sin being allowed to excite desires in us, it will soon ripen those desires into consent, and then it is said to have conceived. The sin truly exists, though it be but in embryo. And, when it has grown [to] its full size in the mind, it is then brought forth in ACTUAL EXECUTION…

“Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. After sin is brought forth in actual commissions, the finishing of it… is its being strengthened by FREQUENT ACTS and SETTLED INTO A HABIT. And, when the iniquities of men are thus FILLED UP, death is brought forth… the wages of sin is eternal death… Your own hearts’ lusts and corruptions are your tempters; and when by degrees they have carried you off from God, and finished the power and dominion of sin in you, then they will prove your DESTROYERS.”

It is correct that James is addressing here, foremost, the concept of the UNPARDONABLE SIN. All sin deserves the death penalty, and sin is not only to be seen in outward acts, but also in inward WRONG desires. Christ said that whoever LOOKS at a woman with the thought of committing adultery with her has already committed adultery in his heart and has therefore sinned in the eyes of God (compare Matthew 5:27-28). He also said that whoever HATES a person in his mind has already committed murder in the eyes of God (compare Matthew 5:21-22). But sin can be forgiven, upon repentance (1 John 1:8-10), unless it has reached such a state of habitual conduct that the perpetrator does not want to repent of it anymore. In that case, it is IMPOSSIBLE to renew such a person to repentance (Hebrews 6:4-6). His conscience is seared–he does not see anymore that what he does is evil; he has embraced his sinful conduct as a way of life to be desired. In that case, eternal death is the fate of such a person, and his sin–which began in his mind but which was allowed to grow unchecked–has led to the second and final death in the lake of fire from which there will be no resurrection (Revelation 20:15; 21:7-8).

We are admonished to bring every thought into the obedience of Jesus Christ–not to dwell on evil thoughts, but to eradicate them from our minds (2 Corinthians 10:5). Christ was tempted in all points as we are, but He never allowed any tempting thought to take root in His mind; He never allowed any natural desires to embrace sinfulness. When Satan tempted Him in the desert, He resisted Satan by dwelling on the Word of God. When people tempted Christ by either wanting Him to become their king or by ending His misery and pain at the cross, He rejected those tempting thoughts by dwelling on the Word of God. He never allowed desires to settle in His mind to conceive sin–let alone allowing sin to grow in His mind and to even manifest itself in outward acts.

We read that Christ, who had been GOD since all eternity, BECAME flesh–a human being. He came into sinful flesh (Romans 8:3), being born of the Virgin Mary who had human nature, but He overcame sin in His flesh. He never sinned once–not even in His mind. When He was in the garden called Gethsemane, He prayed to the Father to let the cup of torture and crucifixion depart from Him, if there was a different way to accomplish the same purpose for His Coming, but He added that the Father’s Will–not His own Will–needed to be done. He always submitted to God’s Will. His prayer for relief from death was a product of His human desire not to die, but this desire was not bad or sinful. IF, however, He had decided NOT to go through His ordeal and flee from the soldiers who had come to arrest Him, then He would have sinned, as He would have violated the Will of God. But He did not do this–in fact, He never entertained the thought of doing this. He never had the desire to disobey God; but He controlled His human desires so as to never entertain the thought of wanting to do evil.

With Christ living in us through His Holy Spirit, we CAN reach the same kind of mind frame which Jesus possessed. We are told to renew our mind (Romans 12:2); to acquire and have the same mind which Jesus had (Philippians 2:5). We, too, can CONTROL our thoughts and overcome any desires to sin. We CAN become more and more perfect by eradicating from our minds the very desire to disobey God and to sin.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Was Rahab really a harlot?

The famous woman Rahab who helped the spies at the time of Joshua, is clearly identified in the Bible as a harlot or a prostitute. This is the obvious conclusion, when we just accept the relevant Scriptures on their face value.

However, many commentaries feel uncomfortable with that assessment and have been trying to re-interpret and re-write Scripture to bring it more in line with their humanly-devised perceptions. The following serves as a very good example to caution everyone NEVER to accept the opinions of commentaries as inspired doctrine, UNLESS they are clearly supported by the biblical evidence. Commentaries reflect, as a whole, the opinions of man which may or may not be inspired by God. We must also remember that God has revealed His truth to “babes,” while HIDING it from most of the learned and sophisticated intellectuals of this world (compare Matthew 11:25).

Regarding Rahab, notice the following clear biblical evidence:

Joshua 2:1 and Joshua 6:17, 22, 25 identify Rahab as a “harlot.” This is confirmed, in the New Testament, in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25. The Hebrew and Greek words are “zanah” and “porne” and designate a harlot, as we will see.

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. Based on these facts, many commentaries have concluded that Rahab could not have been a harlot, but that she was just an upstanding innocent and respected “innkeeper.”

Notice the following examples for this adventurous reasoning:

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible states to Hebrews 11:31 that it is “exceedingly probable that the [Hebrew and Greek words]which we translate harlot, should be rendered innkeeper or tavernkeeper, as there is no proper evidence that the person in question was such a woman as our translation represents her. As to her having been a harlot before and converted afterwards, it is a figment of an idle fancy. She was afterwards married to Salmon, a Jewish prince… And it is extremely incredible that, had she been what we represent her, he would have sought for such an alliance.”

Please also consider these comments in John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible:

“The Targum… calls her… ‘a woman, that kept a victualling house’: this paraphrase is taken notice of by Jarchi and Kimchi on the place, who interpret it, ‘a seller of food’: and even the Hebrew word… is so explained by a considerable Jewish writer… and this may rather seem to be the sense of the word, and to be her proper business, from the spies going to her house, as being an house of entertainment; and from Salmon’s marrying her, which might be thought strange that a prince of Israel would, had she been a person of ill fame.

“… but yet, the constant use of the word, in this form, the testimonies of two apostles, and her making no mention of her husband and children, when she agreed with the spies, confirm the generally received character of her, that she was an harlot. Some Jewish writers say… that she was ten years of age when the Israelites came out of Egypt; and that all the forty years they were in the wilderness… ‘she played the harlot’; and was one and fifty years of age when she was proselyted. She is called an harlot…”

In addition, Vincent’s Word Studies explains correctly:

“Rahab’s occupation is stated without mincing, and the lodging of the spies at her house was probably not a matter of accident. Very amusing are the efforts of some earlier expositors to evade the fact of a harlot’s faith, by rendering [the word for “harlot” as] landlady.”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible also explains correctly:

“Among the noble army of believing worthies, bravely marshalled by the apostle, Rahab comes in the rear, to show that God is no respecter of persons… She was a Canaanite, a stranger to the commonwealth of Israel… She was a harlot, and lived in a way of sin; she was not only a keeper of a public house, but a common woman of the town…”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible contains the following interesting annotations to Hebrews 11:31:

“Much perplexity has been felt in reference to this case, and many attempts have been made to remove the difficulty. The main difficulty has been that a woman of this character should be enumerated among those who were eminent for piety, and many expositors have endeavored to show that the word rendered ‘harlot’ does not necessarily denote a woman of abandoned character, but may be used to denote a hostess… But there are no clear instances in which the Greek word, and the corresponding Hebrew word… is used in this sense. The usual and the fair meaning of the word is what is given in our translation, and there is no good reason why that signification should not be retained here…

“… the obvious meaning of this word here and of the corresponding place in Joshua 2:6 is, that she had been a woman of abandoned character, and that she was known as such. That she might have been also a hostess, or one who kept a house of entertainment for strangers, is at the same time by no means improbable, since it not unfrequently happened in ancient as well as modern times, that females of this character kept such houses…

“Other females of a similar character have been converted, and have subsequently led lives of piety… ‘Publicans and harlots,’ said the Saviour, ‘go into the kingdom of God;’ Matthew 21:31. Rahab seems to have been one of them; and her case shows that such instances of depravity are not hopeless. This record, therefore, is one of encouragement for the most abandoned sinners.

“… there is no need of supposing that the apostle in commending this woman [in Hebrews 11:31] approved of all that she did. That she was not perfect is true. That she did some things which cannot be vindicated is true also – and who does not? But admitting all that may be said about any imperfection in her character… it was still true that she had strong faith – and that is all that the apostle commends. We are under no more necessity of vindicating all that she did, than we are all that David or Peter did – or all that is now done by those who have the highest claims to virtue.”

In addition, please note, as a matter of clarification, that at the time of the destruction of Jericho, Rahab and her relatives were at first not allowed to stay INSIDE the camp of Israel (compare Joshua 6:23)–obviously due to Rahab’s reputation. She first had to prove herself–she had to show or bring forth fruits worthy of repentance (compare Matthew 3:8). That she clearly did so is manifested by the fact that she would later live IN Israel (compare Joshua 6:25).

In any event, we really don’t need to guess as to who and what Rahab was. The concept that she was just an outstanding noble landlady is plainly and totally ridiculous.

The Hebrew word “zanah” (translated as “harlot” in regard to Rahab, in Joshua 2:1, etc.) can also mean, “to commit fornication, go a whoring.” It is used in Genesis 34:15, 24, 31. Jacob’s brothers condemned the Hivite prince Shechem of having treated their sister Dinah like a harlot–not like an innkeeper.

Jephtah is called the son of a harlot in Judges 11:1; and there are many more passages which translate this word accurately as “harlot.” (Compare, Judges 16:1; 1 Kings 3:16; Proverbs 29:3; Isaiah 1:21; Jeremiah 3:1, 6, 8; 5:7; Ezekiel 16:31, 35; Hosea 3:3; Joel 3:3; Micah 1:7, etc., etc.)

The Greek word “porne” (translated as “harlot” in regard to Rahab, in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25), can also mean, literally, “one sold” or “fornicator.” It is used in Matthew 21:31-32 where Christ talked about publicans and harlots, not publicans and innkeepers. Notice also Luke 15:30 where the “lost son” did not devour his living with innkeepers, but with harlots. Also, notice 1 Corinthians 6:15-16 where Paul was not talking about fornication with an innkeeper, but with a harlot or prostitute. AND, notice Revelation 17:5 where Babylon is described as the mother of harlots, not of innkeepers.

The Bible is very candid about the strengths and weaknesses of its heroes. The Bible does not tell fairy-tales, but it gives us the complex characteristics of real life people. The GOOD NEWS is that EVERYONE who is called by God to repentance CAN change–NO MATTER what he or she was or what he or she might have done. Rahab was a harlot–no doubt–but she responded to God’s call with faith, and she acted upon her faith by hiding the spies and saved them from death. After all, faith without works is dead (James 2:17, 24-25). Rahab changed her life, and she became an ancestor of Jesus Christ.

We might also recall that Jesus Christ defended a repentant woman who is identified as “a sinner” in the account given in Luke 7:36-50. The contextual meaning is that she was an immoral woman. However, note what Jesus said of her actions: “Then He said to the woman, ‘Your FAITH has saved you. Go in peace'” (Luke 7:50). This record further supports the reason Rahab is mentioned among the faithful in Hebrews 11:31–in spite of the fact that she had at one time lived as a harlot.

The only women specifically mentioned by name in the genealogy of Jesus, as recorded in Matthew 1, besides Rahab, are Mary, the wife of Joseph (verse 16), who was a righteous woman; Tamar, the daughter in law of Judah (verse 3), who played the HARLOT with him since he had broken his promise to give her one of his sons in marriage (compare Genesis 38:1-30); and Ruth, a non-Israelite from the tribe of Moab (verse 5). One more woman is mentioned, without naming her directly, in verse 6, where we read: “David the king begot Solomon by her [who had been the wife] of Uriah.” This refers to Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, whom David had killed, after Bathsheba became pregnant as a result of David’s adulterous affair with her.

All of these women are listed in the genealogy of Jesus, the stepson and foster child of Joseph. They are listed because they deserved to be listed–not because of their weaknesses and sins, but because of their subsequent repentance and faith. Rahab is no exception. She clearly was a harlot and she was known as such, but she acted upon faith, repented and changed her lifestyle, and she is today memorialized in God’s Word as one of the ancestors of Jesus’ stepfather Joseph. In addition, she was an ancestor of Mary, the mother of Jesus–which means that Jesus Christ was a direct descendant of Rahab! (Compare Luke 3:32 with Matthew 1:5, showing that Boaz, an ancestor of King David, was the son of Salmon and Rahab). Most importantly, however, is the fact that she will be in the first resurrection (Hebrews 11:31, 39-40).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

When reading the book of Zechariah, we find that God will bring terrible punishment on the modern descendants of the ancient houses of Israel and Judah. Why is God so angry with them?

As it is rightly pointed out in the question, the punishment, as described in the book of Zechariah, deals foremost with the MODERN descendants of the ancient houses of Israel and Judah. It will be inflicted on them just prior to the return of Jesus Christ.

We understand that the modern descendants of the houses of Israel and Judah include the peoples of the USA, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, as well as the modern Jews (who live inside and outside the state of Israel). For more information, please read our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”

The Bible contains many prophecies dealing with the sins and punishment of these nations. However, in this answer, we want to limit the discussion to the book of Zechariah.

When God challenged ancient Judah at the time of Zechariah, to get involved in the work of God, He explained to them that they were suffering at that time because of their SINS. God’s values have not changed–therefore, His anger towards ancient Judah and Israel because of their sins applies equally to modern Israel and Judah of our day, as they are engaged in the same kinds of sins and transgressions.

God spoke through Zechariah to ancient Israel and Judah, saying that He had been very angry with their fathers. He cautioned them not to be like their fathers, to whom the former prophets preached, encouraging them, without success, to repent. God also stated that His laws and commandments “overtook” them (compare Zechariah 1:2-6).

Amazingly, ancient Judah did finally repent in response to that challenge (verse 6, second half), even though their repentance was short-lived. It is to be hoped–but it is very unlikely–that MODERN Israel and Judah will also repent of their evil ways when they hear the Word of God proclaimed through God’s modern-day servants.

God also explained that when He was “a little angry” with Zion and Jerusalem, nations “helped–but with evil intent,” so that God became “exceedingly angry” with those nations (verse 15). Again, this prophecy is certainly dual and applies to our day and age as well.

God explained very clearly–in Zechariah 7:4-14–WHY He was angry with ancient Israel and Judah–and He tells us at the same time WHY He is angry with the modern descendants of these ancient houses:

“(4) Then the word of the LORD of hosts came to me, saying, (5) ‘Say to all the people of the land, and to the priests: “When you fasted and mourned… did you really fast for Me–for Me? (6) When you eat and when you drink, do you not eat and drink for yourselves? (7) Should you not have obeyed the words which the LORD proclaimed through the former prophets when Jerusalem and the cities around it were inhabited and prosperous… (9) Execute true justice, Show mercy and compassion Everyone to his brother. Do not oppress the widow or the fatherless, The alien or the poor. Let none of you plan evil in his heart Against his brother. (11) But they refused to heed, shrugged their shoulders, and stopped their ears so that they could not hear. (12) Yes, they made their hearts like flint, refusing to hear the law and the words which the LORD of hosts had sent by His Spirit through the former prophets. Thus great wrath came from the LORD of hosts. (13) Therefore it happened, that just as He proclaimed and they would not hear, so they called out and I would not listen, says the LORD of hosts. (14) But I scattered them with a whirlwind among all the nations which they had not known. Thus the land became desolate after them, so that no one passed through or returned; for they made the pleasant land desolate.”‘”

Again, this prophecy is dual. As it applied to ancient Israel and Judah, so it applies to us today. As God scattered ancient Israel and Judah “with a whirlwind”–that is, through invasion and war–“among all the nations,” so God will scatter the modern houses of Israel and Judah.

In speaking of OUR day, God tells us that the modern nations of Israel and Judah WILL repent, but only AFTER they have been held captive by foreign invaders. We read in Zechariah 8:7-15:

“(7) Thus says the LORD of hosts: ‘Behold, I will save My people from the land of the east And from the land of the west; (8) I will bring them back, And they shall dwell in the midst of Jerusalem. They shall be My people, And I will be their God, In truth and righteousness… (10) For before these days… There was no peace from the enemy for whoever went out or came in; For I set all men, everyone, against his neighbor… (13)… just as you were a curse among the nations, O house of Judah and house of Israel, So I will save you, and you shall be a blessing… (14) Just as I determined to punish you When your fathers provoked Me to wrath… And I would not relent, (15) So again in these days I am determined to do good to Jerusalem and to the house of Judah… (16) These are the things you shall do; Speak each man the truth to his neighbor; Give judgment in your gates for truth, justice, and peace; (17) Let none of you think evil in your heart against your neighbor; And do not love a false oath. For all these are things that I hate…'”

Another aspect of God’s anger today over sinful Israel and Judah is their willingness and eagerness to fight wars, which are not approved of or endorsed by God. But God says that this will be changed, and this will be accomplished by Jesus Christ: “I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim [Great Britain] And the horse [symbolic for war machines like tanks] from Jerusalem [the state of Israel]; The battle bow shall be cut off” (Zechariah 9:10).

God also pronounces His punishment against the religious leaders of ancient and modern Israel and Judah, in Zechariah 10:3: “My anger is kindled against the shepherds, And I will punish the goatherds [leaders]… ” The context with verse 2 indicates that those religious leaders were engaged in (and that they approved of) idolatry, divination and the preaching of a false hope.

God continues to explain that He allowed His people to be defeated in war and become captives of war. This prophecy is most certainly dual and refers also to our time and age, as God points out that He will free them from their captivity and bring them back to the Promised Land. This did NOT happen in history, as the tribe of “Joseph” never returned. Notice Zechariah 10:6-10:

“(6) I will strengthen the house of Judah, And I will save the house of Joseph [the modern English-speaking nations of the USA and the British Commonwealth]. I will bring them back [out of captivity and slavery], Because I have mercy on them. They shall be as though I had not cast them aside… (9) I will sow them among the peoples, And they shall remember Me in far countries; they shall live together with their children, And they shall return. (10) I will also bring them back from the land of Egypt And gather them from Assyria [modern German-speaking peoples]… (11) Then the pride of Assyria shall be brought down, And the scepter of Egypt shall depart.”

Another remarkable prophecy for our time, which is directed against the modern English-speaking nations (and the religious and political leaders) of the USA and the British Commonwealth, and their future captivity and slavery, can be found in Zechariah 11, beginning with verse 4:

“Thus says the LORD my God, ‘Feed the flock for slaughter, (5) whose owners slaughter them and feel no guilt; those who sell them say, ‘Blessed be the LORD, for I am rich; and their shepherds do not pity them. (6) For I will no longer pity the inhabitants of the land, says the LORD. But indeed I will give everyone into his neighbor’s hand and into the hand of his king. They shall attack the land, and I will not deliver them from their hand.'”

Notice that this is written in a future tense and for a future time. It pronounces events which will still occur, and it was written AFTER both ancient Israel and Judah had already gone into captivity, and AFTER the tribe of Judah had already returned to Jerusalem and had begun to build the temple.

Notice the continuation of this prophecy, beginning in verse 8, referring to three powerful religious and/or political leaders:

“(8) ‘I dismissed the three shepherds in one month. My soul loathed them, and their soul also abhorred me…’ (14) Then I cut in two my other staff… that I might break the brotherhood between Judah and Israel.”

This indicates that in the times just ahead of us, the close relationship between the USA and Britain on the one hand, and the state of Israel on the other hand, will cease. The future will have to show who the three shepherds will be who will be “dismissed” “in one month.”

God continues to prophesy that a worthless shepherd–a political or religious leader–will arise apparently just after the dismissal of the three shepherds and just prior to Christ’s return. This worthless shepherd will only care for himself. We read, beginning in verse 16:

“(16) For indeed I will raise up a shepherd in the land who will not care for those who are cut off, nor seek the young, nor heal those that are broken, nor feed those that still stand. But he will eat the flesh of the fat and tear their hooves in pieces. (17) Woe to the worthless shepherd, Who leaves the flock! A sword shall be against his arm And against his right eye; His arm shall completely wither, And his right eye shall be totally blinded.”

When God intervenes, He will cleanse the inhabitants of Jerusalem from their sin and uncleanness (Zechariah 13:1). He will wipe out idolatry and cause the false prophets and their evil demonic spirits to depart from the land (verse 2). This shows the depth of deprivation which will have overtaken the land prior to Christ’s return. That is WHY God made the following terrible pronouncement for our time and age:

“(8) And it shall come to pass in all the land, Says the LORD, That two-thirds in it shall be cut off and die, But one-third shall be left in it: (9) I will bring the one-third through the fire, Will refine them as silver is refined and test them as gold is tested.”

Continuing in Zechariah 14:2: “For I will gather all the nations to battle against Jerusalem; The city shall be taken, The houses rifled, And the women ravished. Half of the city shall go into captivity.”

But then, so we are told, beginning in verse 3, God will intervene and fight for the inhabitants of Jerusalem and the modern peoples of Israel and Judah who have been brought into slavery and captivity, because of their terrible sins which cry to high heaven. God’s warnings are sure and certain, and they will come upon all of us very soon–unless we repent.

And even though the modern nations of Israel and Judah will–in all probability–not repent in time to prevent defeat in war and captivity, individuals can be spared. Those who turn to God and are willing to follow His direction in obedience to His law, have been promised protection from the evil and terrible times to come. And we DON’T mean some kind of supernatural secret rapture to heaven–a concept which the Bible does NOT teach. For more information, please read our free booklets, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord,” and,”Is That in the Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation!”

It is up to each and every one of us to heed God’s warning and to act accordingly, so that we can be “counted worthy to escape all these things that WILL come to pass” (Luke 21:36).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Are Bible translations valid, and how can we really trust that we are able to understand the original meaning of Scripture?

Bible translations are most certainly the way we can understand the Word of God in our own language. The Bible offers proof of this fact, and it further reveals additional keys that will determine whether or not we have true understanding of what is written.

On the Day of Pentecost, miraculous events took place that included the giving of God’s Holy Spirit. Note what occurred:

“And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with OTHER TONGUES, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. And when this sound occurred, the multitude came together, and were confused, because everyone HEARD THEM SPEAK IN HIS OWN LANGUAGE. Then they were all amazed and marveled, saying to one another, ‘Look, are not all these who speak Galileans? And how is it that we hear, EACH IN OUR OWN LANGUAGE IN WHICH WE WERE BORN? Parthians and Medes and Elamites, those dwelling in Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya adjoining Cyrene, visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, Cretans and Arabs—we hear them speaking IN OUR OWN TONGUES the wonderful works of God.’ So they were all amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, ‘Whatever could this mean?’” (Acts 2:4-12).

What those assembled heard was the Gospel being preached. They heard the truth of God in their own language, and as the account shows, there were many who came from other countries and who spoke other languages.

The very fact that God caused this miracle in order to teach His truth also places great importance on the fact that people would be able to understand God’s Word as it was taught in their own native tongue.

Remember, it is God Who first caused a mixture of languages to be spoken (compare Genesis 11:7, 9).

At different times various disciples spoke in tongues (compare Acts 10:46; 19:6); that is, God supernaturally enabled them on those occasions to speak in another human tongue or language which they had not studied before. These miraculous occurrences served to reinforce what happened on the Day of Pentecost—that the Gospel would be able to be taught in all of the world and in all languages.

Paul had apparently studied many different languages and was able to speak and understand them (compare 1 Corinthians 14:18)—including Hebrew, the ancient language used by the religious leaders of Judah (compare Acts 21:37-40). However, he made a point of explaining that the spoken words should be easy to understand:

“There are, it may be, so many kinds of languages in the world, and none of them is without significance. Therefore, if I do not know the meaning of the language, I shall be a foreigner to him who speaks, and he who speaks will be a foreigner to me” (1 Corinthians 14:10-11).

At the present time, no original manuscripts of the Bible in either Hebrew or Greek are extant. Rather, we have faithfully preserved copies that have survived impossible odds over many, many centuries! None of the original writings from any of the writers of the New or Old Testament are available today. And, yet, we do have the Bible, and we have it, partly because it was translated into understandable languages.

An example is the Septuagint, a Greek translation from the Hebrew that was popular among Greek-speaking Jews around the time of Christ. It contains more books than the accepted Hebrew (Masoretic) text, but through careful scholarship, those have been classified as apocryphal and are not a part of the accepted books that comprise the Old Testament—at least, among translations that follow the pattern of those such as the Authorized or King James Version. One reason is that the apocrypha contradict the inspired and preserved Word of God–and God’s Word cannot and does not contain errors or contradictions (compare John 10:35).

Early Christians were more familiar with the Greek and Aramaic languages than that of Hebrew. The online encyclopedia, Wikipedia, in an article about the New Testament, points out: “The common languages spoken by both Jews and Gentiles in the Holy Land at the time of Jesus were Aramaic, Koine Greek, and to a limited extent a colloquial dialect of Mishnaic Hebrew. Despite this, it is generally believed that the original text of the New Testament was most likely written in Koine Greek, the vernacular dialect in 1st century Roman provinces of the Eastern Mediterranean, and later translated into other languages, most notably, Latin, Syriac, and Coptic.”

Bible translation has occupied entire lifetimes of countless individuals, and it has been the focus of various religious organizations as well as kings and governments. Translations available to us, today, fall into three general categories: (1.) a literal, word for word translation from the earliest known copies in Hebrew and Greek into modern languages–such as The Authorized Version and The New King James Bible; (2.) so called “thought for thought” translations, or, dynamic-equivalent versions, that focus on contemporary language usage in equivalent words and phrases–such as The New International Version; (3.) paraphrased editions that attempt to restate words and phrases with the introduction of added statements–such as The Living Bible.

While using all three types of translations when studying the Bible can be beneficial, only literally translated editions—such as the New King James Version (for English)—should be depended on for doctrinal clarity. But even they may contain errors due to inaccurate translations, and it is therefore necessary and important that a faithful minister of God explains and corrects such errors (compare Romans 10:14-15). Study Bibles providing added cross references and historical explanations along with Bible Dictionaries also are helpful aids and can be very useful.

Undoubtedly, our resources for Bible study are virtually unlimited. We have computer programs that make commentaries and the myriad of translations instantly accessible in a variety of languages. For example, www.searchgodsword.com along with www.e-sword.com and www.biblegateway.com are some of the sites that expand our ability to research the Word of God.

Yet for all of these remarkable resources, to truly understand the original meaning of Scripture, another dimension must be available to us!

We must stand in awe of the true Author of the Bible, for it is God Who has both inspired and then preserved His Word throughout man’s history. His Word also reveals the starting point for anyone who seeks to know about God and what He has written:

“The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom; A good understanding have all those who do His commandments” (Psalm 111:10).

Obedience to God is the unfaltering key that we must have if we really do want to understand. In addition, God decides WHEN to reveal certain aspects of His understanding:

Daniel was told by Michael, an archangel and spirit being of immense power and responsibility before God, to, “‘…Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end’” (Daniel 12:9). Daniel wrote what he saw, but, at that time, he didn’t understand—nor could he! (verse 8). Compare also Matthew 13:16-17 and Ephesians 3:8-12.

More is explained by Peter about the fact that the Word of God has been preserved to reveal God’s Will at the times of His choosing: “Of this salvation the prophets have inquired and searched carefully, who prophesied of the grace that would come to you, searching what, or what manner of time, the Spirit of Christ [which] was in them was indicating when [it] testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. To them it was revealed that, not to themselves, but to us they were ministering the things which now have been reported to you through those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven–things which angels desire to look into” (1 Peter 1:10-12).

Please also note–in passing–that “no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:20-21). Compare also Psalm 45:1.

In another example, we find that the disciples of Jesus Christ–those who had followed Him throughout His ministry–did not understand certain prophecies in the Old Testament about Christ until He opened their minds: ”And He opened their understanding, that they might comprehend the Scriptures” (Luke 24:45).

On the other hand, Peter testified at one time that Jesus was “‘…the Christ, the Son of the living God’” (Matthew 16:16). How did he know? Jesus explained to him: “‘…Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah, for flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but My Father, who is in heaven’” (verse 17).

Paul understood that the record of God’s Word holds a tremendous purpose and that God is communicating to us through it: “Now all these things happened to them as examples, and they were written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the ages have come” (1 Corinthians 10:11).

In the book of Revelation, we find this explanation about the purpose of the Book: “The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants—things which must shortly take place. And He sent and signified it by His angel to His servant John, who bore witness to the word of God, and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, to all things that he saw. Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written in it; for the time is near” (Revelation 1:1-3).

Consider how few really do understand the book of Revelation or any of the books of the Bible! While estimates range into the billions of Bibles that have been printed and distributed all over the earth in all the major languages, still, understanding remains the issue, because people are not willing to obey what God says (compare John 7:17).

God can reveal His Will to you! He can do it through the voice of a true minister; through the example of a true follower of Christ; or, through His written Word—and even through words written about the Bible! To help you understand the momentous times we are now living in–called the “end of the age” in the Bible, please read our free booklet, titled, “Is That in the Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation.”

Lead Writers: Dave Harris and Norbert Link

©2025 Church of the Eternal God