Christian Living

Would you please explain 1 Timothy 2:1-2? How are we to pray for governmental leaders?

To properly understand what Paul is saying–and what he is not saying–let us read the entire passage of 1 Timothy 2:1-7, in context:

“(1) Therefore, I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks be made for ALL MEN, (2) for kings and all who are in authority, THAT WE MAY LEAD A QUIET AND PEACEABLE LIFE in all godliness and reverence. (3) For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, (4) who desires ALL MEN to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth, (5) For there is ONE God and ONE Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, (6) who gave Himself a ransom FOR ALL, to be testified in due time, (7) for which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle–I am speaking the truth in Christ and not lying–a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.”

As this passage clearly shows, we are to pray for governmental leaders, regardless of whether they behave and rule righteously or unrighteously. But how, exactly, are we to pray for them?

The Life Application Bible explains:

“Paul’s command to pray for kings was remarkable considering that Nero, a notoriously cruel ruler, was emperor at this time (A.D. 54-68). When Paul wrote this letter, persecution was a growing threat to believers. Later, when Nero needed a scapegoat for the great fire that destroyed much of Rome in A.D. 64, he blamed the Roman Christians so as to take the focus off himself. Then persecution erupted throughout the Roman empire. Not only were Christians denied certain privileges in society, some were even publicly butchered, burned, or fed to animals…

“When our lives are going along peacefully and quietly, it is difficult to remember to pray for those in authority, because we often take good government for granted. It’s easier to remember to pray when we experience problems. But we should pray for those in authority around the world so that their societies will be conducive to the spread of the gospel.”

This is a correct statement. True Christians ARE to pray that God would influence leaders, especially in societies hostile to Christianity, to allow the unhindered and unrestricted preaching of the true gospel (compare 2 Thessalonians 3:1). Paul is not telling us here that we are to necessarily pray for the conversion of these leaders–God will convert people in His due time–but that they be motivated to make decisions allowing us to lead peaceful and quiet lives. We are not asked to pray that God would reward evil leaders for and in their sins.

We are to pray even for our enemies (compare Matthew 5:44)–not, that they will be blessed in their sins, but that they perhaps come to the understanding of the truth and change their way of life (compare Romans 12:20). The king of Nineveh and the entire city-state repented of their evil deeds, when they heard Jonah’s warning–and as a consequence, they were spared from destruction. Jonah should have prayed for such a change in the minds of the people–but he did not. This should be a lesson for us today, not to act and think as Jonah did at that time.

There are occasions, of course, when we are not to pray for the benefit and welfare of a particular governmental leader. After God rejected King Saul, He told Samuel to cease mourning for the king (compare 1 Samuel 16:1).

At the same time, we are asked to pray with thanksgiving. This may be easy to do when we are living in peace. It is more difficult to do so when we are encountering persecution. But still, we need to include in our supplications and intercessions the giving of thanks in and even for those circumstances. We know that nothing just happens in our lives of which God is unaware. Whatever God allows to happen in our lives is for a reason. We read that God will see to it that even our enemies make peace with us when our ways are pleasing to God (compare Proverbs 16:7). If our enemies don’t make peace with us, then, perhaps, our ways are not as pleasing to God as we may think. Also, we are asked to be joyful in persecution, as we know that our reward will be great in heaven (Matthew 5:10-12). There are many reasons why we can be thankful even in adverse circumstances. For more information, please read our free booklets, “Teach Us to Pray” and “Human Suffering–Why and How Much Longer?”

The following commentaries explain quite succinctly how to pray for governmental leaders–and WHY. As we will see, Paul emphasizes the outcome of our prayers–to be able to lead quiet and peaceful lives in furtherance of the preaching of the gospel and walking the way of God.

John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible states that Paul is asking Christians to pray for “supreme governors, as the emperor of Rome, and kings of particular nations; and for all sub-governors, or inferior magistrates, as procurators or governors of provinces, and proconsuls, and the like; all that were in high places, and acted under the authority of those that were supreme.”

The commentary continues to explain the phrase, “that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty,” in the following way:

“… which does not merely design the end [or goal, purpose, aim] of civil government by kings and magistrates, which is to preserve the peace and quiet of the commonwealth; to protect the persons and properties of men, that they may possess their own undisturbed; and to secure to them their civil and religious rights and liberties… nor does this clause only point out the duty of saints to live peaceably under the government they are, and not disturb it… but also expresses the thing to be prayed for; and the sense is, that since the hearts of kings are in the hands of the Lord, and he can turn them as he pleases, prayer should be made to him for them [kings, etc.], that he [God] would… bring them [kings] to the knowledge of the truth, [which] they now persecuted; or at least so dispose their hearts and minds, that they might stop the persecution, and so saints might live peaceably under them…”

Vincent’s Word Studies adds that we are to pray for governmental leaders that we may lead a “quiet and peaceable life,” by explaining that “quiet” arises “from the absence of outward disturbance,” while “peaceable” or “with tranquility” arises “from within.”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible points out:

“The design of the Christian religion is to promote prayer; and the disciples of Christ must be praying people. Pray always with all prayer [Ephesians 6:18]. There must be prayers for ourselves in the first place; this is implied here. We must also pray for all men, for the world of mankind in general, for particular persons who need or desire our prayers…

“Pray for kings…; though the kings at this time were heathens, enemies to Christianity, and persecutors of Christians, yet they must pray for them, because it is for the public good that there should be civil government, and proper persons entrusted with the administration of it, for whom therefore we ought to pray, yea, though we ourselves suffer under them… [We] must not plot against them… and give thanks for them and for the benefit we have under their government…

“Here we see what we must desire for kings, that God will so turn their hearts, and direct them and make use of them, that we under them may lead a quiet and peaceable life… Here we have our duty as Christians summed up in two words: godliness, that is, the right worshipping of God; and honesty, that is, a good conduct towards all men…

“The Jews at Babylon were commanded to seek the peace of the city whither the Lord had caused them to be carried captives, and to pray to the Lord for it; for in the peace thereof they should have peace [Jeremiah 29:7]…

“As a reason why we should in our prayers concern ourselves for all men, he [Paul] shows God’s love to mankind in general… God will have all men to be saved; he desires not the death and destruction of any [Ezekiel 33:11], but the welfare and salvation of all. Not that he has decreed the salvation of all, for then all men would be saved; but he has a good will to the salvation of all, and none perish but by their own fault… There is one Mediator, and that mediator gave himself a ransom for all.”

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible states:

“… As it is a positive maxim of Christianity to pray for all secular governors, so it has ever been the practice of Christians… Indeed they prayed even for those by whom they were persecuted. If the state be not in safety, the individual cannot be secure; self-preservation, therefore, should lead men to pray for the government under which they live. Rebellions and insurrections seldom terminate even in political good; and even where the government is radically bad, revolutions themselves are most precarious and hazardous. They who wish such commotions would not be quiet under the most mild and benevolent government…

“Good rulers have power to do much good; we pray that their authority may be ever preserved and well directed. Bad rulers have power to do much evil; we pray that they may be prevented from thus using their power. So that, whether the rulers be good or bad, prayer for them is the positive duty of all Christians; and the answer to their prayers, in either [case], will be the means of their being enabled to lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible writes:

“… while all people should be the subjects of prayer, those should be particularly remembered before the throne of grace who are in authority. The reason is, that so much depends on their character and plans; that the security of life, liberty, and property, depends so much on them. God has power to influence their hearts, and to incline them to [do] what is just and equal; and hence we should pray that a divine influence may descend upon them. The salvation of a king is of itself of no more importance than that of a peasant or a slave; but the welfare of thousands may depend on him, and hence he should be made the special subject of prayer.”

The commentary continues that we ought to pray for governmental leaders so “That their hearts may be so inclined to what is right that they may protect us in the enjoyment of religion, and that we may not be opposed or harassed by persecution.”

The Broadman Bible Commentary explains:

“Prayer for the emperor contrasted with worship of him. The practice reflected Christian fidelity to established institutions and the belief that power for orderly government came from God…”

For more information on this vital issue–how and in what way power for orderly government is derived from God–please read our Q&A on Romans 13:3.

The Broadman Bible Commentary continues:

“The aim of the prayer would be not the conversion of the emperor but the welfare of the state, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way.”

In conclusion, we are instructed to include governmental leaders in our prayers so that we may be able to lead quiet and peaceable lives, enabling us to preach the gospel of the peaceful Kingdom of God in all the world as a witness. We are not asked to pray for the conversion of our leaders, but rather, that they may be motivated not to persecute us or to cease from their persecution. Instead of praying for a violent overthrow of our government, we are to pray that God will influence our leaders to do good and refrain from evil. Anarchy, insurrections and revolutions don’t establish peace, but they are, by their very nature, hazardous and violent. Our prayers for governmental leaders with the goal of leading peaceful lives would also include praying that, subject to God’s Will, our leaders do not decide to go to war, and that they are motivated to end whatever wars their nations might be engaged in.

We are to pray always and without ceasing, including on behalf of our leaders and even our enemies, so that we may be allowed to lead peaceful lives. In this world of hatred, violence and war, such kinds of prayers are necessary and very pleasing to God.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

What is meant by the statement in Matthew 16:27 that refers to us being rewarded according to our works? What works are Christians supposed to perform?

Understanding the true application of what Jesus stated is vitally important, and far too many people misapply what is meant.

The exact quote from Matthew 16:27 is as follows: “‘For the Son of Man will come in the glory of His Father with His angels, and then He will reward each according to his works.’”

This statement is amplified by Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:10: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.”

The implication of Paul’s teaching points to how Christians fulfill their calling as members of the body of Christ—the Church of God (compare Ephesians 1:22-23; Colossians 1:24).

The Bible reveals the kinds of “works” that are acceptable to God, and these are done in the context of His calling us into the truth. Our reward that will be given to us entails our bearing fruit through the power of God’s Holy Spirit. Jesus carefully explained that we are to bear fruit (compare John 15:1-16).

What kind of fruit? A contrast is drawn between “the works of the flesh” and the “fruit of the Spirit” in Galatians 5:19-23. The works of the flesh are actions in rebellion against God’s laws, while the fruit of the Spirit is the outgrowth of obedience to God. Either one or the other of these opposing lifestyles frames our work—the way of this world or the way of God.

Paul challenges Christians to “…be imitators of God as dear children” (Ephesians 5:1). Continuing in chapter 5, he enumerates a different way of living, and he calls those who practice these vile actions “…sons of disobedience” (verse 6). In the next verse he warns us: “Therefore do not be partakers with them.” We find a similar warning to God’s people in Revelation 18:4: “And I heard another voice from heaven saying, ‘Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues.’”

The kinds of works that are acceptable to God are the same kinds of works that Jesus Christ accomplished (compare Matthew 17:5). What were Jesus’ works?

The answer is found in what Jesus testified about Himself: “‘…for the works which the Father has given Me to finish—the very works that I do—bear witness of me, that the Father has sent Me’” (John 5:36). Jesus also said: “‘…My food is to do the will of Him who sent Me, and to finish His work’” (John 4:34). In the prayer of Jesus Christ to His Father that is recorded for us in John 17, Jesus says, “‘…I have finished the work which You have given Me to do’” (verse 4). He continues in His prayer and mentions in both verses 14 and 16: “‘They [His disciples] are not of the world, just as I am not of the world.’”

Yet, while being separate from the world in its ungodly practices, Jesus was sent into the world so “that the world through Him might be saved” (John 3:17)! Note what Jesus taught: “‘The spirit of the LORD is upon Me, Because He has anointed Me To preach the gospel to the poor; He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted, To proclaim liberty to the captives And recovery of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed; To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD’” (Luke 4:18-19).

Jesus spoke of these kinds of works when He gave an answer to John’s disciples about Who He was: “Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Go and tell John the things you have seen and heard: that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, the poor have the gospel preached to them'” (Luke 7:22).

In considering what kind of works we are to be doing, we see in the example of Jesus Christ that He focused on what would ultimately be of the most help—He preached the good news of the Kingdom of God (compare Mark 1:15). Jesus Christ has also left this instruction for us: “‘Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven’” (Matthew 5:16).

Our “good works” are focused on preaching the gospel, but we have further responsibilities. Like Jesus, we are to reach out to others in our sphere of contact. Paul states: “Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially to those who are of the household of faith” (Galatians 6:10); and: “But do not forget to do good and to share, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased” (Hebrews 13:16).

Jesus taught that we should consider those in need: “‘When you give a dinner or a supper, do not ask your friends, your brothers, your relatives, nor rich neighbors, lest they also invite you back, and you be repaid. But when you give a feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the blind. And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you; for you shall be repaid at the resurrection of the just’” (Luke 14:12-14).

The application for us is the same as it was for Jesus. His actions were focused on the work given to Him to preach the gospel. In the course of His ministry He was able to help, to heal, to even feed and to give hope! However, Jesus understood that His role was to point people to God’s Kingdom: “Jesus answered them and said, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw the signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. Do not labor for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to everlasting life, which the Son of Man will give you, because God the Father has set His seal on Him’” (John 6:26-27).

Some have mistakenly adopted an attitude that does not follow the true example of Jesus Christ when it comes to their purported “Christianity”: “‘Not everyone who says to Me, “Lord, Lord,” shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, “Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?” And then I will declare to them, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!”’” (Matthew 7:21-23).

The principle of God’s Word is that we do good whenever we can—that serving others in love is true godliness (compare 1 Corinthians 13:3). Carefully note the following concept as we prepare for the rewards God offers to those who love Him: “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatever a man sows, that he will also reap” (Galatians 6:7).

The kinds of works we should be sowing include the following: “‘But love your enemies, do good, and lend, hoping for nothing in return; and your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High. For he is kind to the unthankful and evil. Therefore be merciful, just as your Father also is merciful’” (Luke 6:35-36).

And, Paul, speaking of the righteous judgment of God, states: “[W]ho ‘will render to each one according to his deeds’; eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality, but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil…” (Romans 2:6-9).

Lead Writer: Dave Harris

Would you please explain Hebrews 10:25. Why does Paul warn against "forsaking the assembling of ourselves together"?

Hebrews 10:24-26 reads, in context:

“And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching. For if we sin willfully, after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.”

We can clearly see from this passage that Paul warns us not to forsake the “assembling of ourselves together,” as the consequence of doing so could lead to our committing the unpardonable sin.

What is meant by, “assembling of ourselves together”?

Note the following renderings, which make the intended meaning clearer:

The Berkely Version of the New Testament says: “… not neglecting our own church meeting.”

J.B. Phillips writes in The New Testament in Modern English: “And let us not hold aloof from our church meetings.”

The Living Bible states: “Let us not neglect our church meetings…”

The Jewish New Testament, by David H. Stern, renders it in this way: “… not neglecting our own congregational meetings, as some have made a practice of doing so, but, rather, encouraging each other…”

These renditions state correctly that we are not to forsake assembling for CHURCH SERVICES. The following commentaries support this understanding:

The Nelson Study Bible writes:

“Evidently some believers had stopped attending the worship services of the church… [Paul] uses a compound form of the word ‘synagogue,’ which specifically means the local, physical gathering of believers (see Ps. 40:9, 10; 42:4)… The local assembly is where the gospel message is preached, but also where the word of God is applied to the circumstances of our lives… Knowing that Christ’s return is imminent, the believers [are] to encourage each other even more to remain faithful to Him.”

The Ryrie Study Bible writes that the term “assembling” describes “the gathering of Christians for worship and edification,” and that “the Day” describes “the day… of Christ’s coming (also v. 37; 1 Cor. 3:13; Phil. 1:10).”

Some have stated that Paul had public gatherings in mind, when speaking about “assembling together,” rather than private Church worship services. However, this does not seem correct. In any case, as Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible explains, the difference is of little consequence. Clarke points out:

“Whether this means public or private worship is hard to say; but as the word is but once more used in the New Testament [compare 2 Thessalonians 2:1], and there means the gathering together of the redeemed of the Lord at the day of judgment, it is as likely that it means here private religious meetings, for the purpose of mutual exhortation: and this sense appears the more natural here, because it is evident that the Church was now in a state of persecution, and therefore their meetings were most probably held in private.”

Clarke continues to warn against deserting regular Church attendance, for whatever reason:

“For fear of persecution, it seems as if some had deserted these meetings… They had given up these strengthening and instructive means, and the others were in danger of following their example… Those who relinquish Christian communion are in a backsliding state; those who backslide are in danger of apostasy…”

John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible explains that “assembling” describes “their act of meeting together in some one place to attend his [God’s] worship, word, and ordinances. Now to ‘forsake’ such assembling, signifies a great infrequency in attending with the saints, a rambling from place to place, and takes in an entire apostasy. It is the duty of saints to assemble together… on the account of the saints themselves, that they may be delighted, refreshed, comforted, instructed, edified, and perfected… And an assembling together ought not to be forsaken; for it is a forsaking God, and their own mercies, and such are like to be forsaken of God; nor is it known what is lost hereby; and it is the first outward visible step to apostasy, and often issues in it… in our day, this evil practice [of forsaking the assembly of the saints] arises sometimes from a vain conceit of being in no need of ordinances…”

Gill states correctly that forsaking the assembly means forsaking God [as we don’t obey His command to assemble for Church services]. Gill also mentions one important “human justification” for forsaking Church services–the wrong idea that we don’t need the Church; that we can stay at home on our own, doing our own Bible studies and gaining thereby the same kind of knowledge which we might have received by attending Church services. This wrong concept is dangerous. It also ignores the fact that we are not only to assemble to be instructed, but also to fellowship with and encourage and help other members.

The Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary explains:

“The Greek, ‘episunagoge,’ [for “assembling”] is only found here and [ in 2 Thessalonians 2:1] (the gathering together of the elect to Christ at His coming)… The assembling or gathering of ourselves for Christian communion… is an earnest of our being gathered together to Him at His appearing. Union is strength; continual assemblings together beget and foster love, and give good opportunities for ‘provoking to good works,’ by ‘exhorting one another’… To neglect such assemblings together might end in apostasy at last…”

Jamieson points out correctly that assembling with other members at Church services demonstrates our love to God and to our neighbor–to God, as we DO what He instructs us to do, and to our neighbor, as we show him or her that we care enough for them to assemble and fellowship with them.

The New Bible Commentary:Revised supports this concept:

“There should also be among Christians mutual ‘provocation’… to active good works by deliberately taking notice of each other’s needs… they should not, therefore, copy the custom of some and cease attendance at Christian meetings, but rather use such opportunities for mutual encouragement, and the more so in the light of the approaching consummation and judgment of the Day that is coming.”

In other words, one reason for assembling at Church services is to encourage one another, and to look after the needs of other brethren. Staying at home does not fulfill any of these requirements.

The Life Application Bible gives the following and most helpful analysis:

“We have significant privileges associated with our new life in Christ: (1) we have personal access to God through Christ and can draw near to him without an elaborate system…; (2) we may grow in faith, overcome doubts and questions, and deepen our relationship with God… ; (3) we may enjoy encouragement from one another…; (4) we may worship together (10:25)… To neglect Christian meetings is to give up the encouragement and help of other Christians. We gather together to share our faith and to strengthen one another in the Lord. As we get closer to the ‘Day’ when Christ will return, we will face many spiritual struggles, and even times of persecution. Anti-Christian forces will grow in strength. Difficulties should never be excuses for missing church services. Rather, as difficulties arise, we should make an even greater effort to be faithful in attendance.”

There may always be “legitimate” reasons to the human mind for not attending worship services regularly and in person–reasons such as inconvenience, just not feeling like it, feeling too tired, staying with visiting relatives or friends, persecution, high costs of transportation or distance, as well as the idea that we don’t really “need” to attend. Rather, as the reasoning may go, we might as well stay home today and listen to sermon tapes or live services which are broadcast over the Internet.

However, based on the PURPOSE of PERSONAL CHURCH ATTENDANCE with other members, the means of broadcasting services of the Church of the Eternal God (CEG) over the Internet was developed for those brethren who are scattered, or who might be sick, and who therefore cannot attend regular CEG Church services. It was never meant to be a replacement for personal attendance. Listening to live Internet Church services or listening to sermon tapes does NOT constitute an equally valuable alternative to personal CEG Church attendance. Those who can physically attend CEG Church services are commanded by God to do so, for their own good and for the benefit of other Church members. Listening to Internet services and participating in the chatlines before and after services may only be the second-best option; personal attendance is always the preferable course of action.

The practice of meeting together for religious services that was observed by the New Testament Church of God and that has been faithfully continued to this time is based on God’s command regarding the weekly and annual Sabbath Days. Note how the weekly Sabbath is addressed in Leviticus 23:3: “‘Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, a HOLY CONVOCATION…'”

Focusing on the annual Holy Days, which are also called “Sabbaths” (compare for example Leviticus 23:32, 39), notice the instructions regarding “holy convocations” in Leviticus 23:7-8, 21, 24, 27, 35, 36-37, pertaining to the annual Holy Days of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, Pentecost, Trumpets, Atonement, Tabernacles and the Last Great Day.

Concerning the concept of a “holy convocation,” God very carefully commanded His people to assemble for worship services according to His instructions and in the place He chooses (compare Deuteronomy 12:5, 11, 14, 18, 21; 16:6, 11, 15-16). Upon the founding of the Church, Jesus Christ established the ministry and holds them strictly responsible to continue guiding His people in obedience to God’s commands–including, “…the assembling of ourselves together” (compare Ephesians 4:11-16).

Acts 2 reports that Christ’s disciples were all assembled in one room on the Day of Pentecost, and that is when they received the Holy Spirit. Would God have given the Holy Spirit to those, using modern terms, who had decided to stay home and listen over the Internet, while they could have assembled in person with the other disciples?

Paul’s warning to us today rings loud and clear: We are NOT to forsake REGULAR PERSONAL Church attendance, if we can reasonably do so. Our attitude towards this command tells God quite a lot about our whole make-up as Christians. How dedicated and zealous are we? How diligent are we to OBEY His command? How much LOVE do we have for God and our brethren? Remember, what we have done for the least of our brethren, that we have done for God. If we decide that it is not important enough for us to personally attend Church services, for whatever reason, then we are walking on dangerous ground. Paul tells us that if we are not careful, such an indifferent neglectful attitude might very well lead to the point that we commit apostasy–the unpardonable sin.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Since God has already qualified His people to be in His kingdom, isn't their salvation a fait accompli?

It most certainly is not, even though some within orthodox Christianity teach this false idea. The biblical teaching, however, is altogether different.

It is true that God WANTS those to be in His Kingdom whom He calls to salvation. And as we explain in our booklet, “Are You Predestined to Be Saved?”, God is confident that His disciples WILL “make it” into His kingdom (compare Philippians 1:6). He knows that all those whom He has called now CAN make it. We even read that God has already “glorified” them (Romans 8:30), even though their glorification is still in the future. God is so confident that they will be glorified that He speaks of that future event as something which has already occurred (compare Romans 4:17).

Paul tells us in Colossians 1:12 that “the Father… has qualified us to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in the light.” The Authorized Version states that He has “made us meet,” which actually means, that He has made us “fit” or “sufficient” or “able” or “worthy.” Paul says in 2 Corinthians 3:5-6 that God made him and others “sufficient as ministers of the new covenant.”

When God calls us in this day and age, He ENABLES us and therefore KNOWS that we CAN finish our race successfully. Our ability, sufficiency or qualification come from God: We cannot come to Christ unless the Father draws us to Him (John 6:44, 65); we cannot repent unless the Father grants us the gift of repentance (Romans 2:4); we cannot really and truly believe unless the Father grants us the gift of faith (1 Corinthians 12:9; Hebrews 12:2); we cannot live a righteous life unless the Father grants us the gift of righteousness (Romans 5:17).

All of this does not mean, however, that we cannot lose out. The Bible contains many warnings against taking our calling lightly. It is our responsibility to accept God’s gifts and use them. For instance, we are being admonished that we are to hunger and thirst for God’s righteousness, and that we are to seek it as a first priority (Matthew 5:6; 6:33). And so, even though the Father has qualified us to inherit salvation, we must continue in that process of qualification. We must make sure that we DON’T DISQUALIFY ourselves.

Although Paul was a “qualified” minister, he knew that it was possible that he might become disqualified, and so he made every effort to prevent this from happening. We read in 1 Corinthians 9:27: “But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become DISQUALIFIED.” The Authorized Version renders this as “castaway.” The phrase means, “not approved,” “not standing the test,” “rejected” or “reprobate.”

Paul encourages and warns the Church in 2 Corinthians 13:5-6: “Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?–unless indeed you are DISQUALIFIED. But I trust that you will know that we are not disqualified.”

Additional Scriptures using the identical Greek word can be found in 2 Timothy 3:8 (“disapproved”) and Titus 1:16 (“disqualified”).

That it IS possible for “qualified” members of the Church to become “disqualified” can also be seen in Paul’s strong warning in Hebrews 6, where the concept of the unpardonable sin is discussed. In verses 4 and 5, Paul talks about those who “were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift and have BECOME PARTAKERS OF THE HOLY SPIRIT and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come.” In other words, he is speaking of those who HAD received the Holy Spirit–who WERE converted. Paul is clearly NOT talking here about people who had never been enlightened. Just the opposite is true. He was speaking about those whom God had “qualified” to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in the light (compare again Colossians 1:12), and who had been “delivered” from the “power of darkness and conveyed… into (i.e., placed under the power of) the kingdom of the Son of His love” (Colossians 1:13; compare Acts 26:18).

In regard to these converted Church members, Paul says that it is “impossible” (Hebrews 6:4) to “renew them AGAIN to repentance,” “if they fall away… since they crucify AGAIN for themselves the Son of God” (Hebrews 6:6). He goes on to explain that they–like the earth which bears thorns and briers–are “rejected” or “disqualified” and “near to being cursed, whose end is to be burned” (verse 8)–referring to their destruction in the lake of fire.

The concept that those who are called to salvation could not lose salvation is also wrong for the additional reason that they don’t have yet complete and total salvation. Salvation, as well as our qualification, is a PROCESS. We read that God’s people WERE saved (Romans 8:24); that they are BEING saved (Acts 2:47); and that they WILL be saved (Romans 5:9-10). Salvation is something which they are to INHERIT (Hebrews 1:14), and they will inherit it, IF they endure TO THE END (Matthew 10:22; 24:13). It is only promised to those who “overcome,” that they will INHERIT ALL THINGS (Revelation 21:7)–including the gift of salvation. That is why we are encouraged to “WORK OUT [our] own salvation with FEAR and TREMBLING” (Philippians 2:12), always recognizing the fact that it is GOD who works in us both to WILL and to DO for His good pleasure (verse 13). Even though we are appointed to obtain salvation (1 Thessalonians 5:9), we are admonished not to “drift away” and “neglect so great a salvation” (Hebrews 2:3); for if we do, we will not escape the judgment of God for our transgression and disobedience (verses 2-3). In 1 Corinthians 15:2, Paul says to the Church members in Corinth that they “ARE saved, IF [they] hold fast that word which [Paul] preached” to them.

It is true that God has qualified us to be partakers of the inheritance (compare again Colossians 1:12). But this does not mean that we already possess the inheritance. Today we are HEIRS of the promises (compare Romans 8:17; Galatians 3:29; 4:7; 1 Peter 3:7; Titus 3:7). We are not yet inheritors–but we will inherit the promises if we remain faithful. God says that He “has chosen [or we might say, “qualified”] the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him” (James 2:5). We are told that we love God when we keep His commandments (1 John 5:3). THEREFORE, if we don’t love God–if we refuse to keep His commandments–we don’t have God’s promise of the kingdom and are disqualified from being heirs of the kingdom and of salvation (Note the connection between inheriting salvation, eternal life and the kingdom of God, in Matthew 19:16, 23-25).

Let us also realize what our FUTURE inheritance will consist of–always recognizing that we don’t have it yet. We are to INHERIT eternal life (Matthew 19:29)–an “eternal inheritance” (Hebrews 9:15)–the kingdom of God (Matthew 25:34; note that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God, 1 Corinthians 15:50; Ephesians 5:5-7). We are to INHERIT the promises through faith and patience (Hebrews 6:12), always remembering that it is GOD who is ABLE to build us up and give us an inheritance among all those who are sanctified (Acts 20:32). When we receive the Holy Spirit after repentance and belief in Christ’s sacrifice, baptism and the laying on of hands by one of God’s true ministers, then we receive a “guarantee of our INHERITANCE until the redemption of the purchased possession” (Ephesians 1:13-14). As long as God’s Holy Spirit continues to dwell in us, we WILL inherit the promises–including the promise of salvation.

Note 1 Peter 1:3-5:

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an incorruptible and undefiled INHERITANCE and that does not fade away, RESERVED in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith FOR SALVATION ready to be revealed in the last time.”

Some commentaries, including the Ryrie Study Bible, have said that our salvation is guaranteed, even though we might lose our reward, referring to a passage in 1 Corinthians 3:8-15. However, that passage does not justify such a conclusion. It refers to God’s ministers who are to preach the gospel and feed the flock. The endurance of the flock–the “work” of the minister–will be tested by fire (verse 12-13). If that work endures, the minister will receive a reward for that particular work (verse 14). But if that work is burned, he himself might suffer loss (it is never a pleasant experience for a minister to see the flock under his care drifting away), but he still will be saved, “through fire,” if he was genuine in his efforts (verse 15). However, this passage does not address someone who falls away from the truth. Such a person will neither inherit salvation nor will he receive a reward.

We should also ask, how COULD it be that someone who was unwilling to obey God and who developed an attitude of hatred toward God COULD inherit salvation WITHOUT a reward? What would he DO for all eternity–how would he live? The truth is, both our salvation and our reward for living a righteous life pleasing to God ARE interconnected. Even though God GRANTS us the gift of salvation by His grace, independent from what we might have done prior to our calling (Titus 2:11; 3:5), He expects of us to live worthy of our calling by diligently seeking Him and His Will (Hebrews 11:6). We will be rewarded in accordance with our works (Revelation 22:12), but our reward might be greater or smaller, depending on how we live our lives (Matthew 10:42; Luke 6:35; 2 John 8).

To summarize, those who live unworthy of God’s gift of salvation will NOT inherit salvation, nor will they receive a reward. After all, we don’t have total salvation yet, but we are waiting for it. Paul says in Romans 13:11 that “now our salvation is NEARER than when we first believed.” He also tells us in Colossians 3:23-25: “And whatever you do, do it heartily, as to the Lord and not to men, knowing that from the Lord you will receive THE REWARD OF THE INHERITANCE, for you serve the Lord Christ. But he who does wrong will be repaid for what he has done, and there is no partiality.”

God has qualified us to inherit the promises, but we must continue in that qualification process to ensure that we don’t become disqualified and that we don’t judge ourselves unworthy of everlasting life (Acts 13:46)

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Why did Jesus ask John just prior to His death to take care of His mother Mary?

Some have concluded that Jesus was Mary’s only child, and that He therefore asked John to take care of His mother after His death, as there was nobody else in His immediate family who could have done so. However, this is not what the Bible teaches.

We read in John 19:25-27:

“Now there stood by the cross of Jesus His mother… When Jesus therefore saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved standing by, He said to His mother, ‘Woman, behold your son!’ Then He said to the disciple, ‘Behold your mother!’ And from that hour that disciple took her to his own home.”

Almost every biblical scholar agrees that the “disciple whom Christ loved” was the disciple John (Compare for additional references, John 13:23; 20:2; 21:7). Especially in John 21, John identifies himself as the “disciple whom Jesus loved” (compare verses 20-24).

The fact that Jesus entrusted John, who was possibly one of His nephews [compare comments in the “People’s New Testament”], with the care of His mother, does not mean, however, that Mary did not have other children. The Bible clearly reveals that Mary and Joseph had additional children, AFTER Jesus was born.

Our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–A Great Mystery,” proves this fact in great detail in chapter 3, “Christ’s Relatives,” on pages 28-30. You might want to read the entire passage in the booklet, but here are just a few highlights:

“The ‘Virgin Birth’ is clearly taught in Scripture. However, the Bible does not teach that Mary stayed a virgin for the rest of her life. We read in Matthew 1:25 that Joseph ‘did not know her till she had brought forth her firstborn Son.’ The word ’till’ or ”until’ signifies that after the birth of Jesus, Joseph DID ‘know her,’ that is, he did have a sexual relationship with her…

“Luke 2:6–7 confirms this: ‘So it was, that while they were there, the days were completed for her to be delivered. And she brought forth her firstborn Son…’ The Greek word for ‘firstborn’ is, ‘prototokon.’ It means, ‘first-born,’ but it does not describe an only child. The word for ‘only-born’ is ‘monogenes.’ In Luke 7:12, the word ‘monogenes’ is used, when describing a person who was ‘the only son of his mother.’

“The Jews knew that Jesus was not the only son of Mary. They knew very well that Jesus had brothers and sisters. We read the account in Matthew 13:53–56: ‘Now it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these parables, that He departed from there. When He had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said, “Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works? Is this not the carpenter’s Son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things?”‘…

“Some teach that Christ’s ‘brothers’ were in fact Christ’s cousins. This is the official position of the Roman Catholic Church, although this has recently been criticized by Catholic scholars who have concluded that the brothers were, in fact, Christ’s real brothers and not His cousins. The word for brother is ‘adelphos.’ This Greek word is used in Matthew 1:2 and 4:21, clearly referring to literal brothers. The word for cousin is ‘exadelphos,’ meaning ‘from brothers.’ When the Jews pointed out in Matthew 13 that Christ’s brothers were with them, they used the word ‘adelphos,’ not the word ‘exadelphos.’

“Some propose that the brothers and sisters mentioned in Matthew 13 were Christ’s spiritual brothers and sisters, not His physical siblings. But… the Bible makes a clear distinction between Christ’s physical brothers and His spiritual brothers. In addition… Christ’s physical relatives did not believe in Him and so they could not possibly have been referred to as Christ’s spiritual brothers and sisters.”

Why, then, did Jesus ask John, rather than His brother James, to take care of Mary?

We need to realize that at the time of Jesus’ death, none of His brothers believed in Him. Also, John was the ONLY disciple who stayed with Christ until He died–showing His dedication and bravery and the intimate relationship between Christ and His disciple whom He loved. Christ KNEW that John would take care of His mother–more than His half-brothers would have been able or willing to do–and that from the very moment (or the “same hour”) of His death.

Even though the Bible does not specifically and expressly say why Jesus chose John, there are several important hints. Most commentaries which understand that Jesus HAD brothers and sisters, also give plausible explanations, based on Scripture, as to WHY Christ entrusted His mother to His beloved disciple who BELIEVED in Him–rather than to one of His brothers who did NOT believe in Him at that time of His death.

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible points out, in John 19:26, that Jesus said, in effect:

“‘… take that disciple whom my power shall preserve from evil for thy son; and, while he considers thee as his mother, account him for thy child.’ It is probable that it was because the keeping of [Mary] was entrusted to him that he was the only disciple of our Lord who died a natural death, God having preserved him for the sake of the person whom he gave him in charge. Many children are not only preserved alive, but abundantly prospered in temporal things, for the sake of the desolate parents whom God hast cast upon their care. It is very likely that Joseph was dead previously to this.”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible elaborates, as follows:

“This was an honour put upon John, and a testimony both to his prudence and to his fidelity. If he who knows all things had not known that John loved him, he would not have made him his mother’s guardian. It is a great honour to be employed for Christ, and to be entrusted with any of his interest in the world… It would be a care and some charge to John; but he cheerfully accepted it, and took her to his own home, not objecting the trouble nor expense, nor his obligations to his own family, nor the ill-will he might contract by it… [Some commentaries say] that she lived to remove with him to Ephesus.”

Tradition and historical records report that John was later accompanied on his missionary travels by an elderly woman, who–it is felt–was none other than Mary, the mother of Jesus.

We might also add that John had more writing to do. At least five writings of his have been preserved and are part of the Holy Scriptures. He wrote the “gospel of John” (of which Mary was undoubtedly a good source of information), three letters (1 John; 2 John; and 3 John) and finally the last book of the Bible–the book of Revelation, while banished to the isle of Patmos.

It is true, that ultimately, as we explain in our afore-mentioned booklet, at least three of Christ’s four brothers came to the faith (James, Simeon and Jude, who wrote the letter of Jude). Perhaps Jose or Joseph became converted, too. We are also informed that James became a very influential leader in the early Church, and that he wrote the letter of James. But that happened LATER. Before then, Christ’s brothers were unbelieving and hostile toward Christ (compare John 7:5). They might have been envious and even perhaps hateful toward Him. He referred to them as enemies within His own household–being without honor in His own home.

At the time of the crucifixion, Christ did not think that Mary needed to experience further agonies from her own family. It was more than enough that she had to observe the brutal death of her beloved Son–feeling the sword piercing through her own soul also (Luke 2:35). Christ, in His wisdom and foresight, entrusted His mother to the care of John, knowing that he would be able to provide for her the physical and spiritual needs which Mary needed the most at that difficult time in her life.

As explained in our afore-mentioned booklet, tradition tells us that James, after his conversion and leadership role in the early church in Jerusalem, experienced a violent death in his faithful service to Christ. IF Mary was still alive by that time, a further transition of care for her would have been necessary. Christ, foreseeing this, entrusted the care of His mother to John, knowing that John would die long AFTER the death of His mother.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Do you believe that the "Virgin Mary" has appeared to children and others with messages from God?

We don’t believe that Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, appeared to anyone after she had died in the first century. Mary is dead and buried, sleeping the sleep of death in her grave, and awaiting her resurrection to eternal life at the time of Christ’s return. The Bible makes it very clear that all who died in Christ will be resurrected when Christ comes back to this earth–not before then (compare 1 Corinthians 15:22-23, 50-52; 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). As we explain in our free booklet, “Do We Have an Immortal Soul?”, those who die sleep a dreamless sleep of death, without any knowledge, activity, consciousness or thought. For this reason alone, Mary could not have really appeared to anyone after she had died.

Some believe that Mary appeared in a vision. For proof, they point to the occasion of the “transfiguration on the mount” (Matthew 17:1-9), when three of Christ’s disciples, Peter, James and John, saw Jesus Christ in a vision (verse 9) talking to Moses and Elijah, who had died. In that vision, the disciples were given a glimpse of how it would be like in the Kingdom of God, which will be established on this earth after Christ’s return. Jesus had told those disciples that they would not die until they had seen the Kingdom of God having come with power (compare Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1). They did see it–in a vision (For more information on this vision, please read our free booklet, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God.”).

We must note, however, that that vision was quite different from visions children and others might have experienced, claiming that they saw the “Virgin Mary” appearing to them with a message from God, pertaining to future events. While the disciples experienced a vision pertaining to a time when Jesus, Moses and Elijah would in fact be powerful spirit beings in the Kingdom of God, the visions of Mary deal mainly with the time prior to Christ’s return–prior to Mary’s resurrection from the dead.

In any event, we are told in Scripture to test the spirits whether they are from God (1 John 4:1). It may not be all that clear to many from the outset whether a particular vision or message is from God or from another source. The Bible warns us that, especially in these end times, many will listen to and be deceived by “lying spirits.” The fact that a message might even accurately foretell certain events is not proof, all by itself, that that message was given by God.

Some point to the episode of King Saul’s encounter with the witch of Endor (1 Samuel 28:3-25), when allegedly, Samuel, who had died, appeared to Saul. They state that if dead Samuel could appear to Saul, why could not dead Mary appear to children?

We read that the prophet Samuel had died, but subsequently King Saul, who had been forsaken by God, went to a witch to find out his future. In the séance, the witch “saw” someone who claimed to be the prophet Samuel. Of course, it was not the real Samuel, as he had died and was in his grave, and as God had clearly stated that he would no longer speak to King Saul through His prophets (verses 6, 15). The figure which only the witch “saw”–Saul did not see anything–was a demon impersonating Samuel. Nevertheless, we find that the demon accurately foretold the future–that Saul and his sons would die in battle the following day (verse 19) (For more information on this séance with Saul and the witch of Endor, please read our free booklet, “Do We Have an Immortal Soul?“).

The fact that the demon accurately foretold the future does not negate the fact that he was a deceiving spirit. We read in Deuteronomy 13:1-4: “If there arises among you a prophet or a dreamer of dreams, and he gives you a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder comes to pass, of which he spoke to you, saying, ‘Let us go after other gods’–which you have not known–‘and let us serve them,’ you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the LORD your God is testing you to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. You shall walk after the LORD your God and fear Him, and keep His commandments and obey His voice; you shall serve Him and hold fast to Him.”

Notice! Even though the sign or the wonder came to pass, this was no proof that the prophet was God’s messenger. That is why we are told, as mentioned, to test the spirits–whether they preach the Word of God and obedience to His commandments, or whether they teach a different gospel (Galatians 1:6-9) or a different Jesus (2 Corinthians 11:4).

We also find that apparently, King Saul “prophesied” under the influence of a demonic spirit, after the Spirit of God had left him. We read, in 1 Samuel 18:10, that a distressing spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied inside the house. This distressing spirit was a demon motivating Saul to try to kill David (vs. 11-12). God had allowed this demon to plague Saul, who was unwilling to obey Him, and Saul was even prophesying under demonic influence. The Bible does not tell us, exactly, what Saul prophesied, but he might very well have foretold accurately some future events. Further references to that distressing spirit or demon can be found in 1 Samuel 16:14-23. For more information on the powerful and deceptive role of demons and their activities, please read our free booklet, “Angels, Demons and the Spirit World.”

Many today are unwilling to obey God and keep His commandments. And so, God allows deception to come upon mankind, including signs and wonders which might appear to be very real, and which might even accurately foretell certain future events. But we are told that these are “lying wonders,” and that they are inspired by Satan, not by God–even though God allows these things to happen. We read in 2 Thessalonians 2:8-12 about the appearance of a powerful religious personage, called the “lawless one” or the “false prophet.” He will manifest himself just prior to the return of Christ:

“The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs,and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.”

This powerful personage is also described in Revelation 13:13-14: “He performs great signs, so that he even makes fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men. And he deceives those who dwell on the earth by those signs which he was granted to do…”

Christ warned that this false prophet or “lawless one” will be accompanied by many other false preachers, priests, ministers and prophets who will deceive most people. We read in Matthew 24:5, 23-24: “For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am Christ,’ and will deceive many… Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There!’ do not believe it. For false christs and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect.”

When we are faced with apparitions of “the Virgin Mary” and other dead “saints,” we must consider the biblical testimony and compare it with the kind of message and teaching conveyed in those alleged apparitions. If they don’t match, then we know that those apparitions are not from God, because God is a God of truth, who cannot lie or deceive (Titus 1:2; Hebrews 6:18), and we know that “no lie is of the truth” (1 John 2:21).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Would you please explain the "image of the beast," as described in Revelation 13:14?

In the thirteenth chapter of the book of Revelation, John sees two “beasts.” These are symbolic descriptions of powerful world empires.

Beginning with Revelation 13:1, John sees in a vision a fantastic beast rising out of the sea, which has seven heads and ten horns. This beast received a deadly wound, but was healed. We explained in previous Q&A’s and some of our booklets, that this beast describes the Roman Empire at the time of John, its subsequent fall and its ten revivals or resurrections throughout history until the time of Christ’s return. The last and tenth resurrection is unfolding in Europe right now before our very eyes. (For more information, please read, for example, our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”)

Beginning with Revelation 13:11, John sees in vision a second beast coming up out of the earth. This second beast had two horns. It looked like a lamb (Jesus Christ is referred to as the Lamb of God throughout the New Testament, compare John 1:29), but it spoke like a dragon (Satan is identified as a dragon in Revelation 12:3, 9). This second beast is obviously a religious power, which is influenced by Satan, while pretending to speak on behalf of Christ.

We read in Revelation 13:14 that the second beast will make an “image” to the first beast–the Roman Empire.

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible states the following regarding the nature of that “image”:

“All that is stated here would be fulfilled if the old Roman civil power should become to a large extent dead, or cease to exert its influence over people, and if then the papal spiritual power should cause a form of domination to exist strongly resembling the former in its general character and extent, and if it should secure this result—that the world would acknowledge its sway or render it homage as it did to the old Roman government. This would receive its fulfillment if it be supposed that the first ‘beast’ represented the ancient Roman civil power as such; that this died away—as if the head had received a fatal wound; that it was again revived under the influence of the papacy; and that, under that influence, a civil government, strongly resembling the old Roman dominion, was caused to exist, depending for its vital energy on the papacy, and, in its turn, lending its aid to support the papacy.

“All this in fact occurred in the decline of the Roman power… In the empire which then sprung up, and which owed much of its influence to the sustaining aid of the papacy, we discern the ‘image’ of the former Roman power; the prolongation of the Roman ascendency over the world.”

John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible gives a similar explanation:

“… the Roman empire… had received a deadly wound… but now revived in… the pope of Rome… the image made to this beast some understand [to describe] the translation of the empire to Charles the [Great], and [subsequent] emperors, by the pope of Rome… this was an image to the first beast… for [the pope received] the power of inaugurating and crowning these emperors, and of setting up and deposing them when the pope pleased…”

However, this passage about the “image of the beast” is not just of historical application for us today, but it also contains a prophecy for the immediate future. Therefore, many commentaries suggest that the “image” to the first beast–a final revived political and military Roman Empire–might very well point at an ultimate literal fulfillment of the creation of a real image—and this even more so, as there have been isolated incidents in the past, which might serve as forerunners to a final all-encompassing deception.

We read in Revelation 13:15 that the image will speak and cause those to be killed who will not worship the image of the beast. In applying this statement quite literally and figuratively, John Gill writes:

“[This] may be understood either of the images of the virgin Mary, and other saints, which it is pretended, and the people are made to believe, that they do at times actually speak, and really weep and laugh, as it may serve their different purposes; or this image may be said to speak by the decrees, canons, anathemas, curses, threatenings, persuasions, doctrines… of the pope and his clergy… these are the known orders and decrees of the Papacy, which have been executed by the Inquisition, and other hands, in innumerable instances…”

The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown adds the following:

“Charlemagne’s image was set up for homage; and the Pope adored the new emperor… Rome’s speaking images and winking pictures of the Virgin Mary and the saints are an earnest of the future demoniacal miracles of the false prophet [the final representative of the second beast, which looks like a lamb and speaks like a dragon, and which makes an image to the first beast–the revived Roman Empire] in making the [first] beast’s… image to speak.”

Lehmann Strauss writes in “The Book of the Revelation”:

“The false prophet will attempt to lead the people to finance the erection of a great image in Jerusalem, thereby making Jerusalem the center of a world-wide religious system… How the image is made to speak, or what it says, is not revealed… When the image speaks, Jews and Gentiles, Roman Catholics and Protestants, wherever they are, will worship the image or be killed if they refuse.”

Whatever the exact meaning of the “speaking image,” it is clear that it includes the description of a future worldwide demonic deception, leading to the murder of all those who will not worship and obey the beast (Revelation 13:4, 8, 12) and its image (Revelation 13:15). We are warned in God’s Word to be aware of these terrible times to come in the very near future. We are told to consciously prepare for these evil days. Even though misguided and deceived men may persecute us for refusing to worship the beast and his image, God assures us that He will punish us very severely if we give in to pressure and worship them. Revelation 14:9-11 leaves us with this warning of the third angel:

“…’If anyone worships the beast and his image… he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation… they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image…'”

But notice, too, this blessing pronounced for those who refuse to worship the coming beast and his image: “… then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshipped the beast or his image… And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years… Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years” (Revelation 20:4, 6).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Should we have and use crosses or pictures or statues, depicting Jesus Christ?

The answer to all of these questions is a resounding, “No.”

Regarding pictures, images or statues of Christ (including those which picture Him on the cross), we clearly read that we are not to have images of God (Exodus 20:4). Since Jesus is God (John 1:1; Hebrews 1:8; Titus 2:13), the creation and use of images or pictures of Christ violates this express prohibition.

Some say that this commandment does not prohibit us to portray Christ when He was a man, and not God. Even though Christ became fully man and fully flesh, He nevertheless did not cease to be the Personage that He had always been before–the Son of God, the second member in the God Family. That is why He, when here on earth, was called “Immanuel” or “God with us,” and that is why people, recognizing this fact, worshipped Him in the flesh.

In addition, Paul tells us that we are not to know Jesus Christ any longer according to the flesh (2 Corinthians 5:16), as He is now again a glorified, all-powerful and divine God being. He is depicted in Revelation 1:14, 16 with eyes as a flame of fire and as the sun shining in full strength. Pictures which show Christ today, even as a man, are totally inaccurate, even from a human standpoint. They portray Christ with long hair, although Paul said that it is a shame for a man to wear long hair (1 Corinthians 11:14). And even though Christ was a Jew, pictures today show Him with features which have no resemblance to Jewish men, but which give Him an effeminate appearance, instead.

When addressing the cross and its worship or use in religious services or at home, we should realize that the Bible does not even say that Christ was nailed to a cross, as it is pictured and portrayed today. In every case when the word “cross” is used in the Authorized Version or the New King James Bible, the Greek word is “stauros.”

According to Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible, the meaning of that word is simply, “stake.” Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible agrees, defining “stauros” as a “stake or post, as set upright,” continuing that it could refer to a pole or a cross.

Bullinger’s Companion Bible states in Appendix 162 under “The Cross and Crucifixion”:

“In the Greek N.T. two words are used for ‘the cross’ on which the Lord was put to death. (1) The word ‘stauros’; which denotes an upright pale or stake, to which criminals were nailed for execution; (2) The word ‘xulon’, which generally denotes a piece of a dead log of wood, or timber, for fuel or for any other purpose… As this latter word ‘xulon’ is used for the former ‘stauros’, it shows us that the meaning of each is exactly the same. Our English word ‘cross’ is the translation of the Latin ‘crux’; but the Greek ‘stauros’ no more means a ‘crux’ than the word ‘stick’ means a ‘crutch’. “

The word “xulon” is translated many times in the Authorized Version or the New King James Bible as “tree,” for instance in 1 Peter 2:24, stating that Christ bore our sins in His body on the tree (compare, too, Acts 10:39; 13:29).

The Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words by Vine adds the following, when discussing the kind of death which Christ endured:

“… stauros denotes, primarily, an upright pale or stake. On such malefactors were nailed for execution. Both the noun and the verb stauroo, to fasten to a stake or pale, are originally to be distinguished from the ecclesiastical form of a two beamed cross.”

Since the Greek in the New Testament does not state that Christ died on a cross, as we know it today, how did this idea enter orthodox Christianity? Here is what happened:

Alexander Hislop writes in his book, The Two Babylons, pp. 197, 199:

“The same sign of the cross that Rome now worships was used in the Babylonian Mysteries, was applied by paganism to the same magic purposes, was honored with the same honors. That which is now called the Christian cross was originally no Christian emblem at all, but was the mystic Tau of the Chaldeans and Egyptians–the true original form of the letter T–the initial of the name of Tammuz… There is hardly a Pagan tribe where the cross has not been found. The cross was worshiped by the Pagan Celts long before the incarnation and death of Christ… It was worshiped in Mexico for ages before the Roman Catholic missionaries set foot there, large stone crosses being erected, probably to the ‘god of rain.’ The cross was widely worshiped, or regarded as a sacred emblem, was the unequivocal symbol of Bacchus, the Babylonian Messiah… “

We have found pictures, showing Assyrian, Egyptian, Hindu and Greek gods and goddesses associated with crosses. The ancient Greek goddess Diana is shown with a cross over her head–very similar to the portrayal of the “Virgin Mary” by many medieval artists.

Vine adds that the shape of a “two-beamed cross” had ” its origin in ancient Chaldea, and was used as the symbol of the god Tammuz (being in the shape of the mystic Tau, the initial of his name) in that country and in adjacent lands, including Egypt. By the middle of the 3rd century A.D. the churches had either departed from, or had travestied, certain doctrines of the Christian faith. In order to increase the prestige of the apostate ecclesiastical system pagans were received into the churches apart from regeneration by faith, and were permitted largely to retain their pagan signs and symbols. Hence the Tau or T, in its most frequent form, with the cross-piece lowered, was adopted to stand for the cross of Christ.”

In addition, it is true that the Romans used a two-beamed cross as one of their methods of crucifixion, but it is highly unlikely that that method was used in the case of Christ. The Encyclopedia Britannica writes in its 11th edition, volume 7, on page 506:

“Two methods were followed in the infliction of the punishment of crucifixion. In both of these the criminal was first of all usually stripped naked, and bound to an upright stake, where he was so cruelly scourged with an implement, formed of strips of leather having pieces of iron, or some other hard material, at their ends, that not merely was the flesh often stripped from the bones, but even the entrails partly protruded, and the anatomy of the body was disclosed. In this pitiable state he was re-clothed, and, if able to do so, was made to drag the stake to the place of execution, where he was either fastened to it, or impaled upon it, and left to die.”

Regarding another method, the encyclopedia states that:

“After the scourging, the criminal was made to carry a cross beam to the place of execution, and he was then fastened to it by iron nails driven through the outstretched arms and through the ankles. Sometimes this was done as the cross lay on the ground, and it was then lifted into position.”

As pagans already worshiped the cross as we know it today, before they entered the Catholic fold; as the Roman Church allowed them to continue to worship the cross–only now in association with Christ; and as the Romans used a two-beamed cross as one of their methods of crucifixion, it can be easily seen how the Roman Church was able to convince an unsuspecting world that THAT was the method of Christ’s crucifixion.

However, as mentioned, it is highly unlikely that Christ was killed in that way. In the New Testament, the word for “stauros” is equated with a “tree”–and never with a two-beamed “cross.” Also, Christ had to carry His “cross” (“stauros”) to Golgotha (Matthew 27:32; John 19:17). Some commentaries say that this was only the cross beam–that is, only a small part of the “cross.” However, the Bible does not seem to support this. We read that Christ carried His “cross”; that subsequently, Simon a Cyrenian was compelled to bear “His cross” (Mark 15:21); and that after His crucifixion had begun, His mother and other relatives stood “by the cross of Jesus” (John 19:25). In all these passages, the same word “stauros” is used in the original Greek for “cross”—with no indication of just different parts of the “cross” being described at different times.

In addition, Christ told us to carry our “cross” (Matthew 10:38; 16:24) as He had carried and endured His “cross” (Hebrews 12:2). If He only carried a portion of the “cross,” then that analogy would break down, as we are to carry our entire “cross”–not just portions of it.

We also read that Christ compared the manner of His death with the way in which Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness (John 3:14). Numbers 21:9 tells us how Moses did it: “So Moses made a bronze serpent, and put it ON A POLE; and so it was, if a serpent had bitten anyone, when he looked at the bronze serpent, he lived.” The bronze serpent was placed on a solid pole, consisting of one piece–indicating the kind of pale or stake on which Christ died.

Since we don’t even know for sure the exact method of Christ’s crucifixion, but since we DO know that the “cross”–as orthodox Christianity uses it today “in memory of Christ”–was worshiped by pagans in connection with their pagan idols, we should not use it at all, nor even wear it as an amulet. The “Christian” use of the cross did not begin until the time of Constantine, and there is no evidence that God’s true Church has ever used cross symbols for any purpose.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Would you please explain Matthew 8:21-22. Isn't it rather inconsiderate of Jesus to prohibit His disciple from burying his father?

Let us read Christ’s sayings in Matthew 8:21-22 in context, beginning with verse 19:

“Then a certain scribe came and said to Him, ‘Teacher, I will follow You wherever You go.’… Then another of His disciples said to Him, ‘Lord, let me first go and bury my father.’ But Jesus said to him, ‘Follow Me, and let the dead bury their own dead.'”

The parallel passage in Luke 9:59-60 reveals that Christ was calling this man into the ministry, challenging Him to “Follow Me… [and to] go and preach the kingdom of God.”

Christ was not prohibiting this disciple from attending his father’s funeral. The passage does not say that his father had died and needed to be buried. We read in Luke 7:11-15 how Christ Himself showed kindness to a mother during a funeral procession of her only son.

What Christ was addressing here was the desire of His disciple to stay with his elderly father UNTIL he had died, rather than following Christ’s invitation to become a minister and preach the gospel of the Kingdom of God wherever he would be sent. This man tried to make excuses for not following the call to the ministry at that moment in time. He wanted to wait for a more “appropriate” time. As the early apostles forsook everything they had in order to follow Christ, so this disciple was challenged to do the same. But he refused.

The Commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown points out:

“Was his father actually dead – lying a corpse – having only to be buried? Impossible. As it was the practice… to bury on the day of death, it is not very likely that this disciple would have been here at all if his father had just breathed his last; nor would the Lord, if He was there, have hindered him discharging the last duties of a son to a father. No doubt it was the common case of a son having a frail or aged father, not [supposed] to live long…”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible agrees, stating (in regard to Luke 9:60):

“The excuse he made: ‘Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. I have an aged father at home, who cannot live long, and will need me while he does live; let me go and attend on him until he is dead, and I have performed my last office of love to him, and then I will do any thing.’… It is a plausible excuse indeed: ‘Let me go and bury my father, – let me take care of my family, and provide for my children, and then I will think of serving Christ;’ whereas the kingdom of God and the righteousness thereof must be sought and minded in the first place… Not that Christ would have his followers or his ministers to be unnatural; our religion teaches us to be kind and good in every relation, to show piety at home, and to requite our parents. But we must not make these offices an excuse from our duty to God… This disciple was called to be a minister, and therefore must not entangle himself with the affairs of this world [2 Timothy 2:4].”

The Nelson Study Bible explains Matthew 8:21-22 as follows:

“This passage most likely describes a follower whose father was still alive, because by Levitical law the man would not be out in public if his father had just died. His father was aged. So the man wanted to go to his home, wait for his father to die, and then follow Christ. Jesus’ answer means that we must never make excuses for refusing to follow Him. There is no better time than the present.”

The same commentary makes the following comments to the parallel account in Luke 9:59-60:

“This aspiring disciple placed family responsibilities ahead of following Jesus. The concerns of home were this man’s stumbling block… Jesus emphasized that a disciple must have clear priorities. The call of God should receive priority over everything else.”

Christ is teaching us that we are not to allow physical concerns to prevent us from serving Him. In His parable of the Sower, He addresses a category of people who receive the word but become unfruitful due to the “cares of this world” (Matthew 13:22).

The Life Application Bible adds this thought regarding Matthew 8:22: “As God’s Son, Jesus did not hesitate to demand complete loyalty. Even family loyalty was not to take priority over the demands of obedience.”

As we pointed out in the Q&A in Update 343, nothing and no one must prevent us from following Christ and obeying His Word. As those called and chosen by God, we are God’s Spirit-begotten children whose first and foremost responsibility is to love GOD with all of our heart, might and soul. Christ said that no one is “fit” for the Kingdom of God, who puts his hand to the plow and looks back (Luke 9:62)–wanting to return to where he came from.

Christ showed the difference to His disciple who wanted to wait until his father had died, before following Christ, by explaining that the spiritual dead can take care of his father, including his brothers and other family members who were apparently not called at that time.

Christ was not saying, of course, that the father should not be buried when he died. He was talking about spiritually dead relatives who would be in a position to take care of the funeral arrangements. We were all, at one time, “dead in trespasses and sins” (Ephesians 2:1), but God has made us “alive” in Jesus Christ (same verse), having forgiven us all of our trespasses (Colossians 2:13). For us, who have been made spiritually alive, nothing must be more important than to follow Christ wherever He goes and wants us to go (Revelation 14:4).

John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible gives the following explanation, when discussing the “dead” who can “bury their dead”:

“Our Lord is not to be understood, as speaking against, or disrespectfully of burying the dead; his words suppose it ought to be done: only it was not proper, that this person should be concerned in it at this time, who was called to an higher employment; and therefore should leave this to be done by persons, whom it better became. And however strange and odd such a phrase may sound in the ears of some, of one dead man’s burying another, it was easily understood by a Jew; with whom it is common to say… ‘that a sinner is counted as… dead, and that ungodly persons, even while they are alive’,… are ‘called dead’… And in this sense is the word used, in the former part of this phrase; and Christ’s meaning is, let such who are dead in trespasses and sins… bury those who are dead in a natural or corporal sense… there were enough of them to take care of this service: and therefore, there was no need why he should neglect the ministry of the Gospel to attend that…”

The Ryrie Study Bible elaborates on Christ’s saying, as follows (commenting on Luke 9:59-60):

“The father had not died; the speaker meant that he was obligated to care for him until he died… [Christ replied:] let those who are spiritually dead bury those who die physically. The claims of the kingdom are paramount.”

In conclusion, Christ tells us that the concern for an elderly parent who might or might not die soon must not prevent us from doing the Will of God for us. Even though it may appear that only we can and must deal with certain physical situations, upon deeper analysis, we might find that others, who are not called to God’s Way of Life at this point, might be in a better position to do so, while God wants us–and especially those called into His ministry–to fulfill much more important tasks at this time.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Would you please explain Christ's sayings in Luke 14:26? I thought we were not to hate others?

Let us note and review carefully what Christ said in Luke 14:26: “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.”

However, Christ also commanded us to love even our enemies (Luke 6:27), and to love our neighbors as ourselves (Matthew 22:39). As the Bible does not contradict itself (John 10:35), it is therefore obvious that Jesus’ sayings in Luke 14:26 cannot mean that we actually are to HATE our fellow man. But what DO they mean?

The word for “hate” is “misei” in the Greek. In the overwhelming majority, this word does refer to malicious and unjustifiable feelings towards others, including a right feeling of aversion from what is evil. However, as the Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words by W.E. Vine explains, it can also describe the “relative preference for one thing over another, by either expressing aversion from, or disregard for, the claims of one person or thing relatively to those of another… as to the impossibility of serving two masters… as to the claims of parents relatively to those of Christ…”

According to Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, the Greek word “misei” can also convey the meaning of “to love less,” or “to postpone in love or esteem.”

When discussing Paul’s statements in Romans 9:13 in a previous Q&A, expressing the thought that God “loved” Jacob and “hated” Esau, we pointed out the following:

“God’s statement that He loved Jacob and HATED Esau must be understood as saying that God loved Esau LESS BY COMPARISON… We might… note that the Bible itself sometimes defines ‘hate’ as ‘love less by comparison.’ “In Luke 14:26 we read that Christ tells us, ‘If anyone comes to Me and does not HATE his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.’ In the parallel passage, in Matthew 10:37, the word ‘hate’ is defined as ‘love less by comparison.’ We read, ‘He who loves his father or mother MORE than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter MORE than Me is not worthy of Me.’ In other words, we must love them LESS, by comparison, than Jesus Christ. We are to love the Father and the Son with all our heart and our strength and our mind (compare Matthew 22:37). God must always come first in our lives. At the same time, we are to LOVE — not hate — our neighbor AS ourselves (compare Matthew 22:39). We are not to hate our neighbor, including our own family. We are to love them LESS than God, though, by comparison.”

This conclusion is shared by the vast majority of Biblical commentaries.

For instance, Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible explains:

“Christ must be loved supremely, or he is not loved at all. If we are not willing to give up all earthly possessions, and forsake all earthly friends, and if we do not obey him rather than all others, we have no true attachment to him.”

John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible writes:

“… not that proper hatred of any, or all of these, is enjoined by Christ; for this would be contrary to the laws of God… and divine revelation: but that these are not to be preferred to Christ, or loved more than he, as it is explained in [Matthew 10:37]; yea, these are to be neglected and forsaken, and turned from with indignation and resentment, when they stand in the way of the honour and interest of Christ, and dissuade from his service: such who would be accounted the disciples of Christ, should be ready to part with their dearest relations and friends, with the greatest enjoyment of life, and with life itself, when Christ calls for it; or otherwise they are not worthy to be called his disciples…”

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible states:

“‘And hate not…’ Matthew, [in Matthew 10:37] expresses the true meaning of this word, when he says, He who loveth his father and mother More than me. In [Matthew 6:24] he uses the word hate in the same sense.”

The People’s New Testament explains:

“Hate not his father. In just the same sense that he hates his own life also. That is, these must all be given up, turned away from, if we have to choose between them and Christ.”

Wesley’s Notes points out:

“If any man come to me, and hate not his father – Comparatively to Christ: yea, so as actually to renounce his field, oxen, wife, all things, and act as if he hated them, when they stand in competition with him.”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible elaborates:

“… A man cannot be Christ’s disciple but he must hate father, and mother, and his own life. He is not sincere… unless he [loves] Christ better than any thing in this world, and be willing to part with that which he may and must leave, either as a sacrifice, when Christ may be glorified by our parting with it (so the martyrs, who loved not their lives to death), or as a temptation, when by our parting with it we are put into a better capacity of serving Christ. Thus Abraham parted with his own country, and Moses with Pharaoh’s court…

“Every good man loves his relations; and yet, if he be a disciple of Christ, he must comparatively hate them, must love them less than Christ, as Leah is said to be hated when Rachel was better loved. Not that their persons must be in any degree hated, but our comfort and satisfaction in them must be lost and swallowed up in our love to Christ…

“When our duty to our parents comes in competition with our evident duty to Christ, we must give Christ the preference. If we must either deny Christ or be banished from our families and relations (as many of the primitive Christians were), we must rather lose their society than his favour…

“Every man loves his own life, no man ever yet hated it; and we cannot be Christ’s disciples if we do not love him better than our own lives, so as rather to have our lives embittered by cruel bondage, nay, and taken away by cruel deaths, than to dishonour Christ, or depart from any of his truths and ways… When tribulation and persecution arise because of the word, then chiefly the trial is, whether we love better Christ or our relations and lives… Those that decline the service of Christ… and are ashamed to confess him, for fear of disobliging a relation or friend, or losing a customer, give cause to suspect that they love him better than Christ.”

In conclusion, nothing must be more important for us than our love for God and our willing and loving obedience of His Word and Law. Those who teach that they are not duty-bound to keep His Law do NOT have within them the LOVE of God (1 John 5:2; 2 John 6). It is God’s GREATEST commandment to love HIM with all our heart and soul and mind (Matthew 22:37)–much more–in comparison–than anyone and anything else. And we ONLY love God truly if we keep His Word (1 John 2:5).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

©2025 Church of the Eternal God