The Bible’s Difficult Scriptures Explained!

Genesis 4:23

“And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; you wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.”

Who are the two men killed by Lamech?

Records from ancient history records that Lamech did kill two men—his third-great grandfather Cain (“a man”), and Tubal-Cain (“a young man”), Lamech’s son (vs. 19, 22). The phrase “to my hurt” is best translated “who hurts me.”

Jewish tradition says that Lamech also killed the preacher of righteousness Enoch (5:24), but this is almost certainly not accurate. (See next explanation.)

No suggested reading.

Genesis 5:24

“And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.”

Many interpret this verse as stating that God took Enoch to heaven, making this contrary to John 3:13, but that is not what the verse actually says. Where then did Enoch go?

Enoch was the seventh of eight preachers of righteousness (Gen. 5; II Pet. 2:4-5). He “walked with God”—faithfully obeyed God—for 300 years (vs. 21-24), until his death. He “was not” in the sense that he “was not found” (Heb. 11:5). Verse 5 explains that God “translated” him; here, the Greek term for “translated” means “to transfer or transport.”

God removed Enoch’s body to another location for burial (as He did with Moses, Deut. 34:6). The same Greek word for “translated” is also used in Acts 7:16 to describe Jacob’s body being transported to Sychem for burial.

If Enoch had been taken to heaven and is still living to this day, he would still be walking with God—present tense. Enoch was not taken to heaven, but is in his grave awaiting his resurrection.

Enoch was Methuselah’s father and Lamech’s grandfather (the Lamech of Gen. 5:25-31). History and tradition both reveal that these two men corrupted themselves. This caused God to raise up Noah (Enoch’s faithful great-grandson) to warn of a coming worldwide flood and to do a “work” (referenced in vs. 29) in that time. Methuselah died in the flood, and it can be determined that Lamech died five years before the flood (vs. 31). This can be proven through carefully connecting the chronology of the first few chapters of Genesis.

Suggested reading:

Genesis 9:3

“Every moving thing that lives shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.”

This verse seems to state that all living creatures are good for meat. But it also says that the standard for measuring this is “even as the green herb” (see Gen. 1:30 explanation).

Using this phrase as authority, human beings can no more eat all types of meat than they can eat all poisonous plants (again, Gen. 1:30). Recall that Noah had already by this time taken seven pairs of clean and one pair of unclean animals into the ark because: (1) he needed food, and (2) he must have known the difference between clean and unclean animals. Had Noah eaten even one of the unclean animals (pig, etc.), the pair could not have reproduced. Notice that “by sevens” (Gen. 7:2) is plural, but “by two” is singular. The two does not have an “s.” There were only two of each unclean animal taken into the ark.

Suggested reading:

Genesis 9:24-25

“And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.”

Who was the one cursed here for the sodomy committed against Noah? If Canaan was cursed (Noah’s grandson), why does it appear to say that Noah’s youngest son committed the act?

Canaan was cursed, and he was the youngest son of Ham (see 10:6). Canaan would not have been cursed by God if it was Ham who had sinned. Also, Ham was the middle son of Noah (see 9:18). The word “his” (vs. 24) means Ham’s youngest son. Also notice that verse 22 makes reference to “the father of Canaan.” Canaan is the object of this entire event. Noah, upon sobering up, undoubtedly knew what his grandson Canaan had done to him.

It is interesting that the word Canaan means humiliated and the verb form of his name means to bend the knee.

No suggested reading.

Genesis 11:26

“And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran.”

Questions have arisen about the breakdown in the chronology of Genesis 11, specifically at verse 26. Compensation must be made for the wording of verse 26. We can demonstrate how the wording can lead to the wrong conclusion, and how to arrive at the correct chronology of Terah and Abram. Follow carefully.

Due to the fact that Abram became a central figure of the biblical record in Genesis, he was placed first ahead of his brothers, with the intent of honoring him as the preeminent patriarch. However, Abram was not the firstborn of Terah. The eldest son was Haran, who died before his father died. Haran was the father of Lot whom Abram had reared after his elder brother’s death.

In tracing the chronology of Genesis 11 to the birth of Abram, the wording of verse 26 can and does lead to erroneous calculations. Since Haran was the eldest son, Terah would have been 70 years of age when Haran was born. But when we trace to the date of Abram, obviously the age of Terah at Abram’s birth is not 70 years. As we will see later, Abram was born when his father was 130 years of age.

Genesis 11:31 states: “And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son’s son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram’s wife; and they went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.” Later, Terah died as indicated in verse 32: “And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and Terah died in Haran.”

Then we read of God’s call of Abram. Genesis 12:1 reveals, “Now the Lord had said unto Abram, Get you out of your country, and from your kindred, and from your father’s house, unto a land that I will show you:” Acts 7:2-4 records more details about Abram’s departure: “And he said, Men, brethren, and fathers, hearken; the God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran [Haran], and said unto him, Get you out of your country, and from your kindred, and come into the land which I shall show you. Then came he out of the land of the Chaldaeans, and dwelt in Charran [Haran]: and from there, when his father was dead, he removed him into this land, wherein you now dwell.”

In Genesis 12:4 we find the age of Abram at the time he departed from Haran upon Terah’s death: “So Abram departed, as the Lord had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy and five years old when he departed out of Haran.” Above, we have already read that Terah was 205 years of age when he died (Gen. 11:32). To calculate the age of Terah when Abram was born we simply subtract 75 (Abram’s age) from 205 (Terah’s age at death). This gives us 130 years of age for Terah when Abram was born (205 – 75 = 130).

Therefore, in counting up the chronology of Genesis 11, and adding 130 years at the point of verse 26 (instead of 70 years as most mistakenly do), this will give a total of 427 years from the time the flood abated until the time of the call of Abram. This leads to the correct chronology of Genesis 11 and the correct basis for subsequent timing of later events.

No suggested reading.

Genesis 14:18

“And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and He was the priest of the most high God.”

Who was Melchizedek? Answer: He was Jesus Christ!

Hebrews 6:19-20 and Hebrews 7:1-6 can be read phrase by phrase to prove this. Notice there: Only One who was God could be fully “righteous.” Also, men do not know the way of “peace” (Isa. 59:8). Finally, having “no beginning or end” can only describe one who is eternal. This could not possibly refer to any human being. Note these passages:

(1) Hebrews 5:5-6, 10

(2) Psalms 110:4

(3) Acts 2:24—Jesus Christ is alive today.

(4) Hebrews 4:14 and 5:5-6, again—references “High Priest after the order of Melchizedek.”

This subject is addressed more fully in the Hebrews 6:20-7:17 explanation.

Suggested reading:

• The Ten Commandments – “Nailed to the Cross” or Required for Salvation?

• Bible Introduction Course Lesson 3 – WHO and WHAT IS GOD?

Genesis 17:11

“And you shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant between me and you.”

Many scoffers, who believe that the New Testament nullified everything in the Old Testament, cite this verse seeking to demonstrate that the Old Covenant was represented by physical circumcision, making everything else found there to be invalid. In other words, if the New Testament is the only thing for Christians today, the Law of God—the Ten Commandments, among other things—have no application.

But read verse 11 closely. It says that circumcision is a “token” of the covenant. The Hebrew word (#226 in Strong’s Concordance) can be translated “sign, signal, omen, flag, beacon, evidence.” The overall inference to be drawn is that circumcision is a sign of the covenant, not the covenant itself. The Old Covenant had both temporary, physical birthright promises to Israel’s descendants and eternal, spiritual promises to the few called by God. The spiritual promises, and part of the physical promises, are being fulfilled today, and will be fulfilled by salvation in the future.

Romans 2:28-29 shows that circumcision has been changed—not done away—and is now of “the heart”—conversion. Therefore, physical circumcision is no longer required but this practice, for a number of reasons, is still medically and hygienically prudent.

Suggested reading:

• Bible Introduction Course Lesson 14 – WHAT IS THE OLD COVENANT?

Genesis 32:32

“Therefore the children of Israel eat not of the sinew which shrank, which is upon the hollow of the thigh, unto this day: because he touched the hollow of Jacob’s thigh in the sinew that shrank.”

Is avoiding the eating of this portion of an animal a tradition that Christians should observe today?

This is a custom the children of Israel began to observe voluntarily out of respect for their forefather Jacob. A renowned Jewish historian (who also recorded more about the Jews than any other historian), Flavius Josephus, stated that the Jews of Christ’s time routinely observed this custom (Bk. I, Ch. XX, Sec. 2). Even today, some Orthodox Jews still follow this. However, nowhere in the Bible do we find that Jesus himself observed this custom. This is simply a tradition of men and is not binding upon Christians today. The passage merely records that it was happening—it does not say God wanted it.

While it is not wrong to observe this custom today, it is unnecessary.

No suggested reading.

Exodus 12:40-41

“Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years. And it came to pass at the end of the four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt.”

What was the 430-year time period referenced here?

Many have wrongly assumed that this passage meant Israel was in Egypt for 430 years. If this was not the case, then some other major event must have occurred 430 years before the time of the exodus. In fact, this is the case.

Exodus 12:40-41 best reads, “Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, who dwelt in Egypt, was [completed] four hundred and thirty years. And it came to pass at the end of the [completion of] four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of the Lord went out from the land of Egypt.”

The 430-year span measured from the time of the covenant with Abraham (Gen. 17:1-8), about the year 1873 B.C., until the exodus of 1443 B.C. This is confirmed by the following scripture:

“Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He said not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, and to your seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise” (Gal. 3:16-18).

The covenant and promise made to Abraham preceded the giving of the Law (Ten Commandments) at Sinai, which occurred nearly two months after the exodus during the same year. Galatians 3:17 explicitly states that the span of 430 years was from the covenant with Abraham to Sinai. All the family of Jacob (Israel) went into Egypt (Gen. 46:1-6) in the year 1682 B.C. Since the exodus occurred in 1443, Israel had been in Egypt for about 239 years. She had fallen into slavery well after the death of Joseph.

For those who enjoy such calculation, here are the mathematical facts available from scripture so that we can perform the proper computation. Extra space is taken so the reader can appreciate through an interesting illustration how accurate dating of important historic biblical events can be determined.

We can approximate the time that Joseph was alive in Egypt by the following facts:

Joseph died at the age of 110 years (Gen. 50:26).

He began to reign at about the age of 30 (Gen. 41:46).

The 7 years of “plenty” had elapsed before Israel came into Egypt, plus 2 years of the famine had elapsed as well, leaving 5 years of famine remaining (Gen 45:11).

Thus 110 - 30 = 80; then we subtract the 9 elapsed years: 80 - 9 = 71 years.

Joseph was alive for 71 years while Israel was in Egypt.

We have seen the time that Joseph was alive while Israel was in Egypt. Before we arrive to the point that “there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph” (Exodus 1:8), a few decades would have elapsed after his death—for he was highly esteemed by the generations that knew him. So we could add at least another 20 to 30 years to those 71 years, allowing for a new generation to mature, which would have placed Israel approximately 90 to 100 years in Egypt before becoming enslaved. Thus, of the 239 years in Egypt, as much as 150 years could have been spent in bitter bondage.

Apart from Galatians 3:17 showing the 430 years from the time of the covenant with Abraham until the exodus, we can calculate that span of time by what is recorded in Genesis. First, we need to find the span of time from the covenant until Israel went into Egypt. This is done by subtracting 239 years (the total time of Israel in Egypt) from the 430 years total span. Therefore, 430 - 239 = 191 years. This 191-year span can be easily verified by the following points:

• Abraham was 99 years old at the time of the covenant (Gen. 17:1).

• Abraham was 100 years old when Isaac was born (Gen. 21:5).

• Isaac lived 180 years (Gen 35:28).

• Isaac was 60 years old at Jacob’s birth; these men lived 120 years concurrently (Gen. 25:26).

• Jacob lived in Egypt 17 years (Gen 47:28); he came into Egypt at age 130 (Gen. 47:9).

• Jacob lived a total of 147 years; (130 + 17 = 147).

• Since 147 - 120 = 27, Jacob outlived Isaac by 27 years.

Of the 27 years Jacob outlived Isaac, 17 were in Egypt; thus 27 - 17 = 10 years.

Ten years elapsed from the death of Isaac until Israel entered Egypt.

We add the 1 year from the covenant until the birth of Isaac + Isaac’s life span of 180 years + the 10 years that elapsed from Isaac’s death until Israel entered Egypt.

Since 1 + 180 + 10=191 years, this was the time from the covenant until entering Egypt.

The total time of 191 years + the 239 years in Egypt = 430 years as we saw in Galatians 3:17.

Rather than Israel suffering 430 years in bondage, we see the duration of suffering would have been approximately 150 years in this enslaved condition to the Egyptians. Considering the severity of the bondage, any greater length of time would have virtually destroyed the nation.

To summarize, Israel was in Egypt only 239 years and in bondage for about 150 years.

No suggested reading.

Exodus 34:28

“And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread, nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments.”

Many have misunderstood this verse, believing that “he wrote” is a reference to Moses. They conclude that Moses must have written the Ten Commandments on the stone tablets. The hidden message in this point is to diminish the Ten Commandments, to make them appear to have come from Moses, not God.

Exodus 24:12 shows that this is an incorrect assumption. There, God instructed Moses, “…Come up to Me into the mount, and be there: and I will give you tables of stone, and a law, and commandments which I have written; that you may teach them.” Also, Exodus 31:18 states that God “…gave unto Moses, when He had made an end of communing with him upon Mt. Sinai, two tables of testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God.”

Also notice: “The tables were the work of God, and the writing was the writing of God, graven upon the tables” (Ex. 32:16). These were the stone tablets that Moses later broke (vs. 19), when finding the Israelites worshipping the golden calf. God later commanded Moses (34:1), “Hew…two tables of stone like unto the first: and I will write upon these tables the words that were in the first tables, which you broke.” God (YHVH – “the Lord”) clearly stated that HE would write the Ten Commandments again.

As the Israelites’ forty years of wandering in the wilderness drew to a close, Moses recounted to them the ways that God had miraculously delivered them and provided for them. He stated this in Deuteronomy 5:22: “These words the Lord spoke unto all your assembly in the mount…with a great voice…and He wrote them in two tables of stone, and delivered them unto me.” Here, Moses was referring to the first tablets of stone that God had given him, the ones which he had broken (Ex. 32:19).

In Deuteronomy 10:1-5, Moses went on to repeat to the congregation of Israel that it was God who had twice written the Ten Commandments. Clearly, God, not Moses, recorded this great Law in each case.

Suggested reading:

Leviticus 19:27 and 21:5

“You shall not round the corners of your heads, neither shall you mar the corners of your beard.”

“They shall not make baldness upon their head, neither shall they shave off the corner of their beard, nor make any cuttings in their flesh.”

Do these two passages forbid either haircuts or shaving?

It was the custom of some heathen nations to cut and trim their beards and hair into particular shapes in honor of certain pagan gods. The Egyptians, for example, had their hair cut short and shaped in a way that what remained appeared in the form of a circle surrounding the head (the halo was derived from this practice). In another instance, a round spot would be shaved off. Both of these are indications of sun god worship.

Modern forms of such extremes include: extremely short or even no hair done to intimidate (e.g., Nazis, skinheads); strangely cut, colored or spiked hair to intimidate, but also to shock and attract undue attention (e.g., punk rockers, the more recent “Gothic” look, etc.); strangely cut and colored hair at sporting events (a form of idol worship); and many others.

However, shaving one’s facial hair and the regular cutting of the hair on one’s head for normal grooming is totally different and, in fact, should be common practices for Christians. Take time to read I Corinthians 11:14-15. As with most things, moderation and respect should play the higher role and, if there is any doubt, one should even “Abstain from all appearance of evil” (I Thes. 5:22).

Suggested reading:

• Worldliness – What Is It?

• Did Jesus Have Long Hair? – Proper Hair Lengths and Styles in God’s Church

Numbers 6:24-26

“The Lord bless you, and keep you: the Lord make His face shine upon you, and be gracious unto you: the Lord lift up His countenance upon you, and give you peace.”

Some have asserted that these verses support the trinity simply because “the Lord” (in italics) is recorded three times. As silly as this is, it deserves some attention because it is the kind of passage trinitarians use to support their teaching.

Besides the fact that the New Testament does not, in fact, offer anything that helps bring the trinity to light in the Old Testament, another problem is that verses like these are used to confuse the symbolism associated with the number three. Throughout Scripture, we see a pattern of three used to denote completion of time and events—never in reference to God.

Consider these. God uses three annual Holy Day seasons to depict His Plan of salvation (Deut. 16:16), punctuated by three resurrections (I Thes. 4:16; Rev. 20:5-15). Jonah was in the belly of a great fish three days and three nights (Jonah 1:17). Christ pointed to Jonah, giving as the only sign that He was the Messiah the fact that He would be three days and three nights in the grave (Matt. 12:39-40). Notice that these are all time-related events!

Merely because Numbers 6:24-26 references three things that the Lord does, trinitarian theologians and scholars actually claim this verse as one “proof” that even ancient Israel supposedly recognized a triune godhead.

Before we explain why they believe this, ask yourself if you see any part of this passage espousing a triune godhead? Of course not! And notice that it is “the Lord,” not the Father or the Holy Spirit, who is mentioned in all three places.

Then consider this: How can theologians attest that ancient Israel believed in the trinity when they later rejected Christ, accusing Him of blasphemy when He claimed to be God’s Son? And, as Acts 19:2 states of a group of Jews that had been baptized by John the Baptist, that they had not even “so much as heard whether there be any Holy Spirit.” If ancient Israel as a whole had recognized (in form or principle) the existence of the Holy Spirit as a third member of a supposed triune godhead, it makes no sense that these Jews could have no knowledge of it whatsoever?

Under thorough examination, such “proofs” disintegrate.

If belief in a trinity had been at the core of ancient Israel’s worship of God, and if Numbers 6:24-26 is a blueprint for it, why is this passage not explicit? If Numbers 6 constitutes a supposed trinitarian “deific formula,” as some assert, why would God hide its meaning in a cryptic and coded message, instead of clearly showing three members of the godhead in this passage? Further, phrased another way, in light of the all-important First Commandment—“You shall have no other gods before Me”—why would God leave such unnecessary mystery surrounding His supposed triune nature—and correct identity as the only true God—by using these kinds of obscure passages to send so-called “messages” to His followers?

He would not!

Suggested reading:

Deuteronomy 22:13

“If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her.”

The Old Testament describes certain circumstances under which people obtained divorces. This passage sets the stage to discuss the principle of fraud, always discovered after a marriage has occurred, but which can annul the marriage. This is the first of two passages, two chapters apart, that we will examine.

Notice: “If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her [the husband, ready to consummate the marriage, finds something wrong with his new bride], and give occasions of speech against her [he is upset with her, raising some issue], and bring up an evil name upon her [slanders her reputation], and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid [virgin]: then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel’s virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate: and the damsel’s father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hates her; and, lo, he has given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not your daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.”

Though the Bible is not clear as to how this was done, Numbers chapter 5 indicates that these tokens may have involved a kind of litmus test, or “water test,” in which a determination could be made about the woman’s virginity. It may have also been something supernatural—provided by God—used to determine if a woman was a virgin on her wedding day.

Continuing in Deuteronomy 22: “And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him [because he was wrong!]; and they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he has brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days. But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she has wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shall you put evil away from among you” (vs. 14-21).

These are the basic instructions on the major type of fraud—where one party thought he or she was marrying a virgin and found out otherwise after marriage! (If the husband made false accusation, he kept the woman and the marriage continued.) If either party had lied, the marriage was fraudulent. It was over—annulled!—and the guilty party was put away, and in the Old Testament stoned to death. God takes this matter very seriously!

Moses was plain about this. However, there is no room in this passage for someone claiming, ten, fifteen or twenty-five years later, “I got a ‘pig in a poke’, something I did not bargain for,” trying to devise a case for fraud.

Keep this in mind. The above is not technically describing a divorce, but rather an annulment. God never bound the marriage, because one partner lied from the beginning! If there is a major problem, hidden from the beginning, and the person that learns it raises the issue, the marriage would be annulled.

Suggested reading:

Deuteronomy 24:1-4

“When a man has taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favor in his eyes, because he has found some uncleanness in her [“some unseemly thing” or “some matter of nakedness”—in other words, perhaps she has been naked in front of another man]: then let him write her a bill of divorcement [better translated, “that he write her a bill of divorcement”], and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife. And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and sends her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife; Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and you shall not cause the land to sin, which the Lord your God gives you for an inheritance.”

The Pharisees were very familiar with this passage and quoted it to Christ in Matthew 19, seeking to pin Him down with a trick question about who is, and is not, eligible for divorce and remarriage.

The beginning of the passage is a kind of “what if” situation. It neither forbids nor commands divorce, and does not really give grounds for divorce. These verses simply deal with when divorce happens.

God plainly states that He hates “putting away” (Mal. 2:16). This has always been His perspective of divorce! However, by the time Moses was teaching Israel (2,500 years after Genesis 2), men were obtaining divorces without regard to God’s will. As a result, God inspired Moses to explain, in effect, “When this happens, the man can never take his wife back.”

Suggested reading:

II Samuel 24:1

“And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, ‘Go, number Israel and Judah.’”

In a casual reading of II Samuel 24:1, it appears that the Lord was the one who moved David to number Israel. Yet, such a position would contradict God’s integrity, because David’s numbering of Israel’s army constituted sin, by his own admission as the following scripture reveals: “And David’s heart smote him after that he had numbered the people. And David said unto the Lord, I have sinned greatly in that I have done: and now, I beseech you, O Lord, take away the iniquity of your servant; for I have done very foolishly” (II Sam. 24:10).

Would God actually tempt someone to sin, and then punish them in anger because they gave in to His persuasiveness? Of course not! Such a scenario has never happened. James 1:13 states that “Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempts He any man.”

Although God does not tempt mankind to sin, He allows all men to be tempted by circumstances in order to develop character and occasionally to test the level of that development. Also, Satan the devil, who certainly does regularly tempt all men, also directly tempted Christ in numerous ways in Matthew 4.

In light of these facts, a close examination of II Samuel 24:1 reveals a more complete picture. The term “he” is correctly translated from the Hebrew term denoting the personal pronoun in the third person masculine. Yet, in the Oxford edition of the King James Version of the Bible, a note in the margin explains that “he” is referring to Satan. Most Bible commentaries agree the “he” in verse 1 decidedly refers to the devil. Here is one example. The commentary by Jamieson, Fausset and Brown states that God “permitted Satan to tempt David. Satan was the active mover…and the great tempter prevailed against the king.”

However, the scripture that conclusively settles this issue is found in I Chronicles 21:1. It reads: “And Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number Israel.” No ambiguities exist in this parallel verse, as it settles the question as to whom “he” refers in II Samuel 24:1.

No suggested reading.

I Kings 17:21

“And he stretched himself upon the child three times, and cried unto the Lord, and said, O Lord my God, I pray you, let this child’s soul come into him again.”

Does I Kings 17:21 prove that man has an immortal soul?

The word “soul” in this verse does not refer to an immortal soul. It is translated from the Hebrew word nephesh, meaning “breath” or “anything that breathes” (Analytical Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary). This same word—nephesh—is found in Genesis 2:7. Notice: “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” Notice the word “became.” In other words, men do not have souls—they are souls!

In I Kings 17:21, Elijah was praying that God return the “breath of life” to the dead little boy. God answered Elijah’s prayer and the boy was miraculously revived.

The Restored Church of God has prepared many booklets and articles that address the pagan doctrine of the immortal soul. Those listed below contain the most detail. Other verses are addressed later.

Suggested reading:

• How Religion Deceives You About Your Incredible Future

• Bible Introduction Course Lesson 9 – WHO AND WHAT IS MAN?

Isaiah 24:6

“Therefore has the curse devoured the earth, and they that dwell therein are desolate: therefore the inhabitants of the earth are burned, and few men left.”

The Seventh-Day Adventists cite this passage to prove that the earth will be completely desolate during the Millennium, with everyone either dead or “gone to heaven.” However, notice that the end of the verse plainly states, “and few men left.” It is obvious, then, that some people will remain alive after Armageddon and the plagues of Revelation. Prophecy demonstrates that approximately 10 percent of humanity will survive this period. By any definition, even if it would be 640 million (10 percent of 6.4 billion alive today), this is “few” survivors.

Suggested reading:

• Revelation Explained at Last!

• Tomorrow’s Wonderful World – An Inside View!

Isaiah 43:10

“You are my witnesses, says the Lord, and My servant whom I have chosen: that you may know and believe Me, and understand that I am He: before Me there was no God formed, neither shall there be after Me.”

The Jehovah’s Witnesses use this passage as authority to preach door-to-door. But notice Luke 10:7, which shows that Christ directly instructed the apostles to not go from “house to house.” The Bible nowhere commands, or even suggests, Christians to actively profess Christ, but rather always to confess Him when confronted with the question of their belief (I Pet. 3:15).

Suggested reading:

• Should You Preach to Others?

• Are You Being Called?

Ezekiel 1 and 10

The reader will need to open his Bible to examine what are whole chapters in this case. Ezekiel was given “visions” (1:1) while he was among the Jewish captives in Babylon. Many are confused as to the “strange sights” that he describes, with some believing these are Bible references to UFOs.

Ezekiel saw four creatures (vs. 5) appear out of a great whirlwind. Verses 6-10 describe these angelic creatures. They carried “upon their heads” a platform made of a crystalline material. (The material was likely gold of such quality that it appeared as “transparent glass” – Rev. 21:21).

On this platform was a throne!

In vision, Ezekiel saw God seated on this throne. Ezekiel 1:26-28 describes God’s appearance: “I saw as the color of amber, as the appearance of fire round about within it, from the appearance of His loins even upward and from the appearance of His loins even downward, I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and it had brightness round about…This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord.” This God being was the Eternal (YHWH) (vs. 28)—the same Personage Who later became Christ. (You may wish to read Revelation 1:13-16, which further expands on this description.)

The Bible also defines the purpose of the cherubim (Ezek. 10:1) and the wheels under the platform of God’s throne. Various parts of the Bible show that God, at times, comes to Earth (Psa. 18:10; Ezek. 10:1-22). When He does, He arrives sitting upon His throne. The angels carry His throne at “lightning speed” (Ezek. 1:13) wherever God wishes to go.

The “wheel in the midst of a wheel” (Ezek. 1:16; 10:10) appear to be, in a sense, types of gyroscope assemblies—one is near the position of each of the cherubim. In Ezekiel 1:12, 17 and 10:11, the fact that “they turned not as they went” also confirms some form of spiritual gyroscopic platform. Even physical gyroscopic platforms in the guidance systems of airliners or guidance missiles always keep the same orientation—they never turn. Thus, as the platform described by Ezekiel travels across the universe, it maintains the same orientation.

No suggested reading.

Ezekiel 13:17-23

“Likewise, you son of man, set your face against the daughters of your people, which prophesy out of their own heart; and prophesy you against them, and say, Thus says the Lord God; Woe to the women that sew pillows to all armholes, and make kerchiefs upon the head of every stature to hunt souls! Will you hunt the souls of My people, and will you save the souls alive that come unto you? And will you pollute Me among My people for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread, to slay the souls that should not die, and to save the souls alive that should not live, by your lying to My people that hear your lies? Wherefore thus says the Lord God; Behold, I am against your pillows, wherewith you there hunt the souls to make them fly…Your kerchiefs also will I tear, and deliver My people out of your hand, and they shall be no more in your hand to be hunted; and you shall know that I am the Lord. Because with lies you have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad; and strengthened the hand of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life: therefore you shall see no more vanity, nor divine divinations: for I will deliver My people out of your hand: and you shall know that I am the Lord.”

When reading through these verses, the question arises: Who is God talking about? Who are the “daughters” who “prophesy” and make “pillows” and “kerchiefs” in order to “hunt souls”?

The context of this chapter is the time just prior to the Day of the Lord (vs. 5). It addresses the “Christian” leaders of the modern-day descendants of Israel—mainly America and Britain.

Verses 1-16 mention false prophets, men who deceive the people. But in this day and age, more women are also becoming actively involved in preaching and missionary work. This prophecy addresses the ever-increasing number of false “prophetesses” active today.

Verse 17 shows that these false women ministers prophesy (proper translation: “preach”) out of their own hearts. They are not sent by God, nor are they preaching His message—the gospel, or good news, of the coming kingdom of God. These false leaders are also not warning (Isa. 58:1) the modern descendants of ancient Israel of the destruction to fall upon them if they do not heed, and repent of their sins. (See Ezekiel 3:19; 4:2-3; 5:2-4, 8-10, 12-17; 6:11-14; 12:10-16.)

A host of passages make plain that all false ministers are an abomination to God. But, despite the howling protests of “modernists,” He especially forbids women to be in positions of religious leadership (I Cor. 14:33-35; I Tim. 2:11-12).

By examining what these false ministers preach, one can better understand what false prophetesses preach—because their message is the same. They do not show the people their sins. Ezekiel further states that they have “…daubed the wall with untempered mortar” (13:10-15). (Untempered mortar does not contain the correct proportions of raw materials. This faulty construction results in walls that will not stand.) They have preached “smooth things” (Isa. 30:10) that will not get them fired or disciplined by boards of deacons who do not want to be told that they must obey God instead of being told about “love.” In other words, they have told the people what they want to hear instead of what they need to hear.

Also, these misguided “soothsayers” attempt to solve all of the world’s problems—literally fix the world—through various forms of “do-gooding,” which are the equivalent of taking an aspirin to try to cure cancer. Because of their neglect in pointing out to the people their sins, God’s wrath will be poured out upon them. They have spread (and are still spreading) a message of “Peace, peace, when there is no peace” (Jer. 8:11).

Believing that God is somehow in a kind of cosmic wrestling match with Satan, these false ministers are in the business of “hunting for souls” (13:18). They travel to the farthest reaches of the globe on their “soul-saving missions”—the very term they use. But they will be powerless to save the world from the punishment that God has promised in His Word (which they generally deny will really come).

The meanings of the terms “pillows” and “kerchiefs” are unclear. Some commentaries suggest that a better translation of “pillows” (Hebrew: keceth [#3704]) is “fillets” or “headbands.” They believe that “kerchiefs” (Hebrew: micpacthath [#4556]) is a reference to “long veils.” A long veil secured by a headband is an accurate description of part of the attire of members of certain female religious orders.

Other sources interpret “pillows” and “kerchiefs” to symbolize the soothing, feminine nature of the religion espoused and promoted by these false prophetesses. Many commentators believe that the use of these terms in the original Hebrew is in a merely figurative sense. The “pillows” are a reference to these women attempting to cover God’s hands, and thus conceal His power to rebuke sin. The “kerchiefs” picture the veil of spiritual blindness (II Cor. 4:4) that they cast over their devotees. The term “magic bands,” as it is translated in some English versions of the Bible, is refuted by certain Hebrew scholars.

These women actually pollute the Word of God among the people “for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread” (vs. 19). (Note: the Hebrew word kiy can be rendered as “for” or “with”). This means that they either use food to attract followers or actively request donations to support their mission. (More and more churches today are actually in fact bribing people with gifts to attend their services.)

Since these women do not teach their followers that the cause of world suffering is rooted in their disobedience to God’s laws, they will be punished (vs. 20-23).

Suggested reading:

• Which Is the True Gospel?

Micah 4:5

“For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the Lord our God forever and ever.”

What is the meaning of “the name of his God” and “the name of the Lord our God”?

As the context shows, this verse will be fulfilled after Christ has returned to earth and ended all wars. All nations, both large and small, will be subject to Christ’s rulership and rebuking. They will convert their instruments of war into tools for agricultural (vs. 3). War will no longer be fought anywhere on Earth. And happiness, peace and prosperity will be known throughout all nations (vs. 4).

Through Christ’s headquarters at Jerusalem, people will receive true and proper education. They will worship the true God in their own language—“the name of his God.” The Israelis will worship in their own language—“we will walk in…our God.” While they may also be able to use their native languages, all will be worshipping the same God.

Also, the phrase “walk every one in the name of his god” is almost certainly a reference to the many God Beings at that time—true Christians who have been born into the God Family at the First Resurrection upon Christ’s Return—who will then rule the earth under Him.

Also, all people and nations will be taught a new language. This pure language will allow everyone to communicate with one another (Zeph. 3:9). Their native language will possibly exist side-by-side with one universal language—as is the case with English throughout the world today.

Suggested reading:

• How Religion Deceives You About Your Incredible Future

Zechariah 8:19

“Thus says the Lord of hosts; the fast of the fourth month, and the fast of the fifth, and the fast of the seventh, and the fast of the tenth, shall be to the house of Judah joy and gladness, and cheerful feasts; therefore love the truth and peace.”

This scripture mentions fasts that were held on the fourth, fifth, seventh and tenth months of the year. These fasts were proclaimed by men of Judah to commemorate four terrible events that fell upon the Jews during the days of the final defeat by the Babylonians.

The fasts depict the following events (listed chronologically):

Tenth month: Jeremiah 52:4-5 records the account of King Nebuchadnezzar setting up the final siege against Jerusalem in the tenth month during the ninth year of the reign of Zedekiah.

Fourth month: Jeremiah 52:6-7 records the Babylonians breaking into Jerusalem due to the city being so weakened by famine after sixteen months of the siege. This occurred during the fourth month of the eleventh year of the reign of Zedekiah.

Fifth month: In Jeremiah 52:12-14, Nebuzaradan, the captain of the guard of King Nebuchadnezzar came to Jerusalem with his army and carried away valuables that were in the Temple, burned the Temple and the city, and took away many captives. This event occurred in the following month of the same year that the Babylonians broke into Jerusalem as noted above.

Seventh month: This fast commemorates the tragedy of Gedaliah and those with him at Mizpah being slain by Ishmael and his band of murderers. This account is recorded in Jeremiah 41:1-3. Gedaliah had been appointed governor by the Babylonians in the wake of the captivity to oversee those left behind to manage the land.

When Israel is once again obeying God’s laws and following His way of life, God will have changed these humanly-appointed fasts. Zechariah 8:19 states that these days of sorrow “shall be to the house of Judah joy and gladness, and cheerful feasts; therefore love the truth and peace.” Verses 20-23 in the same context show that Judah will follow God and be blessed abundantly, thus no longer having a need to commemorate these horrific events. However, the commanded annual fast of the Day of Atonement will be kept, along with all of God’s Holy Days (Zech. 14:16-19).

Suggested reading:

• God’s Holy Days or Pagan Holidays?

• What You Need to Know About Fasting

Matthew 1:18

“Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: when as his mother Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.”

This is a key verse used in the attempt to prove that the Holy Spirit is a person. The idea is presented as follows: If the Holy Spirit performed the act of begetting Christ, it must be a person, not merely the power that emanates from God. This false reasoning neglects one important point.

Christ prayed to another Being, which He called Father (Matt. 6:6-15 and many other places). This proves that the Holy Spirit is merely the agent or power of God. The only other explanation would be that Christ was terribly confused about who His Father was. This would also mean that He was confused about the entire Plan of God—because it is the Father-son relationship that all of us share with Christ to the Father that depicts how God is expanding His family.

Suggested reading:

Matthew 3:11

“I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that comes after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Spirit, and with fire.”

Some have thought that the baptism of fire and water baptism are both to be sought. Typically, Pentecostals speak of receiving the baptism of fire at the point of supposedly truly receiving the fullness of God’s Holy Spirit.

Notice verse 7, and see that John is talking to the Pharisees. These accusative, hypocritical, carnal-minded men were not qualified for water baptism in order to “flee from the wrath to come.” Verses 9-10 show that John warns them that they had not qualified and is saying in verse 11, in effect, “Look out, because One is coming who not only baptizes with water but with fire also.”

The meaning is that the lake of fire is a form of liquid fire, and being cast into it (the Bible punishment described for the wicked) constitutes a “baptism” (Rev. 20:14-15). Of course, none would want this baptism!

Suggested reading:

• What Do You Mean “Water Baptism”?

• Bible Introduction Course Lesson 20 – ABOUT WATER BAPTISM

• Understanding Tongues

Matthew 3:17

“And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.”

If “no man has seen God” (I John 4:12) or “heard His voice at any time” (John 5:37), then whose voice is this?

The answer: Since Christ, the former Logos (the Spokesman or Word—John 1:1, 14) who spoke for God (Gen. 1:26), was His Son and was occupied with being a human being on Earth for 33 1/2 years, then an angel must have been “filling in” for Christ during this period.

No suggested reading.

Matthew 4:17

“From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

If God’s kingdom begins at Christ’s Return and the First Resurrection, then what does “at hand” mean? (See Luke 17:21 explanation to understand further.)

Christ meant that the knowledge, certainty and understanding of the kingdom was right where He was preaching at that moment—or it was immediately “at hand.” Also, Christ, as a member of the God Family, was a direct representative of the kingdom of God. This government was literally His government.

An ambassador, whose counsel might be sought in a matter, as an official representative of the U.S. to France (for instance), would not be surprised to have a French diplomat ask him for the “knowledge, counsel, opinions, etc.” of his country. Only the ambassador—not the country of France—need be present to offer this.

Luke 17:21 is used by Catholics alongside Matthew 4:17 to demonstrate that the kingdom of God is on Earth now, “in the hearts of men.” This false conclusion naturally follows the misunderstanding of “at hand.” But John 3:3-6 explains that one must be composed of Spirit to “see” the kingdom—because flesh and blood cannot (I Cor. 15:50). This is covered in much greater detail in the booklet below, and in a variety of our other books and booklets.

Suggested reading:

Matthew 5:11-12

“Blessed are you, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.”

This passage is found just seven verses after Christ had said, “the meek shall inherit the earth.” Did Jesus somehow forget what He had just said? Or did He teach two separate rewards—one for the meek (earth) and another (heaven) for those who are persecuted for following Him? What does this scripture mean?

Read I Peter 1:3-4:“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fades not away, reserved in heaven for you.”

Notice the word reserved. It is the reward of Christians that is reserved in heaven, to be “revealed” (i.e., salvation) “in the last time” (vs. 5). Quite literally, every true Christian holds a reservation for a glorious future event. The apostle Peter says nothing about going to heaven to either obtain this reward or to stay there as the reward—only that a Christian’s reward is reserved there until the “last time”—when Christ returns. In this way, a Christian’s reward remains “incorruptible,” “undefiled” and “unable to fade.”

Some also claim that I Peter 1:4 (expanded later) is, in itself, a “heaven proof text.” Recognize two points. The verse does not say that Christians are going to heaven to receive their reward. Here is why.

Revelation 22:12 states, “And, behold, I [Christ] come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.” (Also see I Cor. 15:50 and Matt. 25:34 to see when Christians inherit their reward.) Christ is coming to earth, bringing rewards with Him—not the other way around.

Suggested reading:

Matthew 7:6

“Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast you your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.”

The analogies of “dogs” and “swine” were used by Christ to demonstrate how people whose minds have not been opened by God to understand His truth react when they encounter spiritual knowledge. Jesus taught in John 6:44, “No man can come to Me, except the Father which has sent Me draw him…”

Christ was instructing the disciples not to go about trying to convert the masses. The Father would do the calling. Unless God is opening someone’s mind to spiritual understanding, they will treat His truth in the same manner that pigs would treat pearls or as dogs would treat something holy—as dirt. A pig would neither understand nor appreciate the marvelous beauty and worth of the pearls, a type of the many wonderful truths of God. Neither would a person not being called by God understand the great value of the truths of His Word. He would, figuratively, “trample it underfoot,” and “rend” (attack) the one giving it.

One should never try to force God’s truths on others. Instead, God’s people should certainly “…be ready always to give an answer to every man that asks you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear” (I Pet. 3:15). The Christian should always be prepared to answer questions that others may have, if they are asking sincerely—to learn—and not for the purpose of debate or argument. Often, when people honestly desire to understand what the Bible teaches, it can be an indication that God is opening that person’s mind.

In Matthew 13, Christ once again compares the truths of God to pearls. This account states, “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking goodly pearls: who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it” (vs. 45-46). Like the merchant, who sold all that he had to purchase a pearl of great price, God expects His people to treat His truths as priceless gems.

Suggested reading:

• Should You Preach to Others?

• Are You Being Called?

Matthew 7:21

“Not everyone that says unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that does the will of My Father which is in heaven.”

Does the Bible’s periodic reference to the kingdom of heaven mean that Christians are going there?

The Bible teaches that Christ and the apostles taught the gospel of the kingdom of God, referenced earlier. The word gospel is found 101 times in the Bible. Sometimes it is found alone, and sometimes as “gospel of the kingdom.” Other times it appears as “gospel of the kingdom of God” or the equivalent phrase “gospel of the kingdom of heaven.”

Recognize that this version of the phrase says, “OF heaven,” not “IN heaven.” It is heaven’s kingdom. There is a big difference. Just as kingdom OF God means God’s kingdom, not the kingdom IN God, the same is true of the kingdom OF heaven, or heaven’s kingdom. The preposition “of” always connotes possession.

The phrase kingdom of God is synonymous in every case with kingdom of heaven.

Suggested reading:

Matthew 8:12

“But the children of the kingdom shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

What does this mean? Who are “the children of the kingdom…cast out”?

Revelation 22:15 defines the types of people who are disqualified from entering the kingdom—left “without” (outside). Matthew 8:12 refers to the Jews, who had access to the knowledge of, and entrance into, the kingdom. They were one-twelfth of the “chosen people”—one-twelfth of the twelve tribes of Israel. Christ directly warns that many of them could miss out on what they once had free access to, because they were not properly responding to the knowledge that they had been given.

No suggested reading.

Matthew 10:28

“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear Him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.”

This verse proves that men can kill the human body, but not the soul, which the passage reveals God can destroy. The “soul” is the life in a person, and this can only be a reference to eternal life, because any man can take the physical life of another human being. Ezekiel 18:4 and 20 plainly state that souls can die. Romans 6:23 agrees with that. However, at baptism, our “life” is hid with Christ (Col. 3:3) and belongs only to Him.

Luke 12:5 is a parallel account. There, people are told to fear the God who can bring eternal death in “gehenna fire”—not just someone who can end their physical life. This verse is another proof of the pagan doctrine of the immortal soul.

Suggested reading:

Matthew 11:12

“And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent take it by force.”

How could the kingdom of God, which is spiritual, suffer violence, presumably at the hands of physical people? The representatives of the kingdom often suffered violence from those who hated their message. John the Baptist was beheaded, and Christ would later be crucified. Most of the prophets were tortured or killed, or both. History records that virtually all the apostles, except John, died in ways that involved torture and violence.

Notice the last phrase. There are two correct meanings: (1) Christ, as a representative of the kingdom, was taken by force, and (2) those who seek to enter the kingdom must struggle—battle—to do so. (The reader should take the time to examine the following passages: Ephesians 6:12; Luke 16:16 latter; Philippians 2:12-13; 3:14; II Corinthians 10:3-5; Ecclesiastes 9:10; Matthew 24:13; James 4:7-8; I Peter 5:9; I Corinthians 9:24-27; I Timothy 6:12—among others.) Notice the powerful action verbs—wrestle, fight, war, endure, press, pull down, run, resist—found in these verses.

No suggested reading.

Matthew 12:31-32

“Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaks a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaks against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”

What is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit? What is the unpardonable sin? Is it merely swearing or taking God’s name in vain? Is any form of swearing blasphemy against the Holy Spirit and, therefore, unforgivable? The subject of the unpardonable sin is enormous, and the booklet referenced at the end must be read in conjunction with this very brief explanation of this verse offered here.

This verse explains that “all manner of sin and blasphemy” shall be forgiven, but that “blasphemy and speaking against the Holy Spirit” are unpardonable—unforgivable. Therefore, identifying exactly what this offense is becomes supremely important. It is interesting that the Greek word for blasphemy (whether against the Holy Spirit or the Son of man) is the same. The key then must be who or what is spoken or blasphemed against, not the blasphemy itself.

Hebrews 6:4-6 explains that there are those who are unable to repent—who once had God’s Spirit, but let it completely slip away. Verse 4 says, “it is impossible” for these to repent because, in the process of falling away, a person loses all desire to repent and change.

Let’s examine Hebrews 10:26: “if we [Christians] sin willfully [this is in the present progressive tense] after that we have received the knowledge of the truth…” People can quench the Holy Spirit by overriding the way it guides them! Hebrews 3:13 reveals that the deceitfulness of sin can harden people—can get them to commit the unpardonable sin by allowing deceit to choke God’s Spirit. Eventually, this ongoing action becomes “willful” or premeditated. Verse 29 in chapter 10 explains that such people are practicing sin as a way of life and have therefore “trodden (Christ) under foot.” The key phrase describing the seriousness of this is that they “have done despite unto the Spirit of grace.”

Anyone can foolishly curse or use God’s name in vain, and sometimes be immediately sorry about it and repent. But the unpardonable sin is when a person deliberately hardens himself against God’s Spirit and the power of that Spirit. Usually, such people become deceived (Heb. 3:13) early in the process, but later (willfully) choose to continue in their actions until they destroy their conscience and thus any desire to repent.

To speak against God’s Spirit is to understand what one is doing and to knowingly attribute the power of God to the devil (possibly the case with the Pharisees). Generally, it is to knowingly squelch, quench or ignore the warning pricks coming from God’s Spirit over time within a converted mind.

Suggested reading:

• Just What Is “The Unpardonable Sin”?

Matthew 14:1-4

“At that time Herod the tetrarch heard of the fame of Jesus, and said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him. For Herod had laid hold on John [this had happened previously], and bound him, and put him in prison for Herodias’ sake, his brother Philip’s wife. For John said unto him [in the past], It is not lawful for you to have her.”

This passage records the beheading of John the Baptist as the result of what he had said to King Herod. It re-introduces the subject of divorce and remarriage, again, a far bigger subject than can be addressed in this short explanation.

This said, the question has arisen: In light of the truth about divorce and remarriage, and understanding which marriages God is and is not binding in this world, how is it that, if Herod’s previous marriage was not bound, John could say to him that what he was doing was wrong? If God is not entering into the marriages of people in this world (Herod certainly was of this world)—not binding them—then how could John make this statement?

Let’s understand. Since Herod was breaking the Sabbath, John could have said to him, “You’re breaking the Sabbath.” Was he being judged for this transgression? Was sin being imputed? Did he know that it was the Sabbath? Of course not. But anytime someone breaks the Sabbath—he is breaking the Sabbath!

John could as easily have said, “Herod, you’re not tithing. You’re stealing from God.” Did Herod know he was stealing from God? No. Did he know tithing was in the Bible? No. Was he at that time being held accountable by God—for what he did not know? In other words, was he being judged? No. But, if anyone does not tithe, he is still stealing from God.

John could have told Herod, justifiably, that he should not marry someone who had been divorced. But John’s statement did not mean that Herod’s wife’s first marriage had been bound by God. The present world is cut off from God by sin (Isa. 59:1-2).

Romans 3:23 states, “all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Sin is sin. But the world is not now being judged for sinning, because the world generally does not know what sin is. While sin is not being imputed, people are still committing sin. It was in this way that John the Baptist could tell Herod it was not lawful for him to have his brother’s wife.

Suggested reading:

Matthew 16:18

“And I say also unto you, That you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.”

This verse is central Catholic theology regarding the authority of popes, who are said to derive their authority from Christ’s supposed empowerment of Peter, and thus his successors. This passage is thought to designate Peter as the first pope.

Breaking down the important Greek words within this verse makes it easier to understand:

Peter comes from petros (Greek #4074 Strong’s) meaning a piece of rock, but either bigger or smaller than a stone (Greek lithos #3037 Strong’s). Rock comes from petra (Greek #4073 Strong’s) meaning a mass of rock, usually very large.

Peter was a small rock. Jesus Christ is the large rock, or foundation stone of the Church He built. Christ is distinguishing between the two. Proof that the mass of rock is Christ can be found in I Corinthians 10:4, Ephesians 2:20, Matthew 7:24 and 16:13-16.

Understand that Christ is the great Rock that the Church is built upon. This verse is absolutely not saying that Peter is a rock or that the Church is built on him. I Corinthians 3:11 shows there can be only one foundation (Christ), not two. This applies to Peter’s role. Ephesians 4:11-12 explains that apostles (Peter, Paul, John, etc.) were merely in offices that Christ established to serve His Church. Collectively, with the prophets, they form part of the Church’s foundation—with Christ (Eph. 2:20).

Think of Christ as complimenting Peter. Then there is this: If He had established him as the first (infallible) pope, how could Peter almost immediately have fallen into what Christ labeled a satanic attitude in the very next verses, 21 to 23? Would such an attitude be possible for one who was infallible? Also, there is this question: How could Peter have later denied Christ three times?

Here are ten proofs that Peter was never at Rome—and therefore could not have been the first pope:

(1) Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles (Rom. 15:16; Gal. 2:7) not Peter. Rome was a Gentile city.

(2) The Emperor Claudius had banished all Jews from Rome in A.D. 50 (also see #9 below).

(3) Peter went to Babylon—in Mesopotamia (I Pet. 5:13).

(4) Paul would never have written what he did in Romans 1 (the book was written in A.D. 55), verses 11 and 15—clear insults to Peter if he had been faithfully serving there for thirteen previous years (from A.D. 42), particularly if it had been as pope. Actually, a “Peter,” Simon Magus (see the account in Acts 8), was there. It was this Simon (not Simon Peter) who was the Pater (or Peter), which means “a father.” (Paternity and patriarch come from this word.) Simon Magus was already by this time the leading figure in the early apostate church at Rome.

(5) Romans 15:20—Paul declared that he would not preach (or write) upon any other man’s foundation. Yet, Paul wrote the letter to the Romans. Thus, Peter could not have laid the foundation of the Roman congregation.

(6) Romans 16 contains thirty different salutations, yet Peter, supposedly the resident “pope” there, was not greeted by Paul. Think of what a grievous slight this would have been had he been present. Paul’s epistle did not even acknowledge Peter.

(7) Galatians 1:18-19 and 2:7 demonstrate that Peter was based at Jerusalem, from where he periodically traveled to places like Bithynia, Northern Galatia and Babylon, and other places where Israelites (also see #9) had migrated, from A.D. 38 to A.D. 49—the dates of these events described in Galatians.

(8) Luke 22:24—If Peter was already designated to be the future pope, why did the disciples argue among themselves about which of them was the greatest?

(9) Galatians 2:7 reveals that Peter took the gospel to “the circumcision”—the Jews, and the other tribes of Israel, referenced in #7. (See Matthew 10:5-6.)

(10) II Timothy 4:10-11 mentions that Paul wrote from Rome and records that “only Luke was with him.” This eliminates Peter.

Suggested reading:

Matthew 17:1-3

“And after six days Jesus took Peter, James, and John his brother, and brought them up into an high mountain apart, and was transfigured before them: and His face did shine as the sun, and His raiment was white as the light. And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elijah talking with Him.”

Many have badly misunderstood this “transfiguration.” In this account, Peter, James and John saw Christ in glory—“transfigured”—and appearing with Moses and Elijah. Had these men gone to heaven?

For those who will simply believe the Bible, the obvious explanation lies in verse 9: “Tell the vision to no man.” This entire account is a vision! It involved what three men saw (vs. 7-8) IN VISION. The subject of the vision was not to address where these men were. Remember, Christ stated that no man has ascended to heaven (John 3:13). Certainly this would apply to Moses and Elijah.

No suggested reading.

Matthew 19:3-9

“The Pharisees also came unto Him, tempting Him, and saying unto Him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And He answered and said unto them, Have you not read, that He which made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they two shall be one flesh wherefore they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder. They said unto Him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He said unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, commits adultery: and whoso marries her which is put away does commit adultery.”

The topic, once again, is divorce and remarriage. The explanation of Deuteronomy 24:1-4 should be reviewed with this one.

In this account, the Pharisees were trying to see whether Christ (read vs. 8-9) would “side” with either: (1) God, from the time of Adam, or (2) Moses, from the time of Moses—when the issue in the law (end of verse 3) referred to was amended—to that present time. Had Christ sided with either of these to the exclusion of the other, the Pharisees would have accused Him of blasphemy. Christ outwitted His questioners by stating that both periods were correct! The fact that God allowed no divorce was correct. The fact that Moses did permit—not command—divorce for reasons of “hardness of heart” was also correct.

Why? Let’s examine each verse:

vs. 5—Describes marriage by God.

vs. 6—The governments of men have no authority to permit divorce.

vs. 7—Moses did allow it.

vs. 8—He allowed it because people can be hardened (the Greek word means callused or hardhearted). There are those who are unable to overlook certain sins—they simply cannot forgive them! Adultery can be one of them. Interestingly, the English word translated hardness (vs. 8) comes from the Greek word sklerokardia, from which come sclerosis, arteriosclerosis and atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries). The word cardiac (meaning, of the heart) comes from kardia.

Remember also that, in verse 3, the Pharisees had wanted to know if “any cause” for divorce was a good enough reason.

vs. 9—The answer to their question is simply ‘no.’ Christ went on to explain that only for “fornication” (Greek porneia includes fornication, looseness and promiscuity) could divorce be lawfully pursued. Divorce because of fornication would often be done in the form of annulment.

If one commits sexual immorality after marriage, for a long enough period, the person has evidenced himself or herself to have now become an unbeliever—or to never have been one. The marriage could then end, and the believing party would be free to remarry on the basis of I Corinthians 7:12-15. Paul explained that the unbelieving party would have departed anyway, and the marriage bond would have been severed by God’s permission.

The Church of God understands, and has always taught, that the simple act of one-time adultery—however grievous the impact on the marriage—would not be enough to end the marriage bond and allow a person to divorce and be eligible to remarry, though it might cause a couple to choose separation. One act of adultery does not automatically mean a person has become an unbeliever. Many have fully repented of this sin.

Suggested reading:

• The Ten Commandments – “Nailed to the Cross” or Required for Salvation?

Matthew 19:10-12

“His disciples said unto Him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry. But He said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given. For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”

This discussion is a continuation of the previous verses. The context leading to verse 12 is that of any man (end of vs. 10) who has put away his wife. Christ’s disciples suggest that it would then be “not good” to marry. Note that nothing about “forbidden” is said.

Verse 11 states that some are able to or must remain unmarried. Verse 12 describes three such types of eunuchs: (1) “Eunuchs from their mother’s womb” are unmarried men who remain single men and virgins for life, (2) “eunuchs of men” are castrated men, found in some societies, who have had this procedure forcibly done to them so that they can be trusted with wives and harem girls, and (3) “eunuchs for the kingdom” are men who have chosen to remain single to better serve God without encumbrance under difficult circumstances (such as Paul)—or this can refer to those who are bound in marriage to someone they do not or cannot live with. This would be because of circumstances described in I Corinthians 7:10-11.

No suggested reading.

Matthew 19:16-19

“And, behold, one came and said unto Him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life? And He said unto him, Why call you Me good? There is none good but One, that is, God: but if you will enter into life, keep the commandments. He said unto Him, Which? Jesus said, You shall do no murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, Honor your father and your mother: and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

Why did Christ mention only five of the Ten Commandments be kept in order to receive eternal life? Does this mean the others were done away, with the usual focus being that Christ did not restate the Sabbath command?

The answer is an emphatic “No”! King David said, “all His commandments are sure. They stand fast forever and ever…” (Psa. 111:7-8). Christ, as God of the Old Testament (I Cor. 10:4), also stated, “I am the Lord, I change not” (Mal. 3:6). Hebrews 13:8 explains that Jesus Christ is the same—“yesterday, today and forever.”

Because Christ was speaking to a Jew in the account, He had to clarify of which commandments He was speaking. By citing some of the Ten Commandments, Christ clarified that He was speaking about God’s commands, not the commands of the Sanhedrin (the Jewish “Supreme Court”) or those of any man.

To clarify this further, look at which commandments He did state: “You shall do no murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness, Honor your father and your mother: and, You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

Christ wanted to reassert to the listener the importance of loving one’s neighbor (Matt. 19:22). The rich man’s refusal to use his wealth to help others proved that he needed a reminder and lesson in these points.

One should also note the commandments that Christ did not directly mention: “You shall have no other gods before Me…You shall not make unto you any graven image…You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain…Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy…You shall not covet…” (Ex. 20:3-8, 17).

Because Christ did not directly refer to these commandments, is it alright to break them? For instance, is it acceptable to worship other gods?—to swear?—to covet? The answer: Of course not! Yet, this obvious point is overlooked in the rush to do away with God’s Sabbath command.

Notice James 2:10: “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” Christ inspired James to write that every point of the law is crucial. Christ did not need to state all Ten Commandments, because if one breaks any of them, he is guilty of breaking them all.

Suggested reading:

• See the articles mentioned after Exodus 34:28 explanation.

Matthew 22:31-32

“But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have you not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.”

Does this passage mean that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are alive, and in heaven?

This text is often twisted in an attempt to prove that these three men are not really dead, since it states that God is the God “of the living.” Careful reading refutes this argument.

Jesus is speaking “touching [concerning] the resurrection.” He is not speaking of these men living in heaven now, but rather about who must be resurrected in the future, since God is the God “of the living.” This is the subject that He is explaining—the resurrection. Abraham, Isaac and Jacob are dead (Heb. 9:27). Therefore, the God of the living must resurrect them—bring them back to life—at some point in His Plan. Recognize that this was the specific point Christ was addressing. He was not attempting, in one verse, to explain all of the other understanding about the what, when, where and how of that Master Plan!

Suggested reading:

• Bible Introduction Course Lesson 8 – IS HEAVEN the Reward of the Saved?

Matthew 25:41, 46

“Then shall He say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from Me, you cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels…And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.”

Do these verses prove that there is an ever-burning hell?

They do not! The Greek word, aionios, translated “everlasting,” means “agelasting.” The event referred to is the 1,000-year Millennium, when Satan and his demons will have been thrown into the bottomless pit and bound (Rev. 20:2-3). There are three separate phases of Satan’s “hell”:

(1) II Peter 2:4 (latter part): The 6,000 years that he has been cast down to earth, as explained by the Greek word tartaroo, which means prison, incarcerate or place of restraint. II Peter incorrectly translates tartaroo as “hell.”

(2) Revelation 20:1-3: 1,000 years in the bottomless pit.

(3) Jude 13 (latter part): Contains a reference to Satan being cast into “outer darkness” after the Millennium.

Matthew 25:46 also refers to an everlasting “punishment,” not “punishing.” Whenever death occurs, it is certainly an everlasting event—as far as the person is concerned. This helps to explain verse 41. Verses 41 and 46 must be understood together.

Suggested reading:

• Bible Introduction Course Lesson 10 – THE TRUTH ABOUT HELL

Matthew 26:17

“Now the first day of the feast of unleavened bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto Him, Where will You that we prepare for You to eat the Passover?”

What specific day does this speak of? Many would conclude by reading the verse that it is talking about the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, a high Holy Day. Let’s examine this idea.

The King James Version italicizes the words “day” and “feast of.” Any time you see italicized words in the KJV, this tells you that these words were not found in the original texts (in this case, the original Greek). Italicized words were added by translators either to clarify the English, or because they thought it necessary to aid the overall meaning. A better translation of this verse is “Now [at] the first of unleavened bread, the disciples came to Jesus, saying unto Him, Where will You that we prepare for You to eat the Passover?”

The Greek word translated “first” is protos. It means the “foremost in time,” “foremost in order,” “beginning” or “to go before.” This precisely describes how the Passover always precedes or goes before the Days of Unleavened Bread. Leviticus 23:5-6 makes this pattern unmistakably clear.

God considers the previous day over, and a new one beginning, at sunset (Lev. 23:32). The conversation between Christ and the disciples took place at sunset on the 13th of Nisan (Abib), the beginning of the 14th. Christ would introduce the New Testament Passover later that evening (Matt. 26:20).

Therefore, this verse is not referring to the first Holy Day, which begins the Feast of Unleavened Bread. It actually refers to the day before that, the 14th of Abib, also known as Passover day. This day is the final day in which to prepare for the upcoming Feast of Unleavened Bread, by putting all leavened bread out of the home (Ex. 12:18-19).

As a result, many in that day came to consider the Passover day to also be part of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, explains that the eight-day spring festival period was commonly referred to as “the days of Unleavened Bread.” He also confirms the understanding that Passover day was the 14th—not the 15th, which is the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, beginning at sunset (Antiquities of the Jews). Luke 22:1 also reveals that the word Passover was often interchanged with the Days of Unleavened Bread, referring to the entire eight days.

So, Matthew 26:17 refers to the beginning of the 14th of Abib—Passover—not the 15th, the feast day. Because translators did not understand what we have covered here, they mistakenly inserted “feast of.”

Suggested reading:

• Christ’s Crucifixion Was Not on Friday

Matthew 26:52

“Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again your sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.”

Does this state that people who “live by the sword will die by the sword?”

This verse is usually not read correctly by the casual reader. It actually reads, “all they that take the sword shall perish WITH the sword,” not by the sword, and there is a big difference. Here is the point: Christ is explaining that a sword cannot, of and by itself, protect anyone! One who attempts to use a sword for personal protection will ultimately die—despite the fact that there is a sword in his hand. His point is that we should not trust in swords, but rather in God. People should never trust in physical weapons for protection. This does not say that one carrying a sword, gun, knife, chain, or other weapon for protection, will die a violent death by the same kind of weapon.

Suggested reading:

• War, Killing and the Military

Matthew 27:9

“Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of Him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value.”

Because of a similar prophecy found in the book of Zechariah (11:12-13), some believe that the word “Jeremiah” in Matthew 27:9 should have been translated “Zechariah.” However, the original Greek word is “Jeremiah.”

This verse must be read carefully to understand its meaning. As it states, the prophet Jeremiah was the speaker. However, this verse is not recorded in the book of Jeremiah, which, of course, he did write.

The Bible never contradicts itself (John 10:35). The obvious implication is that Jeremiah uttered the prophecy, but only at a later time was Zechariah inspired to record it.

No suggested reading.

Matthew 27:52-53

“And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after His resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many.”

Who were these “saints which slept and arose”? Does the resurrection referenced in verse 53 reflect proof that people die, are then resurrected and immediately go to heaven—as Protestants assert?

Though these are called saints in this account, Matthew wrote his gospel from a vantage point of many years later. These people probably, in most or all cases, became saints, in the fullest sense, after Pentecost in Acts 2. They likely were among the many followers of Christ who died of natural causes (like Lazarus in John 11) during His ministry without receiving an opportunity to be in the first resurrection.

Some claim that these saints were Moses, Abraham, Noah, etc. But if these people had tried to claim this at the time, no one would have believed them. So, this is merely unscriptural idle speculation. Also, whoever they were, they would have needed to be familiar with the Jerusalem area (see vs. 53).

I Timothy 6:16 shows that Jesus is the only one with immortality, and so this group must have been merely resurrected back to human physical form. Recall that they did “appear” unto many. Consider. Who would have believed strangers claiming that they were Moses or Abraham?

Notice also that verse 52 says that “the graves were opened”—the earthquake must have caused this! However, verse 53 states they came out of their graves “after His resurrection…”—which would have been three days later. Also, this timing disproves any idea that they went “straight to heaven with Christ” at His death, the assertion that many make in order to put the patriarchs of the Old Testament into the New Testament “heaven-is-the-reward-of-the-saved” false teaching.

No suggested reading.

Matthew 28:1-6

“In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher. And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. His countenance was like lightning, and His raiment white as snow: and for fear of Him the keepers did shake, and became as dead men. And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not you: for I know that you seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for He is risen, as He said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.”

Some feel these verses prove an “Easter Sunday” resurrection. Understand that the entire account speaks in the past tense. Verse 2 mentions that a great earthquake “had been” (the correct Greek tense). In effect, verse 6 says, “He has already gone; for He is risen [already].” This is because Christ had already been crucified on the previous Wednesday, and would have been raised on Saturday. Hence, He would have already been gone by Sunday morning!

Suggested reading:

• The True Origin of Easter

• Christ’s Crucifixion Was Not on Friday

Matthew 28:19

“Go you therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.”

Scholars and theologians have universally misunderstood the meaning of this instruction. We must ask: What does this scripture actually mean? Does it validate the trinity—that God is three persons in one being?

First, let’s understand some basics of this scripture. It is clear that all three have a name—but a name does not make something a person. People name all kinds of things—mountains, buildings, pets, cars, boats, planes, estates, and many more. The point is that just because there is a name for all three, this does not mean that all three are persons or personalities.

What does it mean to be baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit? This is not difficult. The Father and Son have a name and the Holy Spirit conveys or bears that name to His children.

Let’s understand the baptism process more clearly.

The disciples were to baptize in the name of the Father, because it is the Father “of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named” (Eph. 3:15). In other words, the Father is the Head of the house—the family—and families traditionally carry the name of the father. Also, it is God’s (the Father’s) goodness that leads one to the recognition and repentance of his sins (Rom. 2:4).

The apostles were instructed to baptize in the name of the Son, because His death, in our stead, makes salvation possible (Rom. 5:8; II Pet. 3:9).

But they were also to baptize in the name of the Holy Spirit, because the Father uses that Spirit—His Spirit—as the power through which the begettal is performed (Rom. 8:16). The Holy Spirit is the begetting agent.

This is what the passage means! God gives Christians His Holy Spirit, which is His seed. When they receive that seed, it gives them God’s name—they become heirs with Jesus Christ. From the point of conversion, Christians carry the name of God. When understood, this is why the name of the true Church has always been the “Church of God.” The word “Church” (Greek: ekklesia) literally means “the called out ones”—human beings are called out of the world, begotten as God’s children, put into His Church and given His name.

Note what John said about the “seed” within converted people: “Whosoever is born of God does not commit sin; for His seed remains in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God” (I John 3:9). It is interesting that the Greek word for “seed” is sperma, from which comes the English word “sperm.” This makes plain that the Holy Spirit is the “sperm” or “seed” of God.

Notice another scripture, adding light to what the seed of God is: “Seeing you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that you love one another with a pure heart fervently: being born again [Greek: anagennao, begotten again], not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which lives and abides for ever” (I Pet. 1:22-23).

While Christians will ultimately be born again into the kingdom of God at the resurrection, they are, at conversion, begotten of God through the Holy Spirit. This is similar to the human reproductive system. As soon as the sperm of a father attaches to the egg of the mother, a child is conceived. The child is not yet born, although he is begotten of the physical seed—the father’s sperm. We, once we have received the Holy Spirit—the seed of God—are begotten in this life, but not yet born! Like any human father who would say that his wife is carrying his child, God speaks of the Church—described as the “Mother” of Christians (Gal. 4:26; Heb. 12:22; Rev. 12)—as carrying His children.

So then, Matthew 28:19 clearly does not establish the trinity, but rather simply reveals that when we are baptized, we are given God’s name through His Spirit.

Suggested reading:

Mark 8:33

“But when He had turned about and looked on His disciples, He rebuked Peter, saying, Get you behind Me, Satan: for you savor not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.”

Why did Christ refer to Peter as “Satan”?

Let’s understand. Peter was the most outspoken of the disciples. This was not a trait that always served him well. (Notice Mark 14:47 and John 13:6-9.) In the Mark 8:33 account, Satan—the “god of this world” (II Cor. 4:4), and “prince of the power of the air…[working] in the children of disobedience” (Eph. 2:2)—had influenced Peter, causing him to “rebuke Him [Christ].”

Satan knows “…that he has but a short time” (Rev. 12:12). He does not want to give up his influence and hold on this world. Christ came to earth as a physical, flesh-and-blood human being in order to qualify to replace Satan.

Because of the closeness that Peter felt to Christ, he could not humanly accept the fact that Christ would have to die. Satan seized on Peter’s emotional tendencies and influenced him to rebuke Christ as he did. Christ recognized Satan’s influence. Another example of this is found in John 13:27.

Suggested reading:

• Who Is the Devil?

Mark 9:43-48

“And if your hand offend you, cut it off: it is better for you to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: where their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched. And if your foot offend you, cut it off: it is better for you to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: where their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched. And if your eye offend you, pluck it out: it is better for you to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye, than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire: where their worm dies not, and the fire is not quenched.”

These verses appear to support the “ever-burning hell” idea. The word translated hell here is the Greek word gehenna, which references the “Valley of Hinnom.” This was a small valley on the edge of Jerusalem where all the refuse of the city was regularly thrown and burned.

The fires in this valley were kept burning almost constantly. Even bodies of criminals were occasionally thrown there. Jesus likened it to a type of hell-fire. The term “never shall be quenched,” or a similar phrase, is found five separate times in this passage. It means these fires were never really put out, but they could periodically burn out.

Christ meant that anything thrown into this valley would completely burn up before the fire could burn itself out. This condition would best be described as unquenched or “unput” out. For additional references to this valley, see Nehemiah 11:30, II Kings 23:10, and Jeremiah 19:6.

What is the meaning of the phrase “their worms die not”? This could only be maggots that appear in rotting bodies as they naturally decompose. This process helps to fulfill the Ecclesiastes 3:20 reference to “dust to dust.” (During the Millennium, this fire will apparently burn continuously—Isa. 66:24). Some bodies did not burn in gehenna, but rather rotted there. There were often corpses, literally stuck on ledges without completely falling into the valley and, therefore, into the fire. In other words, two possible things could happen to bodies: (1) fall into the fire and burn up, or (2) get stuck on a ledge and be consumed by maggots.

Suggested reading:

Luke 9:60

“Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go you and preach the kingdom of God.”

What does “Let the dead bury their dead” mean?

The context is about those who want to, or temporarily go back to, the old way of life and to the world. It is customary for a parent’s funeral arrangements to be taken care of by the children, but the verse is properly explained this way: (1) Let the spiritually dead take care of the physically dead, or (2) Christ may have meant that this particular man actually wanted to take care of his father for the entire period until he died and was buried, instead of serving God. Christ said that others could perform that duty, but that this man should seek the kingdom of God wholeheartedly (vs. 62).

Therefore, this does not mean that God’s people should never bury their unconverted relatives or plan their funerals, but rather that they should not permit caring for them long term to choke their spiritual growth or cause them to compromise God’s Way.

No suggested reading.

Luke 16:1-12

“And He said also unto His disciples, There was a certain rich man, which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had wasted his goods. And He called him, and said unto him, How is it that I hear this of you? Give an account of your stewardship…If therefore you have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if you have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own?”

Often called the Parable of the Unjust Steward, what is this really talking about?

Open your Bible and we will examine this parable verse by verse:

vs. 1—Type of a Christian who is wasting his talents.

vs. 2—As he is called to judgment…

vs. 3—…he realizes time is short, so he has to work double-time to qualify for salvation.

vs. 4—He determines to make some friends.

vs. 5-7—This means that we should always strive to do whatever we can without necessarily telling people why. Also, no one should ever spiritually give up without at least attempting last-minute growth.

vs. 8—No explanation needed

vs. 9—The word translated “of” means “with” or “by means of.” The word translated “mammon of unrighteousness” means “money, riches (see Matt. 6:19, 24) possessions.” The word translated “fail” means “die,”—death is certainly an “everlasting habitation.”

There are several additional keys to understanding this parable:

(1) Read James 4:4. But, Christians can make “friends” in the world (not “of the world”) by using the world’s monetary systems, to be received when necessary into people’s dwellings (houses) because there may be an emergency.

(2) God’s people should diligently tithe and give generous offerings now, so that the unconverted can one day join us in the eternal kingdom of God later.

(3) Christians may one day be received into the chosen country of the place of safety for “favors” that the Church may have done for that country. Finally, the emphasis is on the “you” of verse 9 and not “they” (the world). God merely mentions the world as a standard of comparison for our conduct.

No suggested reading.

Luke 16:19-31

“There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day: and there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried…”

Once again, the reader should open his Bible to this extensive passage. The parable of “Lazarus and the Rich Man” is also best examined verse-by-verse:

vs. 19-21—Lazarus is a type of Abraham’s children who receive eternal life (Gal. 3:29; Rom. 4:16-17).

vs. 22-23—Many think these easy-to-misunderstand verses teach that evil people die and go straight to hell. The key point is that while Lazarus and the rich man died, it does not say when the rich man “lifted up his eyes in hell” (the Greek word Hades here means “the grave” and is not the Greek word gehenna which means “hellfire”). Nor does it say when Lazarus joined Abraham.

vs. 24—Would the rich man only ask for water to cool his tongue if he was in an everburning hell with his feet and legs roasting? Of course not. This is a picture of the third resurrection (Rev. 20:12-13). And as the wall of flames approached, out of enormous fear, the rich man’s tongue dried up. In verses 23-25, mention is made of “torment.” The Greek word translated “tormented” is odunao. It means, “to grieve, sorrow, torment, duress, distress, strain” and describes mental—not physical—anguish and torment. The rich man was literally “scared spitless” in torment (I John 4:18). The word in (vs. 24) is better rendered by means of.

vs. 25—The words “remember” and “now” indicate the passage of much time (Heb. 11:13). Recall that everything stops at death (Psa. 146:4, Ecc. 9:5). Also notice that the angels are involved (vs. 22). This must refer to the time of the First Resurrection at Christ’s Return (Matt. 25:31; I Thes. 4:16).

vs. 26—This “great gulf fixed” is a reference to what sin does (Isa. 59:1-2).

vs. 27-31—The rich man wanted to warn his five brothers by sending Lazarus (the “him” of vs. 27 and the “he” of vs. 28 ) to them. Verse 31 reveals that this was not necessary and would not work, anyway. This means that Lazarus remained dead in the grave after he died, and only later will join Abraham at the resurrection.

This passage is covered in much greater detail in the following booklet, with commentary on every verse.

Suggested reading:

Luke 17:21

“Neither shall they say, Lo here! Or, lo there! For, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.”

Stated earlier, Catholics use this passage to teach that God’s kingdom is established in “men’s hearts,” and is found wherever the Catholic Church is. (It becomes the premise upon which missionaries function—to spread (their) “kingdom” around the world.) Reread the Matthew 4:17 explanation.

The phrase “within you” is more properly translated “in your midst.” (See the Revised Standard Version text and the New KJV margin.) Christ was standing “in the midst” of a number of people—and He represented the kingdom of God! It is important to recognize that He was talking to a group of Pharisees. The Pharisees hardly represented an example of “hearts” in which God was working! Recall that John 3:3-6 teaches that one must be spirit to see the kingdom of God. One cannot merely have God’s Spirit to do this.

Suggested reading:

• Seven Proofs God’s Kingdom Is Not Here Yet

Luke 22:36

“Then said He unto them, But now, he that has a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

Is Christ advocating violence—the use of a “sword” when necessary—in this passage?

It is evident that the subject is that of literal weapons. But Christ was not encouraging His disciples to defend themselves through violence, which would have contradicted His previous instruction in Matthew 5:38-39 against harming others.

Let’s understand.

In Luke 9:56, He had stated, “For the Son of Man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them.” In Matthew 5:44, He had instructed, “…Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.”

In Luke 22:37, Jesus revealed the meaning of His statement: “For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in Me, and He was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning Me have an end [they will be fulfilled].”

Why then did Christ instruct His disciples to get swords? The answer is to assure the fulfillment of the prophecy in Isaiah 53:12 (which He had originally inspired as the God of the Old Testament, and now was quoting). Jesus was to be considered a lawbreaker (“transgressor”). He was in no way endorsing the use of weapons for the purpose of harming human beings (whether in self-defense or otherwise). In verse 51 of Luke 22, we see that when Peter drew a sword and struck the High Priest’s servant, cutting off his ear, Christ chastised him for his actions. He then healed the man by re-attaching his ear.

No suggested reading.

Luke 23:42-43

“And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto you, Today shall you be with Me in paradise.”

Along with the popular idea of a so-called “deathbed repentance,” supposedly represented by the thief’s belief, this account is often cited as proof that “the saved go to heaven.” The passage proves neither—and there are a number of points to examine.

Consider: King David was “a man after God’s own heart” (I Sam. 13:14; Acts 13:22). Abraham was God’s “friend” (II Chron. 20:7) and the “father of the faithful” (Gal. 3:7-9). Moses was the meekest man who had ever lived (Num. 12:3) and spoke with God personally (Ex. 33:11). If none of these great servants of God had ascended to heaven (John 3:13), how is it possible that a thief, although repentant at the end of his life, could have a guaranteed—and immediate—reward in heaven?

Upon death, did Christ go directly to “paradise,” which is in heaven (II Cor. 12:4)? Did He promise the thief that he would join Him there the same day? Notice the key phrase “when You come into Your kingdom.” This alone shows there is an important time element involved in Christ’s statement.

Before continuing in Luke 23, read I Peter 3:19-20: “By which also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison; which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.”

This scripture is often cited to prove that Christ was preaching to demon spirits in an ever-burning hell during the period He was supposedly in heaven, while His body was in the tomb. This reasoning shows the inconsistency of those who do not carefully study the Bible. It also ignores the time element in I Peter. Careful reading reveals that Christ preached to the “spirits in prison” just before the Flood, not when He was in the tomb. The Greek word for “prison” is tartaroo, meaning prison or place of restraint—the earth!

Could Christ have (1) preached to “demons in hell” while also (2) enjoying paradise (heaven?) during the three days and three nights that He was supposed to be in the tomb? Both would be impossible, and actually neither is true. When the full biblical truth is understood, when all relevant passages about death are put together, it is clear that Christ was completely dead, without consciousness of any kind, while in the tomb.

Now notice John 20:17. Christ told Mary Magdalene, four days after Luke 23:43 occurred, that He had still not been to heaven! Could He have so quickly forgotten what He told the thief?

Let’s reread Luke 23:43, but this time let’s read it with the comma after the word “today,” not before. Then realize that “shall you” is more commonly said as “you shall.” Therefore, the Greek is best understood as “Verily I say unto you today, you shall be with Me in paradise.” In verse 42, the thief said, “remember me when You come into Your kingdom.” He would not say “remember me,” unless he understood that much time would pass before Christ could fulfill this promise. Christ used the word “today” as if to say, “Right now, even while we are dying on a stake, I can tell you with certainty that you shall be with Me in paradise.”

Also notice verse 42. The emphasis is that Christ would be coming somewhere—not that the thief would be going somewhere.

Christ could not have literally meant the same day, since He would not be resurrected until three days and three nights after burial (Matt. 12:40). Obviously, at the point Christ said this, He had not yet died. The three days and three nights had not even started. Since God “cannot lie” (Titus 1:2), and Christ and the Father are of the same mind (John 10:30), He was not telling the thief that he would be with Him “in heaven” that same day.

The meaning of the Luke 23 account is distorted because of a simple error in grammar. The comma, which follows Christ’s lead-in statement, “Verily, I say unto you…” was inserted and misplaced by men. It changed His entire meaning. The original Greek, the language of the New Testament, did not use certain punctuation, such as commas and quotation marks. Translators using their own discretion added them later. The correct rendering is, “Verily, I say unto you today [in other words, “I tell you right now”], shall you be with Me in Paradise.”

The Bible teaches that there are three resurrections (Rev. 20:4-15). Since the thief obviously had not been baptized and given God’s Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38), he cannot be among those raised in the First Resurrection (I Thes. 4:16). Since Christ did not condemn him, we know that he will not be raised in the Third Resurrection, which is for those who would not repent. These will all be destroyed (Rev. 20:6, 14-15). The thief will receive his opportunity for salvation in the Second Resurrection, to take place after the millennium (Rev. 20:5, 11-12). At that time, the world will truly be “paradise,” since Satan will have been bound and cast away, no longer permitted to deceive mankind (Rev. 20:1-3; 12:9).

Suggested reading:

Luke 24:21

“But we trusted that it had been He which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, today is the third day since these things were done.”

The context of chapter 24 is the Sunday morning after Christ’s Wednesday crucifixion. People try to use this scripture to prove that a Friday crucifixion/Sunday resurrection fulfills the meaning of “the third day since these things were done.”

Several keys unlock this verse: (1) The Greek term used here means “at least three days,” and (2) this would have been a logical term to use, because “these things” is plural—and any number of events in the last week could have been the starting point for measuring all that had happened before, during and after Christ’s death! See verse 18 for the key to the context. Cleopas and the group with him were saying to Christ, in effect, “Where have you been? It’s been at least three days since all of these things have occurred.” (Remember, Christ was unrecognized by them.) Verses 19-20 clarify what “things” of which Cleopas was generally speaking.

Suggested reading:

• Christ’s Crucifixion Was Not on Friday

John 2:1-11

“And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee; and the mother of Jesus was there: and both Jesus was called, and His disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus said unto Him, They have no wine. Jesus said unto her, Woman, what have I to do with you? My hour is not yet come. His mother said unto the servants, whatsoever He said unto you, do it. And there were set there six waterpots of stone, after the manner of the purifying of the Jews, containing two or three firkins apiece. Jesus said unto them, fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. And He said unto them, draw out now, and bear unto the governor of the feast. And they bare it. When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was: (but the servants which drew the water knew;) the governor of the feast called the bridegroom, and said unto him, Every man at the beginning does set forth good wine; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse: but you have kept the good wine until now. This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth His glory; and His disciples believed on Him.”

Certain denominations that do not believe consumption of alcohol in any form or amount is permissible, teach that Jesus actually turned water into grape juice. Does this miracle involve wine or grape juice?

Several points prove this miracle involved wine:

(1) Wine, not grape juice, was commonly consumed at weddings at that time. Nothing is said implying that Jesus was out of step with proper custom.

(2) The Greek word for wine is oinos. It can only mean fermented grape juice.

(3) There would be no need for a “taster” (vs. 9) if this was grape juice. Typically, the “ruler of the feast” was the wine taster.

(4) Verse 10 shows concern over drinking the best wine first to properly appreciate its good taste! Only then—later—would the lesser quality wine normally be consumed. The consumption of grape juice would not raise this issue.

Suggested reading:

• Is Drinking a Sin?

John 3:5

“Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”

How is one “born of water and the Spirit”? Some believe this is how God’s kingdom enters men’s hearts.

Without examining any other scripture, this thinking can be disproved with two points just from the context: (1) Verse 6 is speaking of someone who is Spirit. Notice the phrase, “and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit,” and (2) Verse 5 states that Christians enter God’s kingdom. It does not say that the kingdom enters into Christians or their hearts.

Now notice several other verses, which clarify John 3:5:

James 1:18: God begets His children with the word.

I Peter 1:22-23: God’s truth is obeyed through or with the Holy Spirit.

Ephesians 5:26: We are all washed by the water of the word.

When taken together, these verses reveal that Christians are washed by water and the word now—in this life. Also, the word translated born can be translated begotten and, in most other contexts, this would be the correct rendering. Initially, either word would seem to be acceptable as a proper translation in verse 5. However, verse 6 demonstrates that the only correct meaning is born. The end result describes one who is composed of spirit—not just one who has it.

Suggested reading:

• What Does “Born Again” Mean?

John 4:15-19

“The woman said unto Him, Sir, give me this water, that I thirst not, neither come here to draw. Jesus said unto her, Go, call your husband, and come here. The woman answered and said, I have no husband. Jesus said unto her, You have well said, I have no husband: for you have had five husbands; and he whom you now have is not your husband: in that said you truly. The woman said unto Him, Sir, I perceive that You are a prophet.”

This woman had been married five times. Christ acknowledged it. The question arises: To which husband was she bound? This, once again, introduces the subject of divorce and remarriage.

Some have concluded that Christ was, in effect, saying to the woman at the well, “The man you are with is not your husband, because you are bound to the first of your five husbands.”

This is not what Christ is talking about, because this is not a discussion or dissertation about divorce and remarriage. Understand that He was speaking rhetorically, more correctly saying, “You’ve been with five husbands, and now you’re living with another person (cohabiting outside marriage—what was once commonly referred to as “shacking up”).”

This was Christ’s reference. When one reads the full account, it becomes clear that divorce and remarriage is not the subject under discussion, and that Christ makes no comment about which husband she was bound to—about which of her five marriages was valid.

Suggested reading:

John 8:15-16

“You judge after the flesh; I judge no man. And yet if I judge, my judgment is true: for I am not alone, but I and the Father that sent me.”

Did Christ contradict Himself in the same verse? How could He judge people when He had just said He judged no man? The answer becomes a lesson for everyone.

The first half of verse 15 speaks of human judgment after outward appearance, and by whatever human ability to judge that any man may possess. In context, Christ is saying that He did not judge anyone “after the flesh.” He went on to explain that, if He did have to judge, He relied on the Father to guide Him (by His Spirit). I Samuel 16:7 states that God judges the heart, not outward appearances and impressions. This is the biggest proof that God’s Spirit of discernment is the key to correctly evaluating, deciding upon or making assessments of people.

This verse certainly does not endorse the condemning of people to the lake of fire. This usurps the role of the Father, and it is this kind of judging that Christ condemns in Matthew 5:22.

Recognize that it is impossible for human beings to avoid making various decisions based on the conduct of others. Employers, coaches, leaders, parents and ministers cannot avoid periodically evaluating, assessing and making decisions about people as they work with them. But Christians cannot take to themselves God’s role and condemn people as worthy of destruction in the lake of fire because of what they may or may not see them do.

No suggested reading.

John 9:1-3

“And as Jesus passed by, He saw a man which was blind from his birth. And His disciples asked Him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? Jesus answered, Neither has this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.”

Was the blind man healed by Christ predestined to be born blind?

The account explains that this man was blind from birth for a special purpose. Notice verse 3: “Jesus answered, Neither has this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest [obvious] in him.” God carefully planned this event to show the world that Jesus Christ was His Son.

It is evident from this verse that the man’s blindness was unusual, and his condition set the stage for one of the most extraordinary miracles recorded in Scripture. It also heralded a fascinating spiritual lesson inherent within the man’s blindness, symbolizing the current status of this world.

Christ had certain tasks that God wanted Him to fulfill during His time on Earth. Consider this statement: “I must work the works of Him who sent Me” (vs. 4).

Healing this man’s blindness was perhaps one of Christ’s greatest miracles—works. The blind man himself stated this in verse 32: “Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind.” The next verses show that no one present disputed this. No human had ever given someone his sight back. But Jesus Christ—with the power of God—was able to do so.

No suggested reading.

John 9:4

“I must work the works of Him that sent Me, while it is day: the night comes, when no man can work.”

What is the “night when no man can work”? Three explanations apply:

(1) When people die—the final “night” of life—they can no longer perform Christian works. Their allotted time for service, growth and opportunity to overcome has ended.

(2) It refers to the local Jerusalem congregation, which the Roman General Titus would scatter in 69 A.D.

(3) Finally, it refers to the time at the end of the age (the present time), when “daytime” runs out for the true Church of God to any longer continue the Work of preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God and warning the modern nations that have descended from ancient Israel. The Work of God is a very large subject, impossible to be covered in this brief explanation. The material below will be most helpful.

Suggested reading:

• Which Is the True Gospel?

• The Work of God – Its Final Chapter!

John 10:16

“And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear My voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.”

Who are the “other sheep” that Christ must bring to His fold? When understood, there are dual meanings, both of them correct:

(1) Christ sent His disciples to the “lost sheep of the house of Israel” in Matthew 10:6. These were Israelite sheep that were not part of the tribe of Judah (the Jews) living in Judea, which is generally the land that comprises modern-day Israel.

(2) The Palestinian Jews did not receive Christ when He came to them (John 1:11). This requires additional explanation.

In John 7:35, the Jews referred to these Palestinian Jews as “the dispersed among the Gentiles.” It is important to realize that Gentiles were never called “sheep.” (See Ephesians 2:11-13, where they were called “Uncircumcision” and “aliens.”) The “one fold” is the coming of the New Covenant, which was prophesied in Jeremiah 31:31-33 and Hebrews 8:8, and which would be consummated in the birth of the New Testament Church. Eventually, the whole world will be converted. All Gentiles in God’s true Church today are a type of this soon-coming age!

Suggested reading:

John 10:34

“Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, You are gods.”

Jesus plainly declares in this scripture to those in His audience, “You are gods.” What does this statement mean, and why was it said after His statement in verse 30, “I and My Father are one”?

Jesus was accused of blasphemy, in verse 33, so He quoted Psalm 82:6. Of course, this scripture had been recorded in what the Jews called “their law” (same verse). This verse is actually a prophecy of all who would one day be born into the God Family. Romans 4:17 reveals that God often speaks of “those things which be not as though they were,” because, when He makes a promise, it is as good as done.

Those who understand the true plan of salvation recognize that eventually all true Christians literally will be “gods”! Critics try to twist the fact that Psalm 82:6 uses the Hebrew word Elohim as the word translated gods. They assert that this word can also be translated judges. This is true—Elohim can be translated either way. However, the Greeks had separate words for judge (kritikos) and god (theos). In effect, Christ interpreted Psalm 82:6 by selecting the Greek word theos, which can only mean gods. His purpose in this account was to emphasize that it was not blasphemy if He and His Father were one—both were God!—since the ultimate destiny offered to every human being is to become a member of the God Family!

Suggested reading:

• How World Peace Will Come!

• What Does “Born Again” Mean?

John 13:17, 30

“If you know these things, happy are you if you do them…He then having received the sop went immediately out: and it was night.”

These questions arise: Did Judas take the Passover and did Christ wash his feet and eat with him?

Read verse 12. Obviously Christ did wash Judas’ feet and did eat dinner with him (vs. 30—notice the term “received the sop,” or vs. 26, “dipped the sop”). These are references to eating a meal.

This account is important because it demonstrates the tremendous love that Christ has toward everyone, including Judas who would momentarily betray Him that very evening! Jesus was even willing to wash this man’s feet and eat with him right up to the very moment of betrayal.

However, it is very important to note that Judas did not have the proper attitude for taking the Passover symbols of the bread and wine. This point is vital to consider because of its example. God does not want “just anyone” to partake of this most holy service (Matthew 26:21 proves this), to be observed only once each year.

While John’s gospel does not record the actual taking of the bread and wine, Matthew’s does. The same conversation is shown in both gospels. At the end of the conversation in John, it states that Judas left immediately. In Matthew, however, it is evident that the point at which Judas must have left is after verse 24.

No suggested reading.

John 14, 15 and 16

“Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it sees him not, neither knows him: but you know him; for he dwells with you, and shall be in you…”

Chapters 14, 15 and 16 of John contain the numerous verses cited most often as “proof” that the Holy Spirit is a person. John 14:17 is quoted above as one example. The word “he” is used in verses 7, 8, 13, 14, 15 and others, in chapter 16. Only a relatively brief explanation can be offered here, with additional literature referenced.

The Greek word used here throughout is the exact same word found in Romans 8:16 (there translated “itself”). It is ekinos, and can be translated either “it” or “he.” The Greeks did not assign the masculine gender to ekinos.

In the Greek language (as with Romance languages like French, Italian and Spanish), nouns have gender. As a grammatical tool, they are designated as masculine, feminine or neuter. For example, el libro, in Spanish, means book and carries the masculine article el. Of course, books are neither male nor female. Therefore, where reference is made to the Holy Spirit, it is incorrectly translated “he,” instead of “it.”

In these three chapters, Christ many times referred to the Spirit as “the Comforter.” The masculine pronoun “he” is used in reference to the word “Comforter” (Greek: parakletos). This is a result of the grammatical structure of the Greek language, in which the New Testament was originally written. Gender was not assigned to the Holy Spirit, merely to the word used to describe it. This will be explained later.

Some other background explanation would also be helpful.

In the rest of the New Testament, the Greek word pneuma, meaning either “breath” or “spirit,” is translated “Spirit.” This word is the equivalent of the Old Testament Hebrew word translated “spirit”—rûah. Grammatically, the word pneuma is neuter. Therefore, it is properly represented by the English pronoun “it.”

Let’s understand further. Christ stated, “I and My Father are One” (John 10:30). What does this mean? To properly understand what Christ meant, we must turn to the Old Testament.

Amos 3:3 asks a rhetorical question: “Can two walk together, except they be agreed?” Christ and the Father are of the same mind. They are unified in both thought and purpose. Notice that, in John 10:30, Christ did not say, “I and My Father and the Holy Spirit are One.” If God is a trinity, why would Christ have excluded the Holy Spirit in His explanation of the Godhead relationship?

This is a huge unanswered question.

In John 14:9, Jesus said, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” Did Christ mean that He and the Father look alike? In shape and form, yes. Identical in appearance, no. By His actions, Christ showed what the Father was like. God and Christ are of the same mind. In Luke 2, He asked, “Know you not that I must be about My Father’s business?” These scriptures show that Christ and the Father both work.

It is again important to note that Christ did not say, “He who has seen Me has seen the Father and the Holy Spirit.”

Then notice how John 1:1-3 shows the relationship that God and Christ have: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Him; and without Him was not any thing made that was made.” Again, where is any mention of the Holy Spirit? Only two beings are referenced.

The Greek word Logos, translated “Word” in John 1, also means “spokesman.” Psalm 33 shows the role that Christ had in the creation of the world: “By the word of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth” (vs. 6).

A related question arises, however, and it can be addressed and also be helpful in the context of what has already been explained.

In Matthew 19:17, Christ asked a young man who had questioned Him about salvation, “Why call you Me good? There is none good but One, that is, God.” If Christ knew that He was also God (Luke 2:49), what then did He mean by this?

Two things become apparent:

(1) He was giving deference to the Father (see John 14:28). Christ had completely emptied Himself of the power of the Godhead, taking on the form of physical flesh as a servant (Phil. 2:7). Christ was made of flesh, and there is nothing about flesh that is good. See Romans 7:18-24, among numerous other verses.

(2) In anticipation of the reaction in the young man—that he would reject Christ’s answer (vs. 22)—Christ was showing the paradox of the young man’s question. Consider. He called Christ, “Good Master,” and professed to want to do whatever Christ said, but his actions showed that he did not believe that he was talking to God—one who was “good.” Christ recognized that the young man had the same “worshipful” attitude held by so many who rejected Him. (See Luke 6:46; 20:17; Matt. 7:21; 21:42; 13:57; Mark 12:10; Acts 4:11.) Therefore, He was pointing the young man to what the Father requires.

Again, the following extensive book is vital for those who truly want to understand all of the many elements that comprise the false doctrine that God is three-in-one. The serious reader will want to carefully study this book.

Suggested reading:

John 19:19

“And Pilate wrote a title, and put it on the cross. And the writing was, JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

What were the exact words that were written on the stake on which Christ was crucified? Each of the four gospels records a slightly different rendering, and this has created some confusion, and also caused some to actually doubt the validity of the Bible.

Why are the accounts different?

As in other gospel accounts, each gospel gives certain different emphasis. Read Luke 23:38, Matthew 27:37, Mark 15:26, and John 19:19. Each account represents a portion of a bigger picture. When placed together, they say, “THIS IS JESUS OF NAZARETH THE KING OF THE JEWS.”

No suggested reading.

John 19:30

“When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, He said, It is finished: and He bowed His head, and gave up the ghost.”

Why does this account state that Christ died at this point, and then, in verse 34, appear to say that He was speared after He was already dead? When truly understood, this explanation represents a subtle satanic plot designed to picture Christ’s death with a very wrong emphasis. The problem springs from the presence of two key translational errors.

The first is in verse 34. This passage reflects the wrong tense. It should reflect the Greek aorist tense (past tense), which would require had pierced instead of pierced and had come (the Greek is canae). This is proven by Matthew 27:49. This scripture has an entire phrase left out that would make it properly conclude: “…and another took a spear and pierced His side and there came out water and blood.” This is why Jesus died in the next verse (vs. 50)!

What is the greater problem referenced earlier?

Many preachers and religionists teach that Jesus Christ actually died of a broken heart, and the above wrong translation appears to substantiate this idea. In fact, Christ died because He bled to death!—and He was prophesied to die in this fashion! (See Exodus 12:6-7, Hebrews 9:22, Isaiah 53:7-8 and 12, Leviticus 17:11, Deuteronomy 14:21, Genesis 9:6, Ephesians 1:7 and Colossians 1:14.) When placed together, these verses demonstrate that Christ had to shed His blood for humanity.

Hebrews 9:22 shows that blood must be shed for sins to be forgiven. Ambassador College once had a copy of an original Greek manuscript from A.D. 300, which contains this phrase. Unfortunately, the phrase had become a marginal reference by the time the King James Version was produced in A.D. 1611. The Moffatt translation still contains it, but only in parentheses.

The entire reason that Christ died was part of a Master Plan by God. His suffering—and consequent death by blood loss—did not happen by accident, but rather was entirely by design. In addition to denying the truth of Scripture and the need for blood to be shed to forgive sins, the attempt to picture Christ with a broken heart (1) weakens Christ into One who was shocked by that which He was not really prepared to witness and (2) is a classic example of how the maudlin, sentimental Protestant view of Christ often rules their teaching.

Suggested reading:

John 20:23

“Whose soever sins you remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins you retain, they are retained.”

Does this passage prove that the Catholic practice of confession to a priest is necessary for sins to be forgiven or not? Since remit means to “forgive,” does this verse support this idea?

This scripture actually refers to any sin or sins that a faithful minister can recognize have not been repented of. (See the John 8:15-16 explanation.) Of course, in cases where a minister has come to such a recognition, a sin unrepented of would have been left unforgiven by God—and thus “retained” to the person. For illustration, see Romans 16:17 about the need to occasionally “mark” one who is sowing division or teaching heresy, and then ask how any minister can possibly know to do this unless that minister recognizes he is dealing with someone who either will not or has not repent(ed). Discernment is vital.

It is simply not possible, and actually ridiculous, to draw the doctrine of regular, required confession from this verse.

No suggested reading.

Acts 1:5

“For John truly baptized with water; but you shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.”

Pentecostals use this scripture to teach that one’s ultimate baptism is with God’s Spirit, not with water. But first notice that the passage does say, “John truly baptized with water…”

Some points to consider: (1) Acts 19:1-7 reveals that the key to John’s baptism was not just that it was by immersion, but also by whose name in which it was done, and (2) there had been no laying on of hands of those in the Acts account, so that these could receive the Holy Spirit (also see Heb. 6:2; Acts 8:14-20).

In his first sermon, on the Pentecost that began the New Testament Church in A.D. 31, Peter stated, “be baptized” (Acts 2:38). The Greek baptiso can only be translated immersed. If someone reasons that Christians are only “immersed” in spirit, then why did Peter say “be baptized [immersed]…and [then] you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”? The inference is that two separate events occur at conversion—repentance and baptism. The theology of most professing Christians plays down the spiritual burial that Christians must undergo. Realize that Satan does not want anyone’s sin buried—as Acts 2:38 shows is necessary for true forgiveness!

Suggested reading:

• What Do You Mean “Water Baptism”?

Acts 1:20

“For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.”

What do the phrases in this scripture mean, and why are they quoted from Old Testament passages with different contexts? Read Psalm 69:25 and Psalm 109:8. They show that Judas was to be replaced, but also that his home and everything familiar to his “habitation” would never be the same—would be “desolate” of his presence.

The fact that this is an Old Testament quote, made singular here, instead of its original plural form in Psalm 69:25, demonstrates that God can use any quote or phrase to prove or illustrate whatever His point may be. This is exactly why this phrase was used, and it demonstrates that there is not always a single, closed meaning to every Bible passage! These two Old Testament scriptures were speaking of the wicked in general in both cases.

No suggested reading.

Acts 2:1-5

“And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.”

Is this biblical precedent for Pentecostal “tarry meetings.”

This passage is usually taken together with John 21:22-23, where people pray, wail, cry, shout, chant and often fall on the floor foaming at the mouth when “it comes”—supposedly the Holy Spirit?

Understand these points: (1) This is the first day of Pentecost ever kept by the New Testament Church, and (2) it was the time when God first sent His Holy Spirit to His Church. This is why those present spoke in tongues, and this is why there was the presence of mighty wind and fire! God used these powerful forces to signal a great event—the New Testament time of receiving His Holy Spirit had come (Joel 2:28-29). However, remember other verses explain that only by the laying on of hands (Acts 2:37-38; 19:1-6; Heb. 6:2) can Christians receive the Spirit of God.

Understand that the subject of “tongues” is large, and requires our full booklet to be properly addressed.

Suggested reading:

• Understanding Tongues

Acts 2:31

“He seeing this before spoke of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.”

The question here is this: How could Christ have died and putrefaction (“corruption”) of His body not have begun?

First, the Greek word translated “hell” is hades, which simply means the grave. A body can go several days or longer without corruption (beginning of decomposition), if all of the blood has been removed. Certainly Christ did shed all of His blood, making this more possible. However, due to the extreme temperature in Jerusalem, God would have had to supernaturally preserve Christ’s body from this natural process.

No suggested reading.

Acts 2:44-45

“And all that believed were together, and had all things common; and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need.”

These two verses are referenced in the explanation of Acts 5:1-11, regarding supposed communism or socialism within the early Church of God—with brethren having “all things common.” The meaning in Acts 2 is not difficult to understand if one reads Acts 5:1-11 first. That account shows the decision to do this was made by choice, and was always as “men had need.” Therefore, the purpose was guided by how to best keep the Church in a position to help people in need in a time of general difficulty. Gathering possessions into a common location for distribution to the needy was not done to practice socialism, but rather because circumstances of extreme persecution at the time made this practical.

No suggested reading.

Acts 5:1, 3

“But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife…But Peter said, Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land?”

Some use Acts 5 as another “proof” that the Holy Spirit is a person. This is because they do not carefully examine what is called “the Ananias and Sapphira account.”

In Acts 5:3-4, the apostle Peter said, “Ananias, why has Satan filled your heart to lie to the Holy Spirit, and to keep back part of the price of the land? While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own power? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied unto men, but unto God.”

Does this passage, in fact, prove that the Holy Spirit is a person or separate being within the Godhead? In other words, how could Peter state that Ananias and Sapphira were lying to it, if the Holy Spirit is merely the inanimate power or agent of God?

This is actually not very difficult to understand. It was the Holy Spirit that gave Peter the ability to discern (Heb. 5:14) Ananias and Sapphira’s lies. Notice I Corinthians 2:11: “what man knows the things of a man, except by the spirit of man which is in him? Even so the things of God knows no man, except by the Spirit of God.” Human beings learn by what this passage calls the “spirit of man,” and this spirit is given to all people. Obviously, this does not mean that there is another person in each human person. Similarly, having the Holy Spirit in one does not mean there is another person in the person.

So, while there are things that human beings can learn and understand without having God’s Holy Spirit, certain things can only be understood with His Spirit. Discerning spiritual things comes through God’s Holy Spirit in the mind.

Christ demonstrated this ability of discernment in John 13:27: “And after the sop Satan entered into him [Judas]. Then said Jesus unto him, That you do, do quickly.” Christ was able to recognize when the devil had entered Judas. Also notice Mark 8:33: “But when He [Christ] had turned about and looked on His disciples, He rebuked Peter, saying, Get you behind Me, Satan: for you savor not the things that be of God, but the things that be of men.” The Holy Spirit present in Christ’s mind made this discernment possible.

To understand how Peter could “see through” Ananias and Sapphira, consider the following analogy:

An attorney is discussing an extremely technical legal matter with a potential client. The implications are such that only a lawyer with the utmost legal understanding could properly handle the case. Also, only with complete and total knowledge of every aspect and detail of the situation can the lawyer hope to proceed. But the client, having dishonest ulterior motives, intentionally omits some minor details. Those details are so minute that they could potentially escape the attention of an attorney not deeply, intricately versed in the law. But the attorney sees the deception for what it is. How does he see through it? Because of the knowledge of the law that he possesses. Without that knowledge, he would not recognize the lie for what it is. His knowledge of the law leads him to understand the man’s ulterior motives.

However, if one lies to a farmer about a matter dealing with aerospace engineering, the farmer probably will not recognize the lie. Likewise, if one lies to a rocket scientist about a matter concerning agriculture, the scientist will most likely not recognize it. Why? Because neither is versed in the particular subject being addressed. The lie goes “right over his head.”

It is the same with spiritual understanding: “Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge” (I Cor. 8:7).

Realize that Romans 8:14 defines Christians: “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” They must allow the “Spirit of truth” (the same as the Spirit of God) to guide them (John 16:13).

In Acts 5, Peter, guided by the Holy Spirit working in his mind, was able to discern three things about Ananias and Sapphira:

(1) They had conspired together on their way to see him.

(2) Their sin and their motive.

(3) The punishment they would receive.

After Pentecost in A.D. 31, God communicated to His servants through His Spirit (John 16:13). The above shows why Peter could say they were lying to the Holy Spirit.

Peter could say they were also lying to God because:

(1) Peter was the leading apostle in the Church of God. Christ had told him and the other disciples, “Whatsoever you shall bind on Earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 18:18).

(2) Christ had also told His disciples, “And whatsoever you shall ask in My name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you shall ask any thing in My name, I will do it” (John 14:13-14). Christ had given His disciples power to act on His behalf. God had to guide them in these matters, and the Holy Spirit is the way through which He does this.

(3) Conversely, He showed that anything done to or for Christians was considered to be done to or for Him. Notice: “Inasmuch as you have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, you have done it unto Me” (Matt. 25:40).

Also notice the following Old Testament accounts:

(4) “And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness…And in the morning, then you shall see the glory of the Lord; for that He hears your murmurings against the Lord: and what are we, that you murmur against us?…for that the Lord hears your murmurings which you murmur against Him: and what are we? Your murmurings are not against us, but against the Lord” (Ex. 16:2, 7-8).

(5) “And the Lord said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto you: for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them” (I Sam. 8:7).

All these passages illustrate why Peter could say that Ananias and Sapphira were lying to both God and the Holy Spirit. It was not because the Holy Spirit is a separate person in the Godhead. They were lying to one of God’s apostles, in whom He was working—through the power of His Holy Spirit.

Also, consider Peter’s statement, “You have not lied unto men.” Advocates of the trinity teaching ignore the fact that the husband and wife had lied directly to Peter (a man). Peter was a flesh-and-blood human being. Was he somehow elevating himself to the status of either God or the Holy Spirit? (See Acts 10:25-26; also 14:7-18.)

Why do trinitarians not consider this part of Peter’s statement? Their argument has no strength, because it is inconsistent and does not examine every aspect of the account. As is always the case, religionists have taken a single scripture out of context and either ignored or twisted other scriptures, building a doctrinal “house of cards.” The wise are always able to see through it and knock it down.

Suggested reading:

• Bible Introduction Course Lesson 16 – WHAT IS THE HOLY SPIRIT?

Acts 5:1-11

“But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a possession, and kept back part of the price, his wife also being privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the apostles’ feet…While it remained, was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own power? Why have you conceived this thing in your heart? You have not lied unto men, but unto God. And Ananias hearing these words fell down, and gave up the ghost: and great fear came on all them that heard these things…And it was about the space of three hours after, when his wife, not knowing what was done, came in. And Peter answered unto her, Tell me whether you sold the land for so much? And she said, yea, for so much. Then Peter said unto her, How is it that you have agreed together to tempt the Spirit of the Lord?…Then fell she down straightway at his feet, and yielded up the ghost…”

What was Ananias’ and Sapphira’s sin? Did they simply wish to keep money that was already theirs? Acts 2:44 has shown that, during this period, all people in the Church had “everything in common,” meaning for common use. From Acts 5:1-11 we can conclude it meant money and possessions. This couple conspired (vs. 2) to “keep part of the price” of their land, when others gave everything they had (Acts 4:36-37), apparently by prior agreement, and this is the hidden key, not readily visible.

Their sin was lying, not stealing, as verse 4 makes clear. This couple tried to deceive Peter into believing that they were giving the entire sum they had been paid. Their sin was certainly not an unwillingness to become socialists. In fact, they obviously wanted to be thought of as more generous than they actually were. In other words, they had a problem with pride—vanity. And the matter was serious. The apostles had, no doubt, been acting on the knowledge that certain funds were coming. The impact of this deception on the Church must have been great.

Verse 4 shows they neither (1) had to sell the land at all, nor (2) had to give the entire value once they did. Lying occurred by saying that they were giving it all when they were not! That Ananias and Sapphira died is a powerful statement about how God views lying.

No suggested reading.

Acts 10:13

“And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.”

Does this account reveal that all animal flesh has been cleansed and may be eaten?

Many have used this verse to prove that the dietary laws of Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 are no longer in effect.

Here is the question: Did God command Peter to eat any kind of meat that he wished? The answer will become an obvious, No! God was merely illustrating Peter’s attitude toward people, as we shall see. On a great sheet lowered from heaven were all types of unclean and common (ceremonially defiled) meats that Peter had never eaten and knew he should not eat. Also, Peter never ate any of them in the account (even symbolically, since what occurred was a vision). Critics presume to know what the vision meant before Peter did.

In verse 17, Peter was still in doubt—and he was the only one who saw the vision! In verse 19, his mind was still open as three men came with the message about Cornelius, an Italian gentile. The biggest point that God wanted to make is explained by Peter in verse 28: “God has shown me that I should not call any MAN [not meat] common or unclean.” Verse 34-35 continues, “God is no respecter of PERSONS [not meats]: but in every nation he [a person] that fears Him, and works righteousness, is accepted with Him.”

This vision was a means of showing Peter his inconsistency—his hypocrisy—toward non-Jews, and revealing to him that God viewed everyone equally and offered His Spirit to all men.

Suggested reading:

Acts 13:2-4

“As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy [Spirit] said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work where I have called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. So they, being sent forth by the Holy [Spirit], departed unto Seleucia; and from there they sailed to Cyprus.”

This scripture presents another perfect example of how so many religionists ignore context, sometimes vital context, focusing on a single aspect of a passage to make it say something it clearly does not. This one is supposedly proof of the personhood of the Holy Spirit, with it having “said” something.

Notice the seven elements of this scripture:

(1) “As they ministered to the Lord”: These men were seeking God’s will in a matter—specifically, the ordination of two men. James 4:8 states, “Draw near to God [not His Holy Spirit], and He will draw near to you.”

(2) “when they had fasted”: Fasting is one of the tools of Christian growth. It helps Christians acknowledge to God that they are nothing, of and by themselves, while allowing them to draw closer to Him. Fasting also binds Satan, blocking his influence. If you are drawing near to God, then you are also resisting Satan. And, as James 4:7 states, if you “Resist the devil…he will flee from you.” By fasting, these men demonstrated to God that they wanted His complete and total involvement in what they were doing.

Also, a fast involves going without food and drink for a period of at least 24 hours. Read Jeremiah 36:6; Matthew 9:15; Mark 2:19-20; Luke 5:35. So the period of time covered between Acts 13:2 and verse 3 is at least 24 hours. (You may read our helpful article “What You Need to Know About Fasting” to learn more about how to fast.)

(3) “…the Holy Spirit said”: To properly understand this part of the scripture, review the Acts 5:3-4 explanation. If they had heard a literal voice from God, why would they have felt the need to continue in fasting and prayer? The men would have had their answer! None would suggest that God was speaking the same message to them non-stop for 24 hours. (Notice II Samuel 12:16-23; Daniel 10:3-13; Matthew 9:14-15.) They were being guided by the Holy Spirit within them, and they needed to be crystal clear about the intent of the message it was bringing. The sound of an audible voice eliminates any such need. Again, “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God” (Rom. 8:14).

(4) “Separate Me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them”: It is God the Father who does the calling (John 6:44, 65). The Holy Spirit is the means by which He does this. It is Christ who determines who will be used in the ministry—and in what capacity (I Cor. 12:28). Also, if this were a literal audible voice from a God Being, spoken for all to hear, it would have been accompanied by obvious displays of natural forces. (Notice John 5:37 and also Acts 9:3-7.)

(5) “…and prayed”: Prayer is another tool of Christian growth, used to make our needs known to God. It is also the way we ask God to make His will known to us. (See Matthew 6:10; 26:39, 42.) Again, if they had already received an audible answer, why would they have continued in prayer?

(6) “…and laid their hands on them”: The laying on of hands is a symbolic act when God is called upon, in faith, to bless and sanctify or to impart authority and power. The power of the Holy Spirit is involved in four different and individual purposes—blessings, baptism, healing and ordination—when this ceremony occurs. We can look at some examples of each.

Genesis 48:13-20 records that Ephraim and Manasseh received a unique and very special blessing when Israel (Jacob) laid hands upon them. The blessing of little children is also performed by the laying on of hands, as instructed by Christ (Mark 10:15-16; Matt. 19:13-15; Luke 18:15-17).

In the baptism ceremony, the repentant person receives the gift of the Holy Spirit by having hands laid on him. This is first recorded in Acts 8:17-18: “Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit…through laying on of the apostles’ hands the Holy Spirit was given.” Also see Acts 19:5-6 and II Timothy 1:6.

God’s healing is also the result of an elder’s prayer with faith, accompanied by the laying on of hands on the head of the afflicted person. We find this example in Acts 9:17: “…and Ananias [not the Ananias of Acts 5]…entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus…has sent me, that you might receive your sight.”

Ordination into an office within God’s Church is also done through the laying on of hands. The first example is found in Acts 6:6-8, involving the ordination of deacons: “…and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them…And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people.” God’s Church today faithfully observes this practice in all ordinations. Hebrews 6:2 specifically lists it as one of God’s doctrines.

(7) “…they sent them away”: These men were acting on God’s behalf, ordaining men into higher offices in the ministry. This part of the verse reveals two things: (a) In addition to prayer and fasting, they had also counseled together in order to reach a wise decision (notice Proverbs 11:14; 15:22); (b) the Holy Spirit did not, of itself, send these men out. Again, notice that the verse states, “…they [Niger, Lucius, Manaen] sent them away.”

Let’s summarize the points: God, through the power of His Spirit, acting in response to those who were asking for His guidance, inspired the men involved to understand that He wanted Barnabas and Saul ordained.

Suggested reading:

• What Does the New Testament Teach About Law And Grace?

• Bible Introduction Course Lesson 16 – WHAT IS THE HOLY SPIRIT?

Acts 13:17-20

“The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers, and exalted the people when they dwelt as strangers in the land of Egypt, and with a high arm brought He them out of it. And about the time of forty years suffered He their manners in the wilderness. And when He had destroyed seven nations in the land of Canaan, He divided their land to them by lot. And after that He gave unto them judges about the space of four hundred and fifty years, until Samuel the prophet.”

This passage presents a mathematical problem. First, take a moment to read I Kings 6:1. How does the 480 years referenced there square with the “about 450 years” in Acts 13:17-20? Which period only goes “until Samuel”?

The word “until” (vs. 20) should properly be translated “including.” This time marks the period to the end of Samuel’s service. Now examine the math:

480 years (I Kgs. 6:1)

- 40 years (Acts 13:18)

440 years, which is “about…450 years” (vs. 20)

No suggested reading.

Romans 1:17

“For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.”

What does “from faith to faith” mean? How can one go from “having faith” to “having faith”?

Verse 16 explains that God’s overall Plan involves calling the Jew first, and then Gentiles. The Jews first demonstrated faith (end of vs. 16). Then, Acts 10:2 records the first Gentile who was converted, thus developing faith (end of Rom. 1:17).

Also, in a second application, there is another kind of human faith that all people have at certain times in their lives—but this faith must eventually be replaced by the permanent faith that only comes by the Spirit of God in converted minds (Gal. 5:21-22; 2:16).

Remember that Christ healed many people and praised their faith as He did. Consider that none of these people had the Holy Spirit. But they did have human faith! Finally, it does take human faith to even believe that we will be forgiven by Christ’s sacrifice, that God has called us, and that we will receive His Spirit, because all of this belief is expressed prior to baptism. After conversion, we live by the faith of Christ in us.

Suggested reading:

• What Is Real Faith?

Romans 2:16

“In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.”

What are the “secrets of men” spoken of by Paul? Before proceeding, read verses 11 to 16 for context. Notice a parenthesis beginning at verse 13 and ending at verse 15. Now, exclude verses 13-15 and read verses 11-12 and 16, in that order, to begin to understand at least the continuation of the context. Then read verses 13-15! Let’s examine each verse:

vs. 11—God judges all people by the same standard.

vs. 12—Those who do and those who do not know the law have sinned!

vs. 16—Shows when this judgment will occur and what God will judge—the secrets in men’s minds. Secrets are obviously what no other man knows, and remain hidden until someone makes them known, and in this case God does!

vs. 13—The crux of the problem was that some thought that by merely knowing the law, they would be saved and were better than others who were ignorant of the law.

vs. 14—Some Gentiles were keeping some of the commandments better by “accident” than certain Jews who had known the law their entire lives. The conduct of some Gentiles made them a law in their own right.

vs. 15—These verses address the conscience. What Christians do with their consciences demonstrates, in a certain way, whether or not they will obey God’s law in all points. Will they do what they are taught to think is right—apart from what they may know about God’s law? In effect, their conscience either “excuses” or “accuses” them in everything that they say, do or think throughout their lives.

vs. 16—These are the “secrets,” hidden in all men’s consciences, that God will judge.

A crucial point emerges from what we have learned. No human being will ever be able to stand before God and claim that he would have obeyed Him had he been called, because God will remind such a person of his or her “secrets”—sins perhaps known only to God and the person.

No suggested reading.

Romans 3:4-9

“God forbid: yes, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That you might be justified in your sayings, and might overcome when you are judged. But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who takes vengeance? (I speak as a man) God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? For if the truth of God has more abounded through my lie unto His glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come? Whose damnation is just. What then? Are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin.”

Carefully read through these verses before proceeding to the explanation. This is a somewhat complicated, and sometimes rhetorical, passage:

vs. 4—This verse explains that God will never allow any man to “overcome” Him (God)—or any to feel “justified” because God is “wrong” in any matter.

vs. 5—A false teacher in Rome was spreading the idea that, the more that people sin (commit “unrighteousness”), the more God’s righteousness stands out (is “commended”). This is generally tied to the idea that God is then able to extend more mercy, and mercy glorifies Him. This illogical reasoning creates the question of “how can God punish people if their ongoing sinning glorifies His righteousness?” Paul concludes by saying rhetorically that he “speaks as a man”—not as God or any minister of God “would speak.”

vs. 6—How could God judge people as sinners if the end result of that sin was good, and glorified Him?

vs. 7—Paul had been accused of lying and of setting a sinful example. Of course, he did neither. (This verse must be read to understand the context.) In effect, Paul responded with, “If this (lying, which is a sin, but supposedly glorifies God) is the way God wants it, why would I be judged by God to have sinned?” The fruits of Paul’s work was greatly increasing and prospering. However, some were accusing him. Others had judged Paul a sinner.

vs. 8—This verse best reads: “And not say right out (as we be slanderously reported and some affirm that we say), ‘Let us do evil that good may come whose damnation is just’” (those who were accusing Paul). Paul said that he wished his accusers would stand up and just speak plainly what they were implying.

vs. 9—Here is the point: Did merely having God’s law make Jews better than the Gentiles who did not have it? Obviously, No! His Law must be KEPT, not just be known. In addition, Romans 2:11-12, 16 proves that all—Jew and Gentile—are under sin.

No suggested reading.

Romans 3:19-21

“Now we know that what things soever the law says, it says to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in His sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets.”

Is verse 20 a license to set aside and disobey the Law of God, because by obeying it one cannot be justified, and thus righteousness is imputed “without the law” (vs. 21)? What does “under the law” mean?

Verse 20 actually speaks of being under the penalty of having broken the law, not of being under the need to keep it, because verse 19 speaks of “stopping mouths,” meaning that everyone is guilty of sin because of disobedience to the law—which must be in effect for sin to be possible. Verse 23 makes this point clear because it states that “all have sinned.”

Why can no person be justified by the works (or keeping) of the law? The answer is fundamental to Christianity: because with the law only comes the knowledge of what sin is (end of verse). Keeping the law can neither forgive nor save anyone. Only Christ’s death and His blood applied to Christians by faith can forgive them—can justify and reconcile them (Rom. 5:8-9)—but it is His Resurrection to eternal life that saves them (Rom. 5:10). However, the law certainly can tell us what sin is!

Romans 3:21 explains that God’s righteousness in Christians does not come via their human efforts to keep the law (as Israel tried to do). But it should be obvious that righteousness is of (or by) faith (vs. 27). No one can boast that he kept the law on his own power, thus claiming that God owes him salvation!

Conclude your study by reading verse 28 and then verse 31. It is faith that establishes the law! This is because it requires faith from God—the faith of Christ (Rev. 14:12), not mere human faith (discussed earlier)—to be able to keep it. Then, and only then, can anyone become truly righteous (Psa. 119:172).

Suggested reading:

Romans 5:12, 19

“Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned…For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”

Does this passage state that all can be judged sinners because Adam alone sinned? Verse 12 does show that all human beings suffer death because of what this first man did. The key is the latter part of verse 12—“death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” The end of verse 16 emphasizes that death comes not because of Adam’s sin alone, but because of “many offences” committed by many people, actually every person.

The Catholic doctrine of “original sin,” centered on these verses, teaches:

(1) Adam, not us, is really responsible for our sin, referred to as “original sin”!

(2) He passed on his sin in and through our flesh, which is now inherently wicked. Further, Catholics believe, however, that deep inside, all people are good, and secretly want to obey and love God. This idea derives from the pagan teaching that human beings have a pure, pristine immortal soul locked inside an evil “prisonhouse” body, only able to “escape” at death.

Romans 3:11 and 8:7 negate any supposed secret, noble motives lying inside a person’s “mind” and that these are able to somehow control the “flesh.” Paul did speak of a very real internal spiritual warfare going on daily inside Christians. Much of Romans 7 describes the daily battle of the Christian’s human mind at war against Christ’s mind within him.

No suggested reading.

Romans 5:13-15

“For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come. But not as the offense, so also is the free gift. For if through the offense of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, has abounded unto many.”

What is “imputed sin”? What was the “similitude of Adam’s sin”? Of whom was he a “figure”?

First, imputed sin is sin that people are responsible for because they knew the law when they committed the sin (Rom. 4:15). People cannot sin or thus be guilty of sin where there is no law. Yet, Adam sinned, as did all others after him, including Cain (Gen. 4:7-8).

Second, the “similitude of Adam’s sin” was that it alone cut people off from the Tree of Life (Gen. 2:16-17; 3:24). No other sin in history ever did that! This first human being’s choice, in real effect, spoke for all people who would follow. In this way, Adam was a “figure” of Christ because they both were unique forerunners.

On the one hand, Adam was the first person to make the wrong choice, thus cutting off all humans from the Tree of Life. On the other hand, Christ was the first to live a perfect life in harmony with God and the first to offer redemption to all people through the forgiveness of sins (vs. 18-19). In this way, both Adam and Christ affected the entire human race.

No suggested reading.

Romans 5:20

“Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.”

Does this passage state that God gave His Law so that would-be Christians better understand how to sin as much as possible? Of course not! (Also see Romans 3:4-9 explanation.)

God gave His Law so that people could see that sin was “abounding” all around (and in) them. The purpose of the Ten Commandments and the rest of God’s Law is to make it possible for people to see sin for what it is—in other words, to know what to avoid, not to know what they should do.

Some in Rome were becoming confused by false teachers and were asking, “Does God want His people, and eventually all people, to abound in sin so that He can glorify Himself by forgiving them?” Apparently, some were actually teaching this, and various brethren were wondering about it. Obviously, while some had actually found a way to be confused by this, the question should be seen as ridiculous. This said, wherever sin is widespread, more of God’s mercy is certainly required to remove its penalty.

Verse 21 explains that after mercy is extended, then righteousness reigns in sin’s stead. As explained in Romans 3:4-9, righteousness does not “reign” by virtue of humans’ effort to do all in their physical power to keep the law!

No suggested reading.

Romans 7:1-3

“Know you not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law) how that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives? For the woman which has an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he lives; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband lives, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.”

Some refer to Romans 7:1-3, attempting to demonstrate that every marriage in every culture, and no matter its circumstances, is bound until death. Of course, this is true—when God has bound a couple.

This is not a difficult verse to understand. Recognize that Paul qualifies to whom he is speaking—“brethren”—the converted Romans—stating, in effect, “What I’m about to say to you is said to people who know the Law, who understand the truth, who have God’s Spirit—who are true Christians.”

As with the woman at the well (recall this account in John 4:7-26, explained earlier), and the beheading of John the Baptist (this account in Matt. 14:1-4 was also explained earlier), people take Romans 7 out of context. Some forget the all-important qualifier, “For I speak to them that know the law.”

Let’s understand how God identifies those who are under judgment and those who are not. Notice what James wrote: “To him that knows to do good, and does it not, to him it is sin” (4:17)—and also what Paul recorded in Hebrews: “For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sins” (10:26). These passages, coupled with “judgment must begin at the house of God” (I Pet. 4:17), qualify Romans 7. However, Paul actually qualifies it again by using the terms “brethren” and “them that know the law.”

Therefore, this passage has no application to, nor does it reference, those who do not know either God’s truth or His laws of marriage. God is not entering into the marriages of this world.

Suggested reading:

Romans 7:4

“Wherefore, my brethren, you also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that you should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.”

Does this verse say that the law is dead—no longer in effect? This scripture trips up many people. It is helpful to recognize that the passage is actually an extension of the first three verses, covered in the previous explanation.

The point being made by Paul is that people become dead to the law—it is not the law that becomes dead. How does this happen? Notice Romans 6:2, 7 and 23 for illustration and comparison. These verses reveal that people, once converted, become dead to sin, and 6:7 shows that “he that is dead is freed from sin.” Verse 23 shows that this means freed from the penalty of sin—death!

Let’s now apply this to 7:4. Notice that it refers to “brethren.” Again, it must mean that the Roman brethren were dead to the penalty of the law, because brethren are converted, sanctified people! Verse 6 shows that Christians are delivered from the law—its penalty—and have been freed from death. So, verse 7 concludes that the law is not sin, rather it shows people what sin is—the law points out sin.

This becomes the answer to those who read verse 6 and say, “God has delivered us from keeping that horrible law.”

Suggested reading:

Romans 8:9

“But you are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.”

What does it mean to be “not in the flesh, but in the Spirit”? This passage represents what could be called the Christian “DNA test.” Everyone recognizes that one must have a man’s genes to be that man’s biological child. In a sense, God is the same. Without God’s Spirit, one cannot be His spiritually begotten child. But does one receive the Holy Spirit, God’s Spirit, the Spirit of the Father, or the “Spirit of Christ” at conversion?

We can understand more about the process of spiritual begettal by examining the actual process of human begettal. In reproduction, an egg must be fertilized by a sperm cell, which then “seals off” the egg. The egg can never be fertilized by another sperm.

Now consider. Romans 8:9 spoke of Christians receiving in the same begettal the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ. Are these two different Spirits—yet, Christ said, “I and My Father are One” (John 10:30)? If they were two different spirits, this still would not validate the trinity as some use this verse to suggest. It would mean there are four, not three, beings—God and His Spirit and Christ and His Spirit—in the Godhead.

Upon baptism and the laying on of hands (the point at which one receives the Holy Spirit), Christians are begotten by the Father, just as Christ was begotten in Mary’s womb by the Father. Once this has occurred, Christ lives in them (Gal. 2:20). At that point, they have the spirit of both Christ and the Father dwelling in them. These are one and the same Spirit. It is through this Spirit—the same as the Holy Spirit—that Christians take on the mind of Christ (Phil. 2:5).

It is important to recognize, however, that a Christian can literally “abort” in this lifetime—if he does not continue in the right path. The begotten child of God may also not come to term—be born again.

Grasp this! It is possible to lose the Holy Spirit, and bring the new begotten life to an end. Notice: “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Spirit [the same as the mind or Spirit of Christ], and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame” (Heb. 6:4-6).

Suggested reading:

• The Ten Commandments – “Nailed to the Cross” or Required for Salvation?

• What Is True Conversion?

Romans 9:16

“So then it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy.”

What is this passage talking about? The subject is those whom God chooses to call!

A related question arises, however. May Christians do—or not do—anything that they wish because all that ultimately matters is God’s mercy? Is the passage saying that their “will” and how they conduct their lives—how they “run”—is not important or relevant to God?

Verse 15 reveals that God forgives and/or works with whomever He chooses. (Notice verses 12 to 14.)

Verse 16 is actually explaining that a person cannot have access to God now, or have His grace now, simply because the person either “wills” it, or is the more logical, and more humanly-qualified choice (is one who “runs” hard). The phrase “runs” is referring to those who work and do things on their own and, therefore, who might seem or appear to be natural choices for God to call. God’s subjective mercy on some and not others is what makes the difference.

No suggested reading.

Romans 10:4

“For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believes.”

Does this passage declare that Christ brought the Law of God to an “end”?—made it no longer necessary to obey?

First, read Matthew 5:17-19. Careful reading shows that Romans 10:4 actually states that Christ is the end of the law “for righteousness” (or as far as righteousness goes). The Greek word telos, translated “end” here, means the “aim, purpose, goal, etc.” (of the law). This same word is found in I Peter 1:9 and James 5:11, and both make the meaning of “end” very clear.

Take a moment to read from Romans 9:33 to 10:4 for context. Certain Roman brethren were trying to keep the law without asking Christ to keep it perfectly through them! An interesting last point to note is that telos literally means “a point aimed at.” Telescope, telephone, telegraph, and television are all derived from telos. All of these are objects that take something that is distant and make them closer. Christ certainly did this to the law (Isa. 42:21)!

Suggested reading:

Romans 10:9

“That if you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead you shall be saved.”

Does this passage instruct and give an obligation to the Christian to continually “witness for Jesus”—to continually “confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus”?

Note that it says to “confess” Christ, not profess Him. A confession implies standing up and being counted when faced with persecution (Matt. 10:27-32). Remember, when under pressure, Peter denied Christ three times—he was unwilling to confess that he was a follower of Christ, a Christian.

Perhaps the most important passage on this subject is I Peter 3:15, which states that Christians should “be ready always to give an answer to every man that asks you a reason of the hope that is in you.” Answers are given to questions. Christians are careful not to ignore Christ’s admonition by “casting pearls before swine” (Matt. 7:6). They should answer with their beliefs when asked or challenged about them—in other words, when questioned!

Suggested reading:

• Should You Preach to Others?

Romans 10:13

“For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.”

Does this passage contain all there is to becoming a Christian—and to being saved? Does it mean that Christianity is merely “Just believe and you will be saved”? Understand that the idea of “just believe…” requires virtually an entire book to thoroughly explain this. The last three items below do.

First, notice Acts 4:12 to see that Romans 10:13 is instructing people to call on Jesus Christ as opposed to anyone else. At that time, the worship of every god and idol imaginable existed in Rome (I Cor. 8:5-7)! The point is that there is only one Savior, and typically the Roman citizenry believed the tradition of various other “saviors” for mankind.

Second, verse 12 shows that it does not make any difference to God who the person is that is calling out to Him. He will save Jew or Gentile! But is just calling on God enough? Read Matthew 15:8 and Mark 7:7-9. These verses reveal that one must do as Christ says—not just believe on His Name. Matthew 7:21 removes all doubt! Christians have to obey God. Matthew 25:11-12 proves that simply saying, “Lord, Lord” is far from enough! To truly believe on the Name of Christ is to accept His authority, meaning to observe all of His commands and instructions in their lives.

Suggested reading:

Romans 11:17

“And if some of the branches be broken off, and you, being a wild olive tree, were graffed in among them, and with them partake of the root and fatness of the olive tree.”

Who are the “olive trees” mentioned here?

Realize that Romans is written to a congregation of Gentiles. Gentiles are the “olive tree” that is “wild by nature” (vs. 24). Israel is the natural “branches…broken off” (vs. 17 and latter half of vs. 24). The context is that God can call Gentiles, even to the exclusion of Israelites who received the promises directly. But verse 20 explains that Gentiles should be humble, or they can also be broken off (vs. 21). The “mystery” here is explained in verse 25. Israel has largely been blinded in this age (God has called any number of physical Israelites), while God brings the initial number of Gentile callings to its “fullness.”

No suggested reading.

Romans 11:26

“And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob.”

Some teach that this scripture proves that everyone, even Satan and his demons, will be saved! This idea is generally referred to as the doctrine of universal salvation.

As a basis to build understanding, reread the Romans 10:13 explanation. Certainly it is God’s will for all to be saved (II Pet. 3:9 and I Tim. 2:4). However, Revelation 22:15, 18-19 and Matthew 25:11, 30 and 34 plainly reveal that this will not happen. Context is the crucial key in Romans 11.

The Romans 11:17 explanation showed how Israel was broken off like branches from a tree. The emphasis in verse 26 is that Israel has a Deliverer (vs. 27), and that God will one day forgive them. Verses 31-32 show that God’s overall intent is to have mercy on all people and that this is why He waited—to the end that Israel might be able to see the Gentiles achieve salvation (vs. 31) and then desire it themselves.

Romans 9:1, 3-4 clarifies what Paul would have done, if he “could” have been permitted by God (vs. 3), but he understood that Israel’s—or anyone’s—salvation depends on their own, or his own, overcoming (Rev. 2:7, 11, 17, 26; 3:5, 12, 21). Israel’s time for salvation is largely yet to come.

Suggested reading:

Romans 14:1-8

“Him that is weak in the faith receive you, but not to doubtful disputations. For one believes that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eats herbs. Let not him that eats despise him that eats not; and let not him which eats not judge him that eats: for God has received him. Who are you that judges another man’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. Yes, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. One man esteems one day above another: another esteems every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regards the day, regards it unto the Lord; and he that regards not the day, to the Lord he does not regard it. He that eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he that eats not to the Lord he eats not, and gives God thanks. For none of us live to himself, and no man dies to himself. For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s.”

Do verses 5 and 6 approve keeping any day as a day of rest? Is Sunday as good as Saturday for weekly observance? Do these verses allow individual Christians freedom of choice—so that no one can or will be offended by which day others choose? (The Restored Church of God has produced numerous books, booklets and articles, which clearly demonstrate the many proofs that exist regarding Saturday as the Sabbath. These go far beyond what is covered here.)

It is important to examine the text for precisely what it does and does not say. Verses 1 to 4 identify the overall subject in context as vegetarianism—not Sabbath-keeping or which day one selects for rest or worship. (Also see Hebrews 4:9 explanation.)

Verse 5 reveals that some were apparently choosing different days to fast or not to fast. It concludes by instructing Christians to decide for themselves, by themselves—instead of, as the RSV says, getting into “disputes over opinions” (vs. 1, latter part). God leaves some decisions in the hands of people—how long to pray, size of offerings, whether to have two, three or four children, etc.

The subject of the Sabbath is entirely different, however. God commanded the Sabbath, beginning in the book of Genesis. Ancient Israel kept it. Christ kept it. Paul kept it. The early New Testament Church kept it. And true Christians observe it today, because God never allows people to decide what to obey, only whether they will obey His commands (Deut. 30:19-20).

Suggested reading:

• The Ten Commandments – “Nailed to the Cross” or Required for Salvation?

• The Sabbath – Has Time Been Lost?

• Why the Sabbath Command to Assemble?

I Corinthians 1:21-23

“For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness.”

What does the end of verse 21 mean (in italics)?

God enjoys (is “pleased”) in showing the “wise” of the world that He chose fools (vs. 27) to preach both His gospel (it is foolish to some!) and His Plan, which “saves them that believe.”

Also, what is the meaning of “sign” and “wisdom” in verse 22? The Jews often sought miracles (signs) for evidence of where God was working (just as the Pharisees sought from Jesus), while the Greeks were more concerned with this or that interesting philosophy (wisdom) as evidence of God or His presence.

What about verse 23? Why are both parts of this verse true? Jews tend to stumble because they want(ed) a conquering Messiah, not a weak Savior. The Greeks, however, thought that Christianity was foolish, because its founder claimed to be the Light and Savior of the world, but could not even save himself! The Greeks as a people generally were interested in some kind of profound “wisdom” or impressive theory to espouse.

No suggested reading.

I Corinthians 2:2

“For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.”

Is “Jesus Christ and Him crucified” the only topic that Christians should ever talk or think about?—the only thing that they should “know”? In an overall sense, yes! But this is not the whole picture.

In I Corinthians 1, Paul attacks the attitude of partisan, political spirits (vs. 10, 13), because the Corinthian congregation was shot full of this problem. I Corinthians 2:2 is a basic summary of how to deal with that attitude—point to Christ and His purpose for mankind, and His Return to earth. This overarches all other attitudes, subjects and positions. Notice Paul said that he practiced this approach when he was “among you”—among the Corinthians. Brethren today must also occasionally be brought back to the basics of Christianity! I Corinthians 1:1-10 is a block of verses that must be taken together to be understood. Notice how many times Christ’s name is mentioned. Read the whole chapter as a lead-in to this verse, focusing especially on verse 10.

No suggested reading.

I Corinthians 5:6-8

“Your glorying is not good. Know you not that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, as you are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.”

Does this passage disprove any need to literally keep the Days of Unleavened Bread?

Verse 6 condemns leaven. Some believe that this only means spiritual leaven, while others believe it means physical and spiritual leaven. Which is right?

Verse 8 is very emphatic and begins, “Therefore, let us keep the feast…” This refutes false claims about this verse. However, notice the next two phrases in verse 8: “…not with old leaven [physical leaven], neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness [spiritual leaven].” They are plainly told to “purge out” old leaven, and this can only mean out of their houses. Christians are to keep the Feast (Days) of Unleavened Bread both physically and spiritually (notice the end of verse 8)!

Suggested reading:

• God’s Holy Days or Pagan Holidays?

• Bible Introduction Course Lesson 24 – THE DAYS OF UNLEAVENED BREAD

I Corinthians 6:12-13

“All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body.”

Does this scripture teach that Christians do not have to keep any law or follow (any other) standards? Verses 9 to 11 show that Christians do have standards of conduct. Verse 9 plainly states that to be unrighteous is to break the commandments (Psa. 119:172). I Corinthians 6:12 shows, however, that Christians do have certain “liberties” as they overcome the bad character of verses 9 to 11.

The word “expedient” comes from the Greek word sumphero meaning “to bear together, advantage, be better for.” Paul is saying that “Everything within the law is proper (lawful), but some things are better off not being done, because those who do them are not better for having done so. There was no advantage in doing them.” Other translations reveal this meaning. The concern can also become using liberty in a way that offends weak brothers.

Sleep, food, and alcohol are all lawful, but there are circumstances when using them would not be the “expedient” thing to do. Paul added (the conclusion to verse 12 could be verse 13) that he would not let things like oversleeping, overeating, or overdrinking rule him.

Though eating is not wrong, verse 13 explains that God will destroy gluttons! The key to understanding this passage is found in the end of verse 13. This passage is saying that “Sex is permissible, because God made the body, but its wrong use (fornication) is a sin.” This was a big Corinthian problem Paul had to address.

Remember, the first and great rule of Bible study is to start with the most basic scriptures on a subject and build from there.

Suggested reading:

I Corinthians 7:1

“Now concerning the things whereof you wrote unto me: it is good for a man not to touch a woman.”

Catholics use this passage to support celibacy, particularly for priests. Is this what it is saying?

Recognize that Paul is quoting from a letter he had received. Notice that he said, “concerning the things you wrote unto me.” Paul was quoting the rumor that they had written to him. The Greek word translated “touch” means “to attach oneself in many implied relationships.” Now realize that fornication was absolutely rampant in the Gentile city of Corinth, and that this was having an effect in the Church. Seeing this, some were concluding that they should swing to the other ditch, and that no man should ever touch any woman for any reason.

Paul disagreed (vs. 2) and answered, “avoid fornication by having your own wife.” Also, “due benevolence” (vs. 3) means “sexual responsibility.” Paul was obviously not immediately contradicting himself, two verses later, by saying that all touching of women was wrong (vs. 1), but rather that men have a sexual responsibility to their wives (vs. 3).

Suggested reading:

• Sex – Its Unknown Dimension

• The Purpose of Marriage – Ever Obsolete?

• You Can Build a Happy Marriage

I Corinthians 7:8-12

“I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn. And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: but and if she depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away his wife. But to the rest speak I, not the Lord: if any brother has a wife that believes not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away.”

This passage represents some of the basis for the new “divorce and remarriage” understanding that Mr. Herbert Armstrong began to teach in 1974. Some of his critics still argue with these verses.

Verses 8, 10, and 12 each address different groups or categories of people within a congregation. The question becomes who are the “rest” in the third category, referred to in verse 12, unless they are people in marriages that are failing?—and what is the “bond(age),” which can be broken (vs. 15)? Consider: human beings can be either “married” (vs. 10) or “unmarried” (vs. 12). There are no other options.

The “rest” must be a category within these two conditions. Read verse 27, noticing that the only conclusion is that a man can be “loosed” in certain circumstances, if he was bound. Think for a moment. A person can only be loosed from something that he was bound to. This means that such a person can remarry and not sin (vs. 28)—he has been loosed!

The Church of God grew out of the understanding that the “loosing” (vs. 27) meant loosed from a wife who had a previous husband to whom she was bound.

So then, cited as an example of our old understanding, a wife would have never actually been bound to her second husband. Such a couple would merely separate—leave each other, but there could have been no actual “loosing” as such, that would have been necessary. In any event, the Church grew out of this understanding, and the booklet below explains the truth of when one can and cannot divorce and remarry.

Suggested reading:

I Corinthians 8

“Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffs up, but charity edifies. And if any man think that he knows any thing, he knows nothing yet as he ought to know…As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one…Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled. But meat commends us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumblingblock to them that are weak…But when you sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world stands…”

This chapter discusses the legality of Christians eating meat that was sacrificed by heathens to an idol.

Verse 7 explains that some weak Christians cannot separate the sacrilege done to such meat from the value of the meat as simple food. This could be likened to a new convert being unwilling to drive a secondhand car that a serial killer had once owned. His conscience causes him to believe the car is condemned, sinful or defiled.

Verse 8 holds two keys. First, people pull this passage from context by declaring that one can eat unclean meats or avoid them—that either position amounts to the same thing. However, the true overall intent is actually an important principle for all converted people to consider when with weak brethren. Christians should be careful not to do anything that may be a “liberty” (vs. 9)—recall the I Corinthian 6:12-13 explanation—but defiles the conscience of a weak bystander observing him practicing it. An example might be that of a newly baptized person who cannot yet drink liquor, because of prior mistaken belief that alcohol is wrong in any amount or form. Such a person may have to battle his conscience for a long time to ever be able to enjoy even one drink!

No suggested reading.

I Corinthians 10:27

“If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and you be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.”

Many feel that this passage indicates God changed His laws concerning unclean meats. At first glance, it does seem to say that there are situations in which eating them is acceptable—or even advisable. So, did the apostle Paul institute a change in God’s Law? The subject is not unclean meats.

To answer this question, we must reflect on the background of the Corinthians, whom Paul is addressing in this epistle. In ancient Greece, pagan temples were the site of continual sacrifices and offerings to idols. To the Corinthians, whom Paul was used to convert from paganism, this would have been a part of everyday existence.

After making a sacrifice, the one who brought the meat would usually be the one who ate it. However, every day there was a surplus of meat, which was left to the local pagan priesthood. The priests, realizing that they could gain from this surplus, would then sell the leftover meat to local “shambles”—butcher shops. The public could then purchase the once-sacrificed meat for their personal consumption. This practice caused problems to develop.

The Corinthians had learned through Paul’s diligent teaching that they, as Christians and followers of the true God, were to abstain from pagan sacrifices and rituals (I Cor. 10:14-21). However, some wondered if eating meat purchased from the “shambles” would be a sin. They had no way of knowing if it had been sacrificed to an idol—nor could they be sure that the meat served to them by friends was not “defiled” in this way.

Notice I Corinthians 10:19. Paul is stating that the idol is just a thing made of wood and stone, and the meat is just meat. Verses 20 and 21 reveal that the sin would be involving oneself in the pagan sacrifice itself—that this ceremony was what was wrong, not the eating of such meat that went to a butcher shop.

Now let’s read verse 25: “Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience sake.” Paul basically told the Corinthians to stop fretting and continue to consume meat sold in the local butcher shops. As long as the meat was clean (according to God’s dietary laws), it did not matter whether it had been offered to an idol. This also applied to the meals eaten in the homes of their friends—as long as the meat was clean, it was permissible to eat it.

The use of “whatsoever” in verses 25 and 27 does not imply that God was repealing His clean and unclean meats laws. Nor was Paul trying to do away with them. The context of this chapter clearly indicates that the issue involves the meat that was sacrificed to idols.

The subject of clean versus unclean meats is not the problem—nor is it even mentioned. Both Paul and the Corinthians would have been aware of and obeyed God’s dietary laws, as recorded in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14. These laws are to be followed by all Christians through all ages.

But what did Paul mean by the phrase, “Ask no question for conscience sake”? Basically, this was a warning to the Corinthians not to ask the server of the meal where the meat came from. It did not matter, as he had told them—so what was the point in worrying about it? Besides, if the meat was proclaimed “tainted,” and the Christian proceeded to consume it, it might lead the host to feel that the Christian was compromising his beliefs, or endorsing idol worship. Of course, if someone stated that the meat was sacrificed to an idol, the Christian should cease to eat it, so as not to lead others to believe that he thought idolatry was acceptable.

Again, the issue at hand was not clean and unclean meats, but the ingestion of clean meats offered or sacrificed to pagan idols.

Suggested reading:

I Corinthians 11:1-16

“Be you followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. But every woman that prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head…”

Most Protestants believe this extensive passage means that women must cover their heads with a hat in church. This is very easily disproved, because the subject is plainly “hair” not hats (vs. 14-15). If the subject was hats, why does verse 6 mention “shorn” and “shaven” as acts of dishonor to women practicing them? The importance of long hair on women, not the wearing of hats, is the subject because hair not hats is shorn or shaven.

With the wrong explanation of this verse, a kind of duplicity becomes worse, particularly among women in the modern world. They often cut their hair extremely short, but deem it proper as long as they wear a hat in church!

No suggested reading.

I Corinthians 11:25

“After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in My blood: this do you, as oft as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.”

Many believe “as oft as you do it” means to take the bread and wine as often as you choose. Is this the case?

The proper explanation arises from verse 24, and is easy to understand. The Passover is a memorial, “a remembrance.” Memorials are observed on an annual basis. Verse 26 refers to “the Lord’s death,” which occurred on Passover (Christ is “our Passover” – I Cor. 5:7). The Passover is always observed only once a year.

Also, verse 28 shows that the Passover ceremony is preceded by personal examination. This could not logically be done every day or even every week.

No suggested reading.

I Corinthians 15:29

“Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then baptized for the dead?”

This passage represents a central teaching of the Mormon Church, which feels that the phrase “baptized for the dead” means that each convert has an ongoing obligation to be baptized for every deceased relative that he or she can identify. This leads Mormons to meticulously research and comb their genealogy, so that all their relatives can be “saved” by ‘‘substitute” baptism. While utterly ridiculous and contrary to the entire plan of salvation, incredibly, millions believe it.

This verse actually means that all Christians “are baptized for the hope that the dead are later resurrected.” Colossians 3:3 explains that a Christian’s life is “hid(den) with Christ in baptism” (also Rom. 6:3-6). Hebrews 6:17-19 shows that the resurrection is the hope that Christians have as an “anchor of the soul.” Colossians 1:18 states that Christ was the firstborn from the dead—this was His hope!

In I Corinthians 15, heresy (vs. 12) was occurring. Some were saying that there is no resurrection from the dead. Paul proves this to be wrong and this is the context of the whole passage. In other words, he asks, “What about the dead who died with hope of the resurrection, if there is no such thing?”

No suggested reading.

I Corinthians 15:51

“Behold, I show you a mystery; we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed.”

Does this passage teach that human beings possess immortal souls that sleep upon death—often referred to as “soul sleep”?

Ezekiel 18:4 and 20 state directly that souls can “die.” Notice that I Corinthians 15:51 does not say anything about souls. However, it is true that death is certainly like sleep, in that Christians awaken in the resurrection as though no time had passed since their last consciousness. Also notice I Thessalonians 4:15-16, which states that the dead rise first at Christ’s Return. “Sleeping” is also mentioned in this parallel chapter. Reference to sleep is an analogy, not a fact pertaining to supposed souls within people. In a host of verses, the plain Bible teaching is that the dead are dead.

No suggested reading.

I Corinthians 16:1-3

“Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do you. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God has prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever you shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem.”

This passage is the generally recognized authority for passing the “collection plate” every Sunday as the central means of funding for the “church.” Does it represent a general command to all Christians, for all time, to give freewill offerings at “Sunday services”? If not, what is the account describing?

The offering described is unique in five separate ways, and it will be clear that it has nothing to do with “passing the plate” at weekly local services:

(1) It is a specific offering (Romans 15:25-28 references the same offering).

(2) It was to be given to a specific people (see Romans 15:26; I Corinthians 16:3).

(3) It was done at a specific time (when Paul passed through).

(4) It was given at a specific place (“let everyone of you lay by him in store”). This is because Paul would come later (vs. 3—“when I come”) to gather what the brethren had been individually saving at home (“lay by him”).

(5) This command is entirely specific to the Corinthians (vs. 1). It should be clear that it is not a command for Sunday collections, but merely instruction to local brethren to store an important offering. It was to help poor brethren in Jerusalem—and was not for the ministry, or for the administration of the church, or for “missionary work” around the world, or for any other purpose than that described!

Finally, this letter was received in Corinth during the Days of Unleavened Bread. “First day of the week” should correctly be translated “first of the weeks (plural).” The collection was almost certainly to happen immediately after the Days of Unleavened Bread, in the first week counting toward Pentecost. It was not instruction to give on Sunday, the first day in the weekly cycle, as another means of validating Sunday-keeping.

No suggested reading.

II Corinthians 2:15-16

“For we are unto God a sweet savor of Christ, in them that are saved, and in them that perish: to the one we are the savor of death unto death; and to the other the savor of life unto life. And who is sufficient for these things?”

What do the phrases “death unto death” and “life unto life” mean? Verse 16 refers to verse 15. “Perish” means the process of “perishing.” Consider: Christians appear to the world (“those that are perishing”) to be worshipping a dead leader (Christ), which in their mind leads to a dead way of life. Also, those perishing are dead in sins now, which could ultimately lead to the second death later, if they do not eventually come to repentance and receive forgiveness.

On the contrary, true Christians, those who are in the process of being saved, appear to be: (1) Leading an abundant life now in route to eternal life later, and (2) serving a living Christ who has already received eternal life and resides in heaven.

To all who view them, true Christians always appear to be one or the other.

No suggested reading.

II Corinthians 3:9

“For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more does the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.”

What are the “ministration of condemnation” and the “ministration of righteousness”?

Take a moment to read the entire chapter and then notice verse 11. It shows the latter (ad)ministration is more glorious than the earlier (ad)ministration (of condemnation). The ministration of condemnation is the ministration of death (vs. 7) of the Old Testament, when people either died for their sins (death is the ultimate condemnation) or paid severe penalties.

The ministration of righteousness represents the New Testament period, when people can be forgiven and cleansed by Christ’s righteousness. From this point forward, people could now be helped to live righteously because the Holy Spirit is available, making this possible. Verse 13 mentions Moses’ veil, which he wore in the presence of the Israelites. This was a symbol, which showed that the ministration of death was all that Israel could understand—because their understanding was veiled. The future terms of the New Testament were veiled (blinded) from Israel’s mind (vs. 14). This veil was a type of the wall in Israel’s collective mind to the understanding that Christ would die, for their sins and the sins of the world, at His first coming.

Suggested reading:

II Corinthians 5:1-8

“For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon with our house which is from heaven: if so be that being clothed we shall not be found naked. For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life. Now He that has wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also has given unto us the earnest of the Spirit. Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord: (for we walk by faith, not by sight:) we are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.”

Be sure to read this entire passage before the explanation.

Paul is speaking of being “at home in the body” and “absent from the Lord” (vs. 6), and then “to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord” (vs. 8). This scripture is similar in principle to Philippians 1:23-24, explained later.

Does verse 8 prove that going to heaven is the reward Paul was looking forward to at death? Was Paul’s immortal soul waiting to be “absent from his body” in order to join Christ (“the Lord”) in heaven? It is critical to notice that Paul said nothing of when and where he would be with Christ! Nothing in the text implies that this would happen immediately. Verse 2 references how Christians “groan” to one day become spirit with God. This is what Paul sought above all things.

All of I Corinthians 15 explains that Christians have two bodies: One is physical (the first body). The other is a spirit body (at the resurrection). Paul was speaking of this spirit body, which comes later at the resurrection. This entire chapter becomes the context of II Corinthians 5:1-8.

Verse 4 is the key to the entire passage! Our physical bodies are a type of “clothing” and when Christians are dead they are, in a sense, unclothed! Paul recognized this and, because he did not merely want to die (and “be unclothed”), he put the emphasis on having “mortality [death] be swallowed up of life”—eternal life!

Verse 7 reveals that Christians walk in faith in this life looking to salvation, while Hebrews 11:13 reveals that they see salvation “afar off”—not something that occurs immediately upon death. The verses disproving the immortal soul concept (Ezek. 18:4, 20; Matt. 10:28; etc.) also apply to verse 8.

Suggested reading:

II Corinthians 6:1-2

“We then, as workers together with him, beseech you also that you receive not the grace of God in vain. (For He says, I have heard you in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succored you: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)”

Does verse 2 state that now is the only time in which salvation is offered to mankind? It is almost universally believed and taught that “the day of salvation” mentioned here means that everyone alive today is getting his “chance” for salvation now.

The word “the” in verse 2 is actually mistranslated as the definite article, but the original Greek reads “a day of salvation,” the indefinite article.

The world is not facing a “now or never” ultimatum from God, with missionaries desperately trying to “get the masses saved.” The world is now blind—deceived (Rev. 12:9). On the other hand, though God’s Church has often been accused of teaching that people get “two chances” for salvation, it has never taught this. All people get one chance for salvation. We have always understood that learning and knowing the truth is what brings accountability (Jms. 4:17; Heb. 10:26).

Isaiah 49:1-8 mentions this same phrase and includes the indefinite article “a” when describing the prophesied salvation of Israel.

Suggested reading:

• What Is True Conversion?

II Corinthians 10:13-16

“But we will not boast of things without our measure, but according to the measure of the rule which God has distributed to us, a measure to reach even unto you. For we stretch not ourselves beyond our measure, as though we reached not unto you: for we are come as far as to you also in preaching the gospel of Christ: not boasting of things without our measure, that is, of other men’s labors; but having hope, when your faith is increased, that we shall be enlarged by you according to our rule abundantly, to preach the gospel in the regions beyond you, and not to boast in another man’s line of things made ready to our hand.”

Paul speaks of a kind of “rule” (vs. 13) and “line” (vs. 16) here. What is he referring to?

The subject in context is the New Testament ministry. The margin shows that these two words come from the same Greek word kanon, from which comes the familiar word canonize. The Greek word for “measure” (vs. 13) is metron. We get the word meter from it and it means a certain width. This becomes more interesting because kanon is also a reference to the famous Isthmian Games track meet of that time. (This was similar to our modern Olympics.)

In these races, each runner had a lane, “line” or “rule,” in which he ran a certain distance or measure. Consequently, Paul could use this term knowing that Corinth would then easily understand and conclude that he had the authority (“rule”) to correct them, so that they would not be “out of bounds” spiritually. The context (vs. 7-16) reveals this more plainly. The point is that the apostle Paul was telling the brethren in Corinth that he had the authority to make them “toe the line.”

The world’s churches have and employ little or no actual government over their members. This passage simply reveals that there is government in the true Church of God.

No suggested reading.

II Corinthians 12:1-7

“It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knows;) such a one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knows;) how that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter. Of such a one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities. For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he sees me to be, or that he hears of me. And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.”

This account in scripture raises the question of whether Paul visited heaven during his lifetime. Is this what he is describing?

Notice some of the text with certain emphasis and clarifying words added: “It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory, I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord. I knew [know] a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knows;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knows;) how that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter” (vs. 4).

This question arises: Does verse 4 prove that Paul went to heaven, because “he was caught up into paradise,” and that heaven is also our reward? The Bible does reveal that paradise is near God’s throne in the third heaven: “He that has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says unto the churches; to him that overcomes will I give to eat of the tree of life…in the midst of the paradise of God” (Rev. 2:7).

There is no doubt that this account does refer to Paul himself and no one else. He uses the pronoun “I” fourteen times.

It is also clear that this event was a “vision”—a “revelation”—from God. Verse 1 mentions “I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.” In verse 7, Paul added, “And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.”

Verse 2 shows that Paul’s experience was so real to him that he could not discern if it was a vision or something that really happened! The word “knew,” in verse 2, should be translated “know.” Again, Paul was obviously speaking of himself. This is not written in past tense, as though he was speaking of having once known someone else to whom the account pertained.

In verse 3, Paul repeats his uncertainty for emphasis. Understand! In no way does this represent Paul’s future in heaven! Remember, Paul could not have literally gone to heaven, because Christ said, “No man has ascended up to heaven, but…the Son of man which is in heaven” (John 3:13).

This unusual experience was given to Paul for an extraordinary reason—so that he would have the special strength to endure all that he would be required to suffer over the course of his ministry. In the previous chapter, 11:23-33, Paul describes the terrible and seemingly endless trials and persecution that he experienced. His ability to endure all these difficulties required special encouragement from God. This was why Paul was allowed to see his future glory in the resurrection—when he will actually receive salvation.

Verses 5-6 show that Paul described himself indirectly so that people would not think too highly of him. He realized that people could begin to view him as an exalted person, merely because of what had been the vision God had shown him. This is why he said what he said. Notice again: “Of such an one will I glory: yet of myself I will not glory, but in mine infirmities. For though I would desire to glory, I shall not be a fool; for I will say the truth: but now I forbear, lest any man should think of me above that which he sees me to be, or that he hears of me.”

Paul remained humble by “glorying in his infirmities.” Yet, he received great inspiration from this extraordinary vision to press on through the rest of his difficult ministry. This account has nothing to do with Paul having been to heaven during his lifetime.

No suggested reading.

II Corinthians 12:16

“But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.”

How could Paul, a Christian, use guile (craft or trickery) to gain advantage or prove a point to others?

The most likely explanations are: (1) He was possibly quoting something that the Corinthians had been saying, or (2) he was being sarcastic because he might have been previously accused of this (recall chapter 10 and notice that he defends his office in 12:11), or (3) there are times when a deeply converted person, one who knows their true motives, could employ godly psychology to “win souls” (Prov. 11:30)—or to point out the error of another person.

An example of the latter is Nathan the prophet using psychology to help David see the evil that he had done to Uriah the Hittite (II Sam. 12:1-9). Also, when it is properly understood, the entire book of Philemon is seen to be a detailed study in converted psychology used by Paul to win Philemon.

No suggested reading.

Galatians 2:4

“And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage.”

What is the “liberty…in Christ Jesus” referenced here?

Those who believe that the Law of God was done away by Christ’s sacrifice believe that the “bondage” spoken of here is the keeping of the Ten Commandments—and the “liberty” is freedom from keeping them.

First, read Matthew 5:17-19 and James 2:8-12. James states that God’s law is a royal law (vs. 8), and verse 12 calls it a “law of liberty.” Also see Romans 7:12 and 14, Micah 4:2, Deuteronomy 5:29 (which uses the words “always” and “forever”), Romans 13:8 and 10 and I John 5:3, among many others. Finally, notice Acts 15:1-2, which shows that some were teaching the need for obedience to the law of Moses, not the Ten Commandments, which is the Law of God. Note the reference to the “book of the law,” in the Galatians 3:10 explanation, regarding circumcision, washings, sacrifices, etc. Also consider rereading the I Corinthians 6:12 explanation. In addition, Hebrews 2:14-15 explains that the bondage pertaining to the law is bondage to the death penalty for all who break it and who do not repent.

No suggested reading.

Galatians 2:11

“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.”

Why was Peter “to be blamed” by Paul? What had he done?

It is interesting as a side note that Peter, with whatever was the wrong attitude that he demonstrated, was not a very good “Pope.” (Remember, Catholics teach that he was the first Pope—Matthew 16:18 explanation—and no one among the Catholic hierarchy would dare blame the Pope publicly for anything.)

In Galatia, certain Jews wanted to see the Mosaic “book of the law” taught in this region inhabited largely by Gentiles. The Jews thought that keeping this law made them more righteous than the Gentiles (see Gal. 2:4 explanation).

This contention polarized and split these two groups! This was so serious that some of the apostles had become polarized into one “camp” or the other—rather than combating the problem. Verses 12-13 show that Peter (a Jew) and Barnabas sided with the Jews (vs. 14), but Paul, apostle to the Gentiles, saw this and rebuked Peter openly (vs. 14-21)! Verse 12 shows that certain Jewish converts of James appeared on the scene while Peter was sitting with Gentiles. Seeing them, Peter removed himself from the Gentiles for fear of what the Jews (the “circumcision”) might think.

Verse 13 shows that Peter actually was part of causing the division to grow worse, until Paul asked (paraphrasing vs. 14), “How can you who have the liberty the Gentiles have, being a Jew yourself, turn around and tell Gentiles they should give up their liberty (from the Mosaic law) and live like the Jews (who keep it)?” This explains what was really the hypocrisy that Paul was addressing.

No suggested reading.

Galatians 2:16

“Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.”

Does this scripture say that Christians should not attempt to keep God’s law because law—commandment—keeping cannot save anyone? This is the first of several usually-misunderstood passages in Galatians supposedly teaching that the Ten Commandments are no longer in effect.

Notice that the scripture actually says, “the works of the law cannot justify us.” Grasp this all-important point. The living Christ never condones sin. He is always willing to forgive it, but then commands, “Go, and sin no more” (John 8:11). Notice that Galatians 2:17 asks, “is…Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.” Now read Romans 2:13, which states that Christians must be “doers of the law to be justified,” and Romans 3:20, which seems to contradict, “by the…law…there shall no flesh be justified.” Either Paul contradicted himself in successive chapters or both statements are true!

Galatians 2:16 states that Christians are justified “by the faith of Christ…” Since Christians must be doers of the law to be justified by Christ (Rom. 2:13), it becomes clear why James recorded that faith and works go together (2:18).

Let’s make this even more clear. If men were saved by keeping the law, then they would be able to brag to God that they had earned salvation (Eph. 2:8-10). Ephesians 2:10 states that Christians are “created…unto good works,” while verse 9 shows that these works have no power to save anyone. Christians keep the law—but that cannot pay for a single past sin (Rom. 6:17-18)! People are justified by the blood of Christ (Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14) and saved by His life (recall Romans 5:10), but Christ will not justify anyone who continues to disobey Him!

No suggested reading.

Galatians 3:10-12

“For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continues not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, the just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith: but, the man that does them shall live in them.”

As with so many other passages in Galatians that are twisted out of context, this is another much-quoted scripture attempting to disprove commandment keeping. The verses cited in the Galatians 2:16 explanation are all equally applicable in explaining how faith (vs. 11) and works (vs. 10) are inseparable! I Timothy. 1:18-19 helps explain James 2:18, because it shows that the conscience must be rid of guilt, or faith will be shipwrecked!

Christians demonstrate their faith in God by keeping His law and it requires faith in Christ’s power at work in the person for him to succeed. For example, it takes faith to give a tithe of one’s income with pressing bills on hand—it takes faith to keep the Sabbath and Holy Days when one could be ridiculed or lose employment as a result—it takes faith to resist surgery or medical treatment that may be prescribed, in certain circumstances, because one believes that God will heal!

Ultimately, it takes the greatest faith for Christians to believe that God will resurrect their bodies at Christ’s Return. Think of it this way: Since all Christians will be dead, they would never know if God broke His promise, and that they never “awoke” into His kingdom (I Thes. 4:14-15).

Realize that the book of Galatians almost invariably is referring to the “book of the law” (vs. 10, 12, 17-19)—physical sacrifices, washings, etc., that Old Testament Israel was required to keep—but that New Testament Israel (the Church – Rev. 12) is not.

Finally, the passage contains two confusing phrases that summarize the confusion of most: “Cursed is everyone who continues not in all things…in the book of the law” and, again referencing the law, “The man that does them shall live in them.” What do these mean? Simply that, if one is going to ignore the role of faith and return to the physical ceremonies as certain Jews were teaching the Galatians to do, that person had better keep “all things” in Moses’ law—in other words, he had better fully “live in them.” But this still would not save him.

No suggested reading.

Galatians 3:13

“Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree.”

Does this scripture declare that law keeping puts one under a curse? The question is best summarized as this: From what did Christ redeem us—the law itself, or the “curse of the law”?

The law’s curse is its penalty of death (Rom. 6:23). The laws in society against rape, murder, kidnapping, armed robbery, and other offences are not curses. But everyone would agree that the penalties for breaking them—from fines, to jail, to long prison terms, to execution for capital offenses—certainly are a curse!

Christ was made a “curse for us,” not because He kept the law perfectly for us, but because He suffered the death penalty for us (Heb. 2:9-10; John 3:16)! Law keeping is not a curse—but the penalty for sin certainly is.

No suggested reading.

Galatians 3:18-19

“For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise. Wherefore then serve the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.”

This passage is also used to show that obedience to the commandments do not bring salvation—(eternal) “inheritance.” So some were asking, “wherefore then serve the law?”—or what is the point of keeping the Ten Commandments?

Verse 19 holds the key to understanding the text because it shows Christians how to deduce which law is being discussed. Notice that the law described is one that was “added” to something “because of transgressions.”

What is a transgression? I John 3:4 states that “sin is the transgression of the law.” Since people can only sin (transgress) when law is present (Rom. 4:15), then there must have already been a law in place to have another law added to it! Of course, the reason for this was that the ancient Israelites were sinning as do any normal human beings and, like children, needed a “schoolmaster” (Gal. 3:24), a governor or baby-sitter (Gal. 4:2) until they could conduct themselves as adults!

Verse 19 explains that the book of the law, which some were still urging the Galatians to keep, was only a law to be kept “till the seed [Christ] should come.” Finally, verse 21 states, “Is the [book of] the law then against the promises [Plan] of God?” The answer is, of course, no. But observing the book of the law cannot justify or give anyone righteousness.

No suggested reading.

Galatians 4:9-10

“But now, after that you have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn you again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto you desire again to be in bondage? You observe days, and months, and times, and years.”

Many have asserted that this passage condemns the keeping of the Holy Days and the Sabbath? Is this what it means?

Protestants teach that the Galatians were returning to these practices. This is impossible! I repeat: The Galatians were Gentiles and had never kept any of God’s Sabbaths—annual or weekly—or had even heard of the true God before their calling. Grasp this. They could not return to what they had never known!

Also, read Leviticus 19:26, Isaiah 1:13-14 and Deuteronomy 18:9-10 to see that God strongly condemned keeping various “days” and “times”! These were humanly-devised “sabbaths” and “holy days,” actually like today’s many familiar holidays—and this very word derives from “holy days.” Leviticus 23 reveals that God wants HIS Sabbaths kept! At the same time, He consistently condemned the wrong days and man-made “sabbaths” of the above-referenced verses.

Nowhere did God ever command the observance of any months. Colossians 2:8 and 20-22 explain that the “weak and beggarly elements” (referenced there) are philosophical forms of will-worship and self-denial, devised by men and commonly found in certain parts of the world. The word “rudiments” (Col. 2:8) is the same word translated “elements” in Galatians.

No suggested reading.

Galatians 4:21-31

“Tell me, you that desire to be under the law, do you not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which engenders to bondage, which is Hagar. For this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answers to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, you barren that bears not; break forth and cry, you that travails not; for the desolate has many more children than she which has a husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what says the Scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.”

I have chosen to include the entire passage for aid in studying it. What do these 11 verses refer to—and mean? The context is somewhat difficult to understand, so a verse-by-verse approach is best:

vs. 21—The reference to law means the “book of law,” and “hear” means to “fully understand.”

vs. 22—The bondmaid (Hagar) bore Ishmael (a type of the world). Notice verse 24 to see this.

vs. 23—Isaac was a son promised by God and truly a “miracle baby” (Rom. 4:16-21; Gen. 17:1-6). Ishmael was born entirely of human effort, by Abraham and Hagar, without involvement of faith.

vs. 24—The two covenants mentioned here represent the Old Covenant and the New Testament, respectively. The Old Covenant was a study in human effort alone, which always leads to a continuing in bondage to sin. The New Testament included promises that were given requiring belief through the faith of Christ found in His followers. It is this kind of belief that leads to freedom from the penalty of sin.

vs. 25—The world is in bondage to: (1) sin, (2) the frustration of doing things by human effort alone, and (3) the ways, customs, and traditions of society.

vs. 26—The reference to Jerusalem is to the New Testament Church (which is our mother—see Hebrews 12:22-23 and Revelation 12).

vs. 27—More people are in bondage in today’s world than are spiritually free, so Christians ought to rejoice that our mother—the Church—is not barren and does have children. The “desolate” are the world, and it has “many more children” than does the Church, the “she which has an husband [God].”

vs. 28—Self-explanatory.

vs. 29—The world hates true Christians today, just as the Arabs (Ishmael) hate Jews (born of Sarah and Isaac).

vs. 30—Ultimately, the Church will be saved in advance of the world, which now hates and persecutes it.

vs. 31—The New Testament Church.

Suggested reading:

• America and Britain in Prophecy

Ephesians 1:3

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ.”

Does this passage teach that Christians receive all their “spiritual blessings” later, after they “go to heaven”?

The problem is a mistranslation. The verse should properly conclude with “…all spiritual blessings which are enjoyed in heaven in Christ.” Malachi 3:9-10 explains that God blesses those who obey him today with the ability to enjoy the same excitement and thrills that He enjoys spiritually now! Recognize that spiritual blessings almost invariably precede physical blessings, anyway. If this happened the other way around, it would probably destroy Christians—prosperity would choke them, leaving them with little need to seek God for their daily needs, and for protection and guidance.

Also, Psalm 16:11 reveals Christians will one day in the kingdom of God only then truly experience “fullness of joy” as well as “pleasures for evermore” after receiving salvation. It was this part of salvation to which Paul referred—to these “blessings [enjoyed] in heavenly places.”

No suggested reading.

Ephesians 1:5

“Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will.”

Are Christians God’s “adopted” sons, or will they be real sons after the resurrection? Does it matter?

The concept of adoption by God represents a subtle counterfeit to God’s Master Plan. Satan wants Christians to believe that they are only going to be artificially added by God to an already complete Family and family Name.

The popular belief and idea of a closed, completed Godhead—the trinity—does not allow for more sons of God beyond Jesus Christ. However, Colossians 1:18 and Romans 8:29 plainly state that Christ is the firstborn of many brethren who are to follow later into the family by the same process of conversion, begettal, spiritual growth and resurrection from the dead (John 3:3-6).

Christians are not adopted children, but are sons as legitimate as Christ Himself. This is because every child of God is begotten by the same Spiritual Father (Matt. 3:17). Christians are in every sense real sons—in a real Family—named of God. Romans 8:23 contains the same mistranslation found in Ephesians 1:5. The phrase “adoption of sons” comes from the Greek word huiothesia, and should be correctly translated “spirit of sonship.”

Suggested reading:

Ephesians 2:8-9

“For by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast.”

How are Christians “saved by grace through faith and not of works”? Does this passage say that works play no part in the life of a Christian?

For this to be true, then even faith cannot be “worked up.” Otherwise, faith would be a human work supplied by the Christian, meaning that God would then owe him salvation by works and not by “gift.” The end of verse 8 shows that Christians’ faith is given as a free gift. It is not a faith “of ourselves,” as is shown in the explanations for Galatians 3:10-11 and 3:18-19. All these explanations help explain Ephesians 2:8-9, but Galatians 2:16 is particularly helpful.

The word grace means unmerited pardon (or forgiveness). Christians neither earn nor deserve such mercy and help from God, yet receive it anyway. It takes godly faith to believe in this forgiveness. When truly understood, Galatians 2:16 and 3:21-22 explain a remarkable principle. Consider that “we believe in Christ”—that He is the Christ. But Galatians 2:16 shows that “we are justified by the faith of Christ”—by His actual faith living in us as a fruit of the Holy Spirit (Gal. 5:22-23). In other words, Christ even supplies the faith to believe that we will be justified (forgiven) and saved.

Protestants overlook verse 10, which qualifies verses 8 and 9. It explains that “good works” (Christ’s works in the Christian) ARE still a fundamental requirement. These works, though, can never be the by-product of human effort alone. If so, each Christian could come before God boasting that he was owed salvation!

Suggested reading:

• What Does the New Testament Teach About Law And Grace?

Ephesians 2:14-15

“For He is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of partition between us; having abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in Himself of twain one new man, so making peace.”

What was the “middle wall of partition” that existed between Jews and Gentiles, which was “broken down”? Was it the law that was “abolished”? Let’s carefully examine this almost universally misunderstood passage phrase-by-phrase:

(1) Jesus Christ is “our [Jew and Gentile] peace…” (vs. 14).

(2) “…who hath made both (Jew and Gentile) one (people).”

(3) “having abolished…the enmity [the hatred between peoples was abolished, not the law]” (vs. 15).

(4) The word “even” (vs. 15) is in italics. This means it is a manmade addition, thought by the 1611 translators to be helpful in making the passage more easily understood. It actually confuses the reader and the passage is best rendered “due to the law of commandments.”

(5) Similarly, the word “contained” is in italics and this word is best rendered “interpreted in ordinances,” or talmudic traditions.

See Mark 7:7 and Colossians 2:20-22 for reference. Recognize that “ordinances” derives from the Greek dogmasine—from which comes the English word dogma. These dogmas, or ordinances, were the Pharisaical “do’s and don’ts” recorded and still found in the Jewish Talmud! Sixty-five of these traditions pertained to just the Sabbath day alone and how Jewish leaders—who did not have God’s Spirit!—decided that it was to be observed!

What Christ abolished was the hatred—“enmity”—between Jews and Gentiles due to these awful, self-righteous laws. It was this approach that made the Jews believe and teach that they were superior to Gentiles.

No suggested reading.

Ephesians 4:8

“Wherefore he says, When He ascended up on high, He led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.”

Does this passage mean that Christ takes His servants “captive” in order to “lead” them to heaven? How exactly does Christ lead “captivity captive”?

First, Catholics believe that this scripture refers to limbus patri—meaning the place of limbo occupied by the fathers (Old Testament figures like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, Samuel, etc.). They teach that these men were captives trapped in a place of salvation limbo before Christ “ascended” to heaven and made it possible for them to finally join Him there. In this way, Christ supposedly led “captivity (the Old Testament fathers) captive” to Himself.

Do you see that it is foolish—even silly—to think of men trapped in captivity in a kind of vague “neverland” or prison for thousands of years until Christ could “free” them?

The real meaning of the verse is that those who serve sin are captive to it and are its servant or slave (Rom. 6:16-19), until repentance and conversion. Christ ascended to heaven to become the High Priest of God’s people (Heb. 4:14-16) and to intercede for them before the Father so that they can receive necessary, regular forgiveness of sins and be offered salvation—and the gift of God’s Holy Spirit to even begin their conversion (Phil. 2:6; II Cor. 13:5). At begettal, Christians literally become captives of Christ and servants (slaves) of righteousness. He then holds all claim over their lives (I Cor. 6:20; 7:23; Rom. 12:1-2).

Ephesians 4:8 is about conversion, not salvation. Romans 6:17-18 states, “But God be thanked, that you were the servants of sin, but you have obeyed from the heart…Being then made free from sin, you became the servants of righteousness.” When this occurs, one is no longer captive to sin and Satan (II Tim. 2:25-26)!

Suggested reading:

• The Ten Commandments – “Nailed to the Cross” or Required for Salvation?

Ephesians 6:4

“And, you fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.”

How does a parent apply this instruction? How are the terms “provoke,” “nurture,” and “admonition” to be applied?

Colossians 3:21 teaches that provoking a child can also discourage the child as well as cause different reactions, depending on the particular child. This nearly worst of all parental mistakes can be done by teasing, belittling, criticizing, or any kind of wrong correction, such as consistently being too strict. This explanation best fits in Ephesians, because it goes on to say, “but bring them up in the nurture (gentle, patient instruction) and admonition (correction, punishment) of the Lord.”

Many modern parents either do not punish at all or do it as a last resort—out of frustration or anger. If not done in measure—with wisdom and obvious love involved—punishment can cause hatred to well up in the child. Such children will often await the day that they can retaliate against parents, or simply leave the home forever.

Of course, provoking anyone is un-Christian, foolish and wrong. Just as never correcting children will lead to disaster, over-correcting, to the point of provoking them, can be especially disastrous because they could wind up in jail or with other terrible social difficulties. These children will often become very permissive parents or, ironically, could themselves go on to become abusive parents.

Suggested reading:

• Train Your Children God’s Way

Philippians 1:23-24

“For I am in a strait between two, having a desire to depart, and to be with Christ; which is far better: nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you.”

Was Paul saying that he wished to die and immediately go to heaven? As with II Corinthians 5:1-8, be careful of assumptions!

II Timothy 4:6-8 shows that Paul knew that he would have his reward “at that day” and at “His (Christ’s) appearing,” rather than at death. Notice: “For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love His appearing.”

When is “that day”? Revelation 22:12 states, “behold, I come quickly; and My reward is with Me, to give every man…” (also I Thes. 4:16-17; I Cor. 15:52; Dan. 12:2-3). As we have seen, and so much of our literature carefully explains, Christians do not “die and go to heaven.” They wait (in the grave) for Christ to return to earth bringing “His reward with Him.”

Paul knew that the dead who “sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake” (Dan. 12:2). He also understood Ecclesiastes 9:5-6, 10 and Psalm 146:4. These verses show that when a person dies, his thoughts perish, and he is unaware of the passing of time—“for the dead know not anything.” Paul recognized that his next waking moment would be in the resurrection, and that it would seem as though it had happened immediately upon death, not almost 2,000 years later.

Suggested reading:

• What Does “Born Again” Mean?

Philippians 2:27

“For indeed he was sick nigh unto death: but God had mercy on him; and not on him only, but on me also, lest I should have sorrow upon sorrow.”

What does “sorrow upon sorrow” mean?

Verse 25 shows that the “he” of verse 27 was Epaphroditus, a man beloved by the Philippian Church (vs. 26 shows he did not want the Philippians to grieve) and one who ministered greatly to Paul (vs. 25). The sorrow that Paul did not want to have was that of this man’s death. However, God spared Epaphroditus, and therefore Paul from sorrow (vs. 27). This sadness would have been on top of Paul’s already-existing sorrow—that he was in prison at this time (Phil. 1:13, 4:22).

No suggested reading.

Philippians 3:20

“For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Does this passage prove that the dead converse in a strange, new, truer “conversation,” and that they are in heaven?

The word “conversation” derives from the Greek word politeuma and should be properly translated citizenship. The word politics also comes from this word.

This fascinating scripture reveals that a Christian’s “citizenship” is held in heaven (I Peter 3:4, referenced earlier that it is reserved there). These passages explain why Christ said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). This is because it is of, or belongs to, another place—heaven!

Christians are ambassadors for another government (II Cor. 5:20) and citizens of the kingdom of God. This is why they do not participate in man’s systems of government. Their citizenship derives from and is held by a different authority—heaven—GOD!

Christians’ citizenship comes from heaven by the authority of God in heaven. Recall that Revelation 22:12 shows that Christ brings each man’s reward with Him! Philippians 3:21 shows that it is speaking of the resurrection (I Cor. 15; John 5:25-29), when our bodies shall be changed. Verse 20 is not referring to conversation, but rather to citizenship.

Matthew 6:19-23 explains that Christians can store eternal reward in heaven. The analogy is that a Christian’s citizenship is held in heaven for him where no one can destroy it (“neither moth nor rust doth corrupt”).

Philippians 3:20 uses the phrase “from where” in describing Christ’s Return. He comes here—from there—with His reward, not the other way around!

Suggested reading:

• Should Christians Vote?

• War, Killing and the Military

Colossians 2:16-17

“Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.”

Does this scripture state that nobody has authority to tell Christians that they are right or wrong in regards to unclean meats, Holy Day observance, and Sabbath observance? This passage is quoted by nearly every Protestant and Catholic authority to prove this thinking.

The point: Christians should not let people arbitrarily judge what they should or should not do. Only the Church (Col. 1:18)—“the body of Christ” (vs. 17)—can do this. (Also see Ephesians 1:22-23.) The word “is” is in italics and translators blurred the meaning by adding it.

The phrase “in meat or drink” (vs. 16) is correctly translated “for eating or drinking.” Some ascetics in Colossae were teaching that self-denial and will-worship (vs. 20-22) were God’s way (see the Galatians 4:9 explanation).

Notice that the first phrase in verse 17 uses the present tense in reference to the Sabbath and the Holy Days. It says, in effect, “these days are [not were] a [fore] shadow of things to come.” Christians know that the Sabbath and Holy Days picture the Plan of God, which certainly does involve many “things to come.” Verse 18 is a final warning to Christians to not allow anyone to trick them about these important issues, because it is only the Church—the body of Christ—that carried authority to make judgments before the brethren (vs. 17, end).

No suggested reading.

I Thessalonians 1:3

“Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labor of love, and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father.”

What is meant by these three phrases: (1) “work of faith, (2) labor of love, and (3) patience of hope”? Let’s examine each:

(1) Faith certainly involves work because God gives it so that we can do things for Him. Real faith—the active faith of Christ within His servants—is not inert belief. It is active and is a force bringing strength to do works. Faith without works is dead (Jms. 2:17-18).

(2) Labor of love is mentioned, because love is not just a feeling. It is an active approach to keeping the commandments (which are “love,” as explained in I John 5:3 and Rom. 13:10). Christians exercise love, not merely feel it. As was once stated, “It is better to burn out than to rust out.” Love means work and serving!

(3) What about “patience of hope”? Patience means “to bear up under” duress. Hope is very easy as long as Christians are assured that their hope is near. What about when they realize that the hope they look toward may be twenty years away—what about fifty years? What happens when problems, trials, temptations and suffering stand between them and achieving their hope? Doubts can arise and weaken hope. This is why hope must be accompanied by enormous patience (see the Luke 21:19 admonition for the end time). I Thessalonians 1:3 underscores how every word of God is important!

No suggested reading.

I Thessalonians 5:7

“For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.”

To whom does this “drunken”ess and “sleep” refer? Also, what is the “night” referring to?

Romans 11:7-8 reveals that this verse primarily refers to the nation of Israel. Matthew 13:10-17 explains that the world is now blinded and asleep—which are related terms! Matthew 25 describes the final era of God’s Church—the Laodiceans—who fall into this condition. While I Thessalonians 5:7 uses an analogy, it perfectly pictures a world that, at this point, can neither understand God’s Plan nor respond to it. The “night” pictured here is primarily the fact “that men loved darkness to hide and cloak their evil deeds” (John 3:19; 8:12; Eph. 6:12; Matt. 4:16; 6:23; among others). Beginning with Adam and Eve, the world has chosen to be drunk and asleep, and to live a “night” existence.

This passage is also a powerful warning to every true Christian that he or she should be careful not to fall asleep, to dull the senses by drink—literal or otherwise—or to allow darkness to cover his attitude—all of which are practices of the world! Ask: How keenly perceptive can one be about himself, his life, his calling or his salvation, if he is either sleeping, in a drunken stupor or in a pitch-black room?

Suggested reading:

• America and Britain in Prophecy

I Thessalonians 5:23

“And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Again, the question arises: Do people, and therefore Christians, possess an immortal soul?

First read the Matthew 10:28 explanation of how the soul and body are different. The Greek word for “spirit” is pneuma. It means “spirit, breath, current, breeze.” Pneumonia comes from it, literally meaning a disease of breathing. Here, it refers to the spirit in man, which all human beings possess.

This spirit in man is not a soul. See Job 32:8, Luke 23:46, I Corinthians 6:20, Numbers 27:16 and Ecclesiastes 12:7. I Corinthians 2:11 explains the function of the human spirit and how it is works differently than God’s Holy Spirit.

Before explaining the meaning of “soul,” realize that, by this scripture alone, it must be different from the spirit in man or else Paul was being redundant! Psuche is the Greek word for “soul,” and can be translated “drive, energy, breath, life, vitality.” It is best translated here as life.

Soma, the Greek word for “body,” means “body or carcass.” This word is accurately translated.

The soul refers to the eternal life residing within the Christian, because his life is “hid with Christ” (Col. 3:3) or “preserved blameless.”

Suggested reading:

• What Science Will Never Discover About Your Mind

II Thessalonians 2:6-7

“And now you know what withholds that He might be revealed in His time. For the mystery of iniquity does already work: only He who now lets will let, until he be taken out of the way.”

This awkwardly-phrased KJV translation requires help to be clear. It is actually a prophecy concerning the false, universal Babylonian religious system that has dominated Christendom for 2,000 years and has always sought to enter and destroy God’s Church. God’s Spirit literally “withheld” this system from, at that time, crushing the young New Testament Church (vs. 6) that Christ was raising up through Paul and the other apostles.

The “he” of verse 6 is the final, end-time man of sin (vs. 3), referred to in the book of Revelation as the false prophet. To suit His Plan, God did not want this man revealed too early, even though the system that he will lead (vs. 7) has long been active and caused tremendous harm to the world and, periodically, to Christ’s Church.

The end of verse 7 is better translated, “only He [God through the Holy Spirit] who now restrains will, until he [the man of sin] come up out of the midst.” The man of sin comes—and this will happen soon in our age—“out of the midst” (after 2,000 years and after the apostasy) of the false system of this world’s churches. This individual and his partner, a European-based superdictator will be destroyed by Christ’s coming (vs. 8).

Suggested reading:

• Who or What Is the Beast of Revelation?

I Timothy 1:9

“Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers.”

Do the “righteous” need to concern themselves with commandment keeping? Does this verse exempt them from a law that others must keep?

This scripture appears to say that the law is only for the “unrighteous.” But verse 8 states, “the law is good, if a man use it lawfully”—if he does not use it to strive about picky opinions or questions. Of course, only righteous men (Psa. 119:172) would already be keeping the commandments, anyway. In effect, the law is not necessary to point out for them what they are already doing, and in this way was not “made for” the righteous. Far from being “off the hook,” the righteous are ahead of the curve, so to speak, because they are already seeking to obey God.

To paraphrase Paul, “be careful how you use the law—use it lawfully and properly in the way that you ask questions about it, because the unrighteous misuse it and disobey it.” Hence, it is “made” for them—to point out to them their faults.

Suggested reading:

I Timothy 2:15

“Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.”

What does the passage mean when saying that women are “saved in childbearing”?

There are two meanings: (1) The Greek actually means “the childbearing,” and this refers to the birth of Christ, whose crucifixion saves Christians, including all women, and (2) if a woman performs as a strong Christian wife and mother, including her role as teacher of God’s future sons and daughters, she will be saved. The end of the passage makes this clear.

Suggested reading:

• Train Your Children God’s Way

• The Purpose of Marriage – Ever Obsolete?

• You Can Build a Happy Marriage

I Timothy 4:1-5

“Now the Spirit speaks expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God has created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.”

Can “every creature” that God made be eaten for food as long as those who do this are “thankful” (vs. 4)?

Three points clarify this verse:

First, Paul is combating vegetarianism (avoidance of all meat). He is not indicting people promoting avoidance of unclean meat. The passage states “abstain” from meats. This scripture explains the fact that meat (within God’s guidelines) is not a sin to eat.

Second, the Word of God, however, must “sanctify” (set apart) any particular meat. The Bible only sanctifies the clean meats of Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14! This leads to…

Third, verse 3 explains that Christians can thankfully receive meat only if they “believe and know the truth.” John 17:17 declares, “Your word is truth.” The Bible is our only acceptable standard for the truth, and this includes meats that are acceptable to God.

It is important to note Paul records here that abstaining from meats and forbidding to marry are “doctrines of demons.” An interesting side point is that certain clean meats provide crucial proteins for the proper development and strength of the brain, and thus the mind, so that it can resist demons. It is not strange demons would inspire the idea of vegetarianism.

Also—the other subject here—when fully understood, the teaching of celibacy for any reason is utterly satanic, because human marriage represents the very God-given pattern of His Plan to expand His family.

Suggested reading:

• The Purpose of Marriage – Ever Obsolete?

• Sex – Its Unknown Dimension

I Timothy 5:9

“Let not a widow be taken into the number under threescore years old, having been the wife of one man.”

Who is Paul referring to regarding widows “taken into the number”?

The entire context of verses 3 to 9 is important. It is about which women are eligible for third tithe assistance (vs. 3-8). Verse 9 can also be translated, “Let not a widow be enrolled on the list [same as ‘taken into the number’] under age sixty, having been the wife of one man (of course, this means one man at a time).” This guideline may have been laid out because of a particular duress Paul felt that the Church was experiencing at that time.

Suggested reading:

• End All Your Financial Worries

I Timothy 6:10

“For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”

Often quoted, does this verse teach that money is the root of all evil?

This is not what the verse says! A closer look exposes two crucial, overlooked points: (1) It is the “love of” money that is (2) “a” root of all evil, not the root of all evil. The Greek article for “the root” is more properly translated “a root.” (Remember, the Greek language has no definite article.) To love money is both covetous and idolatrous. This is why Paul instructs that having it brings great potential for many “sorrows,” if one is not very careful.

Therefore, God is not condemning the right and proper use of money, but rather the love of it.

Suggested reading:

• Taking Charge of Your Finances

II Timothy 1:6, 14

“Wherefore I put you in remembrance that you stir up the gift of God, which is in you by the putting on of my hands…That good thing which was committed unto you keep by the Holy Ghost which dwells in us.”

What was the “gift of God,” which entered Timothy, probably at ordination, through the laying on of Paul’s hands?

Since Paul did not baptize Timothy, he was almost certainly speaking of ordination, which may have brought additional gifts from the Holy Spirit already present from conversion. Verse 14 reveals that God’s Spirit was capable of keeping this gift (“that good thing”) intact. Most likely, the gift seems to have been either a special ability to speak, as an evangelist, or perhaps a special faith that Timothy needed to carry out his ministry.

No suggested reading.

II Timothy 2:6

“The husbandman that labors must be first partaker of the fruits.”

Who is “the husbandman that labors”?

This passage applies to any true minister whose labor—in this case, his formal work or job—is that of a full-time servant in the Church. Such ministers are always to be the first partakers of the fruits. The fruits are the tithes and offerings of God’s people. When tithes arrive, the ministry is cared for first.

Suggested reading:

• End All Your Financial Worries

Hebrews 4:9

“There remains therefore a rest to the people of God.”

What is the “rest” referred to here that “remains…to the people of God”? The answer becomes the plain New Testament command for God’s people to continue Sabbath observance instead of falling into the popular tradition of Sunday-keeping.

The Greek word rendered here as “rest” is incorrectly translated. It is confused with the other “rest” found in Hebrews 3:11; 4:1, 3, 4 and 8, which derives from a different word. In these other verses, the word translated “rest” is katapausis, which literally means to “rest”—as in the millennial rest!

In 4:9, however, the original word is actually Hebrew, with a Greek suffix attached! The Hebrew word is sabbat, and it can only mean the Hebrew Sabbath! The Greeks had no equivalent word, so the fact that Paul used the Hebrew could only have been for the purpose of referring to the seventh-day Sabbath. Paul added ismos (a Greek suffix) to sabbat (forming the word Sabbatismos) because ismos means “a keeping of” or “a doing of.”

Grasp this! What has been demonstrated here is plain instruction that God’s people today must still keep His Sabbath—“There remains therefore a keeping of the Sabbath for the people of God.” The marginal rendering states this directly.

This scripture is a clear New Testament command to Christians that they must keep the weekly Sabbath rest now, in order to enter the millennial rest later! The context reveals that this is something that Israel had always been unwilling to continue. Paul warns Christians to carefully avoid Israel’s pattern of departing from God’s Law and obedience to His Sabbath command!

Suggested reading:

• The Sabbath – Has Time Been Lost?

• How to Make the Sabbath a Delight

Hebrews 6:20; 7:4, 11, 14, 17

“Where the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek…Now consider how great this man was, unto whom even the patriarch Abraham gave the tenth of the spoils…If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchizedek, and not be called after the order of Aaron?…For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Judah; of which tribe Moses spoke nothing concerning priesthood…For he testifies, you are a priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.”

Who or what is the true identity of Melchizedek (also see the Genesis 14:18 explanation)?

The answer is Jesus Christ. As you read the explanation of each verse, ask how anyone could possibly think that it refers to anyone else:

(1) The word “Melchizedek” means “king of righteousness.”

(2) The phrase “after the order of” means with the rank of (6:20). This begins to reveal Christ, who would then have not just been “on the order of” or merely like Melchizedek. It means that Christ had the same rank.

(3) Hebrews 7:1 shows Melchizedek to be the “King of Salem” or King of the city of Salem (Jerusalem), which means City of Peace (vs. 2). See Isaiah 9:6 for absolute proof that this is Christ, there called the “Prince of Peace.”

(4) Only God can receive tithes (vs. 2, 4)—and, of course, Christ is God (John 1:1, 14).

(5) Only God (vs. 3) has no beginning or end of days. Though they have no end of days, even angels have a beginning of days. So they are ruled out.

(6) Melchizedek was like to the Son of God, who was Christ (vs. 3).

(7) Hebrews 4:15 shows that Christ is the High Priest of all who follow Him, and Melchizedek is still a priest “forever” (vs. 3). No one else is still a priest.

(8) Melchizedek returned as this priest, through Judah, and could only have been Christ (vs. 5-6, 14).

Suggested reading:

• End All Your Financial Worries

• The True Jesus Christ – Unknown to Christianity

Hebrews 7:18-19

“For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw near unto God.”

Has God’s law been “disannulled,” because it could not make its adherents “perfect”? If this is true, is it because it could never help anyone anyway—“the law made nothing perfect” (vs. 19)?

The law spoken of here (vs. 16; 9:10; 10:1-6, 11) is the Mosaic book of the law. It can be “set aside” (not disannulled) so that God can use it later, in the millennium, and this will occur.

Understand! The law of God is not the subject here! The physical, Aaronic priesthood is. This has always been part of the law of Moses, not the law of God! The book of the law could make no one perfect (verses above in chapters 9 and 10). The biggest reason that the book of Hebrews was written was to show Christians that it is Christ’s blood (not that of bulls and goats) that makes them perfect, that justifies them.

No suggested reading.

Hebrews 8:6-8

“But now has He obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also He is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For finding fault with them, He says, Behold, the days come, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah.”

This question arises: Did God in the Old Testament show “poor judgment” in making the Old Covenant and, therefore, have to replace it with the New Testament?

One simple, overlooked key clarifies this verse. Notice that the covenant itself was not faulty, the people were. The plain meaning of verse 8 is “finding fault with them”—the people! God created a “better covenant”…testament, in order to write His law in peoples’ hearts (vs. 10)—to bring spiritual conversion and change in a way that physical Israel never experienced (vs. 11).

So often, careful reading is all that is necessary to understand a “difficult” passage.

No suggested reading.

Hebrews 12:17

“For you know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears.”

Esau sold his birthright to his brother Jacob. Why could this man not repent? Did this happen to him because some human beings are not permitted to change—to repent?

Repent means change, and change always involves a change of mind. Even though Esau was sorry, once he traded away his birthright, it was too late to change his mind or “repent” of his decision. The margin makes this clear by substituting “place of repentance” with “way to change his mind.”

Sin is different—the willing person can always turn from his transgression. But the person who overdrinks, wrecks his car and paralyzes himself has no such later choice. Some choices cannot be undone.

No suggested reading.

Hebrews 12:22-23

“But you are come unto…the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect.”

Does this passage teach that immortal souls of “just men made perfect” are in heaven?

The Bible does teach that Christ, the Father, many angels and the spirits of men are in heaven! We saw that God’s Word plainly says that there is a spirit in every person—but, as we have seen, this is not an immortal soul. Once again, humans do not have immortal souls—reread Genesis 2:7, Ezekiel 18:4 and 20, Matthew 10:28, Romans 6:23, and other verses.

When a converted man dies, God returns his human spirit to Himself. Through this spirit—within it—He has preserved a complete, detailed record of all that pertained to that person’s life. This is the plain teaching of scripture. Notice: “And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless…” (I Thes. 5:23). The verse referenced here has been explained. The spirit, soul and body represent all that was the person. The personality, experiences, accumulated knowledge and character of each human being is stored in the human spirit. This is why it returns to God at death.

Now notice these passages: “Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it” (Ecc. 12:7). And Ecclesiastes 3:21 states, “Who knows the spirit of man that goes upward, and the spirit of the beast that goes downward to the earth?” Certainly, it is very few who know that there is a spirit in man that returns to God at death.

Stephen understood. As he was being martyred for preaching a powerful sermon, the Bible records, “And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep” (Acts 7:59-60). Stephen fell asleep (died) knowing that God would receive his spirit and that it would reunite with him at the resurrection.

Hebrews 12:22-23 reveals that the God “of the spirits of all flesh” (Num. 27:16), of all “just men made perfect,” keeps all these spirits with Him.

In conclusion, the “spirits of just men made perfect” are human spirits containing the stored character, knowledge, personality and experience of every person who has ever lived, with the spirits of converted people—those who had God’s Spirit—awaiting the resurrection. Heaven—the “heavenly Jerusalem”—is where the spirits of all God’s saints from the last 6,000 years are held—preserved intact—awaiting the “coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (I Thes. 5:23). The subject of man’s spirit is large, and the first booklet below thoroughly explains what it is.

Suggested reading:

• What Science Will Never Discover About Your Mind

I Peter 1:4

“To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fades not away, reserved in heaven for you.”

Referenced earlier, does this passage say that Christians receive their reward in heaven?

Notice, once again, the word reserved. The Christian’s reward is reserved in heaven for him, only to be revealed (i.e., salvation) “in the last time” (vs. 5). As stated, all Christians, in effect, hold sure “reservations” for a future event. Peter says nothing about going to heaven to either obtain this reward or to stay there—only that the reward is reserved there until the “last time,” when Christ returns. In this way, a Christian’s reward can remain “incorruptible,” “undefiled,” and “unable to fade.”

Suggested reading:

I Peter 3:19-20

“By which also He went and preached unto the spirits in prison; which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.”

Are these “spirits in prison” evil people who “went to hell” that Christ “preached to” during the three days and three nights He was supposed to be in the grave? This view is easily and properly corrected by using these keys:

(1) The preaching occurred “when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah”—not during Christ’s 72-hour period of death!

(2) The word translated “prison” is not eternal hellfire somewhere under the earth where the “damned” are roasting. Rather, it is the Greek word phulake, which means “a place of restraint or prison.” That place is earth—to where Satan and his demons (Luke 10:18, 20 “spirits”) have been cast down.

During some of the 120 years of Noah’s preaching—the Bible does not say for how long—Christ simultaneously preached to the fallen angels who followed Satan. II Peter 2:4-5 is a helpful reference, because the word translated hell there is really the Greek word tartaroo, which has been explained earlier in this book.

Suggested reading:

I Peter 4:6

“For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the Spirit.”

Some feel that this verse validates the claim that the dead are alive somewhere else, for example, in “heaven” or in an “ever-burning hell.”

To understand this verse, it is vital to know who the “dead” are that Peter was speaking about. By the time this epistle was written, in A.D. 67-69, many thousands of Christians had already received the knowledge of God’s laws, as preached by the apostles, and were living their lives according to those laws. With the passing of time, some of these faithful followers had died in the faith, with others through history martyred by pagan leaders and religious figures.

King Solomon wrote, “For the living know that they shall die: but the dead know not any thing, neither have they any more a reward…Whatsoever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, where you go” (Ecc. 9:5, 10). Those who are physically dead know nothing—and are unable to receive any preaching or communications.

Since the dead know nothing, those who were “dead” had received the gospel while they were still alive!

But there is another way that the gospel is preached unto the “dead.” In the Bible, those that have not repented of their sins—their transgressions not forgiven by God—are sometimes referred to as “dead” (Eph. 2:1, 5; Col. 2:13).

These are “dead” in their iniquity. They have not received the gift of Christ’s sacrifice, nor God’s Holy Spirit—the “earnest” or down payment of salvation—yet. Christ’s statement to a young man, “Let the dead bury their dead…” (Luke 9:60), was a direct reference to those who could not understand spiritual matters—those still under the death penalty. The apostle Paul further explains that they are “…dead in trespasses and sins” (Eph. 2:1). Although still physically alive, by not hearing the words of life—the gospel of the kingdom of God—they are spiritually dead! Christ explains: “It is the spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing: The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life” (John 6:63).

Today, God’s true Church has been commissioned to preach this same gospel to the world “as a witness unto all nations” (Matt. 24:14). However, most people do not heed this message, nor is God calling them at this time (John 6:44). Thus, they remain in ignorance and sin—enslaved under the death penalty—now understood to be what is the true curse of the law!

Suggested reading:

• Which Is the True Gospel?

II Peter 3:10

“But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.”

Was Peter, as some suppose, referring to the future complete annihilation of the earth?

Although verse 10 begins by citing “the day of the Lord,” it uses this event as the opening benchmark in time which unleashes a long series of end-time events culminating in what was mentioned in verse 7. Of course, verse 7 establishes the context of what Peter was focusing upon: “But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.” This is the time of the judgment and destruction of incorrigible and unrepentant sinners that remain on the earth (Matt. 3:12). It also is the culminating event (Rev. 20:13-15) in God’s Plan of Salvation to occur just before the New Heavens and the New Earth discussed in the two final chapters of Revelation.

It is understood that an extensive series of events take place from the time of the “day of the Lord” until the culminating event of the lake of fire which engulfs the earth. Revelation chapter 20 lists this series of intervening events to occur after the “day of the Lord.” The first of these crucial junctures involves the putting away of Satan (Rev. 20:1-3). Next is the establishment of the kingdom of God on Earth for one thousand years (verses 4-6). This is followed by Satan’s final rebellion at the end of the Millennium and his being thrown into the same lake of fire where the beast and false prophet were previously cast (verses 7-10). The next benchmark event is the general resurrection referred to as the Great White Throne judgment (verses 11-12). (Many mistakenly think of this 100-year time of judgment—see Isaiah 65:20-21—as merely the resurrected masses standing in line for “sentencing.”) Only after these events listed in Revelation 20 comes the time of the fire mentioned by Peter.

The lake of fire (Rev. 20:13-15) will destroy or refine all physical components of earth, as Peter describes: “…and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” It is called “unquenchable” in Matthew 3:12 because it cannot be “put out”—it will burn and continue to “purge” until there is no fuel left for it to consume. All remaining life forms and physical remnants left on the earth’s surface, and in its atmosphere, will be either consumed or refined in this fire. Spirit beings will survive this purging process, since they are not affected by physical fire.

In verse 6, Peter compares this cleansing fire to the flood in Noah’s time that was also used by God to rid the earth of sin. And just as with the flood, the planet itself will not be destroyed by this fire, but simply “wiped clean.” The earth will continue to exist (Ecc. 1:4), but in a renewed form.

Continuing in verse 13: “…we, according to His promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwells righteousness.” This is confirmed in Revelation 21:1: “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea,” right after the account of the lake of fire (20:14-15).

Peter then is simply describing, in II Peter 3:10, the cleansing action of the “lake of fire.” The earth’s surface and atmosphere, and everything physical in it, including the unrepentant, will be permanently destroyed. God then will “renew” the earth’s surface in preparation to receive Him and His Family: “And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with them, and they shall be His people, and God Himself shall be with them, and be their God.” (See Revelation 21:2-3, also the rest of chapter 21, as well as chapter 22).

Suggested reading:

• God’s Holy Days or Pagan Holidays?

• Where Is the True Church? – and Its Incredible History!

I John 4:1-3

“Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know you the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: and every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof you have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world.”

What is the meaning of “try the spirits”?

The historic context holds the key. In the first century, a group known as the Gnostics held to a certain philosophy. They believed that Christ did not come as a physical, fleshly person, but rather only as a spirit—an apparition—a phantom! Over time, gnostic thinking took hold and began to flourish in the Church.

Of course, this idea is patently false. But John was forced to combat it, as the first-century Church was going into apostasy and giving way to influence from the bigger, more visible and popular, universal church centered at Rome. A helpful inference comes with a better translation. Starting with the middle of the verse, it should say, “Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God. And every spirit that confesses not that Jesus Christ is coming in flesh is not of God…”

When the issue here is fully understood, it is seen to be part of the doctrine of antichrist. The following vital understanding emerges from this error: If Christ did not come in the flesh, then He could not have been tempted by, and thus could not have overcome, the flesh that he did not have. Besides negating Christ’s role as High Priest (Heb. 4:14-16), Christians are left believing they do not have to follow Christ’s example of overcoming because this is not possible to do. He did not need to overcome anything. Perhaps more than any other single point, it is this idea that has given birth to the idea that Christians need not strive to keep the Law of God—the Ten Commandments. After all, why should one try to observe a law that only Christ was able to observe, and this because He was not composed of flesh. In the end, God’s plan of building the very character of Christ and God is overthrown!

Understand. Christ came in the flesh! And, since His resurrection, Christ is sending his Spirit into Christians, to relive His righteous life through them. Properly understanding this point is vital to explaining any spirit not of God!

Suggested reading:

• Here Is The Restored Church of God

I John 5:7-8

“For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.”

At first glance, this passage appears to directly prove the trinity. Could this scripture be revealing that the God of the Bible is three persons in one being? Was it inspired by God so that mankind would understand who and what He is?

Here are the plain facts of this verse: Transcribers who believed in the trinity concept—but who could find no scriptural support—added the bold italicized words to support their beliefs. They are pure human invention! Those who use these verses to support the trinity doctrine are either unaware that the passage was altered, or they are aware but feel that their use serves a “greater good.”

Most Bible margins directly state the truth of the passage. For example, the New King James Version margin reads this way: “NU, M [versions] omit the rest of v. 7 [after “record”] and through on Earth of v. 8, a passage found in Greek in only four or five very late mss. [manuscripts].”

The Critical and Experimental Commentary says of this section that the verse was not found in the Latin Vulgate until the eighth century. The New Interpreter’s Bible states, “This verse in the KJV is to be rejected…It appears in no ancient Greek MS [manuscript].”

Here is what Adam Clarke’s Commentary, written by an avowed trinitarian, states, “But it is likely that this verse is not genuine. It is wanting [missing] in every MS. [manuscript] of this epistle written before the invention of printing, one excepted, the Codex Montifortii, in Trinity College, Dublin: the others which omit this verse amount to one hundred and twelve.”

Clarke continues, “It is wanting in both the Syriac, all the Arabic, Ethiopic, the Coptic, Sahidic, Armenian, Slavonian, etc., in a word, in all the ancient versions but the Vulgate; and even of this version many of the most ancient and correct MSS. have it not. It is wanting also in all the Greek fathers; and in most even of the Latin.”

These verses should properly read, “There are three that bear record: the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree as one.”

We must then ask: What is the meaning of “three that bear record”? To “bear record” or “bear witness” is to attest or testify to something. When a witness testifies in a courtroom, he is telling “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.” Therefore, these three elements of the conversion process “attest” to the fact that a person is indeed a Christian.

This works in the following way:

(1) Spirit: Romans 8:16-17 states, “The spirit itself bears witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God. And if children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ; if so be that we suffer with Him, that we may be also glorified together.” Verse 9 continues, “But you are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of His.”

It is by the receiving of the Holy Spirit that one is begotten by the Father. With this Spirit then dwelling in the mind, a person can begin to understand God’s Word and His Plan: “For what man knows the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knows no man, but the Spirit of God” (I Cor. 2:11).

(2) Water: The death and burial symbolized by water baptism, preceding true conversion, is the means by which Christians show God their willingness to live a new life, to “put off…the old man” (Eph. 4:22; Gal. 2:20; Rom. 6:4-6) and walk “in newness of life.” It also demonstrates faith in Christ’s death and resurrection.

(3) Blood: It is the blood of Christ that cleanses people from their past sins (Rom. 5:9; Eph. 1:7; 2:13; Col. 1:14; Heb. 9:12) upon repentance and baptism.

So, does I John 5:7-8 teach the doctrine of the trinity? Rhetorically, we could say that it might—if it belonged in the Bible! Actually, most of verse 7 and half of verse 8 did not begin to appear in any manuscripts until A.D. 800! The italicized passage is simply not part of Scripture, and there is no other verse similar to it that is. The Bible does not teach the trinity doctrine! Men added this passage to promote the long-existing, false, pagan concept of the supposed three-in-one nature of God.

Suggested reading:

• Where Is the True Church? – and Its Incredible History!

• What Do You Mean “Water Baptism”?

• What Is True Conversion?

I John 5:16-17

“If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it. All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.”

What is the difference between “sin unto death” and “sins not unto death”? Do these verses teach the Catholic doctrine that categorizes sin into venial and mortal?

Romans 6:23 shows that, until repentance, all sin brings the death penalty, and this is the key here. Since Christians are never to judge others, what does this passage mean?

Basically, if, to all observers, a sin is obviously unrepented of, to the point that the offending person no longer has any desire to either believe or serve God, or be in His Church, then it is a sin unto death, and it is not to be prayed for by others. Such a person no longer has any interest in repenting or overcoming sin. Short of that truly awful condition, Christians should pray for other Christians involved in sin. This includes enemies, who have left the Church but who may think that they are still serving God (Matt. 5:44).

Suggested reading:

• Just What Is “The Unpardonable Sin”?

Jude 6

“And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.”

Does this scripture prove that there are fallen angels “bound in hell”? (See I Peter 3:19-20 explanation.)

The Greek word, aidios, translated “everlasting,” is more properly translated “agelasting.” This event is fulfilled during the millennium, when Satan and his demons are cast into the bottomless pit (Rev. 20:2-3. The book of Revelation states that these angels are “bound a thousand years”—and with “chains” (Jude 6). After this “agelasting” period, these spirits will be cast into “outer darkness forever” (Jude 13). No wonder God’s Word teaches that Christians will “judge angels” (I Cor. 6:3).

No suggested reading.

Revelation 5:8-10

“And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having everyone of them harps, and golden vials full of odors, which are the prayers of the saints. And they sung a new song, saying, you are worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for you were slain, and have redeemed us [them] to God by the blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; and have made us [them] unto our God kings and priests: and we [they] shall reign on the earth.”

Who are these heavenly 24 elders?

Some believe that the 24 elders are taken from all the saved human beings supposedly now in heaven. This teaching comes from a mistranslation of the italicized words. These words should be replaced by the words in brackets. See the Revised Standard Version, and also the margin of the New King James Version, which both render them correctly.

When all the many scriptures about angels are put together, it becomes obvious that these elders are spirit beings created by God to be His counselors. They were probably created before the physical creation, along with the cherubim (Michael, Gabriel and Lucifer—who became Satan—are the only three mentioned by name in the Bible), the seraphim, the four living creatures and the billions of other angels that serve God.

It is impossible that the 24 elders are resurrected saints. Christ stated, “And no man has ascended up to heaven, but He that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven” (John 3:13). Only when Christ returns to earth will Christians be given immortality (I Cor. 15:23; Rom. 2:7)!

The 24 elders rule with God in heaven and have an obvious advisory role (they are “elders”) to Him. The resurrected saints will rule on the earth (Rev. 20:4; Matt. 5:5; Dan. 7:27).

Suggested reading:

• Angels – God’s Ministering Spirits

• Who Is the Devil?

Revelation 6:9-11

“And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, do You not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth? And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellow servants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.”

Who are the “souls under the altar” in this heavenly picture?

Some cite these verses to validate both the immortal soul doctrine and that the saved go to heaven. First, recognize that this description is not literal, but rather is symbolic, as is much of the book of Revelation. Then notice the four horses (of the apocalypse) described earlier in this same chapter. No one believes that these horses are literal, but rather that they are symbolic and part of a vision seen by the apostle John. A consistent standard must be used, without randomly picking and choosing which should be considered literal and which should be considered a vision.

In vision, John saw before him a book or scroll sealed with seven seals. As Christ opened each seal (Rev. 5:5), John was shown a preview of a future event (“hereafter” [4:1]). Since John was “in the spirit” as the seals were opened (vs. 2), the events he witnessed were not actually occurring when he saw them. They were heavenly previews of things that would happen later on Earth. Recognizing this is absolutely crucial for proper understanding.

Upon opening the fifth seal (Rev. 6:9), John “saw under [at the base of] the altar the souls of them that were slain.” In Matthew 24:9-28, Christ had shown the meaning of the seven seals. He explained that the fifth seal symbolizes the coming Great Tribulation, which will occur on Earth.

In the vision, John was shown the future, with a long period of martyrdom having taken place (up to and through the Middle Ages), and a later one (the Great Tribulation) that is yet to happen in our time. The souls who were “slain” (martyred Christians throughout the ages) were told (vs. 11) to “rest yet for a little season, until their fellow servants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled.”

All lukewarm, but still true, Christians will have to suffer this martyrdom (Rev. 3:14-22). Those who have previously died will continue to “rest” (remain “asleep” in their graves—Eph. 5:14; I Cor. 11:30) until others are also martyred.

The “souls” (dead saints) crying “avenge our blood” (vs. 10) is akin to Abel’s blood (his life—note Lev. 17:14) crying to God from the earth (Gen. 4:10). Obviously, since neither blood nor the dead talk (Psa. 115:17; Ecc. 9:5, 10), the meaning must be symbolic, not literal. Therefore, the “souls under the altar” represents a future martyrdom of lukewarm saints.

Suggested reading:

• Revelation Explained at Last!

• Who or What Is the Beast of Revelation?

• Where Is the True Church? – and Its Incredible History!

Revelation 12:13-14

“And when the dragon saw that he was cast unto the earth, he persecuted the woman which brought forth the man child. And to the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.”

Did Christ build His Church or did the Church (the woman described here) give birth to Christ?

The proper explanation is that the woman (the one particularly of verse 2) is the Old Testament “church in the wilderness” (Acts 7:38)—the twelve tribes comprising ancient Israel that gave birth to Jesus Christ, who was of the tribe of Judah. Christ then built His Church (Matt. 16:18), which is the New Testament “woman”! Most of Revelation 12 describes her, and the devil’s attacks against her until the end of the age.

Suggested reading:

• Here Is The Restored Church of God

Revelation 14:11

“And the smoke of their torment ascends up forever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receives the mark of his name.”

Some assume that this verse refers to immortal souls burning forever in “ hell.”

The time frame of what is described here is yet to come. The passage is referring to “Babylon” (vs. 8), “that great city, because she made all nations drink of…her fornication.” This is the final, religious/political, end- time revival of the Roman Empire also described in Daniel 2:42-43 as the “toes,” and in Daniel 7:7, 24 as the tenth horn. Revelation 13 describes it as the seventh and last horn, and Revelation 17:12 describes it as the seventh head, having ten horns (which has not yet appeared).

Revelation 14:9-10 states, “If any man worship the beast [this final end- time revival] and his image, and receive his mark…he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone…in the presence of the Lamb.” As long as the people who are participating in this “beast” system continue to rebel against God, they will receive “no rest day nor night” (vs. 11). This does not state that they will be burning in hell for eternity. What it does say is that once their bodies are burned up, the smoke ascends forever. The fire extinguishes itself but the gases from the smoke will continue to circulate in the atmosphere.

The fire that is talked about is here on this earth— not in an “ever- burning hell.” Malachi plainly states, “And you shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet in the day that I shall do this, says the Lord of hosts” (4:3).

Suggested reading:

• Who or What Is the Beast of Revelation?

Revelation 19:1

“And after these things I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia; salvation, and glory, and honor, and power, unto the Lord our God.”

What is the identity of those called “much people in heaven”?

The Greek word ochlos is improperly translated “people.” This word has a variety of synonyms in the English language, one of which can be people.

Since the Bible clearly shows that the reward of the saved is rulership on Earth at Christ’s Return—not in heaven—another rendering should have been used. The Revised Standard Version and the Goodspeed translations render ochlos as “multitude” and the Moffatt version as “host.” The Numeric English New Testament and the Amplified New Testament render it “crowd.”

While each of these translations uses a slightly different word, they more accurately deliver the meaning of the original Greek. The “people” in heaven referenced in Revelation 19:1 are, in fact, the “host, multitude or crowd” there. This scripture refers to the vast millions of angels—who are in heaven. They are the multitude there, which sing and praise God (Rev. 5:11-12).

Suggested reading:

Revelation 20:13-14

“And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were judged every man according to their works. And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death.”

What are the events described here? What is their timeframe and who do they involve?

Verse 13 refers somewhat to the second resurrection, but primarily the third resurrection, with the second to occur at the end of the 1,000-year reign of Christ and the saints on Earth, when all mankind since Adam will be resurrected to physical life for 100 years (Isa. 65:17-25). All these people will be “judged” from God’s word—“the books” of verse 12.

The third resurrection (vs. 14 and 15) is when all that pertains to hell (gehenna) and death (the entire idea and reality of physical death) are both destroyed in the lake of fire. This last fulfillment—the third resurrection—occurs at the very end of God’s Plan, the time after He will have given every person who has ever lived a full opportunity to qualify to enter His kingdom. This is the time when the wicked shall be resurrected to see all that they have rejected before they are turned into the “ashes under the…feet” of the righteous (Mal. 4:1-3).

Suggested reading: