A Reason of Our Hope—Bible Answers to Bible Questions

©1999 AROH Publishing Company

All Rights Reserved
 A Reason of Our Hope—Bible Answers to Bible Questions

©1999 AROH Publishing Company

All Rights Reserved

1999 E-Published

Published by AROH Publishing Company, P.O. Box 359, Harvest, AL 35749, U.S.A. ©1999 AROH
Publishing Company. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, recording or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of AROH Publishing Company.

Manufactured in the United States of America.

 Table of Contents

Creation
The Bible teaches that God made the earth in seven days. Scientists believe that
the earth evolved over millions of years. Just how old is the earth, anyway? ................ 1
Could God have used evolution as His means of creating man and the animals? .......... 3
I believe the creation “days” to be symbolic of the phased progression (geologic
eras) of God’s creative acts. How could these “days” be literal 24 hour periods?
The sun was not even created until the fourth “day!” ..................................................... 3
You stated that “dinosaurs were on the ark.” Apatosaurus was 70 feet long and
weighed in at 35 tons. More recently, Seismosaurus has been discovered. This
monstrosity was 140 feet long and weighed in at 280 tons. These are just two
species out of numerous land dinosaurs. How many of these (in twos) do you
think the ark could handle in addition to all the other creatures of the world? ............... 4
If Adam was created full grown, would he be one year old or mature (30 years
old)? You would not call Adam a one year old, so why refer to the earth as 6,000
years old if it looks older? ............................................................................................... 5
I disagree with your affirmation that “God could have used evolution, but He
didn’t!” It is a known fact that “speciation” has occurred............................................... 6
You said that the creation days were 24 hours long. What about Leviticus 25:4, 8
and Hebrews 4:3-5? Doesn’t this indicate that those days could have been years?........ 6
You said in your article on creation, “Radiometric techniques and carbon 14
dating used to tell the age of fossils are fundamentally flawed because of
inaccurate assumptions.” Can you back up this claim?................................................... 7
“And God said, Let there be light: and there was light” (Genesis 1:3). How could
there be light before God created the sun? ...................................................................... 7
How can we see the light from stars that are billions of light-years away if the
universe is only 6,000 years old? .................................................................................... 8
Adam lived to 930 years of age. Methuselah died at the ripe old age of 969. Noah
begat his sons at 500, encountered the Flood at 600, and lived an additional 350
years for a grand total of 950 years. It is beyond my imagination to think of such
long lives common in Old Testament times. How can this be? Did they count
years differently back then? Please explain in your article. ............................................ 10
What is leviathan? I’ve heard it’s a crocodile. ................................................................ 13
When you discussed leviathan in a recent article, you quoted James Strauss to
dispel the “fire-breathing myth” discussed in Job 41:19-21. The passage is God
describing leviathan. Don’t you think that when He said “flame goeth out of his
mouth,” He meant it? ...................................................................................................... 15
It has been theorized many times recently that dinosaurs were the ancestors of
modern birds. Many dinosaurs were small and similar to birds. Compsognathus
was the same size as a chicken. Archaeopteryx was a lizard with feathers. Could
these dinosaurs be the transitional forms that Darwin predicted scientists would
find in the fossil record?.................................................................................................. 16
Demons
Can ghosts or demons exist today? ................................................................................. 17
You commented on demon possession recently. If we can’t be possessed, then
what about 1 John 5:19? “We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies
in the power of the evil one” (NASB)............................................................................. 18
If demons could possess us and a Catholic priest tried to exorcise a demon with
his ritual, would he be successful? .................................................................................. 19
Opinion
What was Paul’s thorn in the flesh? ................................................................................ 19
Who is the author of the book of Hebrews?.................................................................... 20
Where is Paul’s epistle to the Laodiceans that he mentioned in Colossians 4:16? ......... 20
Since Revelation talks about Jerusalem, doesn’t this prove that Revelation was
written before the destruction of Jerusalem?................................................................... 21
Do we have guardian angels?.......................................................................................... 21
Pleas
Should even a sexually abused child obey his parents? .................................................. 22
I can’t seem to get past the feeling that I’m lost. I have been taught all of my life
that I can fall from grace if I’m not careful. I don’t feel that I am good enough to
be saved. I think that I’ve done too much wrong to be forgiven. Can you give
Scripture to help me with this problem? ......................................................................... 22
Is it a sin to have an unbridled tongue?........................................................................... 24
Why does God permit suffering and pain?...................................................................... 25
Hebrews 10:26 says, “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the
knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.” Does this
mean that if I committed one sin on purpose, I would lose Christ’s atoning
sacrifice?.......................................................................................................................... 25
What does the Bible say that could help me to be happy? .............................................. 25
Worldly Issues
My prom is coming up and I’ve already bought my dress. My parents don’t agree
with me going but they’ve left the decision up to me. Where does the Bible say
dancing is wrong? David danced..................................................................................... 27
Is gambling wrong?......................................................................................................... 28
One group that is often in the news these days is animal rights activists. Many of
them speak out against wearing fur and using animals in laboratories, and some
even denounce eating meat. Since God created us all, what does the Bible say
about how we should treat or use animals?..................................................................... 29

A Reason of Our Hope Page ii

Paul tells Timothy to drink wine in 1 Timothy 5:23. Wouldn’t you agree that Paul
is saying it’s OK to have one with the boys every now and then, especially if it
gives us a chance to teach someone the Gospel? ............................................................ 29
Since the Bible never specifically forbids drinking (just drunkenness), dancing, or
gambling, why do we? Are the rules Christ established not enough?............................. 30
Does Exodus 21:22-23 imply that a man who makes a woman miscarry will only
be fined for the loss of the woman’s baby and put to death if the mother dies? I
wanted to use this passage to defend “pro-life,” but it appears that it would do the
opposite. .......................................................................................................................... 31
“And that ye study to be quiet, and to do your own business, and to work with
your own hands, as we commanded you” (1 Thessalonians 4:11). A friend of mine
argues that this passage means that we are to stay out of worldly issues, such as
anti-abortion marches, and mind our own business. ....................................................... 33
Is it wrong to bring a lawsuit against someone? ............................................................. 34
Exodus 20:13 says, “Thou shalt not kill.” Luke 3:14 says about soldiers, “Do
violence to no man.” Is capital punishment wrong? What about killing in war or in
self-defense or even by accident?.................................................................................... 35
I don’t want to teach my child to be a violent person. Psychologists say that
spanking is wrong because of this. Is corporal punishment unbiblical? ......................... 36
History
Why are the writings of Barnabas not included in the Bible? Wasn’t he an inspired
writer? Did King James decide what to put in and what to leave out, where to start
and end chapters, etc? Was King James inspired? .......................................................... 37
When was the book of Revelation written? Does Armageddon symbolize the
destruction of Jerusalem? ................................................................................................ 38
I have seen pictures of the Shroud of Turin and have read a lot about it. The
shroud covered Jesus’ whole body and a face is outlined on it. Could this be the
face of Christ? ................................................................................................................. 39
There was an article in the Huntsville Times on June 9, 1991 entitled, “The Bible
Weathers New Storm of Interpretations.” Jim Nesbitt wrote, “In their quest, Jesus
Seminar scholars referred to long-forgotten texts, like the gospel of Thomas.”
Why don’t we have the Gospel of Thomas in our Bibles? Are there more books
like this? .......................................................................................................................... 39
Why don’t we fast today as the apostles did in Acts? ..................................................... 41
You said that Cerinthus was a Gnostic leader during John’s time. Was John
speaking of another Gnostic movement when he said “that thou hatest the deeds
of the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate” in Revelation 2:6 and also in verse 15?
Who else taught Gnosticism back then? ......................................................................... 45
Would you print the enclosed article on the Jesus Seminar in your paper and
comment on it? ................................................................................................................ 46
I’ve heard someone say the Catholics studied and found Saturday to be the
original first day of the week. I don’t believe this to be true, unless they are

A Reason of Our Hope Page iii

counting Saturday as sundown to midnight. Are we actually worshipping on the
wrong day as the first day? What can you find out about this matter? Thank you. ........ 49
A denominational preacher visited us recently. When he heard we attended the
church of Christ, he said, “Oh yes, I am very familiar with the teachings of the
Campbellite organization.” What did he mean?.............................................................. 51
Barton Stone said in a sermon written about 1830, “The first Church of Christ
established on earth after his resurrection is found in the first chapter of the Acts
of the Apostles, which church was composed of one hundred and twenty members
only. ‘They were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other
tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.’ It may be said, that those filled with
the Holy Ghost were the apostles alone. But the Scripture says, ‘they were all
filled with the Holy Ghost;’ and this was the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy.” Is
this right?......................................................................................................................... 52
Contradiction
Joshua 10:12-14 states that “the sun stood still” and “the moon stopped.”
Wouldn’t you think that God would know that the sun always stands still and that
the earth orbits the sun? Therefore, the passage should have said “the earth stood
still.” ................................................................................................................................ 53
Did God really harden Pharaoh’s heart? ......................................................................... 53
Did God violate Lydia’s free morality by opening her heart? ........................................ 54
Why did Jesus say “Touch me not” in John 20:17 and then let them hold Him in
Matthew 28:9?................................................................................................................. 54
Why did the Lord want to kill Moses in Exodus 4:24? If He really wanted to kill
him, He surely would have! Also, why did Zipporah do what she did (v 25)?
Circumcision, as an identifying mark of God’s people, hadn’t even been
mentioned yet. ................................................................................................................. 54
Cain went into the land of Nod and took his wife. Where did he get her? ..................... 55
Is it possible for the apostles to have baptized 3,000 Jews in one day (Acts 2:41)?....... 55
Matthew 27:50-53 tells of the veil of the temple being torn and the earth quaking
and the graves opening. Why didn’t the other Gospels mention this? Were the
saints roaming around for three days until Jesus was resurrected? Did they return
to their graves after appearing in the city? ...................................................................... 56
God said “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live”
(Exodus 33:20). How could Moses see Him “face to face” in Exodus 33:11? ............... 57
John 14:28 says, “For my Father is greater than I.” Yet John 10:30 says, “I and
my Father are one.” I know this is not a contradiction, but how can it be
explained?........................................................................................................................ 57
Galatians 6:2 says, “Bear ye one another’s burdens.” Galatians 6:5 says, “For
every man shall bear his own burden.” Is this a contradiction? ...................................... 58
In the four Gospels’ accounts of Peter’s denials, why does Mark say the cock will
crow twice and the others say just once? Why do they all tell different things
about the denials? ............................................................................................................ 59

A Reason of Our Hope Page iv

In Joshua 2:15 it says that Rahab lived on the Jericho wall. If this is true, wouldn’t
she have died when the wall fell?.................................................................................... 60
My daughter said, “If God created everything, then He must have created sin.
Why would He create something that He hated so much?” Could you answer this
in your paper?.................................................................................................................. 63
Can you explain the differences between Matthew 27:5, where Judas “went and
hanged himself,” and Acts 1:18, where “falling headlong, he burst asunder in the
midst, and all his bowels gushed out”? ........................................................................... 63
In Mark 7:19, Jesus pronounced all foods clean. Peter still had a problem with this
when God caused him to dream before seeing Cornelius. Didn’t he remember the
words of Jesus?................................................................................................................ 63
John says, “If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is
not in us” (1 John 1:10). He later says, “Whosoever is born of God doth not
commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born
of God” (1 John 3:9). Why does he contradict himself? ................................................. 64
Jesus said, “But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite
thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5:39). Why would
Jesus say “resist not evil?” .............................................................................................. 65
Information
Does God authorize a paid preacher?.............................................................................. 65
We know that Peter was married. Did he have children?................................................ 65
When was the sabbath ever taken away? ........................................................................ 65
When exactly is the kingdom to come? .......................................................................... 70
Is it wrong to spend the Lord’s money on unbelievers as some believe? ....................... 71
On our fourth Sunday night singing, we allow boys to lead singing that are too
young to become Christians. Is this right? ...................................................................... 71
Can a man who has adopted children qualify to be an elder, supposing they were
brought up in the Lord?................................................................................................... 71
It was dark from the sixth hour until the ninth at Jesus crucifixion. Is this 6:00
P.M. to 9:00 P.M.?............................................................................................................. 72
Who was Urim in Numbers 27:21?................................................................................. 72
You said 1 Peter 3:19 meant “The Spirit of Christ was in Noah as he preached to
the antediluvians.” What about 1 Peter 4:6? ................................................................... 73
I have seen a symbol resembling a fish on car windows, etc. Someone told me it
was a religious symbol. What does it mean? .................................................................. 73
My mother is very sick with cancer. Elders from congregations in her area came
and prayed for her and anointed her with oil. They read James 5:14-16 before they
did this. She confessed her sins, also. Was the anointing really necessary? ................... 74
Do we become physically sick because we sin? If so, is AIDS God’s punishment
for homosexuals and lesbians?........................................................................................ 75

A Reason of Our Hope Page v

How do you reconcile your statement that “sickness in our lives is not punishment
for our sins” with James 5:15-16?................................................................................... 77
Are all sins equal in the eyes of the Lord? Is telling a lie just as bad as murder?........... 79
Are the “sons of God” in the Old Testament the same as the “sons of God” in the
New Testament?.............................................................................................................. 79
When the Pharisees said that Jesus cast out demons by the power of Beelzebub,
He said, “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” (Matthew 12:31). Since this was a special circumstance, can
this unpardonable sin be duplicated today?..................................................................... 81
Do animals have souls? Ecclesiastes 3:19-21 seems to say so........................................ 82
Terminology
Is the term “brotherhood” a biblical term?...................................................................... 82
Why do denominations call their preachers “pastors?”................................................... 82
Why don’t we use the name “reverend” for our preacher? ............................................. 83
Why don’t we just call ourselves “The Church” instead of “The Church of
Christ”?............................................................................................................................ 83
All my life, I’ve heard, “We must obey the gospel.” What specifically is “obeying
the Gospel?” .................................................................................................................... 84
Why is Barnabas called an apostle in Acts 14:14? I thought there were only
twelve apostles plus Paul................................................................................................. 84
Every time someone wants to work with a congregation, people say they are
“placing membership.” Is this a Bible term?................................................................... 84
You mentioned that Justin Martyr wrote the Apologies in the second century.
There is a publishing company in the brotherhood called Apologetics Press. Why
should we apologize for the Gospel? I don’t understand!............................................... 85
I was thumbing through a book about the Dead Sea scrolls. It was obviously
written by someone who wanted to discredit the Bible. One comment that was
made in it bothered me. The author said that the name “Christian” was a
derogatory term made up by the citizens of Antioch. He quoted Acts 11:26.
Shouldn’t we call ourselves “disciples” or some other biblical name?........................... 85
In Mark 7:24-30, what did Jesus mean by “children” and “dogs?” ................................ 86
1 Corinthians 6:9 lists those that will not inherit the kingdom of God: “neither
fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of
themselves with mankind.” Is Paul saying that men who have female or
“effeminate” mannerisms will not go to heaven? ........................................................... 86
Are people really “called” by God to preach?................................................................. 87
Judgment
What does the Bible teach on where the soul goes after death until the day of
judgment? ........................................................................................................................ 88
Are there degrees of punishment and reward? ................................................................ 89

A Reason of Our Hope Page vi

I was once told that an elder received a different crown than a martyr or a soul
winner. Are any of these crowns better than the others?................................................. 90
Does 2 Peter 2:20-22 indicate varying degrees of punishment in hell? .......................... 92
Is Armageddon some future war on earth and will it be a sign of Christ’s second
coming? ........................................................................................................................... 93
In Matthew 24 it sounds as if the second coming of Christ immediately follows
the destruction of Jerusalem. I know this is not true, but in studying the parallel
passages, I have become more confused. Matthew 24:33 and Mark 13:29 say, “He
is near, right at the door” while Luke 21:31 says, “the kingdom of God is near.”
These three Gospels all say the same thing in the next verse: “Truly I say to you,
this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.” These verses
don’t appear to belong. How can you explain them? ...................................................... 94
Miracles
I have a friend who believes that gifts still exist in the church today, especially
tongues. Can you give exact scriptures that prove otherwise?........................................ 97
I’m confused about Acts 2. Why did the crowd think that Peter and the apostles
were drunk when they were speaking tongues? .............................................................. 98
Why didn’t Philip pass on the gifts to the Samaritans or the Ethiopian eunuch in
Acts 8? Wasn’t he an apostle?......................................................................................... 100
You seem to be a cessationist. If miracles have indeed ceased, then what do you
think the purpose of miracles was? Did miracles authenticate Jesus, the apostles,
or the Scripture? .............................................................................................................. 101
Salvation
Give me the exact Scriptures for proving baptism is necessary for salvation................. 102
If baptism is necessary, what about the thief on the cross?............................................. 103
Ananias called Paul “brother” before he was baptized. Cornelius’ household
received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. This proves that baptism is not
necessary for salvation. ................................................................................................... 103
“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel: not with wisdom of
words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect” (1 Corinthians
1:17). Isn’t Paul saying that baptism is a false road to salvation? .................................. 104
Speaking of the Great Commission, Mark 16:16 says, “He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Christ doesn’t
say, “he that is baptized not shall be damned.” Besides, Mark 16:9-20 is not
included in the two main manuscripts of the New Testament. ....................................... 104
Maybe that’s true, but He’s not talking about water baptism. He’s really talking
about Holy Spirit baptism as Christ promised in Acts 1:5. All 120 disciples were
filled with the Holy Ghost and this was the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy.................... 105
Well, 1 Peter 3:21 says “the answer of a good conscience toward God.” That
means that baptism is only the response that a good conscience gives after one is
already saved or that it is an outward sign of an inward conviction. .............................. 106

A Reason of Our Hope Page vii

But Acts 2:38 says, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of
Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” “For” means “because” which indicates we
are already saved after repentance................................................................................... 106
We’re saved by grace, not by works (Ephesians 2:8-9). Baptism is a work that is
unnecessary for salvation. Grace is God’s unconditional gift......................................... 107
“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto
them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them
out of my hand” (John 10:27-28). Christ said we can’t fall from grace because He
won’t let anyone take us.................................................................................................. 107
“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in
thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with
the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is
made unto salvation” (Romans 10:9-10). This doesn’t say anything about baptism...... 107
There are more verses on “belief” than there are on “baptism.” ..................................... 108
John 3:16 is the most common verse quoted for salvation. It makes no mention
whatsoever of baptism. How do you explain that? ......................................................... 108
Is it necessary for salvation that the confession mentioned in Romans 10:10 be
made before baptism?...................................................................................................... 110
If a person is baptized only because they know Jesus commanded it (Matthew
28:19), even though they do not understand that it is for the forgiveness of their
sins, are they saved at that point? Why or why not? At what point of knowledge
are they saved? ................................................................................................................ 112
John the Baptist baptized. The disciples and apostles baptized. Why didn’t Jesus
baptize?............................................................................................................................ 113
How old should a child be before he or she is baptized? ................................................ 114
What are the seven baptisms and which ones are in effect today?.................................. 114
Authority
Can you describe where we get our authority for items of worship? A friend of
mine says that a piano and organ are fine since Christ did not say “Thou shalt not
use mechanical instruments of music.” ........................................................................... 115
If we do not permit instrumental music in our worship because “there is no
authority for it in the Bible,” how can we justify having a church building? The
Bible never indicates that collected money can be used to purchase a building............. 117
Is there any biblical reason for making “approved apostolic examples” into church
doctrine? .......................................................................................................................... 117
What is a “necessary inference?” What makes it “necessary?” Where is the
biblical precedence for making regulations from these “inferences,” and
condemning those who disagree?.................................................................................... 118
Where is the biblical authority for having a church treasury? For letting the elders
make every financial decision for the church? ................................................................ 119

A Reason of Our Hope Page viii

If the Bible is silent about a particular subject (like Sunday School or Children’s
Bible Hour or instrumental music in worship), is this silence permissive,
prohibitive, or neither? .................................................................................................... 119
Recently on Sunday night, it was preached that the introduction of the instrument
was wrong if for no other reason than the fact that it caused a split in the church.
If this is a sufficient reason within itself, what about other practices that might be
objected to? Wasn’t the inference from the teaching on Sunday night that anything
that splits the church is wrong? ....................................................................................... 120
Are there any Scriptures in the New Testament which indicate that we are to pray
to God to heal the sick? Is God presently healing sickness or is this something
which occurred only during New Testament times? During my life-time, I have
never seen evidence that God has made a blind person see or a deaf person hear. If
God is not healing sickness, why do we pray for Him to do so? .................................... 121
Is the Holy Spirit the Bible, or a living entity? ............................................................... 122
James 5:16 teaches that we should confess our sins one to another. Shouldn’t we
confess all sins publicly then?......................................................................................... 123
There are many things over which we as a group (the church of Christ) have
divided. Some of these things include: Children’s Bible Hour, the number of cups
used in communion, church support of orphanages, and kitchens in the church
building. Why is this? What makes something a “doctrine” other than a direct
statement from God Himself? Have we split so often because we make doctrines
out of biblical silence?..................................................................................................... 124
Attendance
Why should we try to attend every service?.................................................................... 125
The elders have set the times for us to worship at Sunday morning, Sunday night,....... 125
and Wednesday night; but the Bible talks about the saints gathering together on
Sunday and then only once. Is it a sin to miss on Sunday nights, Sunday Bible
classes, Wednesday nights, and the meetings?................................................................ 125
General Worship
My daughter prays at bedtime, “I pray to Jesus, my soul to keep.” It started me
thinking. Do we pray to Jesus or God? ........................................................................... 126
1 Corinthians 16:1-2 indicates that a “setting aside” was to be done every first day
for needy saints in another town. Since our reason for taking a collection every
first day is based on this passage, why do we use our collection for purposes other
than the one spoken of by Paul in this passage? ............................................................. 127
Is there a difference between “corporate” worship and “personal” worship? ................. 128
Lord’s Supper
Someone recently wrote an article on the Lord’s Supper. He wrote, “There is no
way you can serve a meal at noon and it be called ‘The Lord’s Supper’. According
to the dictionary, any meal served at noon is called dinner. Jesus did not mean for
this meal to be eaten at noon. If he had, he would have called it dinner. … Some

A Reason of Our Hope Page ix

of you are sick … because you have not served the Lord the way he told you to (1
Corinthians 11:30).” Comment on this please. ............................................................... 129
Why do we use grape juice at the Lord’s table instead of wine? .................................... 130
Music
The word “psalms” comes from the Greek psalmos meaning a song sung to the
harp. Ephesians 5:19 mentions singing “psalms” to God. Is using mechanical
instruments of music authorized then?............................................................................ 130
Psalm 150:3-5 says: “Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet, praise him
with the harp and the lyre, praise him with tambourine and dancing, praise him
with the strings and flute, praise him with the clash of cymbals, praise him with
resounding cymbals” (NIV). How can we sing “psalms” as the Bible says
(Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16), but be unwilling to do what the Psalms say?
Should we not praise God in the way specified by the Bible? ........................................ 131
Is Christian Contemporary Music wrong? ...................................................................... 132
Women’s Roles
Why can’t women serve the Lord’s Supper? It is a position of servitude....................... 133
I was raised to believe that women were not allowed to speak out in the assembly.
1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Timothy 2:11-12 say women are to keep silent, yet
women continue to speak out during announcements to give information. This is
still part of worship since we haven’t been dismissed. Is this wrong?............................ 133
Are women allowed to speak or teach in the church? ..................................................... 135
I’m confused about 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. Does this passage mean that men
shouldn’t have long hair? Are women to wear veils in worship? ................................... 136
False Doctrines
What is the New Age Movement and how does it effect us as Christians? .................... 139
Could it be possible that Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon church, was really
inspired by an angel?....................................................................................................... 141
Jehovah’s Witnesses have been coming to my door a lot lately. I can’t seem to
convince them that their Bible has been misinterpreted. What can I do about it? .......... 141
I watch televangelists on TV. Surely, they would not mislead the public
purposely. Can they all be wrong? .................................................................................. 142

A Reason of Our Hope Page x

 About the Authors

A Reason of Our Hope is the creation of two Bible students who hunger and thirst for
the Word of God. Through a chain of events, these two men began to answer difficult
Bible questions for their home congregation. The answers were published in their church
bulletin for several years. These were later printed for the congregation and used for a
ready reference. Now, through modern technology, these question-and-answer articles
have been published in electronic-book format.

Kenneth E. Loy, Jr., CN

Kenny Loy is a Certified Nutritionist, author, and engineer. He has worked for the
space program for a decade, which helps to qualify him to answer science questions
relating to the origin of the universe. His studies in biblical nutrition have led to a
groundbreaking book, My Body—His Temple: The Prophet Daniel’s Guide to Nutrition.
Check http://www.MyBodyHisTemple.com for further details.
Kenny obtained his Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering from the
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga in 1988. He obtained his Certification in
Nutrition in 1999 from American Health Science University. He is currently working
towards his Master of Arts in Biblical Studies at Southern Christian University. He is the
writer, editor, and publisher of A Reason of Our Hope, as well as the webmaster of his
own health-related web site, http://www.MyBodyHisTemple.com.

Robert R. Barlow, Psy.D.

Dr. Rob Barlow obtained his Doctorate in Psychology in 1999. He is an excellent

Christian psychologist and has been invaluable as a consultant for many AROH articles.
As well as coming up with the concept, he has also contributed a great deal of humor to
AROH. In spite of his tragic car accident in 1988, he has maintained a strong faith in God
and a sharp wit. Although his accident has robbed him of much of his health, he is an
inspiration to be around. Rob, even now, continues to say, “My accident was the best
thing that ever happened to me.”

A Reason of Our Hope Page xi

 Preface

A Reason of Our Hope, straight as an AROH, aims for the truth. These question-and-
answer articles attempt to call Bible things by Bible names. The truth, no matter how
uncomfortable or incriminating, is never compromised. Wherever opinion is expressed, it
is noted. These articles are written in a theologically conservative, easy-to-understand
format, utilizing the Bible as the inerrant Word of God.
This volume starts at the book of beginnings with questions on the Creation. Genesis
is the foundation to our spiritual and physical health. Our Savior quoted liberally from
Genesis. The very Gospel rests upon the foundation of this book. If the truths and
concepts taught in Genesis are rejected for evolution, humanism, the New Age
movement, Gnosticism, or whatever form of evil doctrine man contrives, then we cannot
maintain our salvation. If our foundation is weak, we will be “sent this way and that,
turned about by every wind of teaching, by the twisting and tricks of men, by the deceits
of error” (Ephesians 4:14 BBE).
This book also addresses general questions asked about demons, matters of opinion,
pleas for help, worldly issues, and church history. It deals with textual questions asked
about apparent contradictions, general information, and specific terminology. Finally, it
focuses on doctrinal questions asked about the judgment, miracles, salvation, authority,
worship, women’s roles in the church, and false doctrines.

A Reason of Our Hope Page xii

 Introduction

“But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to
every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear” (1
Peter 3:15).
Based on the above passage, we should all be ready with a reason of our hope. It is the
fundamental principle of Christianity to evangelize the world. Jesus said, “Go ye
therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have
commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world” (Matthew
28:19-20). He gave us the Great Commission so that we could spread the reason of our
hope across the globe.
Too many of us are not prepared to give a reason of our hope. That is precisely the
purpose of these question-and-answer articles—to prepare you to “give an answer to
every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you.” May they help to increase
your knowledge, to rethink your current positions on Scripture, to bring you closer to
God, and, most importantly, to give you “a reason of the hope that is in you.” May God
bless you in your studies.

A Reason of Our Hope Page xiii

Creation

The Bible teaches that God made the earth in seven days. Scientists believe that the
earth evolved over millions of years. Just how old is the earth, anyway? Scientists
say that man has only been around for the last 0.1 percent of the age of the earth.
How can science and the Bible conflict so much?

Many people have attempted to ascertain the age of the earth. The Jewish calendar
reflects their opinion of its age. September 1991 on our calendar is the first month of the
Jewish calendar, Tishri, and the year 5752. The year of their calendar marks the number
of years since the creation of man on the sixth day of creation, according to the Torah or
Talmud.1 It is difficult to determine the number of years that have transpired since Adam
was created. There may be a few gaps in history, but it has been attempted by many. John
Lightfoot, Vice Chancellor of Cambridge University in 1644, found the creation of the
earth to be on September 17, 3928 B.C. at 9:00 A.M. In 1650, Archbishop James Ussher
calculated the creation of the earth as occurring on October 23, 4004 B.C. Ussher’s date
was widely accepted and was even printed in the margins of English Bibles after 1701.2
Based on their calculations from the Bible, the earth is approximately 6,000 years old.
I tend to support this and also that the days were 24 hours during creation, because
“the evening and the morning were the first day” (Genesis 1:5). The Hebrew word, yowm,
meaning “day,” signifies one sunrise to the next when used with a number, as in “the first
day.” The perceived age of the earth is easy to explain when we look at the creation of
A Reason of Our Hope Page 2

Adam. He was created full grown, not as a baby. Therefore, God could have easily
created the earth “full grown” with the perceived age of millions of years. One thing to
consider is that the radiometric techniques and carbon 14 dating used to tell the age of
fossils are fundamentally flawed because of inaccurate assumptions. Evolutionists base
the age of the earth on how long it takes mountains, glaciers, and waterways to change in
our present time. Since they deny the creation, that pushes back the earth’s formation to
hundreds of millions of years. In that respect, God did make the earth “full grown.” God
did in six days what scientists feel was done in an unfathomable amount of time.
The fossil record of ancient animals and dinosaurs was likely the result of the Flood in
Noah’s day. All animals except for two of each species died in that deluge. Dinosaurs
were on the ark and existed in Job and David’s time (Job 40:15-41:1; Psalms 74:14;
104:26; Isaiah 27:1). The behemoth mentioned in Job 40 could have been Apatosaurus
(Brontosaurus) or Diplodocus according to the description.
Scientists will not acknowledge that dinosaurs and humans coexisted. There have
been many discoveries of post-Mesozoic dinosaur specimens. Mesozoic means “middle
life” and, according to scientists, was the era that dinosaurs ruled the earth from 245 to 66
million years ago. Post-Mesozoic or the Cenozoic Era is “recent life” for the last 66
million years as theorized by scientists. I believe it is possible to find dinosaur fossils in
the same layer of rock as human skeletons, but scientists would explain this away by
claiming that the “post-Mesozoic dinosaur bones have been reworked, that is, removed
from the rock by natural erosion and redeposited in a younger sediment.”3
How the dinosaurs died out, we can only guess. Temperature extremes may have
increased after the Flood, making ice in the polar regions and humid air around the
equator. These conditions may not have been well suited for dinosaurs. Or, perhaps, there
was a shortage of vegetation after the Flood. The herbivorous dinosaurs would have died
out, which in turn, would have caused the carnivorous dinosaurs to become extinct.
However, since there were no fish on the ark and most probably survived the Flood, there
were plenty of sea creatures for the meat eating dinosaurs to survive on. There is not
enough evidence to know precisely what happened.
However, a highly probable concept called the “canopy theory” may explain this. The
theory is based on the creation account. “And God said, Let there be a firmament in the
midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the
firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters
which were above the firmament: and it was so” (Genesis 1:6-7). This passage suggests
that God suspended a vast body of water in vapor form over the earth which would have
caused a “canopy,” creating greenhouse effects beneath it. A uniformly warm temperate
climate would have resulted around the entire earth. Since this vapor was much more than
we have in our atmosphere today, a larger percentage of the sun’s radiation would have
been absorbed and evenly distributed over the earth, both seasonally and latitudinally.4
The creation account also alleges that there was no rainfall before the Flood. “For the
LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the
ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the
ground” (Genesis 2:5-6). There was probably a greater proportion of land to water in the
antediluvian world, but the atmosphere was kept at a comfortable humidity by the “mist”
A Reason of Our Hope Page 3

rising from the gentle seas and rivers.5 This would certainly account for the vast amounts
of water required to submerge the earth. Perhaps Michael Crichton inadvertently gave us
the answer to the dinosaurs’ extinction: “Reptile eggs contain large amounts of yolk but
no water at all. The embryos must extract water from the surrounding environment.
Hence the mist.”6 The Flood depleted the “mist;” therefore, the dinosaur eggs could not
survive by extracting water from the atmosphere.
Since God created both the earth and the Bible, there cannot be a conflict. We must
make scientific evidence match the Bible, not vice versa. If there is a contradiction, then
science is wrong! God’s inspired Word cannot be wrong but human scientists sure can
be! Their thinking is already in error in that most of them deny the very existence of God.
We must put our faith in the Bible, not man. That is the attitude we must have when
evaluating any scientific evidence.

Could God have used evolution as His means of creating man and the animals?

And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the
tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was
good. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the
waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his
kind: and God saw that it was good. And God made the beast of the earth after his
kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his
kind: and God saw that it was good. (Genesis 1:12, 21, 25)
God created every living thing “whose seed was in itself, after his kind.” Like seed
comes from like seed. The seed of an apple does not grow a watermelon. The seed of a
whale does not yield a tortoise. Likewise, the seed of a monkey does not reproduce a
Homo sapien or human. The complexities of the human body could not have evolved by
accident. “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness” (Genesis
1:26). He created us with immortal souls that could discern right from wrong, and bodies
that could breath, digest, reproduce, heal, grow, and die. The answer to your question is,
“Yes, God could have used evolution, but He didn’t!”

We can understand why Adam and Eve were created fully grown in order to
survive; however, this does not explain why God would have “deceived” us with
respect to the earth’s age. I believe the creation “days” to be symbolic of the phased
progression (geologic eras) of God’s creative acts. How could these “days” be literal
24 hour periods? The sun was not even created until the fourth “day!”

The appearance of an aged earth has absolutely nothing to do with deception. Why do
you think God inspired Moses to write the creation account? So that man would not be
deceived. Although you have found peace in your reconciliation with science and faith,
please be cautious. We must not discount the importance of the creation account. Jesus
himself quoted from Genesis 1:27: “But from the beginning of the creation God made
them male and female” (Mark 10:6; Matthew 19:4). Also consider the following: “For in
A Reason of Our Hope Page 4

six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the
seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it” (Exodus
20:11). These are literal “days” written into the law of Moses as the fourth commandment
reveals: “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy” (Exodus 20:8).
These “days” absolutely do not refer to geological eras! Why wouldn’t God create the
earth full grown instead of wasting billions of years on evolution trying to get it right?
There had to be some appearance of age even though the earth was created from nothing.
We know that Adam had the appearance of age when he was created. Why is this biblical
concept so difficult to grasp? “Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?” (1
Corinthians 1:20).
Evolution and the “age-day” theory advocate death before Adam. Those who hold the
“age-day” concept claim that the fossils and skeletons of ancient animals and dinosaurs
were formed millions of years ago, but within the “six days” of Genesis 1. We know that
there was no death before Adam. “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. …
Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses” (Romans 5:12, 14). “For we know that
the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now” (Romans 8:22).
“For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in
Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive” (1 Corinthians 15:21-22). The
“age-day” theory also supports that many animals became extinct before God created
Adam to have dominion over them (Genesis 1:26).
God created plants on the third day. If these creation “days” were actually “eras,” then
how could these plants have survived for millions of years before the sun was created?
Were these “days” of different lengths? We have to be careful. An open mind is
important, but we must always be honest. Truth is reality. Rationalization doesn’t justify
compromising the principles of the Bible. God’s Word is the ultimate truth! Scientific
theories do not have to coincide with Bible fact; however, scientific fact should validate
the Bible further. Setting out to make scientific theory match the Bible has an inherent,
fundamental flaw in logic and can be dangerous. All I ask is that when you consider
science and the Bible, always maintain God’s point of view, as well as keep an open
mind.

You stated that “dinosaurs were on the ark.” Apatosaurus was 70 feet long and
weighed in at 35 tons. More recently, Seismosaurus has been discovered. This
monstrosity was 140 feet long and weighed in at 280 tons. These are just two species
out of numerous land dinosaurs. How many of these (in twos) do you think the ark
could handle in addition to all the other creatures of the world?

DISCOVERY - A Monthly Paper of Bible and Science for Kids does a very good job
of answering this question. In the January 1990 issue Brad T. Bromling said:
You might wonder how such large creatures could have gotten onto the ark. That
is easy! The ark was 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet tall. You know how big a
football field is. The ark was much longer than that! Not only was the ark very big,
but dinosaurs were very small when they were young. If Noah took baby dinosaurs
A Reason of Our Hope Page 5

with him, they might not have been bigger than an average dog. Some scientists
believe that when all of the animals were on the ark, it was still only half full. That is
a big ark! Read Genesis 6-8 and see how that Noah did just what God said. Because
he did, God saved him, his family, and at least two of every major type of animal
alive at that time.7
Not all dinosaurs were of immense size. Compsognathus was up to three feet long and
probably weighed just over six pounds. On average, the size of all dinosaurs considered
together (so far) is just larger than a human. The average size of all mammals (elephants,
rhinos, hippos, whales, horses, monkeys, bats, mice, etc.) is about one-tenth of this.8 It is
entirely possible that dinosaurs were on the ark, especially with God’s description of
“behemoth” in Job 40:15-24:
Behold now behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox. Lo now,
his strength is in his loins, and his force is in the navel of his belly. He moveth his tail
like a cedar: the sinews of his stones are wrapped together. His bones are as strong
pieces of brass; his bones are like bars of iron. He is the chief of the ways of God: he
that made him can make his sword to approach unto him. Surely the mountains bring
him forth food, where all the beasts of the field play. He lieth under the shady trees, in
the covert of the reed, and fens. The shady trees cover him with their shadow; the
willows of the brook compass him about. Behold, he drinketh up a river, and hasteth
not: he trusteth that he can draw up Jordan into his mouth. He taketh it with his eyes:
his nose pierceth through snares.
God certainly wasn’t describing an elephant or a hippopotamus! Job lived after the
Flood, so the dinosaurs obviously coexisted with man before and after the Deluge.

If Adam was created full grown, would he be one year old or mature (30 years old)?
You would not call Adam a one year old, so why refer to the earth as 6,000 years old
if it looks older?

That is an excellent point! You are referring to my statement: “The perceived age of
the earth is easy to explain when we look at the creation of Adam. He was created full
grown, not as a baby. Therefore, God could have easily created the earth ‘full grown’ with
the perceived age of millions of years.” I also presented Ussher’s and Lightfoot’s
calculations from the Bible as being about 6,000 years since the creation of the earth. This
can be explained by clarifying simple terminology. Just as the earth was created “full
grown” with the perceived age of millions of years, Adam was created full grown with
the perceived age of thirty years (or mature). Adam lived 930 years (Genesis 5:5) but he
looked 960 years old when he died. In counting his age, the Bible obviously considered
Adam to be 0 years old when he was created, even though he might have appeared to be
30 years old.

I disagree with your affirmation that “God could have used evolution, but He
didn’t!” It is a known fact that “speciation” has occurred. Life forms that at one
time could interbreed, have changed or “evolved” into life forms that cannot
A Reason of Our Hope Page 6

interbreed through such mechanisms as mutation, genetic recombination, natural

selection, and reproductive isolation. This is in complete agreement with the
creation account.

I agree with your evidence of speciation. For example, there is no reference to a mule
before the Flood, so it is likely that two of them were not on the ark. They didn’t have to
be present since a mule is a crossbreed or hybrid of a female horse and a male donkey. I
did not consider interbreeding or speciation in the definition of evolution; although, I
should have explained that in the article. My comment, “Yes, God could have used
evolution, but He didn’t,” was concerning Darwin’s theory of evolution. His publication,
On the Origin of Species in 1859, argued that natural selection was the mechanism for
evolution. In other words, the best adapted organisms of each generation were selected to
survive and breed while their offspring inherited their beneficial characteristics. Darwin
felt that all organisms came from a single common ancestor about 3,500 million years
ago.9 This theory has no part in God’s plan!

You said that the creation days were 24 hours long. What about Leviticus 25:4, 8
and Hebrews 4:3-5? Doesn’t this indicate that those days could have been years?

“But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the
LORD: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard. … And thou shalt
number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the
seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years” (Leviticus 25:4, 8). Verse
four is speaking of the Sabbatical Year. That was the seventh year after the Israelites were
given Canaan. They were to rest the entire seventh year while only living on the yields of
their crops and without sowing any additional crops. Verse eight refers to the Year of
Jubilee. The fiftieth year, after seven Sabbatical Years, was consecrated in celebration of
the Promised Land. This passage is not a valid argument for the “age-day” theory. If you
recall, the Hebrew word, yowm, meaning “day,” signifies a 24 hour period when used
with a numerical adjective, as in Exodus 20:11: “For in six days the LORD made heaven
and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day.”
For we which have believed do enter into rest, as he said, As I have sworn in my
wrath, if they shall enter into my rest: although the works were finished from the
foundation of the world. For he spake in a certain place of the seventh day on this
wise, And God did rest the seventh day from all his works. And in this place again, If
they shall enter into my rest. (Hebrews 4:3-5)
The Hebrew writer is quoting from Psalm 95:11 where “my rest” refers to the
promised land of Canaan in which the wilderness generation could not enter. He is
applying “my rest” to Christians in this Hebrew epistle. The Greek word for “rest,”
katapausis, is defined as “putting to rest; tranquility.”10 When God rested after the
creation, He enjoyed the sense of satisfaction and tranquility that comes with the
completion of a task. It is in this sense that the Hebrew writer is using “my rest” in verses
1 and 3 of chapter 4. Christ tells us, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy
laden, and I will give you rest” (Matthew 11:28). We, as Christians, enter into God’s rest
A Reason of Our Hope Page 7

through Christ. He promises as a result, “Ye shall find rest unto your souls” (v 29).
“For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God
did from his” (Hebrews 4:10). Joshua could not lead all of Israel into the rest of dwelling
in Canaan because of their unbelief (v 8). Likewise, the Christian must believe the truth
of God’s Word to enter into that perfect future rest. Jehovah’s Witnesses try to apply this
passage to the “age-day” theory as meaning the seventh-day rest of God still continues.
Remember to whom this epistle was written? The Hebrews! The writer was relating the
consequences of unbelief by familiar Old Testament analogies. The Hebrews could better
understand the message with this approach. This passage does not validate the “age-day”
theory either.

You said in your article on creation, “Radiometric techniques and carbon 14 dating
used to tell the age of fossils are fundamentally flawed because of inaccurate
assumptions.” Can you back up this claim?

Easily.
• A scientific journal stated, “Dates determined by radioactive decay may be off—not
by a few years, but by orders of magnitude.” It further related, “Man, instead of
having walked the earth for 3.6 million years, may have been around for only a few
thousand.”11
• Three professors from California Institute of Technology, Carnegie Institute, and
Chicago University co-wrote, “The requirements of the assumptions in the ore lead
method are so extreme it is unlikely that it should give a correct age.”12
• Another scientist stated, “Most of the ages obtained by the lead:thorium method
disagree with the ages of the same minerals computed by other lead methods.”13
• Dr. G. N. Plass related, “All calculations of radiocarbon dates have been made on the
assumption that the amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide has remained constant.”14
All of these methods have a basic flaw. The assumption is made that the “identified
radiogenic isotope has been derived from the parent isotope by radioactive
disintegration.” Also, “the rate of disintegration has always been the same as at
present.”15
The assumptions and inaccuracies of these methods totally discount the Creation and
the Flood. God, more than likely, made all the elements with an “appearance of age” in
radioactive equilibrium. The Flood was a great interruption in the uniform process of
nature that these age measuring techniques do not consider. Is it any wonder why these
methods are so inaccurate?

“And God said, Let there be light: and there was light” (Genesis 1:3). How could
there be light before God created the sun?

Because God said so. He spoke it into existence. We have no way of knowing what
that light source was. John tells us, “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all” (1 John
A Reason of Our Hope Page 8

1:5). The light may have been God Himself, as some suggest, but it was more likely some
fixed light source outside the earth. Next, He separated light from darkness and called
them day and night, respectively (Genesis 1:5). In reference to that light source, the earth
passed through one day-night cycle. Later, on the fourth day, God created the sun, the
moon, and the stars in order to replace the single light source of the first day. The first
light source temporarily marked the division of the days, while the sun and moon
permanently took over this task. However, the sun and moon were created to do far more
than that. God purposed them to mark off the seasons and to give light to the earth. The
sun was made to give warmth and nurture life. The moon was created to govern the tides.
God resolved the sun, moon, and stars to be signs in the sky in which men could get their
bearings and be aware of His handiwork. How could anyone believe that the vast beauty
and order of the universe came about by accident?

How can we see the light from stars that are billions of light-years away if the
universe is only 6,000 years old?

That is a difficult question. The only answer I can give you is based on speculation of
the biblical evidence. The problem arises from the fact that the creation account, when
interpreted literally, only allows for a 6,000-year-old universe. We can see M31 in the
Andromeda galaxy with binoculars, yet it is about two million light-years away from us.
At today’s speed of light, the light from M31 should not even be visible to us yet if the
universe is only thousands of years old.
Evolutionists love this dilemma, yet it is their own theories that aid creationists in
determining viable scenarios to explain a young universe. There are many excellent
theories that creationists have come up with that might possibly explain the starlight
phenomena, but one stands out from the rest. Briefly, however, I will mention some of the
more popular creationist theories and then discuss my favored theory in more detail.
When I first studied this subject, I had no problem with assuming that God created the
universe with a mature appearance. The earth and Adam were created with an apparent
age. Why not the universe? It didn’t take a huge leap of faith for me to believe that God
created starlight in transit. In 1987, however, a star was observed as going supernova.
This explosion was about 160,000 light-years away. In order for us to observe this
supernova in 1987, according to the “created-in-transit” theory, God would have had to
create the information for the explosion in a light wave 6,000 light-years away from us
during the creation week. I don’t believe God would have put on some fictional show in
the heavens for us to see. That supernova really occurred and there is a much better
explanation for it than this one.
Paul Steidl in 1979, and then later Barry Setterfield in 1986, proposed that the speed
of light had decayed over the centuries. Setterfield looked at 17th century data and
determined that the speed of light at that time was 2.6% higher than its value today. Using
this data to predict the speed of light 6,000 years ago, he came up with a value for the
speed of light that was millions of times greater than now. If the speed of light was nearly
infinite when God created the universe, then we would be able to see Supernova 1987a
from 160,000 light-years away. Eugene Chaffin later in 1992 reanalyzed the data and
A Reason of Our Hope Page 9

calculated that the speed of light was really only about 0.4% greater in the 17th century.
Many creation scientists have now abandoned this idea.16
My favored theory was devised by Dr. Russell Humphreys and was published in his
book Starlight and Time in 1994. He observed from Albert Einstein’s general theory of
relativity that gravity affects time. Clocks at higher altitudes tick faster than clocks at
lower altitudes. This gravitational time dilation is a proven phenomenon. Time moves at a
pace determined by the gravitational field of your frame of reference. When God created
the earth, animals, Adam, and Eve, He did it in six literal days according to earth’s time
frame of reference. The starlight from far away galaxies had plenty of time to reach the
earth because these galaxies had a different gravitational field and, thus, a different time
frame of reference.17
The popular Big Bang Theory, espoused by many evolutionists, was helpful to
Humphreys in developing his own theory. Using the same equations, but far different
initial assumptions (i.e. a young universe and a bounded but expanding cosmos), he came
up with the “White Hole” theory. Big-Bang theorists agree that the cosmos has expanded,
but many believe that the universe has no boundaries. The Bible hints at an expanding
universe, for God “stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a
tent to dwell in” (Isaiah 40:22). Observable data also indicate that the universe has
expanded.18
The biggest difference between the Big Bang and the White Hole theories is that one
of Humphreys’ initial assumptions is that the universe has boundaries. This means that it
also has “a center of mass and a net gravitational force, and we could begin to consider
the time-distorting effects of gravity on a massive scale.”19
Dr. Humphreys states that astronomers have possibly observed three star-sized black
holes and another one millions of times larger. Matter falls toward black holes and
generates massive energy. The gravitational force of all the mass inside a black hole is
strong enough to prevent light rays from escaping, which is why it is called a “black”
hole. Humphreys theorizes that our universe was fifty times smaller during creation and
that God trapped its matter into the spherical borders of an “event horizon,” at least one
billion light-years in diameter. The event horizon is where light rays bend back on
themselves, while trying to escape a black hole, and tremendously distort time. Matter
and light can exist within a black hole, but general relativity (GR) suggests that they must
fall inward towards the center until pressed into a pinpoint of infinite density. Since we
know that the universe has expanded, it cannot now be within a black hole where matter
falls inward.20
GR allows one other possibility for the original location of the universe … a “white”
hole. A white hole is similar to a black hole except the matter and light inside its event
horizon expands outward. It is a black hole running in reverse.
The event horizon of a white hole would be a one-way border which permits only
outward motion through itself. Matter and light waves would have to move out of a
white hole, but they could not go back in. Since the diameter of an event horizon is
proportional to the amount of matter inside it, the event horizon would shrink as
matter passes through it and out of the white hole. The analogy would be a fat man on
a very strict diet—no input allowed, only output! Eventually, he would waste away. In
A Reason of Our Hope Page 10

the same way, the event horizon would get smaller and smaller, and eventually shrink
to nothing. There would then be no more white hole, but only scattered matter moving
away from a central point.21
Therefore, Einstein’s general theory of relativity suggests that the universe was
created inside an event horizon and, since the universe has expanded, it was once inside a
white hole. So, “if the universe is bounded, then sometime in its past the universe must
have expanded out of a white hole.”22
The main point is that according to GR, time effectively stands still at the event
horizon. Clocks and all physical processes at that location are stopped, and near that
location they run very slowly (relative to clocks away from it). We have already
shown how the scientific evidence indicates that the universe (with the earth roughly
at its center) must have expanded out of a white hole which no longer exists. This
means that the event horizon shrank down to zero. (GR sets no limit on the speed at
which such a shrinkage can take place, incidentally.)
If you were standing on the earth as the event horizon arrived, distant objects in
the universe could age billions of years in a single day of your time. And there would
be ample time for their light to reach you.23
“And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day
from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years … And
the evening and the morning were the fourth day” (Genesis 1:14-19). It is clear that God
created the sun, moon, and stars all on the fourth day. When He detailed the creation
account, He obviously used earth’s time frame of reference; therefore, according to the
White Hole Theory, the gravitational time distortion from our perspective made the
universe appear to age billions of years in one of our 24-hour days.

Adam lived to 930 years of age. Methuselah died at the ripe old age of 969. Noah
begat his sons at 500, encountered the Flood at 600, and lived an additional 350
years for a grand total of 950 years. It is beyond my imagination to think of such
long lives common in Old Testament times. How can this be? Did they count years
differently back then? Please explain in your article.

Let me attempt to answer your questions in reverse order. Let us first consider how
the patriarchs might have counted their years, and then, I will try to explain how such
long life-spans were possible in the antediluvian or pre-Flood world.
THE HEBREW RECKONING OF YEARS
“And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day
from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years”
(Genesis 1:14). It is common knowledge that the earth revolves around its axis every 24
hours, but the year cannot be calculated based on days as the basic unit. The earth
completes its circuit around the sun in 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes, and 46 seconds.
That extra quarter of a day yields our leap year.
The Jewish calendar is similar to ours by having a 24 hour day and a 12 month year.
However, each month is based on the lunar orbit of the moon which takes 29 days, 12
A Reason of Our Hope Page 11

hours, 44 minutes, and 3 seconds to complete. The Jewish months alternate between 29
and 30 days to compensate for the 12 hours but there is still 44 minutes and 3 seconds left
over. This eventually adds up to a day and must be considered in their calendar, which the
second and third Jewish months, Cheshvan and Kislev, can absorb. Adding these days up
only gives them 353, 354, or 355 days which is much less than a solar year of 365 1/4
days. The Jews take care of this inconsistency by adding an extra month, seven times in
nineteen years. This month is called Adar Sheni or V’Adar, which means “second Adar,”
and is placed after Adar every two or three years in the 19 year cycle. When this new 29
day month is added, the sixth month, Adar, has another day added to it making it 30 days
in length. This makes a Jewish leap year contain 383, 384, or 385 days. To complicate
matters further, Jewish holidays having to fall away from the sabbath also determine the
length of the months Cheshvan and Kislev. Their calendar is lunisolar or “of the moon
and the sun.”24
The seven days of the week were first practiced by God when creating the universe.
“And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the
seventh day from all his work which he had made” (Genesis 2:2). Therefore, the seven
day week originated at the dawn of time. The Hebrews probably reckoned their months
based on the phases of the moon, just as their descendants do now. The earth still rotates
around the sun in the same manner that it did before the Flood, so the years would have
been the same length of time as now. Even if the patriarchs based their year totally on
lunar phases, they would have only been 12 days short of a solar year. If this was the case,
then Noah would have actually died at 919 years of age instead of 950 as the Scriptures
say (Genesis 9:29). Even that age is an astronomical amount of time! The Jews may have
counted years differently back then, but it couldn’t have made much of a difference since
the lunar and solar years almost match each other.
THE PATRIARCHS’ LONGEVITY OF LIFE
One thing you might keep in mind is that God built man to last. The Fall of Adam
invoked death and decay in an otherwise perfect environment (Romans 5:14; 8:22; 1
Corinthians 15:22). Thus, it would take a considerable amount of time for decay to
overwhelm such a flawless creation. Notice in Genesis 11 that people’s lives became
shorter after the Flood. Starting in verse ten, Shem lived 600 years, Arpachshad lived 438
years, Shelah lived 433 years, Eber lived 464 years, Peleg lived 239 years, Reu also lived
239 years, Serug lived 230 years, Nahor lived 148 years, and Terah lived 205 years.
Abraham, the son of Terah, only lived 175 years (Genesis 25:7) and Moses died at the age
of 120 years (Deuteronomy 34:7). The average life-span of the patriarchs before the Flood
was 912 years; including Noah but not Enoch, whom God took. Why does the length of
life start to decrease after the Noahic Flood? Before the Deluge, the patriarchs lived about
900 years without the diminishing life-spans that are evident after the Flood. Something
was different before the earth was inundated by water.
A highly probable concept called the “canopy theory” may explain this. The theory is
based on the creation account. “And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of
the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament,
and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were
above the firmament: and it was so” (Genesis 1:6-7). This passage suggests that God
A Reason of Our Hope Page 12

suspended a vast body of water in vapor form over the earth, which would have caused a
“canopy,” creating greenhouse effects beneath it. A uniformly warm temperate climate
would have resulted around the entire earth. Since this vapor was much more than we
have in our atmosphere today, a larger percentage of the sun’s radiation would have been
absorbed and evenly distributed over the earth, both seasonally and latitudinally. This
would imply an absence of violent windstorms since warm and cold fronts would not be
clashing.25
The creation account also alleges that there was no rainfall before the Flood. “For the
LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the
ground. But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the
ground” (Genesis 2:5-6). There was probably a greater proportion of land to water in the
antediluvian world, but the atmosphere was kept at a comfortable humidity by the “mist”
rising from the gentle seas and rivers.26 This would certainly account for the longevity of
human life before the Flood, as well as the vast amounts of water required to submerge
the earth.
Skeptics of a universal flood have arisen recently. Dr. Bernard Ramm asserts that “all
the waters of the heavens, poured all over the earth, would amount to a sheath seven
inches thick” and “to cover the highest mountains would require eight times more water
than we now have.”27 He, of course, neglects to consider the canopy of water vapor that
God suspended over the earth, and he also ignores “the fountains of the great deep” being
“broken up” (Genesis 7:11).
God caused the Deluge from two enormous sources of water. “In the six hundredth
year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day
were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were
opened” (Genesis 7:11). The canopy of water vapor was released from the heavens in
addition to the subterranean waters erupting through the land. After forty days, God
stopped these two great water sources as quickly as He had started them. “The fountains
also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was
restrained” (Genesis 8:2).
Where did all of this water recede to? With the great violence of the “fountains of the
deep” breaking up, David suggests that the ocean basins were deepened to provide
sufficient storage space for the extra water. “Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a
garment: the waters stood above the mountains. At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of
thy thunder they hasted away. They go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys
unto the place which thou hast founded for them. Thou hast set a bound that they may not
pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth” (Psalms 104:6-9). Moses tells us,
“And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred
and fifty days the waters were abated” (Genesis 8:3). That is why it is believed that the
ratio of land to water was greater before the Flood. The antediluvians lived in a much
different world than we do now.
Another significant difference between the antediluvian and modern world is the fact
that everyone from Adam to Noah was a vegetarian (Genesis 1:29). It wasn’t until after
the Flood that God allowed mankind to eat meat (Genesis 9:2-4). The pre-Flood diet,
A Reason of Our Hope Page 13

then, consisted of global vegetarianism, where only raw fruits and vegetables were
consumed for nearly 1,700 years.
Since God prescribed meat for our diets after the Flood, the animal flesh had to be
cooked, so other foods might have also been cooked that had previously been consumed
raw. Cooking fruits and vegetables destroys the enzymes and most of the vitamins
contained in them. The practice of cooking all kinds of food may have been gradually
introduced at this point. Today, it is rare for the average person to consume any raw food
… except maybe a steak.
Let us review the main differences in the pre-Flood world: they had near-perfect
genes, a moderately warm climate with no storms, a revitalizing mist to water the plants,
radiation protection by a vapor canopy, and a vegetarian diet. It is difficult to know which
of these factors had the greatest effect on antediluvian longevity; however, we do know
that just before the Flood, God promised, “My spirit shall not always strive with man, for
that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years” (Genesis 6:3).
Perhaps the deletion of all of these factors was enough to limit the life span of mankind to
120 years.

What is leviathan? I’ve heard it’s a crocodile.

Most commentators agree that leviathan is a crocodile; however, a crocodile’s skin

can be pierced by a “sword,” a “spear,” an “arrow,” a “habergeon” or javelin, and “barbed
irons” or harpoons. God described how these weapons could not harm leviathan in Job
41:1-34. Hobart Smith relates the characteristics of the crocodile’s armor: “Ventral scales
are large, quadrangular, and soft; the larger dorsal scales are over bony plates; lateral
scales are small and soft; a dorsolateral row of protuberant scales at each side of base of
tail joins as one row at about the middle.”28 He describes the scales of the “heart,” or
chest, and sides as “soft.” Only the back has bony plates to protect the crocodile from
sharp objects. This certainly is not the armor that God reported of leviathan in Job 41.
His scales are “joined one to another” to “shut up together as with a close seal,” so
“that no air can come between them” and “they cannot be sundered” and “cannot be
moved” (v 15-17, 23). “His heart is as firm as a stone; yea, as hard as a piece of the nether
millstone” (v 24), unlike the crocodile’s soft underside. “Who can open the doors of his
face? his teeth are terrible round about” (v 14). “In his neck remaineth strength, and
sorrow is turned into joy before him” (v 22) “and his eyes are like the eyelids of the
morning” (v 18). The leviathan’s trail leaves “sharp stones under him: he spreadeth sharp
pointed things upon the mire” (v 30). “One would think the deep to be hoary” when he
makes it “boil like a pot” and “maketh a path to shine after him” (v 30-32). His mighty
tail boils the water as it swiftly carries him through the sea. By his sneezes “a light doth
shine” (v 18). “Out of his mouth go burning lamps, and sparks of fire leap out. Out of his
nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a seething pot or caldron. His breath kindleth coals, and a
flame goeth out of his mouth” (v 19-21).
James Strauss dispelled the fire-breathing myth by relating that when leviathan “arises
up out of the water, after a sustained period beneath the surface, it propels water in a hot
stream from its mouth. The sparkling steam looks like fire in the sunlight.”29 Although
A Reason of Our Hope Page 14

the description of leviathan is similar to a crocodile, it can only be an animal that is

crocodile-like and much more indestructible.
God also recounted leviathan’s great strength and size: “I will not conceal his parts,
nor his power, nor his comely proportion” (v 12). There had been many failed attempts to
catch or kill him, so God said, “Lay thine hand upon him, remember the battle, do no
more” (v 8). He asked, “Canst thou draw out leviathan with an hook? or his tongue with a
cord which thou lettest down? Canst thou put an hook into his nose? or bore his jaw
through with a thorn? Canst thou fill his skin with barbed irons? or his head with fish
spears?” (v 1-2, 7). God continued to describe leviathan’s invulnerability. “The sword of
him that layeth at him cannot hold: the spear, the dart, nor the habergeon. He esteemeth
iron as straw, and brass as rotten wood. The arrow cannot make him flee: slingstones are
turned with him into stubble. Darts are counted as stubble: he laugheth at the shaking of a
spear” (v 26-29). God asked Job, “Behold, the hope of him is in vain: shall not one be
cast down even at the sight of him? None is so fierce that dare stir him up: who then is
able to stand before me?” (v 9-10). These questions were to illustrate the point that God is
all powerful; even more powerful than the much feared leviathan.
God said, “Upon earth there is not his like, who is made without fear” (v 33). God
made him and only God can destroy him. David wrote, “There go the ships: there is that
leviathan, whom thou hast made to play therein” (Psalms 104:26). This was probably in
the Mediterranean Sea. Crocodiles are only semiaquatic, living in swamps, ponds, lakes,
and shallow rivers.30 David further related, “For God is my King of old, working
salvation in the midst of the earth. Thou didst divide the sea by thy strength: thou brakest
the heads of the dragons in the waters. Thou brakest the heads of leviathan in pieces, and
gavest him to be meat to the people inhabiting the wilderness” (Psalms 74:12-14). Isaiah,
although speaking figuratively, also indicated that only God could destroy leviathan: “In
that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the
piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is
in the sea” (Isaiah 27:1). God is the Almighty and has “created all things,” and for His
“pleasure they are and were created” (Revelation 4:11).
Unlike a crocodile or fish, it was useless to try to catch a leviathan with hooks,
harpoons or anything else. … What was leviathan? The large size, strong jaws, great
teeth, fast swimming ability and its protected back and undersides all give clues. It
could have been a Kronosaurus (KRONE-oh-SOR-us) or something like it. This was
one of the greatest, most overwhelming animals ever to swim the seas. It was not a
true dinosaur, but it was reptile-like and had great, sharp teeth.
It is interesting that many reports of “sea serpents” closely match the ancient
pliosaurs and mosasaurs. They looked somewhat like huge lizards or crocodiles with
flippers or webbed feet. Fossils show their backbones were very flexible. They could
probably swim with a snake-like motion.
A creature very much like these was reported during World War I by a German
submarine. Captain Georg von Forstner described what happened:
On July 30, 1915, our U28 torpedoed the British steamer Iberian carrying a rich
cargo in the North Atlantic. The steamer sank quickly, the bow sticking almost
vertically into the air. When it had gone for about twenty-five seconds there was a
A Reason of Our Hope Page 15

violent explosion. A little later pieces of wreckage, and among them a gigantic sea
animal (writhing and struggling wildly), was shot out of the water to a height of 60 to
100-feet. At that moment I had with me in the conning tower my officers of the
watch, the chief engineer, the navigator, and the helmsman. Simultaneously we all
drew one another’s attention to this wonder of the seas … we were unable to identify
it. We did not have the time to take a photograph, for the animal sank out of sight
after ten or fifteen seconds. It was about 60-feet long, was like a crocodile in shape
and had four limbs with powerful webbed feet and a long tail tapering to a point.31
The crocodile’s longest reported length is 23 feet, found in South America.32
In every part of the world, ships have made reports of animals like this and other
types of unknown creatures. Most scientists agree there are probably many more sea
creatures to be discovered. Man knows more about the surface of the moon than he
does about life in the world’s great oceans. There is more sworn evidence for ‘sea
monsters’ than would be needed to prove any ordinary case in a court of law.33
On April 10, 1977, a Japanese fishing ship, the Zuiyo Maru, snagged the decaying
body of a possible modern plesiosaur about 900 feet underwater near Christchurch, New
Zealand. The large reptile was 32 feet long, weighed 4,000 pounds, and had four fins,
each about three feet long. The Director of Animal Research at the National Science
Museum of Japan said, “It seems that these animals are not extinct after all. It’s
impossible for only one to have survived. There must be a group.”34 Since these sea
creatures did not have to be taken on the Ark, many “thought to be extinct” animals may
be swimming about in our oceans, having survived the Flood of Noah. This evidence
further refutes Darwin’s Theory of Evolution.

When you discussed leviathan in a recent article, you quoted James Strauss to dispel
the “fire-breathing myth” discussed in Job 41:19-21: “Out of his mouth go burning
lamps, and sparks of fire leap out. Out of his nostrils goeth smoke, as out of a
seething pot or caldron. His breath kindleth coals, and a flame goeth out of his
mouth.” Strauss said that when leviathan “arises up out of the water, after a
sustained period beneath the surface, it propels water in a hot stream from its
mouth. The sparkling steam looks like fire in the sunlight.” The passage in Job is
God describing leviathan. Don’t you think that when He said “flame goeth out of his
mouth,” He meant it?

You are absolutely right! Forgive my error of explaining away Scripture. If God said
it was so, it was so. Obviously, leviathan could breath fire. That sounds like a mythical
dragon story, doesn’t it? Well, most myths are based on some fact. It is quite possible that
leviathan did breath fire. We have a modern day example of how such could take place—
the bombardier beetle, brachinus. The bombardier beetle is only one-half inch long yet
has a powerful weapon at its beckoning. When an enemy approaches from behind, he
dispels irritating and foul gases from two tail tubes at 212°F (the boiling point of water).35
Dr. Hermann Schildknecht, a German chemist, studied the bombardier beetle in great
detail. The beetle mixes two chemicals—hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone. These
two chemicals react to make a muddy liquid, so the beetle adds an inhibitor to keep them
A Reason of Our Hope Page 16

from reacting. This mixture is stocked into two storage chambers to be used whenever
needed. When threatened, the beetle squirts the chemical liquid into two combustion
tubes contained in his tail. These tubes contain two enzymes (catalase and peroxidase)
that neutralize the inhibitor and speed up the chemical reaction. An explosion takes place
that renders his enemy bewildered—just long enough to make his escape.36
A similar type of combustion system could have been instigated in such dinosaurs as
Parasaurolophus, Lambeosaurus and Corythosaurus. Each of these dinosaurs
accommodated a bony structure atop his head. They were hollow and connected to their
noses by tubes. Scientists have not determined what its use was. Some suggest that these
crests were chambers for storing air, allowing these duck-billed dinosaurs to stay under
water for long periods of time. Others propose that these bony humps enhanced their
sense of smell. Some go as far as to theorize that these crowns were used as trumpets to
warn the herd of an approaching meat-eating dinosaur. We cannot be sure what purpose
these hollow humps served; however, we can look at the example of the bombardier
beetle and hypothesize.37
The duck-billed dinosaur, Parasaurolophus, had a long curved bony tube that
extended far behind his head. I conjecture that this tube may have been a combustion
chamber similar to the bombardier beetle’s. Stored chemicals could be shot into his crest
where enzymes could cause an explosion to expel from his nostrils. This would be quite
an effective weapon against Tyrannosaurus Rex. Parasaurolophus spent much time in the
water and on the land. His great tail and webbed feet made it easy for him to swim and
escape meat-eaters. It is possible that he could also breath fire as a defense. Kronosaurus,
whom I mentioned in the article in question, was more fierce and crocodile-like. Perhaps
there is a marine reptile that has not yet been discovered that matches the description God
gave us of leviathan—a fire-breathing combination of Kronosaurus and
Parasaurolophus.

It has been theorized many times recently that dinosaurs were the ancestors of
modern birds. Many dinosaurs were small and similar to birds. Compsognathus was
the same size as a chicken. Archaeopteryx was a lizard with feathers. Could these
dinosaurs be the transitional forms that Darwin predicted scientists would find in
the fossil record?

One very important factor has been left out of scientific reasoning: “And out of the
ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air”
(Genesis 2:19). There can never be a discovery of a “transitional form” or “missing link.”
These “in-between” fossils will never be found because they simply do not exist.
Scientists, however, may interpret certain fossils, such as Archaeopteryx, as a
“transitional form.” His fossil appeared suddenly, fully formed, with a combination of
reptile and bird characteristics. He is simply an extinct creature that God created on the
fifth day.
What about Compsognathus and Struthiomimus, who strongly resemble ostriches?
They sound like excellent “transitional forms.” This reasoning has one serious, scientific
flaw—these lightweight dinosaurs have lizard hips. There are two basic kinds of
A Reason of Our Hope Page 17

dinosaurs: Saurischia, or “lizard-hipped,” and Ornithischia, or “bird-hipped.” Ostriches

have bird hips; chickens have bird hips; but Compsognathus and Struthiomimus do not.
None of these lightweight dinosaurs could possibly have been the ancestor of the chicken
or the ostrich—scientifically or biblically.38
Could one of the bird-hipped dinosaurs have been the ancestor of birds?
Ankylosaurus, Stegosaurus, Trachodon, Parasaurolophus, Corythosaurus,
Lambeosaurus, and Iguanodon all have bird hips. None of these even remotely resemble
a bird. In fact, all of the dinosaurs that resembled birds had lizard hips. This presents a big
problem for evolutionists, but those of us who believe in creation have no problem with it
whatsoever.39

Demons

Can ghosts or demons exist today?

Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit, that
I may go to her, and inquire of her. And his servants said to him, Behold, there is a
woman that hath a familiar spirit at Endor. And Saul disguised himself, and put on
other raiment, and he went, and two men with him, and they came to the woman by
night: and he said, I pray thee, divine unto me by the familiar spirit, and bring me him
up, whom I shall name unto thee. … Then said the woman, Whom shall I bring up
unto thee? And he said, Bring me up Samuel. And when the woman saw Samuel, she
cried with a loud voice: and the woman spake to Saul, saying, Why hast thou
deceived me? for thou art Saul. And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what
sawest thou? And the woman said unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth.
And he said unto her, What form is he of? And she said, An old man cometh up; and
he is covered with a mantle. And Saul perceived that it was Samuel, and he stooped
with his face to the ground, and bowed himself. And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast
thou disquieted me, to bring me up? And Saul answered, I am sore distressed; for the
Philistines make war against me, and God is departed from me, and answereth me no
more, neither by prophets, nor by dreams: therefore I have called thee, that thou
mayest make known unto me what I shall do. (1 Samuel 28:7-15)
The “woman that hath a familiar spirit” or medium was sought out by Saul to
communicate with the dead to determine the future. This was strictly forbidden by the
law. “Regard not them that have familiar spirits, neither seek after wizards, to be defiled
by them: I am the LORD your God” (Leviticus 19:31). The medium cried out in fear
when Samuel really appeared. She was expecting a spirit that would speak in behalf of
Samuel; not Samuel himself! God miraculously allowed the actual spirit of Samuel to
foretell Saul’s future. “And Samuel said to Saul, Why hast thou disquieted me, to bring
me up?” (v 15). Saul had disturbed Samuel from the Paradise side of Hades to bring him
up “out of the earth.” Saul could not see Samuel because the medium had to describe him
and he also bowed his face to the ground in reverence. Apparently, these people claimed
to have the power to communicate with the dead in Old Testament times. However, these
people were evil and were severely punished. “A man also or woman that hath a familiar
A Reason of Our Hope Page 18

spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death” (Leviticus 20:27).

We know that Jesus cast out demons and that He gave His disciples the power to do
this, also. Only the apostles could pass on the gifts to believers which included the power
of casting out demons. Notice how Philip the evangelist could cast out demons and heal
the sick in Acts 8:7. However, he could not pass these gifts to the Samaritans. Peter and
John had to come to Samaria and lay their hands on them to pass on the gifts. Jesus had
told the disciples before His ascension, “And these signs shall follow them that believe;
In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues” (Mark 16:17).
The apostles and other believers cast out many unclean spirits fulfilling these words of
Jesus (Acts 5:16; 8:7; 16:16-19).
If the power to exorcise demons passed away with the apostles, would God have let
Satan continue to possess humans? Of course not! “There hath no temptation taken you
but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted
above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye
may be able to bear it” (1 Corinthians 10:13). God would never allow Satan to have the
advantage. Demons could cause those whom they possessed to lose their souls. Someone
today would need the power to cast them out. This, in turn, would mean that we could
still prophesy, speak in tongues, heal the sick, etc. This power, along with the other gifts,
is no longer necessary since we have the complete Word of God. We no longer know “in
part” as the first century Christians did (1 Corinthians 13:9).
Raising ghosts or familiar spirits from the dead was forbidden by the old law. If there
are ghosts now, then they could not be of God. They certainly do not have the power to
bring themselves from the dead. However, if Satan still had the power to raise up spirits
or possess humans, wouldn’t there be more widespread cases than alleged today?

You commented on demon possession recently. If we can’t be possessed, then what

about 1 John 5:19? “We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies in the
power of the evil one” (NASB).

“But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world
hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of
Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them” (2 Corinthians 4:3-4). We
know that Satan is the “god of this world.” The question is, “How does Satan work
today?” “And they had a king over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, whose
name in the Hebrew tongue is Abaddon, but in the Greek tongue hath his name
Apollyon” (Revelation 9:11). The abyss or “bottomless pit” is the abode of the devil and
his servants. The “lake of fire” is the future and permanent home of Satan (Revelation
20:10).
“And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit
and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is
the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless
pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more,
till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season”
(Revelation 20:1-3). “But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with
A Reason of Our Hope Page 19

the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day” (2 Peter 3:8). Therefore,
the thousand years is not a resolute amount of time. The devil is bound for a very long
time by the “great chain” or God’s Word and is a prisoner in his own home.
Satan is the “prince of this world” (John 12:31). So, what is the limit of his power on
the world? The Gospel! It is the chain of light and truth that restrains the devil. He has to
blind sinners to the light of God’s Word in order to be victorious (2 Corinthians 4:4).
John tells us that Satan is cast into his abode and locked in so “that he should deceive the
nations no more” (Revelation 20:3). Just as a dog is chained to a post and can only
venture so far, Satan is restricted by the complete Word of God. He was defeated at the
cross (John 12:31-33) and is only in temporary control and will finally be cast into the
lake of fire.
If the devil is chained by the Word of Truth, we know that demons could not possess
Christians because our hearts are protected by the Gospel. “For the word of God is quick,
and powerful, and sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing
asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts
and intents of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12). Can non-Christians be possessed? If so,
Christians would need the power to exorcise those demons. Demons could cause those
whom they possessed to lose their souls. Wherever there was a case of demon possession
in the first century, there was also the power to cast them out.
What of those who have turned themselves over to the will of Satan? They are already
possessed! Is he using supernatural powers to sway others? How could he? The Christian
should be able to do the same then. “God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be
tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape,
that ye may be able to bear it” (1 Corinthians 10:13). God has always given His people
the power to fight fire with fire (Luke 10:19; Ephesians 6:16). Just as miracles ceased
when “that which is perfect” was come (1 Corinthians 13:10), Satan’s power was limited
as well.

If demons could possess us and a Catholic priest tried to exorcise a demon with his
ritual, would he be successful?

“Then certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them
which had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom
Paul preacheth. And there were seven sons of one Sceva, a Jew, and chief of the priests,
which did so. And the evil spirit answered and said, Jesus I know, and Paul I know; but
who are ye? And the man in whom the evil spirit was leaped on them, and overcame
them, and prevailed against them, so that they fled out of that house naked and wounded”
(Acts 19:13-16).

Opinion

What was Paul’s thorn in the flesh?

A Reason of Our Hope Page 20

There was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me,
lest I should be exalted above measure. For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that
it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my
strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my
infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. (2 Corinthians 12:7-9)
Let’s look at some circumstantial evidence and then make a reasonable conclusion.
Paul did not recognize the high priest in Acts 23:2-5, even though he had been a Pharisee
prior to his conversion to Christianity. He wrote a short letter to the Galatians saying, “Ye
see how large a letter I have written unto you with mine own hand” (Galatians 6:11). He
gave a possible hint when he also told them, “For I bear you record, that, if it had been
possible, ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given them to me”
(Galatians 4:15). Poor eyesight could have been his thorn in the flesh, based on the
biblical evidence; however, this is pure speculation. The scriptures do not reveal this to us
for certain.

Who is the author of the book of Hebrews?

Although the Hebrew writer did not sign his letter, we feel that Paul is the author.
There are several reasons why we have this opinion:
• Hebrews was written before 70 A.D. because the temple was still standing (9:8). Paul
was martyred just before the destruction of Jerusalem.
• The author was a friend of Timothy (13:23).
• It was written in Italy (13:24) which goes hand and hand with Paul’s long
imprisonment there.
• The close of the letter is similar to Paul’s other thirteen epistles: “Grace be with you
all” (13:25).
• “Even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath
written unto you” (2 Peter 3:15). Peter told the Hebrews that Paul had written an
epistle to them, so this could be the letter Paul wrote.
Read Hebrews and compare it to Paul’s other epistles. You can tell that the heart of
the letter seems to be Paul; although, there is no definite proof of this.

Where is Paul’s epistle to the Laodiceans that he mentioned in Colossians 4:16?

“Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the church which is in
his house. And when this epistle is read among you, cause that it be read also in the
church of the Laodiceans; and that ye likewise read the epistle from Laodicea”
(Colossians 4:15-16). Although Rob and I are not convinced one way or the other, we
hold two different view points on this issue.
I feel that the letter addressed to the Ephesians was actually written to the Laodiceans.
A few reasons for this are as follows. The ancient manuscript Vatican leaves out “at
Ephesus” in Ephesians 1:1. Marcion, a nonconformist in the third century, ascribes it to
A Reason of Our Hope Page 21

the Laodiceans. Basil, in the fourth century, speaks of the absence of the words “at
Ephesus” in the manuscripts. “Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord
Jesus, and love unto all the saints, cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of
you in my prayers” (Ephesians 1:15-16). Paul speaks as if his knowledge of the
Ephesians’ faith was reported to him instead of knowing it first hand. Paul was all over
Ephesus (Acts 18:19; 19:1; 20:16; 1 Corinthians 16:8; 2 Timothy 1:18). The letter to the
Laodiceans is lost unless Ephesians is really it.
On the other hand, Rob says that since the Vatican and all other valued manuscripts
title the epistle as “The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Ephesians,” it would be
redundantly redundant to have included “at Ephesus” in verse one. There is no known
manuscript that attributes the letter to any other church. The remark of Paul about
“hearing” of their faith in Ephesians 1:15 has an exact parallel in Philemon 5. “Hearing
of thy love and faith, which thou hast toward the Lord Jesus, and toward all saints.” And
yet, Philemon was his own convert (v 19). It had been several years since Paul had seen
Philemon, so he could only have heard of his faith.
It is not important which view is true. It does not affect our salvation in any way.
After re-reading this article, I am swayed into thinking that Paul really wrote to the
Ephesians instead of the Laodiceans, but don’t tell Rob.

Since Revelation talks about Jerusalem, doesn’t this prove that Revelation was
written before the destruction of Jerusalem?

Nope. Revelation is a book of symbols. The locusts are symbols. The sword is not
literal. The pale and red horses are symbols. Even Jezebel is not literal. Why do you think
Jerusalem is literal? Jerusalem, the capital of Judea and the city of the temple, in
Revelation, becomes the symbol of the church of Christ. The holy city, Jerusalem, is
contrasted with the great city, Babylon, or the true church with the false church.

Do we have guardian angels?

Let us look to the scriptures for evidence of angels. First of all, God created the angels
as free moral agents, just as we are (Revelation 4:11). Jude 6 and 2 Peter 2:4 reveal that
some angels chose the way of darkness. Secondly, at the resurrection, we will not marry,
but will be “as angels of God in heaven” (Matthew 22:30). We will not be angels, yet we
will be like them. Lastly, angels are “ministering spirits” sent to care “for them who shall
be heirs of salvation” (Hebrews 1:7, 14). Everyone is subject to inherit salvation;
therefore, angels care for all mankind.
Jesus tells us to “take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto
you, that in heaven their angels do always behold the face of My Father which is in
heaven” (Matthew 18:10). Apparently, children have angels.
“The Lord is … not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to
repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). “There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one
sinner that repenteth” (Luke 15:10). Angels attend to our souls and wish us to be with
A Reason of Our Hope Page 22

God by attaining salvation. Thus, based on what is found in God’s Word, it is our opinion
that we do have guardian angels. Remember, however, they are not to be worshipped in
place of God (Colossians 2:18).

Pleas

Should even a sexually abused child obey his parents?

Ephesians 6:1-4 says it all. “Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; that it may
be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not
your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.”
We are to obey our parents “in the Lord.” How can a child obey his parents when they
want him to commit immoral acts against God? Parents, especially fathers, are
commanded to bring their children up “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.” Paul
always applied the disclaimer “in the Lord” when talking about obedience.

I can’t seem to get past the feeling that I’m lost. I have been taught all of my life that
I can fall from grace if I’m not careful. I don’t feel that I am good enough to be
saved. I think that I’ve done too much wrong to be forgiven. Can you give Scripture
to help me with this problem?

Unfortunately, you are not alone in this feeling. Paul said:

Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with
thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God. And the peace of God,
which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ
Jesus. Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest,
whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely,
whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise,
think on these things. (Philippians 4:6-8)
It sounds like God is telling us to put negative thoughts out of our heads and only
think about what is true, faithful, noble, honorable, right, virtuous, pure, clean, lovely,
beautiful, admirable, respectable, excellent, commendable, praiseworthy, and worthwhile.
This is very difficult, but we can pray that God will help us in this endeavor and His
peace beyond understanding will bring it about. Our God is truly wonderful!
That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his
kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and
that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.
For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God
hath before ordained that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:7-10)
It is not up to us to be good enough to be saved. We can never be good enough to be
saved. Christ’s blood bridges the gap. His sacrifice (God’s gift of grace) saves us, not our
A Reason of Our Hope Page 23

good works.
“But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another,
and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no
sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful
and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:7-9).
The blood of Christ continually cleanses us after we reach it through baptism, but only if
we walk in the light and confess our sins. Baptism helps us to reach the blood of Christ
who “washed us from our sins in his own blood” (Revelation 1:5). Christians strive to
walk in the light. Oh, we stumble in the dark quite often, too. We cannot be perfect. If
that were so, why would Christ have even bothered dying for us? He was the perfect and
spotless sacrifice for our sins. He died so that we wouldn’t have to. What a wonderful
Savior!
“Hast thou faith? have it to thyself before God. Happy is he that condemneth not
himself in that thing which he alloweth” (Romans 14:22). It is healthy to have high self
esteem and confidence.
And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before
him. For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all
things. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.
And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and
do those things that are pleasing in his sight. And this is his commandment, That we
should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave
us commandment. And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in
him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us.
(1 John 3:19-24)
Even if we have low self esteem, God knows our heart. He knows that we are only
feeling inferior and incompetent. He knows that we try to obey His commandments and
walk in the light. He knows that we stumble from the straight and narrow path. He knows
that we want to please Him. He knows that we love and believe in His Son. He knows
that we want to improve ourselves. Yet, He loves us unconditionally. We can find great
comfort in this knowledge. John is telling us that whether our heart condemns us or not,
God knows us better than we do. If we feel comfortable with our salvation, then we can
be confident of it. If we feel that we are too weak to retain salvation, then God comforts
us with His Word.
You feel that you have made too many mistakes for God to forgive you, but consider
Luke 7:40-50:
And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to say unto thee.
And he saith, Master, say on. There was a certain creditor which had two debtors: the
one owed five hundred pence, and the other fifty. And when they had nothing to pay,
he frankly forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him most?
Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave most. And he said
unto him, Thou hast rightly judged. And he turned to the woman, and said unto
Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water
for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of
her head. Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not
A Reason of Our Hope Page 24

ceased to kiss my feet. My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath
anointed my feet with ointment. Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many,
are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little.
And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven. … Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.
We all sin and stumble off the path of righteousness. There is a difference between
falling away and fallen away. It is not as easy to fall away as you were taught. Falling
away is something that happens to us throughout our lives as we become weak from
adversity and trials. We might even go as far as forsaking the assembly. However, one
who has fallen away has hardened his heart to God completely. That person has
something to be worried about … not you. The beautiful passage above shows that Jesus
can forgive our sins—no matter how great in magnitude or in number. You consider
yourself too sinful to be forgiven? Compare yourself to the woman in Luke 7. Think of
the sins that Christ has forgiven in your life. Does that not make you love Him more?
We do not condone “once saved, always saved”. Anyone can fall away totally, but it
would take turning his back on God and hardening his heart against Him and His Word.
Sometimes, we are weaker than other times. As long as we strive to correct our faults and
emulate Jesus, we can be confident of our eternal destination. However, do not be
overconfident. Even Paul spoke with humility about his salvation, “Brethren, I count not
myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are
behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for
the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus” (Philippians 3:13,14). Paul’s goal
was heaven. He forgot the past and strove for a better future. We must not forget our goal
of eternal life with God!
“Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding”
(Proverbs 3:5). Trust in God and do not depend on a feeling. Look to God’s Word if you
have doubts. There is nearly always something comforting found there. Try to forgive
yourself because God already has. “But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his
righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you. Take therefore no thought for
the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the
day is the evil thereof” (Matthew 6:33-34). “Humble yourselves therefore under the
mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time: Casting all your care upon him;
for he careth for you” (1 Peter 5:6-7). Take comfort that God loves you!

Is it a sin to have an unbridled tongue?

Read and study James chapter three. Meanwhile, let’s highlight some of the verses in
this extraordinary letter. James tells us in chapter one and verse twenty-six, “If any man
among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart,
this man’s religion is vain.” “For in many things we offend all. If any man offend not in
word, the same is a perfect man, and able also to bridle the whole body” (James 3:2).
James further relates in verse eight, “But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil,
full of deadly poison.” “Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My
brethren, these things ought not so to be” (v 10).
Yes, it is a sin to have an unbridled tongue. However, everyone of us has this
A Reason of Our Hope Page 25

problem. James informs us that we should keep a tight rein on our tongues. He also
reveals that it is a small member of our body and yet guides our bodies as the rudder of a
ship or the bit in the mouth of a horse. If we can control our words, then we can keep our
whole body in restraint. Thus, we cannot tame the tongue completely but we must try.
How can we praise God and curse men who are made in His likeness? A fig tree cannot
bring forth olives. A grape vine cannot bear figs. A salt spring cannot produce fresh
water. Neither should a Christian curse God’s creations. Let us strive to bridle our tongue
as Christ did.

Why does God permit suffering and pain?

Satan is “the god of this world” (2 Corinthians 4:4). The devil has “the power of
death” (Hebrews 2:14). “He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the
truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own:
for he is a liar, and the father of it” (John 8:44). The devil is the father of sin. It is sin that
produces pain and suffering, so do not blame God for these things. Satan is to blame.
One day, Christ will come again and bring us to a perfect place where there is no pain
and suffering. We cannot see the end as God does. Do you think God takes pleasure from
looking down on this pain? Of course not! He did not take pleasure from watching His
Son die on the cross either. He permits things to happen for a purpose. “All things work
together for good” (Romans 8:28).

Hebrews 10:26 says, “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the
knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.” Does this mean
that if I committed one sin on purpose, I would lose Christ’s atoning sacrifice?

The verb “sin” here in the KJV is in the present participle of an ongoing action. The
NASB more correctly translates the Greek into “If we go on sinning willfully.” The
Hebrew writer is referring to someone who turns from God. Peter reaffirms this. “For it
had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they
have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them” (2 Peter 2:21).
God will forgive us as long as we strive to be like His Son. “But if we walk in the light,
as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ
his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (1 John 1:7).

What does the Bible say that could help me to be happy?

The Bible says much about how to be happy; however, when it comes right down to
it, happiness is simply a choice. Gary Smalley gives an excellent illustration in his book,
Love Is a Decision.
Imagine yourself as a lamp with one cord. There are many outlets that you can choose
to plug into. We plug our cords into what we feel can give us happiness. For instance,
A Reason of Our Hope Page 26

when we were children, we plugged into our parents. They were the only ones who could
sustain us. But as we grew up, we realized that they could not make us happy. They often
disappointed us and our lights would grow dim.
Later, we thought that our spouse could bring us life. For a time, especially while
dating, no one else existed. Our lights shown brightly for the most part. But we are all
human. We disappoint each other. Our light fades.
So we begin to feel like having children might make a difference. And it does.
Plugging into them gives great joy, even through the sleepless nights. Kids are people,
too. They are not perfect. Our light begins to wane again.
OK. A house! That’s it! A better job! More money! A new car! Etc., etc. etc.
Some situations become so drastic that people begin to plug their lamps into drugs or
alcohol. Everyone is looking for fulfillment, peace, contentment, love, and happiness. Our
problem is that, all too often, we plug into the gifts of life rather than the Source of life.
“The LORD is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear? the LORD is the
strength of my life; of whom shall I be afraid?” (Psalm 27:1). “Then spake Jesus again
unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in
darkness, but shall have the light of life” (John 8:12). We must plug our lamps into God,
because He is the Source of life. He is our light and salvation. His Son is the light of the
world and in Him there is no darkness.
“But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things
shall be added unto you” (Matthew 6:33). If we put God first in our lives by plugging into
Him, He promises to meet our needs. No person, place, or thing can meet our needs. Only
God can give us the peace “which passeth all understanding” (Philippians 4:7). “And to
know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the
fulness of God” (Ephesians 3:19). “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the
life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me” (John 14:6).
Gary Smalley said, “The more we place our expectations on another person, the more
control we give them over our emotional and spiritual state. The freer we are of
expectations from others—and the more we depend upon God alone—the more pure and
honest our love for others will become.”40
You might say, “That all sounds good, but how do I plug into God?” First of all,
through prayer. Read Luke 18:1-8 about the persistent widow. Second, through daily
study of the Scriptures. Third, learn to recognize the warning signals that tell you when
your lamp is not plugged into God.
A car will make certain noises when something is wrong. It has lights and indicators
in the dash board to warn you when the oil is too low or the radiator is getting too hot or
when it needs fuel. A baby has different cries when he’s hungry or needs to be changed.
These are all warning signals that cannot be ignored without consequences. Why do we
choose to ignore our own signals that God gave us?
Our negative emotions—anger, frustration, depression, fear, anxiety, etc.—serve as
warning signals to tell us that we are plugged into a gift of life rather than the Source of
life. Whenever we experience negative emotions, we are expecting someone or something
to give us happiness. If we stop and realize the warning, we can simply unplug our lamp
A Reason of Our Hope Page 27

from the world and plug it back into God.

I’m not saying we should suppress our emotions. Certainly, we should grieve for lost
loved ones. Righteous anger can even cause us to change an injustice. We simply need to
evaluate our negative emotions and determine if we have misplugged our lamps. “But,”
you might say, “so many bad things have happened to me. I don’t see how I can stay
plugged into God.”
The comedian, Mark Lowery, says that his favorite Scripture is: “And it came to pass
...” No matter how bad things get, they “came to pass.” We should never think of bad
times as permanent. We must be thankful for our situation and thank God for the good
and the bad. “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God,
to them who are the called according to his purpose” (Romans 8:28). If we are living for
God, all of our situations “work together for good.”
“In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you”
(1 Thessalonians 5:18). Give God the praise for what He is doing in your life right now.
He is in charge and He has said, “I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee” (Hebrews
13:5). Remember, “it came to pass.” While we are in the “now,” God is in the “not yet.”
He will work it out for us. “I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me”
(Philippians 4:13).

Worldly Issues

My prom is coming up and I’ve already bought my dress. My parents don’t agree
with me going but they’ve left the decision up to me. Where does the Bible say
dancing is wrong? David danced

First of all, you need to make a very important decision. Do you want to please God
or yourself? If it is God, then continue reading. If it is yourself, then there is no point in
going on.
If God listed all of the “do nots” in the Bible, the record would go on forever. The
Bible was written to change our thinking. It is a guide to our conscience. Isaiah describes
our conscience in Isaiah 30:21. “And thine ears shall hear a word behind thee, saying,
This is the way, walk ye in it, when ye turn to the right hand, and when ye turn to the
left.” Hopefully, God’s Word is what our ears hear and what our minds follow.
“That women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and
sobriety” and “with good works” (1 Timothy 2:9-10). “Prove all things; hold fast that
which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thessalonians 5:21-22). If you
have any doubt that something might be a sin, then don’t do it! Stay away from anything
that looks immoral. God wants women to dress and act modestly so that men won’t lust
after them.
How do you know if you’re causing someone to lust after you? You can’t. For
instance, a teacher must give you a test to find out your knowledge. The teacher cannot
judge what you know without this test. Likewise, you cannot know when someone lusts
after you. However, you can avoid that by dressing and acting modestly. Modesty has to
A Reason of Our Hope Page 28

exist inside, too.

“But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath
committed adultery with her already in his heart.” (Matthew 5:28). If you think that
someone else’s lust is not your problem, you’re very wrong. Do not cause someone else
to stumble as in Romans 14. Doing something you know is wrong is more than a mistake;
it is purposely stepping away from God. “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the
living God” (Hebrews 10:31).
Yes, David danced even in worship (2 Samuel 6:14; Psalms 149:3; 150:4). However,
he was under the old law. Would you sacrifice a lamb in worship now? Should we have
fences on our roofs (Deuteronomy 22:8)? Are you willing to give up your blue jeans and
only wear dresses (Deuteronomy 22:5)? Of course not! We are under the new law today.
God introduces certain things at certain times. For instance, the old law forbade
anyone to covet his neighbor’s wife or commit adultery. Christ added to that and said that
lust was also adultery (Matthew 5:28). He also added to the old law by saying “Love your
enemies” as well as “love thy neighbour” (Matthew 5:43-44). God had a reason for this.
“Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ” (Galatians 3:24). The
old law was a teacher and Jesus changed or updated that old covenant.
Your friends are probably pressuring you to go. Bad company corrupts good morals (1
Corinthians 15:33). “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what
fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light
with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14). “For whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Romans
14:23). If you have any doubts, don’t go! Think about it. Would you want to take Jesus
there with you?

Is gambling wrong?

Consider the words of Jesus:

He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is
unjust in the least is unjust also in much. If therefore ye have not been faithful in the
unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if ye have
not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your
own? No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the
other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and
mammon. (Luke 16:10-13)
The odds in gambling are always against you. More money is lost than gained in
nearly every case. Gambling is addictive and becomes a god to the abuser. Choose wise
investments instead. “For of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in
bondage” (2 Peter 2:19).
A Reason of Our Hope Page 29

One group that is often in the news these days is animal rights activists. Many of
them speak out against wearing fur and using animals in laboratories, and some
even denounce eating meat. Since God created us all, what does the Bible say about
how we should treat or use animals?

“And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have
dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and
over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth” (Genesis
1:26). “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” (Genesis 2:7). God breathed life
into man and he became a living soul having dominion over the animals.
God gave us plants and fruit to eat after Creation (Genesis 1:29). Even the animals
were vegetarians. All of mankind did not partake of any animal products until after the
Flood. The pre-Flood diet, then, consisted of global vegetarianism, where only raw fruits
and vegetables were consumed for nearly 1,700 years.
And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth,
and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the
fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered. Every moving thing that liveth
shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. But flesh
with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat. (Genesis 9:2-4)
God changed our diet after the Flood. He gave us the right to eat the flesh of animals.
Environmental changes caused a temporary need for animal flesh due to lack of
vegetation, not an evolution in dietary needs. Daniel proved biblically and scientifically
that humans thrive on a vegetarian diet (Daniel 1). It is the original diet that Adam and
Eve followed. It is the lifestyle that Methuselah lived 969 years on.
Since God has given us dominion over the animals, man is allowed to do whatever he
pleases. Sometimes laboratory animals, furs, and meat are necessary to preserve human
life. However, when someone hurts or kills an animal out of pure meanness, his heart is
in the wrong place. It all boils down to the condition of the heart. “But after thy hardness
and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and
revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to
his deeds” (Romans 2:5-6).

Paul tells Timothy to drink wine in 1 Timothy 5:23. Wouldn’t you agree that Paul is
saying it’s OK to have one with the boys every now and then, especially if it gives us
a chance to teach someone the Gospel?

Yeah right! It would make about as much sense as Paul going into a cat house and
having one with the boys to teach the Gospel! This is a medical prescription, not a
command to party! The stress of Timothy’s trials and persecutions probably attributed to
his poor physical condition. The water of Ephesus may not have been clean, so Paul
prescribed wine for Timothy’s stomach. “Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for
thy stomach’s sake and thine often infirmities” (1 Timothy 5:23).
A Reason of Our Hope Page 30

As we have stated before, the Greek word oinos is used for wine everywhere in the
New Testament except for Acts 2:13 where gleukos is used. Gleukos is new or sweet
wine. Oinos is either fermented wine or unfermented grape juice.41 It can easily be argued
that Paul is referring to unfermented grape juice in this verse. Fermented wine has no
more medicinal value than grape juice. The healthful antioxidants contained in fresh
grape juice would, no doubt, have helped his condition. One thing is certain: Paul is not
recommending the general use of alcoholic wine as a beverage.
Notice closely that Paul prescribed “a little wine.” We can be overindulgent and
gluttonous even on healthy food and drink. Paul said, “every man that striveth for the
mastery is temperate in all things” and has self-control over fleshly desires, bringing the
body “into subjection” (1 Corinthians 9:25, 27).

Since the Bible never specifically forbids drinking (just drunkenness), dancing, or
gambling, why do we? Are the rules Christ established not enough?

“Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil” (1
Thessalonians 5:21-22). If you have any doubt that something might be a sin, then don’t
do it! Stay away from anything that looks immoral. “Bad company corrupts good morals”
(1 Corinthians 15:33 NASB). Drinking, dancing and gambling usually occur in places
where immorality is encouraged. Even people who partake in these desires of the flesh
recognize that Christians should not be doing them. “Be ye not unequally yoked together
with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what
communion hath light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14). Who are we to rationalize
such unscrupulous behavior?
Let’s briefly discuss drinking. There are degrees of drunkenness. If you drink one
beer, you are one drink drunk; if you drink two beers, you are two drinks drunk; etc.
People are intoxicated in varying degrees as they drink alcohol. The confusion over the
Greek word, oinos, which is translated “wine” in the Bible, may cause someone to believe
that God’s Word condones alcohol. But the truth is that oinos can mean either fermented
or unfermented grape juice.
Consider this. God calls fresh, unfermented wine a blessing, while condemning
alcoholic, fermented wine as a mocker. “Thus saith the LORD, As the new wine is found
in the cluster, and one saith, Destroy it not; for a blessing is in it: so will I do for my
servants’ sakes, that I may not destroy them all” (Isaiah 65:8). The new wine in the cluster
can only mean unfermented grape juice. Solomon wisely said, “Wine is a mocker, strong
drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise” (Proverbs 20:1). The
strong, fermented wine makes men foolish and riotous, while fresh grape juice has a
blessing in it. There can be no blessing in the intoxicating poison found in alcohol.
The Bible makes it very clear that drunkards will not “inherit the kingdom of God” (1
Corinthians 6:10). Although the alcohol content of fermented wine in the Bible was much
less than in modern times, it was still intoxicating. Even new wine or fresh grape juice
could be drunk in excess. The apostles were accused of being drunken on “new wine”
when they spoke in tongues on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:7-15). We can be
overindulgent and gluttonous even on healthy food and drink. Paul said, “every man that
A Reason of Our Hope Page 31

striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things” and has self-control over fleshly
desires, bringing the body “into subjection” (1 Corinthians 9:25, 27).
Is dancing wrong? The kind of dancing practiced by teenagers and adults today is
used to entice the opposite sex. One who dances may not deliberately intend to attract
attention; however, the results are inevitable. It brings about lust in our hearts. Our
actions, as well as our dress, should display modesty (1 Timothy 2:9-10). A relationship
between members of the opposite sex should be built on friendship, not just physical
attraction.
What about gambling? Jesus said, “Ye cannot serve God and mammon” (Luke
16:13). The odds in gambling are always against you, so more money is lost than gained
in nearly every case. Gambling is addictive and becomes a god to the abuser. “For of
whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage” (2 Peter 2:19).
Paul said, “For whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Romans 14:23). The predisposition
of any action relates to a condition of the heart. There is nothing inherently wrong with
these three issues; it is what accompanies each that causes sin: such as drunkenness, lust,
and addiction. If you have any doubts, don’t go against your conscience! Think about it.
Would you want to take Jesus drinking, dancing, or gambling with you?

Does Exodus 21:22-23 imply that a man who makes a woman miscarry will only be
fined for the loss of the woman’s baby and put to death if the mother dies? I wanted
to use this passage to defend “pro-life,” but it appears that it would do the opposite.

If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and
yet no mischief follow: he shall be surely punished, according as the woman’s
husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. And if any
mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for
hand, foot for foot, Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. (Exodus
21:22-25)
Those who advocate “pro-choice” argue that this passage implies a man, who makes a
woman miscarry, will only be fined for the loss of the woman’s baby; yet be put to death
only if the mother dies.
The Hebrew word, yeled, is translated “fruit” in the King James Version. Strong’s
definition is “something born, i.e. a lad or offspring: -boy, child, fruit, son, young man
(one).”42 Also, the Hebrew word yatsa’ is translated “depart” in the KJV. The most
appropriate definitions for this situation are as follows: “bear out, begotten, break out,
bring forth, draw forth, fall out, fetch forth, issue out, pluck out, pull out.”43
The KJV is obviously not always clear in its translation but, in this case, it is superior
to other translations. Its offspring, the New King James Version, does an even better job.
The New American Standard Bible translates the Hebrew into “miscarriage,” which is
incorrect. Webster defines miscarriage as “premature expulsion of a nonviable fetus from
the uterus.” Seeing as how the NASB is a recent translation, this interpretation is
disappointing. The original language does not imply this at all. The New International
Version far surpasses all other translations in its rendering of this passage:
A Reason of Our Hope Page 32

If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but
there is no serious injury, the offender must be fined whatever the woman’s husband
demands and the court allows. But if there is serious injury, you are to take life for
life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for
wound, bruise for bruise.
The actual Hebrew word for “miscarry” is used in Hosea 9:14. It is shakol, which is a
primary root defined as “miscarry, i.e. suffer abortion.”44 This root word, or any word
derived from it, is not contained in Exodus 21:22. The implication of this Mosaical law is
that the pregnant woman “gives birth prematurely.” The baby can live or die or be
deformed. If the baby dies, then this is termed as a “miscarriage.” The offender will be
put to death.
The KJV renders ‘acown45 to “mischief” which is better translated “hurt” or “injury”
(NASB, NIV). If the child lives and is injured or deformed, then the offender will be
punished in like manner. The “mischief” or “injury” also refers to the mother. If the
mother is hurt or dies as a result of the fighting, then the offender will follow suit. The
best interpretation would be as follows (NIV plus our comments in brackets):
If men who are fighting hit a pregnant woman and she gives birth prematurely but
there is no serious injury [to the mother or the child], the offender must be fined
whatever the woman’s husband demands and the court allows. But if there is serious
injury [to the mother or the child], you are to take life for life, eye for eye, tooth for
tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, [and] bruise for
bruise [on the offender].
The NASB is too specific in using “miscarriage.” Indeed, a miscarriage could result
from the fighting, but the Hebrew implies a premature birth. A premature birth before
seven months of pregnancy will most likely result in a miscarriage or spontaneous
abortion. The child might live if the woman is anywhere from seven to nine months
pregnant; however, the medical conditions of Moses’ time may have precluded a
successful birth. Therefore, the outcome of such a struggle would most likely be a
miscarriage, but not in every case as the NASB suggests.
We have to remember the importance of posterity to the Jews at this time. It was a
promise of the Jewish covenant (Genesis 15:18; 32:12; Jeremiah 33:22; Hosea 1:10;
Romans 9:27-29). Also, every Jewish male had reason to think that the Messiah should
spring forth from his family. Any injury done to a pregnant woman, by which the fruit of
her womb might be destroyed, was considered a barbarous cruelty, calling down the
judgment of God (2 Kings 15:16-18). The crime was considered primarily against the
husband since his wife and seed were involved. Thus, he decided the degree of fine for
the offender if there was no serious injury, but within the limitations of the court. If there
was serious injury or loss of life, the court punished the offender identically.
“Pro-choice” supporters have taken this passage out of context. The Scriptures clearly
defend “pro-life” for the Lord hates “hands that shed innocent blood” (Proverbs 6:17).
The unborn children are important human lives even before conception. God told
Jeremiah, “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out
of the womb I sanctified thee” (Jeremiah 1:5). Our own Savior “was called JESUS, which
was so named of the angel before he was conceived in the womb” (Luke 2:21).
A Reason of Our Hope Page 33

God had already touched the life of our Savior’s messenger while he was yet unborn.
The angel of the Lord told Zacharias that his son, John the Baptist, “shall be great in the
sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with
the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb” (Luke 1:15). Jacob and Esau were
authors of nations while still in Rebekah’s womb: “And the children struggled together
within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to inquire of the LORD.
And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people
shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other
people; and the elder shall serve the younger” (Genesis 25:22-23).
God protected David after conception. “For thou hast possessed my reins: thou hast
covered me in my mother’s womb” (Psalms 139:13). If everyone could see how highly
God esteems human life, the world could echo the beautiful words of David and end
abortion and infanticide forever: “I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully
made: marvelous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well” (Psalms 139:14).

“And that ye study to be quiet, and to do your own business, and to work with your
own hands, as we commanded you” (1 Thessalonians 4:11). A friend of mine argues
that this passage means that we are to stay out of worldly issues, such as anti-
abortion marches, and mind our own business.

Paul never minded his own business (1 Corinthians 5:1; 2 Corinthians 12:21;
Galatians 2:11-14; etc.). If he had, the early church might have been destroyed before it
even got started. Your friend might say, “But Paul is talking to Christians in these
instances.” Anti-abortion marches may help save countless unborn children. These
children are not yet separated from God. They are without sin. Marching is one of many
options we can take to save precious souls from being murdered, for the Lord hates
“hands that shed innocent blood” (Proverbs 6:17). The unborn children are important
human lives even before conception. God told Jeremiah, “Before I formed thee in the
belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee”
(Jeremiah 1:5). Our own Savior “was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel
before he was conceived in the womb” (Luke 2:21). We could go on and on.
We should also help our fellow man. Paul informs us in Galatians 6:10: “As we have
therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the
household of faith.” God has instructed us, through Paul, to do good unto all men. We are
to take care of our fellow Christians, primarily, but that does not exclude others in need.
“Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels
unawares” (Hebrews 13:2). Christ did not limit Himself only to believers. Where would
we be if He had?
Notice in 1 Timothy 5:13 that Paul points out “tattlers” and “busybodies” as idle
people. He is clearly applying this same principle to 1 Thessalonians 4:11. “To be quiet”
is the Greek word, hesuchazo, meaning “refrain from labor, meddlesomeness or speech”
or “to do your own business.”46 Is Paul telling the church at Thessalonica to sit back and
allow their children and families to be influenced by an onslaught of immorality? Of
course not! He is commanding the Thessalonians “to work with your own hands” and not
A Reason of Our Hope Page 34

be idlers. Apparently, there were brethren in the church at Thessalonica that prompted
Paul’s rebuke:
For we hear that there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at
all, but are busybodies. Now them that are such we command and exhort by our Lord
Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread. But ye, brethren,
be not weary in well doing. And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note
that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. (2 Thessalonians
3:11-14)
Solomon says, “By much slothfulness the building decayeth; and through idleness of
the hands the house droppeth through” (Ecclesiastes 10:18). Jesus states, “But I say unto
you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day
of judgement” (Matthew 12:36). Gossipers sit around idle and talk about the sin of others
but do nothing about it. Paul is calling them to action instead of allowing them to sit idly
by while sin has its way. James tells us, “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and
doeth it not, to him it is sin” (James 4:17). Seeing sin occur yet doing nothing is not only
a greater sin, it is enabling immorality to continue. We, as Christians, must do whatever
lies within our power, legally and morally, to change the world we live in to coincide with
God’s way. “Be not weary in well doing” (2 Thessalonians 3:13).

Is it wrong to bring a lawsuit against someone?

Paul has made it very clear that we do not sue a brother in Christ!
Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and
not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the
world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye
not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then
ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least
esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man
among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother
goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is
utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not
rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do
wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren. (1 Corinthians 6:1-8)
As for being sued, Jesus says, “And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away
thy coat, let him have thy cloak also” (Matthew 5:40). Paul further relates:
Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men. Dearly beloved,
avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is
mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he
thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing
thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil
with good. (Romans 12:17-21)
A Reason of Our Hope Page 35

“Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you?” (2 Corinthians 13:5).
We represent Christ no matter what we do. Can a lawsuit be representative of what Christ
would do? Can money comfort any loss, such as in a malpractice suit? The Scriptures say,
“Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down” (2 Corinthians 7:6).
Therefore, God comforts us … not some monetary gain. Christ says, “My grace is
sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness” (2 Corinthians 12:9). Let
God be the comforter of our souls.
There can be, however, outside the body of Christ, a situation where a lawsuit is the
only reasonable and just method of correcting an unjust action or inaction as it effects
other people. The right or wrong of such an action would require a case by case analysis.
The bottom line consists of asking yourself this simple question: “Will this lawsuit hurt
the name of Christian that I wear?”

Exodus 20:13 says, “Thou shalt not kill.” Luke 3:14 says about soldiers, “Do
violence to no man.” Is capital punishment wrong? What about killing in war or in
self-defense or even by accident?

Consider the Hebrew word for kill, ratsach (Exodus 20:13), or the Greek word,
phoneuo (Romans 13:9). They both mean “murder.”47 God thought human life precious
enough that a murderer should “be surely put to death” (Exodus 21:12). The executioner
could not be guilty of murder. He was simply carrying out God’s law. Paul echo’s this
principle in Romans 13:1-7:
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of
God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the
power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves
damnation. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then
not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the
same: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil,
be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a
revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. Wherefore ye must needs be
subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For this cause pay ye tribute
also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Render
therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom;
fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
The government in power is “ordained of God.” It is to protect those who obey the
law and to punish those who break it. Punishment may even include being “put to death.”
What about killing in war or in self-defense or even by accident? This is clearly not
murder. God often required men to kill in war and there were no penalties for self-defense
or accidents. There is also no indication that Cornelius resigned from his position as a
centurion of the Italian Regiment following his conversion to Christianity (Acts 10).
However, John the Baptist told the soldiers he baptized to “do violence to no man, neither
accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages” (Luke 3:14). The Greek word for “do
violence” in this passage is diaseio. It means “to intimidate.”48 John, quite possibly, was
telling them to refrain from extortion and to be content with their pay. Certainly a Roman
A Reason of Our Hope Page 36

soldier had the means to collect money from civilians by force or intimidation. John was
definitely not telling them to stop defending themselves in war. He was telling them to be
honest soldiers who didn’t try to use their position for monetary gain.

I don’t want to teach my child to be a violent person. Psychologists say that

spanking is wrong because of this. Is corporal punishment unbiblical?

Nothing could be further from the truth. “He that spareth his rod hateth his son: but he
that loveth him chasteneth him betimes” (Proverbs 13:24). David said, “Thy rod and thy
staff they comfort me” (Psalm 23:4). The Hebrew word for rod in both of these passages
is shebet, meaning “a stick for punishing … correction.”49 It is clear that the rod was used
for loving discipline throughout the Bible. The shepherd used his rod to guide his sheep
and define their boundaries—a parallel to child rearing.
Paul warns, “And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up
in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4). The NASB states, “Bring
them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” Loving discipline is a crucial
factor in the welfare of our children; therefore, we as parents are obligated to discipline
without provoking wrath.
Spanking is sometimes necessary if we love our children, no matter how tough it is.
“Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying” (Proverbs
19:18). God disciplines us out of love. “For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and
scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as
with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?” (Hebrews 12:6-7).
“Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless
afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised
thereby” (Hebrews 12:11). Discipline is not something to be enjoyed; however, the results
are joyful. God has told us throughout His Word that we must spank and discipline our
children. That should mean more to us than all the psychologists’ advice put together.
However, there is at least one psychologist who believes in discipline. Dr. James
Dobson cites examples of how pain teaches children how to change their behavior, i.e.
touching a hot stove, pulling the dog’s tail, climbing out of the high chair, etc.
For three or four years, he accumulates bumps, bruises, scratches, and burns, each
one teaching him about life’s boundaries. Do these experiences make him a violent
person? No! The pain associated with these events teaches him to avoid making the
same mistakes again. God created this mechanism as a valuable vehicle for
instruction.
Now when a parent administers a reasonable spanking in response to willful
disobedience, a similar nonverbal message is being given to the child. He must
understand that there are not only dangers in the physical world to be avoided. He
should also be wary of dangers in his social world, such as defiance, sassiness,
selfishness, temper tantrums, behavior that puts his life in danger, etc. The minor pain
that is associated with this deliberate misbehavior tends to inhibit it, just as
A Reason of Our Hope Page 37

discomfort works to shape behavior in the physical world. Neither conveys hatred.
Neither results in rejection. Neither makes the child more violent.50
It is a proven fact that children understand corporal punishment from a loving parent.
When love is amplified in the home, children do not resent spankings. It is the unloved
and abused child who resents any form of discipline. Spanking has its place and method;
however, it must be administered sparingly and tempered with love. Use reality to
discipline your child wherever it may apply: make the punishment fit the crime.
Due to the misuse of corporal punishment, liberal activists are lobbying to involve
government in the rearing of our kids. Sweden’s socialist government has already banned
corporal punishment. Children’s rights activists in America are enticing the same
outcome. They would allow a child to sue his parents for spanking him, deny his parents’
right to teach him religious and moral values, strip his parents of all influence, and have
him reared under state-controlled day care. Unfortunately, child abuse will increase as a
result of taking control from the parents. Thwarted parents will erupt after having no
suitable response to disobedience. To help prevent this, let me close with a few guidelines
to aid you in child rearing.

Guidelines for Child Rearing

Be consistent.
Use real life to teach them.
Allow them to fail.
Disapprove of the behavior, not the child.
Never hit your children in anger.
Always hug them after disciplinary action.
Teach them how to manage money, especially church giving.
Exemplify the morals you teach them.
Do everything with love.

History

Why are the writings of Barnabas not included in the Bible? Wasn’t he an inspired
writer? Did King James decide what to put in and what to leave out, where to start
and end chapters, etc? Was King James inspired?

Barnabas was “full of the Holy Ghost and of faith” (Acts 11:24). He sold his land and
laid the money at the apostles’ feet (Acts 4:26-27). He also accompanied Paul in
spreading the Gospel (Acts 13; 14). However, Paul and Barnabas separated in Acts 15:36-
41. “And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from
the other” (v 39). Barnabas also withdrew from the Gentiles as Peter did “fearing them
which were of the circumcision” (Galatians 2:11-14).
The canon is a collection of books of the Bible which passed a test of authenticity and
authority. It now consists of all 27 books of the New Testament. The test asked the
following: (1) “Was the book written or approved by an apostle?” (2) “Were its contents
A Reason of Our Hope Page 38

of a spiritual nature?” (3) “Did it give evidence of being inspired by God?” (4) “Was it
widely received by the churches?” Some of the letters to individuals were not as widely
spread as those addressed to the churches, so their credibility was in question until the test
of the canon was certified at the Council of Carthage in 397 A.D. Barnabas’ writings were
not chosen because they failed at least the first and last tests regardless of whether he was
inspired or not.51
The Geneva Bible was an excellent translation written under Queen Mary in 1560.
The Bible was then broken into chapters and verses. This version was brought to America
by the Pilgrims. Therefore, King James did not decide which books were to be included
in the New Testament nor did he divide it into chapters. The churches decided which
books were to go into the canon of scriptures. King James was not inspired but his
version of the Bible is very reliable, considering that 54 scholars translated it in 1611.
However, more ancient manuscripts have been found since the KJV was translated.52

When was the book of Revelation written? Does Armageddon symbolize the
destruction of Jerusalem?

“I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom
and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God,
and for the testimony of Jesus Christ” (Revelation 1:9). John was banished to the Isle of
Patmos under the persecution of Caesar Domitian around 95 A.D. He was released in 96
A.D. and was allowed to return to Ephesus. The use of the past tense “was in the isle that
is called Patmos” appears to indicate that he wrote the book of Revelation after his return
to Ephesus in 96 A.D. Some argue that the destruction of Jerusalem (70 A.D.) seems to be
mentioned as yet future and attribute the book to 67 A.D. There is no proof that
Revelation is discussing the destruction of Jerusalem or even the fall of the Roman
Empire, although both can be made to fit this interpretation.
The first thing we have to establish is that Revelation is written in signs and symbols.
John wrote in figurative language to escape persecution. He also wrote it so the Jewish
Christians could understand it. They were familiar with this style of writing from Daniel
and much of the Old Testament. John, through inspiration, encouraged the persecuted
Christians by discussing victory throughout the book of Revelation. Everything in that
book meant something to the first century Christians. It was written to them so that they
might be uplifted in those times of trial.
John could have meant for Armageddon to symbolize the destruction of Jerusalem or
the fall of the Roman Empire. More likely, he meant for it to denote the continuous battle
between Christians and Satan. The Christians of this time knew of Megiddo as a place of
great battle and triumph. It was an important north central Palestine city and strategic
battle position. More battles have been fought on this plain than any other. Gideon won a
glorious victory there as told in Judges 7 (see also Judges 5; 2 Kings 9; 23; and 2
Chronicles 35). Since the Old Testament mentioned this place so often as a place of
conquest, John’s message had more clout. Just as Zion represents heaven, Armageddon
depicts struggle and triumph. We fight this battle daily against Satan, and John tells us
that we will be successful.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 39

I have seen pictures of the Shroud of Turin and have read a lot about it. The shroud
covered Jesus’ whole body and a face is outlined on it. Could this be the face of
Christ?

“And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but
wrapped together in a place by itself” (John 20:7). This is a completely separate face
cloth. Jesus’ face would not show up on the shroud because there was a different cloth
for the body and the head.

There was an article in the Huntsville Times on June 9, 1991 entitled, “The Bible
Weathers New Storm of Interpretations.” Jim Nesbitt wrote, “In their quest, Jesus
Seminar scholars referred to long-forgotten texts, like the gospel of Thomas. … This
work is important because it is a collection of Jesus’ sayings, not a narrative text like
the other gospels. It was also judged to be far more authentic than the writings of
Matthew, Mark, Luke or John.” Why don’t we have the Gospel of Thomas in our
Bibles? Are there more books like this?

This is utterly absurd! The Gospel of Thomas is part of the New Testament
Apocrypha. These books are mostly forgeries and were used to manipulate the truth in
order to support false doctrines. They began to appear in the second century and even
wore the names of some of the apostles. This made it very important for the early church
to distinguish between the forgeries and the legitimate writings of the apostles.
Mohammed got most of his knowledge of Christianity from these books. The Roman
Catholic Church was also influenced by these fakes. These works were written during the
rise of Gnosticism where paganism forced its way into the church. Gnosis, the
Knowledge of Salvation, is secret knowledge a man receives that reveals his superior
spirit. It supposedly unveils the evil of creation and the prison of his body, and gives him
the power to rise above the cosmos (not unlike our modern New Age Movement).
Gnostics make Jesus a subtle spirit not of God, where salvation comes from a secret
revelation of the world beyond what Jesus taught.
Irenaeus and other church leaders wrote works that strongly refuted Gnosticism. Up
until 1947, we relied on writings of men such as this for information of this heresy.
Around the time that the Dead Sea scrolls were discovered, a library of Gnostic writings
was found in Egypt. There were thirteen volumes containing forty-nine different
documents excavated in Nag-Hammadi, south of Luxor in Upper Egypt. The Egyptian
museum at Cairo now holds these apocryphal works. The discovery simply brings to light
the mystery of this false religion of Gnosticism.
The Gospel of Thomas is a collection of more than a hundred sayings of Jesus.
Hippolytus of Rome described it as “aprocryphal” or of doubtful authorship. The work
opens in a confidential mood. “These are the secret words which the Living Jesus spoke
and Didymos Judas Thomas wrote.” Half of these “secret” sayings are contained in the
four Gospels. The other half of the collection, containing new quotes, is spoiled by some
A Reason of Our Hope Page 40

of the following sayings: “Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go out from among us,
because women are not worthy of the Life. Jesus said: See, I shall lead her, so that I will
make her male that she too may become a living spirit, resembling you males. For every
woman who makes herself male will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” “If you keep not the
Sabbath as Sabbath, you will not see the Father.” This was written in the second century
after Thomas’ death, so it is obviously based on legend and heresy.
Another book attributed to Thomas is the Acts of Thomas. It is one of five works of
the acts of the apostles. It is even more absurd and was written towards the end of the
second century. It is a travel romance that contains the basis for the Roman Catholic
Church’s false belief of celibacy for priests. Another tradition which arose from
Gnosticism ignores the four canonical Gospels and states that Jesus only told Philip,
Thomas, and Matthias to write of His teachings. This brought about the forgery of other
Gospels under the names of the apostles. Some of these books are listed below:
Gospel of Philip—It describes the works of Jesus through Gnostic interpretation. It
claims that baptism by fire and water is an “anointing with light” from above and we
escape the prison of our bodies to rise above the cosmic powers.
Gospel of Matthias—It is strongly Gnostic. It quotes Jesus telling Salome (of Mark
15:40; 16:1): “I have come to destroy woman’s work.”
Gospel of Peter—It tells of the trial of Jesus while modifying facts to pin the entire
responsibility of the crucifixion on the Jews. It states that Pilate left the sentencing to
Herod. It also puts the suffering of Jesus in the background and provides witnesses of the
resurrection (mid-2nd century).
Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew—It is a forged addition to the Gospel of Matthew telling
of the birth of Mary and the childhood miracles of Jesus (4th century).
Gospel of Nicodemus—It contains “Acts of Pilate” where the trial of Jesus to
Emperor Tiberius is supposedly reported. It also fantasizes about Jesus’ descension to
Hades (4th century).
Nativity of Mary—As the Pope grew in popularity, so did this book. This fake puts
Mary in a high position of worship and tells of daily visits with angels (6th century).
Acts of Paul—It repeatedly teaches self control of desires and that chastity is the
whole of Christianity. The author was a Catholic priest (mid-2nd century).
Acts of Peter—It tells of a love affair of Peter’s daughter and a conflict with Simon
the Magician. It also tells of his execution (end of 2nd century).
Acts of John—It relates John’s contempt for marriage and how he sometimes could
not touch Jesus as if He were immaterial. This is not even close to authentic (end of 2nd
century).
The Epistle from Laodicea—It claims to be the letter mentioned in Colossians 4:16. If
Colossians refers to the Laodicean letter already written, how can the Laodicean letter
refer to the Colossian letter that wasn’t written yet? Figure that one out. It contains a lot
of Paul’s phrases tied together in an attempt to appear authentic.
These Apocryphal New Testament books are a sad effort to make fiction into history.
Most of these can be exposed as forgeries immediately. The thought that the Gospel of
Thomas could be more genuine than the four Gospels is irrational! Paul tells Timothy,
A Reason of Our Hope Page 41

“For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The
labourer is worthy of his reward” (1 Timothy 5:18). Matthew 10:10 says, “For the
workman is worthy of his meat.” Luke 10:7 says, “For the labourer is worthy of his hire.”
Paul quoted from Matthew and Luke as Scripture thus proving their authenticity. This
quote is found nowhere else in the Bible. Peter classifies Paul’s epistles with “other
scriptures” (2 Peter 3:15-16).
Those living in the time where the original manuscripts were still in existence quote
from the four Gospels and the rest of the New Testament. The Didache or Teaching of the
Twelve, written about 100 A.D., quotes from the Gospels and mentions “The Gospel” as a
written document. Tatian wrote the “Diatessaron” in 160 A.D. about the “Harmony of the
Four Gospels.” Only four Gospels were generally recognized by the early church.
Eusebius (264-340 A.D.) was an elder of Caesarea and a church historian. He was
imprisoned while Diocletian persecuted Christians and later became Constantine’s
adviser on religious matters. Eusebius accepted all 27 books of the New Testament; even
James, 2 Peter, Jude, and 2 & 3 John; which were doubted by some because these books
had not been as widespread as the letters to the churches. The Council of Carthage made
the final decision based on the “test of canonicity” in 397 A.D. We now have the complete
and genuine Word of God and are “thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2
Timothy 3:17).
There are, however, more writings that are important to church history. They are not
inspired Scripture yet they are not false apocryphal books either. They were written by
elders and pupils of the apostles. Some of them are the Epistle of Clement to the
Corinthians (an elder of Rome - 95 A.D.), the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians (an
elder of Smyrna - 110 A.D.), the Epistles of Ignatius (an elder of Antioch - 110 A.D.), the
Epistle of Barnabas (not known if New Testament Barnabas - between 90 and 120 A.D.),
the Papias’ Fragments (an elder of Hierapolis - only fragments remain), the Shepherd of
Hermas (maybe Hermas of Romans 16:14 - about 100 or 140 A.D.), the Apology of
Aristides (philosopher of Athens - 125 and 137 A.D.), Justin Martyr (philosopher
converted to Christianity - 160 A.D.), and the Second Epistle of Clement (a sermon -
between 120 and 140 A.D.).53
Wouldn’t you think that these men, several of whom were pupils of John, would be
better judges of true apostolic writings?

Why don’t we fast today as the apostles did in Acts?

Fasting means to abstain from food (not water) for a certain time (one day to forty
days). The only fast that was commanded by the law was for the Day of Atonement. This
was observed on the tenth day of the seventh month (Leviticus 16:29-31; 23:26-32;
Numbers 29:7). Although the law did not call it fasting, the phrase, “ye shall afflict your
souls” refers to the purpose of fasting. David said, “I wept, and chastened my soul with
fasting” (Psalm 69:10). Fasting was done to “humble” the soul (Psalm 35:13).
It was often performed in times of distress by individuals or by whole nations. Moses
fasted for forty days because of Israel’s sin (Deuteronomy 9:15-18). Israel fasted at Bethel
in the war against the Benjamites (Judges 20:26) and at Mizpah during the Philistine war
A Reason of Our Hope Page 42

(1 Samuel 7:6). David and his army fasted and mourned the deaths of Saul and Jonathan
and the many lives lost in battle (2 Samuel 1:12). David fasted in prayer for God to have
mercy on his son, born from his affair with Bathsheba (2 Samuel 12:16). Ahab fasted for
forgiveness (1 Kings 21:17-29). During the time of the Exile, the Jews observed special
fasts to remember the siege and fall of Jerusalem (2 Kings 25:1-4). Jehoshaphat
“proclaimed a fast throughout all Judah” when threatened by Edom (2 Chronicles 20:3).
Nehemiah fasted and mourned when he learned that Jerusalem had been burned with fire
(Nehemiah 1:4). Esther declared a three-day fast for her Jewish brethren while she prayed
for God to help her deliver her people from death (Esther 4:16). Daniel fasted to pray for
the sins of Israel (Daniel 9:3; 10:3). The city of Nineveh fasted after hearing the
preaching of Jonah (Jonah 3:4-10).
Therefore, the purpose of fasting was to “afflict” and “chasten” the soul in order to
“humble” it before God. The Jews felt that they could attain God’s favor by humbling
themselves in this manner (Ezra 8:21-23). They fasted when they mourned the loss of
loved ones, sought God’s will, needed forgiveness, wanted family members healed,
needed protection from danger, and desired deliverance from their enemies.
The natural accompaniment to fasting was fervent prayer to God, because it was His
favor that they were seeking. If fasting was done for the wrong reason, such as
performing a ritualistic ceremony just to show off, it was of no value (Isaiah 58;
Zechariah 7). Fasting was done to humble the heart and show true repentance and grief so
that God would hear their prayers.
Fasting got a bad reputation in the early church, but Jesus taught and practiced it. The
second century brought about a strong emphasis on fasting. It was part of the
development of asceticism in the early church under the evil influence of Gnosticism.
Asceticism was extreme self-denial, such as fasting and celibacy, which became the
fundamental belief of the Catholic Church. This was brought about by the Gnostic belief
that all matter was evil and all spirit was good. They taught that the physical body was
evil and had to be denied. The Gnostics believed that Christ was a phantom and only took
the appearance of a man. These teachings were prevalent in the early second century and
infiltrated the church.54
John seemed to have these heretics in mind as he wrote his first epistle. Cerinthus was
the leader of this cult in Ephesus, where John resided in his later years. Polycarp, an elder
of Smyrna, Ignatius, an elder of Antioch, and Papias, an elder of Hierapolis, were all
pupils of the apostle John. They, along with Irenaeus, an elder of Lyons, wrote of the
dangers of Gnosticism.
This pagan heresy contradicts biblical teachings. Although the Gnostics believed that
the physical body and matter were evil, God created matter and “saw that it was good”
(Genesis 1:10). After He created man, He surveyed the results. “And God saw every thing
that he had made, and, behold, it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). Gnosticism was such a
problem that fasting probably became dubious among faithful Christians.
We all know the story of Jesus being tempted by Satan in the wilderness (Matthew
4:1-11; Luke 4:1-13). Having gone without food for forty days, Jesus was very hungry.
Satan knew that, so he tempted Jesus with bread. “But he answered and said, It is written,
A Reason of Our Hope Page 43

Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of
God” (Matthew 4:4).
Spiritual food is far more important than physical food. Jesus had just survived forty
days without physical food, yet He was still strong enough to resist Satan’s temptations.
How? Besides being the Son of God, He had just spent the last forty days eating spiritual
food. He had been sustained by “every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”
Jesus was and is the wisest man to ever have walked upon this earth. By knowing the
Scriptures, He was able to see past Satan’s manipulations of God’s Word and refute him
with His knowledge. Jesus also had knowledge of the wonderful workings of the human
body. Notice that He only fasted for forty days. That is a very long time to live without
food, but it is also the maximum amount of time that the human body can survive
healthily without sustenance.
Notice, also, that Moses and Elijah fasted for forty days (Deuteronomy 9:9; 1 Kings
19:8). They obviously had divine help because they also abstained from water during that
time. The human body can only live without water for a few days. God had special tasks
for these prophets and sustained them miraculously. We should never attempt to deprive
ourselves of water under any circumstances. After all, our bodies are made up of
approximately 70 percent water. Jesus still drank water during His forty-day fast;
otherwise, Satan would have tempted Him with water instead of bread.
What is so critical about stopping a fast at forty days? Recent history has shown us
that people have fasted for longer than forty days and suffered greatly. The longest
recorded fast was 66 days. Bobby Sands, an imprisoned member of the Irish Republican
Army (IRA), starved himself to death in protest of the British occupation in northern
Ireland in 1981. Ten of his fellow terrorists fasted with him and all died within 60 days.
Scientists used this opportunity to find out what would happen to the human body
during a prolonged fast. Of course, extreme hunger is experienced first, followed by
stomach cramps, vomiting, radical changes in disposition, inability to keep warm, weight
loss, deafness, and blindness. The autopsy reports stated that the prisoners simply
deteriorated. Sands died at less than 100 pounds. Through this story, we can appreciate a
little more how our Savior suffered in the wilderness. We can also see what happens to
the human body when it passes the forty-day mark without food. Time magazine reported
this horrific story on August 17, 1981:
At 42 days, almost exactly, a nightmarish experience occurs. They have been
thoroughly warned, and the prisoners await the moment with great alarm. They are
struck with something called nystagmus, a loss of muscular control due to severe
vitamin deficiency. If they look sideways, their eyes begin to gyrate wildly and
uncontrollably, first horizontally and then vertically. … Nystagmus also causes spells
of constant vomiting and dizziness. The whole experience is terrifying and no amount
of advance description can begin to prepare the strikers for the ordeal. When it ends,
usually right on schedule after four or five days, they are enormously cheered up and
for about a week go through a physical and psychological revival. But now the end is
not far off. Their speech is slurred. … They are slowly going blind.55
Jesus knew precisely when to stop fasting in order to avert nystagmus, which would
have caused irreversible damage to His body. Although our Savior was close to
A Reason of Our Hope Page 44

starvation, He had been sustained by “every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of
God” and was able to fend off Satan. “The fact that He stopped at exactly forty days,
obviously aware of what would follow two days later, is humbling and impressive proof
that He was the Son of God.”56
As we have already seen, Jews under the old law understood the spiritual benefits of
fasting. They humbled their souls in repentance so that God would hear their prayers. The
prophetess, Anna, served God with fasting and prayer (Luke 2:37). After Saul was
blinded on the road to Damascus, he fasted for three days (Acts 9:8-9). Even devout
Gentiles understood the benefits. Cornelius fasted and prayed for salvation (Acts 10:30).
Jesus, in His “Sermon on the Mount,” taught that fasting was to be done in secret
“and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly” (Matthew 6:16-18).
Notice that Jesus said, “when ye fast,” not “if ye fast.” He knew that His disciples would
fast after He was gone. The disciples of John the Baptist asked Jesus, “Why do we and
the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not? And Jesus said unto them, Can the
children of the bridechamber mourn, as long as the bridegroom is with them? but the days
will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken from them, and then shall they fast”
(Matthew 9:14-15). Again, Jesus knew that His disciples would fast after His ascension.
Jesus said that if we combine “prayer and fasting” with “faith as a grain of mustard
seed,” we can move mountains and “nothing shall be impossible” to us (Matthew 17:20-
21). His church took this advice to heart and fasted on several occasions. Members of the
church in Antioch prayed and fasted as a group to prepare Barnabas and Saul for their
missionary work (Acts 13:1-3). Paul and Barnabas prayed and fasted with the churches in
Galatia, preparing for the monumental task of appointing elders over each congregation
(Acts 14:21-23).
Paul also fasted as an individual in his ministry to God (2 Corinthians 6:4-10). He
included his frequent fasts in his list of perils and services to God, which validated his
love for Christ (2 Corinthians 11:23-28). He recommended that married couples pray and
fast together (1 Corinthians 7:5). Paul obviously considered fasting as an important part
of our Christian life.
We have seen, then, in the New Testament that Jesus fasted for strength against
temptation and taught His disciples the proper way to fast. Jesus also revealed that when
fasting is joined with faith and prayer, nothing is impossible to us. The early church
fasted in their service to God. Paul also considered fasting as a mark of his ministry.
Therefore, when we desire God’s blessings and guidance, it would be appropriate for us
to fast in addition to our fervent prayers.
Just as in the Old Testament, the purpose of fasting was to “afflict” and “chasten” the
soul in order to “humble” it before God. The Jews fasted when they mourned the loss of
loved ones, sought God’s will, needed forgiveness, wanted family members healed,
needed protection from danger, and desired deliverance from their enemies. Christians
fasted for the same reasons, as well as when they prayed for missionaries and ordaining
elders. Fasting should be done in secret to humble our hearts and show true repentance
and grief so that God will hear our prayers.
There is also evidence that fasting, when done properly, may help the body cleanse
any toxins present. There is no question that those of us on the Standard American Diet
A Reason of Our Hope Page 45

(SAD) have an overload of toxins just from what we eat daily. Sometimes, a brief rest
from this daily onslaught can help our body to replenish itself. I have found that fresh-
juice fasts are the healthiest and least debilitating. A water fast must be monitored by a
licensed professional and can cause temporary weakness.
Unless there are medical reasons, such as diabetes or hypoglycemia, fasting is a safe
and healthful practice to enhance our spirituality. It is not, however, a requirement.
Fasting is yet another way that we can treat our bodies as God’s temple.

You said that Cerinthus was a Gnostic leader during John’s time. Was John
speaking of another Gnostic movement when he said “that thou hatest the deeds of
the Nicolaitanes, which I also hate” in Revelation 2:6 and also in verse 15? Who else
taught Gnosticism back then?

Irenaeus and other ancient church fathers speculated that the Nicolaitanes were
Gnostics, but we do not know for sure who these heretics were. We just know what Jesus
told John to write to the church at Pergamos: “So hast thou also them that hold the
doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate. Repent; or else I will come unto thee
quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth” (Revelation 2:15-16).
They also had some who taught the doctrine of Balaam. The Nicolaitanes could have
taught almost anything but the Gnostics were prevalent at the turn of the century.
Let’s give a brief review of Gnosticism. The Gnostics believed that the material
creation was evil. However, seeds of deity were enclosed in the bodies of “spiritual”
people destined for salvation. These “spiritual” people were not aware that they were
blessed of God. At the appropriate time, God would send down a redeemer who would
unlock the secret knowledge (gnosis) of themselves. This redeemer would explain their
origin and reveal their destiny. The “spiritual” people would then escape the prison of
their bodies at death and proceed through the evil universe to be reunited with God. This
paved the way for Gnostics to justify immoral behavior. They claimed that external sin
could not stain their internal “spiritual” nature. However, most Gnostics held the ascetic
(extreme self-denial) view of sex and marriage. They believed that humans were
originally unisex and that the creation of woman was the source of all evil. Each child
born since Eve was another soul produced in bondage to the powers of darkness.57
“But there was a certain man, called Simon, which beforetime in the same city used
sorcery, and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great
one: To whom they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the
great power of God. And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had
bewitched them with sorceries” (Acts 8:9-11). Although Simon the Magician was
baptized (v 13), early Christian writers were in complete agreement on regarding him as
the source of all heresies. Unlike the later Gnostics, Simon appears to have taught that he
was divine and that salvation came from knowledge of himself rather than themselves.58
Another Samaritan, Menander, taught at Antioch in Syria towards the end of the first
century. His followers believed that they would not die if they practiced his teachings. He
was proven a false prophet when he died himself. Saturninus also taught in Antioch at the
beginning of the second century. He held the Docetic view that Christ was not a material
A Reason of Our Hope Page 46

being (material was evil) and that He only had the appearance of a man.
Cerinthus taught in Ephesus where the apostle John resided in his later years.
Cerinthus believed that Jesus was merely a man whom “the Christ” descended on as a
dove. Since Christ could not suffer, he left Jesus’ body before the crucifixion. The Qur’an
was collected and written by Othman, the second leader of the Muslims after Muhammad.
It also contains this tradition: “They slew him not nor crucified, but it appeared so unto
them.” Conversely, Marcion of Pontus advocated faith in Christ but he denied the
humanity of Jesus and the resurrection of the body.59
There were several teachers of Gnosticism in Alexandria, Egypt. Basilides and his son
Isidore taught there. Carpocrates and his son Epiphanes encouraged sin and believed that
promiscuity was God’s law. Valentinus, the most famous Gnostic, instructed in
Alexandria but moved to Rome in 140 A.D. His followers included Theodotus, Ptolemy,
and Heracleon. Heracleon analyzed the Gospel of John and wrote the earliest known
commentary on a New Testament book.60

Would you print the enclosed article on the Jesus Seminar in your paper and
comment on it?

Sheler, Jeffery L. U.S. News & World Report, “What did Jesus really say?” (July 1,
1991): p 57-58.
Did Jesus really say the Lord’s Prayer and deliver the Sermon on the Mount
as recorded in the New Testament? Probably not, according to a group of Bible
experts who recently completed a six-year study of the sayings of Jesus. In fact,
claim the scholars, more than 80 percent of the words ascribed to Jesus in the
Gospels may be apocryphal. That includes Jesus’ Eucharistic speech at the Last
Supper (“Take, eat. This is my body…”) and every word he is said to have
uttered from the cross.
These are among the assertions of the Jesus Seminar, a controversial panel
of about 50 liberal-to-moderate scholars from universities and divinity schools
around the world who have embarked on a modern-day quest for the “historical
Jesus.” Applying some conventional methods of textual analysis and other more
contentious rules of evidence, the scholars purport to identify the characteristics
of Jesse’s speech and to rule out “hearsay.” Besides his reliance on short
witticisms and parables, for example, Jesus often said the unexpected and
unconventional, according to the scholars.
Based on their historical analysis, they have just published a much abridged
“Gospel of Mark, Red Letter Edition,” which argues that only 17 of 111 sayings
attributed to Jesus in Mark’s Gospel are authentic. In the book, published by
Polebridge Press in Sonoma, Calif., the scholars have printed in red the words
they are most confident Jesus spoke; those they believe he probably spoke are in
pink; words he probably did not say but might reflect his thinking are in gray,
and words they believe he could not have spoken are in black. There is one red
verse in the entire book: “Pay to the emperor whatever belongs to the emperor
A Reason of Our Hope Page 47

and to God whatever belongs to God” (Mark 12:17).

Much of the rest, argues Robert Funk, head of the seminar’s Westar
Institute, consists of later additions to the oral tradition and reflects the thinking
of church leaders decades after Jesse’s death. “If I were a leader of this fledgling
community of Christians and wanted my views remembered,” says Funk, “I’d
attribute them to Jesus.”
That there are so few authentic sayings in the Gospels should not come as a
surprise, says Funk. Only short, pithy aphorisms and a few memorable parables
spoken by Jesus are likely to have survived the decades before the Gospels were
written down, he contends. Passages considered likely to be authentic by the
seminar include Jesse’s paradoxical saying that “It is easier for a camel to go
through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of
God.”
As might be expected, Funk and his colleagues have plenty of detractors.
Bible scholars from across the theological spectrum have challenged the
seminar’s methods and presumptions. Some see the project as a blatant attempt
by theological liberals to discredit the Bible. The seminar’s work, says Don A.
Carson, professor of New Testament at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in
Deerfield, Ill., is flawed by “left wing” ideology that is predisposed to reject
anything supernatural. “To argue that Jesus only spoke in aphorisms and
parables, says Carson, and to use that to exclude sayings that are not aphorisms
or parables, “is profoundly circular.” And to rule out passages that reflect church
traditions “assumes that the church didn’t learn anything from Jesus.” Howard
Clark Kee, a New Testament professor emeritus at Boston University, has called
the seminar’s tactics “an academic disgrace.” Its members, Kee wrote in a letter
to the Los Angeles Times, seem determined to find a Jesus “free of such
features, embarrassing to modern intellectuals, as demons, miracles and
predictions about the future.”
The book, says Funk, is intended mainly to provide a resource for further
scholarly study into the historical Jesus. Similarly abbreviated and annotated
versions of the Gospels according to Matthew, Luke and John, as well as the
apocryphal Gospel of Thomas, are due out later this year. Eventually, they will
be combined into “The Five Gospels: Red Letter Edition,” which Funk hopes
will find its way into church pews and the hands of lay-people. “It should be
helpful,” he says, “to anyone who is looking for a different approach to biblical
material, based on hard historical evidence.”
The next phase of the seminar’s study will be no less controversial. Starting
in the fall, it will begin examining Jesus’ miracles and deeds as recorded in the
Gospels, including the Resurrection.

What nonsense!!! How many times will man question the inspiration of the
Scriptures?! This “Jesus Seminar” may even go as far as to say that the resurrection of
Jesus was not “authentic.” What makes them more capable of determining “authentic”
sayings of Jesus than the apostolic fathers of the church? Men who were pupils of John
A Reason of Our Hope Page 48

have written about the inspiration of the Gospels and all other Scripture. Papias lived
from 70 to 155 A.D. and was an elder of Hierapolis which is about one hundred miles east
of Ephesus. He wrote an “Explanation of the Lord’s Discourses,” where he inquired of
John and followers of the apostles concerning the exact words of Jesus. Papias wrote this
about Mark, quoting from John:
The elder said this also: Mark, having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down
accurately all that he remembered—not, however, in order—of the words and deeds
of Christ. For neither did he hear the Lord, nor was he a follower of His, but later on,
as I said, he attached himself to Peter, who would adapt his instruction to the need of
the occasion, but not teach as though he were composing a connected account of the
Lord’s oracles; so that Mark made no mistake in thus writing down some things as he
remembered them. For one object was in his thoughts—to omit nothing that he had
heard, and to make no false statements.61
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be
perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Paul quotes
from Matthew 10:10 and Luke 10:7; “The labourer is worthy of his reward,” calling it
“scripture” (1 Timothy 5:18). Peter classifies Paul’s epistles with “other scriptures” (2
Peter 3:15-16). “Only short, pithy aphorisms and a few memorable parables spoken by
Jesus are likely to have survived the decades before the Gospels were written down,” says
Funk. Jesus told the apostles, “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the
Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your
remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you” (John 14:26). The Holy Spirit brought
all things to the apostles’ memory so that they would write the sayings and events of
Christ accurately.
John had confidence in the accuracy of Mark’s account. Paul quoted from Matthew
and Luke (both written before his death) in his epistles. Peter contended that Paul’s
epistles were Scripture. Papias was a student of John and confirmed these facts. What
more do these “scholars” need?
They say that “Jesus’ Eucharistic speech at the Last Supper (“Take, eat. This is my
body…”) and every word he is said to have uttered from the cross” may be apocryphal.
What about 1 Corinthians 11:23-30 where Paul, through inspiration, relates the purpose
of the Lord’s Supper? What about David’s prediction in Psalms 22:1? “My God, my God,
why hast thou forsaken me?” What about Psalms 69:21? “They gave me also gall for my
meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.” All four Gospels confirm this
prediction. “They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall” (Matthew 27:34). See
also Luke 23:36 and Mark 15:36. “After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now
accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. Now there was set a
vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and
put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished:
and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost” (John 19:28-30). Why wouldn’t “I thirst”
and “It is finished” be authentic sayings of Jesus? John was at the foot of the cross with
Mary, His mother, and David predicted these events.
It is hardly worth wasting the paper and ink to denounce this blasphemy! However,
A Reason of Our Hope Page 49

there are some who are easily swayed by so called “scholars.” Funk hopes his book “will
find its way into church pews and the hands of lay-people.” Let it never be! This “Jesus
Seminar” should beware of the consequences of taking away from God’s Word! “And if
any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take
away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which
are written in this book” (Revelation 22:19).

I’ve heard someone say the Catholics studied and found Saturday to be the original
first day of the week. I don’t believe this to be true, unless they are counting
Saturday as sundown to midnight. Are we actually worshipping on the wrong day
as the first day? What can you find out about this matter? Thank you.

“And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day
from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years”
(Genesis 1:14). It is common knowledge that the earth revolves around its axis every 24
hours. The civil calendar uses 24 hour days but the year cannot be calculated based on
days as the basic unit. The earth completes its circuit around the sun in 365 days, 5 hours,
48 minutes, and 46 seconds. That extra quarter of a day adds up to a full day every four
years. That is why an extra day is added to February every leap year. Therefore, a month
on our civil calendar can have 28, 29, 30, or 31 days and a year can have 365 or 366 days
to consist of the 12 months of a year.
The Jewish calendar is similar in having a 24 hour day and a 12 month year.
However, each month is based on the lunar orbit of the moon which takes 29 days, 12
hours, 44 minutes, and 3 seconds to complete. The Jewish months alternate between 29
and 30 days to compensate for the 12 hours but there is still 44 minutes and 3 seconds left
over. This eventually adds up to a day and must be considered in their calendar, which the
second and third Jewish months, Cheshvan and Kislev, can absorb. Adding these days up
only gives them 353, 354, or 355 days which is much less than a solar year of 365 1/4
days. The Jews take care of this inconsistency by adding an extra month, seven times in
nineteen years. This month is called Adar Sheni or V’Adar, which means “second Adar,”
and is placed after Adar every two or three years in the 19 year cycle. When this new 29
day month is added, the sixth month, Adar, has another day added to it making it 30 days
in length. This makes a Jewish leap year contain 383, 384, or 385 days. To complicate
matters further, Jewish holidays having to fall away from the sabbath also determine the
length of the months Cheshvan and Kislev.
Their calendar is lunisolar (of the moon and the sun). September 1991 on our calendar
is the first month of the Jewish calendar, Tishri, and the year 5752. The year of their
calendar marks the number of years since the creation of man on the sixth day of creation,
according to the Torah or Talmud. (All information on the Jewish calendar was taken
from Asheri, Michael. Living Jewish. New York: Everest House, 1978. 281-284, 385.)
The name of the Jewish months, in order, are as follows:

Tishri: 30 days (September-October)

Cheshvan: 29 or 30 days (October-November). This month is also called
A Reason of Our Hope Page 50

Marcheshvan.
Kislev: 29 or 30 days (November-December)
Tevet: 29 days (December-January)
Shvat: 30 days (January-February)
Adar: 29 days except in leap year when it has 30 days (February-March)
Adar Sheni or V’Adar: 29 days (March-April)
Nisan: 30 days (March-April or April-May)
Iyyar: 29 days (April-May or May-June)
Sivan: 30 days (May-June or June-July)
Tammuz: 30 days (June-July)
Av: 30 days (July-August)
Elul: 29 days (August-September)

The seven days of the week were first practiced by God when creating the universe.
“And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the
seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and
sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and
made” (Genesis 2:2-3). He sanctified the seventh day and commanded that it be kept holy
(Exodus 20:8-11). It was a “sign” between God and the children of Israel (Exodus 31:17).
Therefore, the seven day week and the sabbath originated at the dawn of time. The names
of the seven days, however, came from astrology. They are literally translated from Latin
as “the day of Saturn” (Saturday), “the day of the sun” (Sunday), “the day of the moon”
(Monday), “the day of Mars” (Tuesday), “the day of Mercury” (Wednesday), “the day of
Jupiter” (Thursday), and “the day of Venus” (Friday). The astrological seven day week
was essentially a Hellenistic invention where they combined astronomy, astrology,
mathematics, and the culture of Egypt, Babylonia, and Greece. It evolved during the
second century B.C. in Alexandria.62
Christianity seemed to have eventually combined the Jewish seven day week with the
astrological names of the week. This is shown by Justin Martyr in the first Apology
written in the middle of the second century:
On the day called the day of the sun, all those who live in the towns or the country
assemble in one place. … We all assemble on the day of the sun, because it is the first
day, that on which God transformed the darkness and matter to create the world, and
also because Jesus Christ our Saviour rose from the dead on the same day; for on the
eve of the day of Saturn he was crucified, and on the day after the day of Saturn,
which is the day of the sun, he appeared to his apostles and disciples and taught them
what we have expounded to you. (1 Apology 67:3-7)
He was saying that Jesus was crucified on Friday (the day before Saturday or the
sabbath) and arose on Sunday. All four Gospels confirm this fact. “Now when Jesus was
risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene” (Mark 16:2, 9;
Matthew 28:1; Luke 24:1; John 20:1). This proves that the first day of the week was
Sunday, not Saturday. The person you heard may have been referring to the fact that the
astrological week opens with “the day of Saturn” or Saturday. The church kept “the day
of the sun” or Sunday as the first day of the week. Regardless, “the day of Saturn” still
A Reason of Our Hope Page 51

fell on the sabbath and was considered the seventh day of the week. Even though
Saturday is the first day of the astrological week, there was never a switching of days or a
slipping of the calendar until 1582.
Pope Gregory XIII reformed the calendar in the sixteenth century. The calendar
included a leap day every four years to account for the solar year of 365 1/4 days. As we
have already noted, the quarter of a day was an approximation. The calendar
overcompensated each year by about eleven minutes. This adds up to a day in 128 years.
This calendar was used since Julius Caesar, so sixteen centuries had passed until the
spring equinox was on March 11 instead of March 25. “It was decided to suppress three
leap days in every four centuries, that is, in those centenary years whose first two figures
are not divisible by four. Thus 1600 would be a leap year, and also 2000, but not 1700,
1800 or 1900. By this ingenious means, the error would be only one day in thirty-five
centuries.”63
They then chose to date the spring equinox at March 21 and suppress the calendar by
ten days. February 24, 1582 marked the official announcement of the reform. October 4
became October 15. The Catholic countries reformed quickly but the Protestant countries
objected strongly. Finally, all nations, except for Japan, reformed to the new calendar by
the eighteenth century.
“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God:
the powers that be are ordained of God” (Romans 13:1). Christ obeyed the laws of the
land. He accepted the Jewish calendar which was in effect in His time. Whatever laws or
calendars we live under, we must adhere to them as long as it does not compromise God’s
Word. It is clear that our calendar is not exact. It has been changed and will be changed
again. The apostles broke bread, preached, and gave of their means on the first day of the
week (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2). Whatever “higher powers” determine as the first
day of the week is what we should observe as “the Lord’s day.”

A denominational preacher visited us recently. When he heard we attended the

church of Christ, he said, “Oh yes, I am very familiar with the teachings of the
Campbellite organization.” What did he mean?

Thomas and Alexander Campbell came out of denominationalism in order to unite

Christians into one faith. Thomas Campbell wrote the “Declaration and Address” in
1809. It was published by the Christian Association of Washington (the organization this
preacher referred to). It was not designed to be the constitution of a church. It was simply
a basis for which Christians could unite. The “Declaration” outlined the purpose and plan
of the Association, while the “Address” called for a return to New Testament Christianity.
Campbell stated that this organization was not a church, but a voluntary association
launched for the purpose of encouraging church reform.
Another movement to unite Christians was led by a man named Barton Stone. The
Stoneites and Campbellites started working together to bring about this union. In 1832 the
leaders of these movements met in Lexington, Kentucky. “Racoon” John Smith spoke for
the Campbellites:
A Reason of Our Hope Page 52

While there is but one faith, there may be ten thousand opinions; and hence, if
Christians are ever to be one, they must be one in faith, and not in opinion. … While
for the sake of peace and Christian union, I have long since waived the public
maintenance of any speculation I may hold, yet not one Gospel fact, commandment,
or promise, will I surrender for the world! Let us, then, my brethren, be no longer
Campbellites or Stoneites, New Lights or Old Lights, or any other kind of lights, but
let us all come to the Bible, and to the Bible alone, as the only book in the world that
can give us all the Light we need.64
These great men forged the way for our return to New Testament Christianity, along
with others in Europe who had no knowledge of any other restoration of the New
Testament church. They simply replicated the church of the first century by studying the
Bible.
The term “Campbellite” is not accurate, for we do not follow his teachings. We
follow only the Word of God. The Campbells were only the beginning of the restoration
movement in America. They did not write a creed for us to follow. God is the only author
of our instruction (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Christ is the head of the church; therefore, we
describe ourselves as the Bible does: the churches of Christ (Romans 16:16). We are the
New Testament church!

I was reading from Pioneer Sermons and Addresses compiled by F. L. Rowe of

Cincinnati, Ohio in March,1908. Barton Stone said in a sermon written about 1830,
“The first Church of Christ established on earth after his resurrection is found in
the first chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, which church was composed of one
hundred and twenty members only. ‘They were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and
began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.’ It may be
said, that those filled with the Holy Ghost were the apostles alone. But the Scripture
says, ‘they were all filled with the Holy Ghost;’ and this was the fulfillment of Joel’s
prophecy.” Is this right?

Barton Stone wrote this address just a few years before he and Alexander Campbell
joined forces in the restoration movement in 1832. Neither man was infallible. Actually,
the church or kingdom came with power (Mark 9:1) when the Holy Spirit baptized the
apostles on the day of Pentecost in Jerusalem (Acts 1:5, 8; 2:1-4). These one hundred
twenty disciples mentioned in Acts 1:15 were not members of the church until the day of
Pentecost, where Peter laid down the conditions of membership (Acts 2:38).
“And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered
with the eleven apostles. 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” (Acts 1:26-2:2).
The last verse of chapter one mentions the twelve apostles. God had just chosen Matthias
to replace Judas Iscariot through the apostles’ prayer. When Pentecost came, the apostles
were probably in the same “upper room” where they had presided when they had first
arrived in Jerusalem (Acts 1:13). All nations of Jews were dwelling in Jerusalem, so the
upper room was probably the only place the apostles could stay. It is unlikely that they
A Reason of Our Hope Page 53

had moved to another place since rooms would be taken by Jews celebrating Pentecost.
Therefore, the sound of the “mighty wind” filled the house where the apostles dwelt. This
is where the apostles were “filled with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:4). There could not have
been enough space for one hundred twenty people in this upper room.
Also there were twelve languages represented by the Jews: one for each apostle and
Hebrew for the spokesman, Peter. If one hundred twenty people were speaking tongues, it
would have been mayhem! “God is not the author of confusion” (1 Corinthians 14:33).
Joel’s prophecy spoke of the “last days” of which this was only the beginning (Acts 2:16-
21; Joel 2:28-32). The one hundred twenty disciples were included in this prophecy (as
well as many other people) but only the apostles started it off by speaking in tongues.
Only the apostles received the “filled” measure of the Holy Spirit that allowed them to
relegate the gifts to others (Acts 2:4, 9:17), so their encounter with the Spirit had to be
separate and unique from everyone else’s.

Contradiction

Joshua 10:12-14 states that “the sun stood still” and “the moon stopped.” Wouldn’t
you think that God would know that the sun always stands still and that the earth
orbits the sun? Therefore, the passage should have said “the earth stood still.”

There is no question that the Creator of the universe knew that the earth orbited the
sun. It was Joshua who asked that the sun stand still and the moon stop. He didn’t know
the laws of astronomy. Besides, the books of the Bible were written from man’s point of
view so that man could understand them.
For instance, the Lord laid down regulations about infectious skin diseases to Moses
and Aaron. Leviticus 13:45-46 exiles the unclean person to live outside the camp. What if
God had told Moses to forbid anyone with a chronic infectious bacterial disease with
progressive deterioration of cellular matter from living in the camp until he is free from
contamination? Do what, Lord? Moses wouldn’t have even had the foggiest idea what
God was talking about. The Bible was written in terms that man can understand … then
and now.

Did God really harden Pharaoh’s heart?

That is difficult to explain since Exodus 4:21 tells us, “And the Lord said unto Moses,
When thou goest to return into Egypt, see that thou do all those wonders before Pharaoh,
which I have put in thine hand: but I will harden his heart, that he shall not let the people
go.” Yet, Exodus 9:34 states, “And when Pharaoh saw that the rain and the hail and the
thunders were ceased, he sinned yet more, and hardened his heart, he and his servants.”
This shows us that Pharaoh sinned again and hardened his own heart.
Furthermore, 1 Samuel 6:6 reveals, “Wherefore then do ye harden your hearts, as the
Egyptians and Pharaoh hardened their hearts? When he had wrought wonderfully among
them, did they not let the people go, and they departed?” God does not contradict
A Reason of Our Hope Page 54

Himself. There has to be some explanation.

Keep in mind that God knows the future better than we know our own past. He knew
the heart of Pharaoh from the beginning of time. He did not literally harden Pharaoh’s
heart. God, who is omniscient, was simply telling Moses the future.

Did God violate Lydia’s free morality by opening her heart?

“And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which
worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the
things which were spoken of Paul” (Acts 16:14). Peter tells us in Acts 10:34 that “God is
no respecter of persons.”
God would not have opened Lydia’s heart in such a way as it would appear He was a
respecter of persons. How did He do it? God opened her heart in the same manner that He
opens everyone’s heart … through His Word. Lydia’s heart was opened by hearing the
message of the Gospel.

Why did Jesus say “Touch me not” in John 20:17 and then let them hold Him in
Matthew 28:9?

Never forget that there are absolutely no contradictions in God’s Word. Further study
is indicated if there appears to be a contradiction. Let us look at the verses you mentioned.
“Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my
brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God,
and your God” (John 20:17). Matthew’s account seems to be different: “And as they went
to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him
by the feet, and worshipped him” (Matthew 28:9).
The New American Standard relates “Stop clinging to Me.” Jesus was telling Mary to
release Him because there were plenty of things to be done before He ascended to the
Father. Touch simply means cling to or stick to in the original Greek language. Christ was
reassuring Mary that He would be around for a while before he ascended to God;
however, telling the disciples of His resurrection was more important for the time being.

Why did the Lord want to kill Moses in Exodus 4:24? If He really wanted to kill
him, He surely would have! Also, why did Zipporah do what she did (v 25)?
Circumcision, as an identifying mark of God’s people, hadn’t even been mentioned
yet.

“And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, and sought to kill
him. Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at
his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me. So he let him go: then she said,
A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision” (Exodus 4:24-26).
Moses had apparently delayed circumcising his son, which was in direct violation of
A Reason of Our Hope Page 55

God’s express command to Abraham. “This is my covenant, which ye shall keep,

between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be
circumcised” (Genesis 17:10). Remember, Moses was raised as an Egyptian and had just
been appointed by God to deliver Israel from bondage. He probably didn’t realize the
importance of this act yet; even though his wife, Zipporah, was perhaps insistent on the
circumcision of their sons, Gershom and Eliezer.
He had to learn that disobeying God and incurring His wrath were far more perilous
than anything that Pharaoh could do to him. The Lord “sought to kill him” but Zipporah
performed the circumcision to save Moses’ life. God spared his life and let him go.
Zipporah called Moses a “bloody husband” (KJV) or “bridegroom of blood” (NASB)
referring to the circumcision she was forced to perform.

Cain went into the land of Nod and took his wife. Where did he get her?

“And Cain went out from the presence of the Lord, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on
the east of Eden. And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch” (Genesis
4:16-17). First of all, nowhere does this verse say that Cain got his wife in Nod. It simply
says that he “knew” her in Nod and “she conceived” Enoch there. Furthermore, there is
no indication of how long Cain lived near his parents. Eight hundred years could have
passed before Cain was banished. He might have married his sister, niece, or even grand-
niece.
Before you criticize, remember that Eve is “the mother of all living” (Genesis 3:20). If
you call this incest, it would be the pot calling the kettle black. We are all children of Eve.
However, since Adam’s and Eve’s chromosomes contained no abnormal genes in them,
such a marriage would not be dangerous as it is today.

Is it possible for the apostles to have baptized 3,000 Jews in one day (Acts 2:41)?

“And they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were
added unto them about three thousand souls” (Acts 2:41). Yes! It is possible! Why? God
said it was! Jesus told the apostles to “teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things
whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19-20).
Let us look at the theory of propagation. After the apostles baptized the Jews, these
new converts were taught to baptize as well. If each baptism took two minutes, then every
time a man was baptized, there were two people to perform baptisms next. Therefore,
every two minutes, the number of men performing baptisms doubled. So, the twelve
apostles baptized twelve Jews. After the first two minutes, there were 24 people to
perform baptisms; then there were 48 in 4 minutes; 96 in 6 minutes; 192 in 8 minutes;
384 in 10 minutes; 768 in 12 minutes; 1,536 in 14 minutes; and 3,072 in 16 minutes. Not
one person would have had to baptize more than eight people. Whether it was done this
way or not, we assure you that it was possible simply because God said it was!
A Reason of Our Hope Page 56

Matthew 27:50-53 tells of the veil of the temple being torn and the earth quaking
and the graves opening. Why didn’t the other Gospels mention this? Were the saints
roaming around for three days until Jesus was resurrected? Did they return to their
graves after appearing in the city?

“Jesus, when he had cried again with a loud voice, yielded up the ghost. And, behold,
the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did
quake, and the rocks rent; 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” (Matthew 27:50-53).
Only Matthew mentions the earthquake and the rocks being split and the raising of the
saints from the dead. Matthew, Mark, and Luke all cite the tearing of the veil in the
temple and the three hours of darkness. Only Luke gives an account of the thief on the
cross. The soldiers not breaking Christ’s legs and the piercing of His side were only told
by John. We are quick to teach of the thief on the cross where it is only related by Luke.
Why do we shy away from the saints’ resurrection? Did this not make the selfless
sacrifice of Christ even more miraculous and wonderful?! Just because these events are
only mentioned once does not justify ignoring it.
“Remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than
to receive” (Acts 20:35). Why didn’t the Gospels mention these wonderful words of
Christ? How could Paul have quoted these words of Christ when he had only met Him on
the road to Damascus? Multiple choice:
A) Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit and was meant to speak these words of
Christ.
B) Christ didn’t really say this and Paul just made it up.
We choose A), the first. “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the
which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not
contain the books that should be written” (John 21:25). There is too much information for
it all to be contained in the Scriptures. Therefore, if it is only mentioned once, it is still
important.
The veil being torn in two symbolized the separation of the old law from the new
(Exodus 26:33; Ephesians 2:14-16). The earthquake probably caused the rocks to split
and the tombs to open. The punctuation used in the KJV and the NASB indicates that the
saints or holy ones arose but did not leave their tombs until after the resurrection of Jesus.
They were given life again and appeared in Jerusalem, the holy city. Their bodies were
probably recognizable in order to glorify God. They may have gone back to sleep after
appearing to many in the holy city or they may have lived another full life. God didn’t
find it necessary to reveal these things to us. “The secret things belong unto the Lord our
God” (Deuteronomy 29:29). Some things are not important for us to know. The point is
that it happened and God’s glory was demonstrated.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 57

God said “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live”
(Exodus 33:20). How could Moses see Him “face to face” in Exodus 33:11?

“And all the people saw the cloudy pillar stand at the tabernacle door: and all the
people rose up and worshipped, every man in his tent door. And the LORD spake unto
Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his friend. And he turned again into the camp:
but his servant Joshua, the son of Nun, a young man, departed not out of the tabernacle”
(Exodus 33:10-11). This is also mentioned in Deuteronomy 5:4 and 34:10.
“And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will
make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream. My servant
Moses is not so, who is faithful in all mine house. With him will I speak mouth to mouth,
even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he
behold” (Numbers 12:6-8). God spoke to Moses directly instead of through visions,
dreams, and riddles. Moses could only see a likeness or “similitude” of the Lord. “And he
said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live” (Exodus
33:20). There are no contradictions in God’s Word, so the term “face to face” has to mean
direct conversation.

John 14:28 says, “For my Father is greater than I.” Yet John 10:30 says, “I and my
Father are one.” I know this is not a contradiction, but how can it be explained?

Consider the following verses: “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than
the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace
of God should taste death for every man” (Hebrews 2:9).
Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: Who, being in the form of
God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: But made himself of no reputation,
and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men: And
being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto
death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and
given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee
should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And
that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the
Father. (Philippians 2:5-11)
“Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and
powers being made subject unto him” (1 Peter 3:22).
Philippians 2:6-7 is better translated, “Who, although He existed in the form of God,
did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the
form of a bondservant, and being made in the likeness of men” (NASB). “A thing to be
grasped” is one Greek word, hapargmos. The word carries an active and passive meaning.
The active meaning is “seizing” or “robbery” as in the KJV. The passive meaning is “a
thing seized” or “a prize” (Strong’s 725). Most scholars agree on the passive meaning.
Jesus did not consider being equal with God a prize to be retained. In other words, Christ
didn’t mind leaving His equal status with God to become “a little lower than the angels”
A Reason of Our Hope Page 58

and be “made in the likeness of men.” Christ “emptied Himself” and laid aside His divine
form. This is a very strong expression of the completeness of His self-renunciation.
Christ’s humility is unbounded!
“Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved
me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I”
(John 14:28). The Father was greater than Jesus in form only. He would not be equal in
form to God until he ascended to Him. “Jesus said to her, ‘Stop clinging to Me, for I have
not yet ascended to the Father’” (John 20:17 NASB). He was not in His heavenly form
yet when He told Mary this because Thomas was able to feel His scars from the cross.
“Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither
thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing” (John 20:27).
“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto
them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my
hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck
them out of my Father’s hand. I and my Father are one” (John 10:27-30). During Jesus’
earthly ministry, His essence was still Deity. Concerning spiritual matters, He was equal
with God. “And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in
heaven and in earth” (Matthew 28:18).
Imagine yourself becoming a dog. You have the limitations, the desires, the fears, and
the instincts of a dog; yet you can still think and reason as a human. Christ lowered
Himself in the same way. He had human limitations, yet He could still think and reason
as God.
Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications
with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was
heard in that he feared; Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things
which he suffered; And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation
unto all them that obey him; Called of God an high priest after the order of
Melchisedec. (Hebrews 5:7-10)
Jesus became complete again through His suffering on the cross and became our high
priest. He was once again equal with God concluding His propitiation. “When he had by
himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; Being made
so much better than the angels, as he hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name
than they” (Hebrews 1:3-4).

Galatians 6:2 says, “Bear ye one another’s burdens.” Galatians 6:5 says, “For every
man shall bear his own burden.” Is this a contradiction?

Always remember when you study the Bible that there are no contradictions. If we use
this kind of thinking, we will be closer to what God wants us to be. Let us examine the
Greek words for “burden” in these two verses and it should clear up any seeming
contradictions. The word in verse two is baros. It comes from bareo defined as “depress
with a heavy weight.” The verb form of this word is used in 2 Corinthians 5:4. “For we
that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened.” The Greek word for “burden” in
A Reason of Our Hope Page 59

verse five is phortion from the verb phero. It is defined as “bear, carry”, therefore
phortion means “something carried.”65
The inspired thoughts of Paul become clear when these two verses are applied
together with the correct Greek meanings. When your brother has a crushing burden
(illness, death in the family, financial problems, sin, etc.), help him lift the burden, lest he
fail under it. However, we should not depend on others to do our work out of pure
laziness. Paul is not saying that at all in verse two. He confirms that in verse five by
saying, “For each one shall bear his own load” (NASB).

In the four Gospels’ accounts of Peter’s denials, why does Mark say the cock will
crow twice and the others say just once? Why do they all tell different things about
the denials?

The first and foremost thing that we have to acknowledge is that there are no
contradictions in God’s Word! Even if we have to research the Greek and whatever
manuscripts were used in a certain translation, a contradiction will not be found in God’s
infallible Scripture! We need to change our thinking to match the Bible; not visa versa.
The four accounts of Peter’s denial are very complicated. There are many variables in
play here. The Gospels agree in certain areas and seem to contradict each other elsewhere.
For instance, Mark’s account states that the cock crowed twice by Peter’s third denial.
Conversely, John says that the cock will not even crow until Peter has denied Christ three
times. Also, they all seem to claim different events as the second and third denials.
In reading the following explanations, keep in mind that the Gospel of Mark was the
story of Jesus as told by Peter. John Mark’s mother took in Peter when the angel released
him from prison (Acts 12:12). He may have been a convert of Peter’s according to the
language of 1 Peter 5:13 where he called him “Marcus my son.” This account of Peter’s
denial should, logically, be the most detailed of the four Gospels.
Let us look at the Greek used in Mark 14:70. The Greek palin means “again, once
more, further,” and is a particle of continuation. The Greek arneomai means “to deny,
disown.” Here, herneito is used which is the exact imperfect tense of the verb arneomai.
The Greek hernesato is the past tense of “deny” and is used everywhere else that “Peter
denied” his Lord. Only Mark 14:70 uses the exact imperfect tense of “deny” (herneito).
An exact imperfect tense refers to the inflected form of a verb that shows an uncompleted
or continuous action or condition. Therefore, a better interpretation of Mark 14:70 would
be, “And he kept on denying.”
It becomes clearer that Peter denied Jesus many times and that the four Gospel writers
were simply counting different instances as the first, second, and third denials. The
accounts of each denial are listed in the table below. As you can see, all four accounts
agree that the first person to confront Peter was the high priest’s maid who kept the door
to the palace.
Mark says that the same maid challenged Peter the second time; while Matthew says
another maid accused him; Luke, a man; and John, a group. Apparently, when the door
keeper saw Peter in the entryway, she left her post to confront him again. Another maid
joined her in the questioning and then a man servant participated. Peter fled to the
A Reason of Our Hope Page 60

campfire in the courtyard and the whole group added to the inquiry. Peter, now
surrounded by inquisitors, repeatedly denied his Lord. The Greek wording in Mark 14:70
gives a graphic picture of the panic going through Peter: “And he kept on denying.” J. W.
McGarvey said, “Peter’s second denial was of a quadruple nature. He denied to four
different parties, but in such quick succession that the event is regarded as one.”66
Luke mentions an hour reprieve for Peter before his third denial, so he had a nice rest
by the fire. Matthew and Mark say the group around the fire started to interrogate him,
while Luke says another man questioned him, and John says a servant of the high priest
who was a kinsman of Malchus (John 18:10) confronted Peter. Matthew and Mark say
that Peter used an oath or swore that he did not know Christ. His third denial, just as the
second, was a series of accusations and denials. Looking at the accounts in this way helps
us to see the harmony of the Gospels.
When Matthew, Luke, and John relate, “The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied
me thrice,” they are simply talking about the 3:00 A.M. crowing of the rooster at dawn.
When Mark states, “That this day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice [before
the second or dawn crowing], thou shalt deny me thrice,” he is being more specific as to
how many times the cock will crow before Peter denies Jesus three times. Since Mark
relates this story as told to him by Peter, details like this would be more specific in his
Gospel. The first crowing of the rooster is about midnight. Obviously, Peter’s first denial
was right at midnight (Mark 14:68). Luke tells of a time span of about an hour between
Peter’s second and third denials (Luke 22:59). All four Gospels agree that the cock
crowed after his third denial just as Jesus foretold. This was the 3:00 A.M. wake up call at
dawn, so Peter’s succession of denials lasted about three hours.

Table 1. Harmonizing Peter’s Denials

Matthew Mark Luke John

Denial Verse Accuser Verse Accuser Verse Accuser Verse Accuser
First 26:69-70 a 14:66-68 high 22:56-57 a 18:15-18 damsel
damsel priest’s maid door
maid keeper
Second 26:71-72 another 14:69-70 same 22:58 a 18:25 a group
maid maid man
Third 26:73-74 a 14:70-72 a 22:59-60 another 18:26-27 kinsman
group group man of
Malchus

In Joshua 2:15 it says that Rahab lived on the Jericho wall. If this is true, wouldn’t
she have died when the wall fell?

“And Joshua the son of Nun sent out of Shittim two men to spy secretly, saying, Go
view the land, even Jericho. And they went, and came into an harlot’s house, named
Rahab, and lodged there” (Joshua 2:1). Rahab was a harlot who lived among immoral
people and shared the same profession as a priestess of the Canaanite religion. Although
A Reason of Our Hope Page 61

she helped Israel take Jericho, she was not exempt from the law. Rahab must have been
forgiven because she married an Israelite named Salmon (Matthew 1:5) who may have
been Caleb’s son (1 Chronicles 2:50-51). If so, she married into the ancestry of David and
Jesus. She is also mentioned in the roll call of faith (Hebrews 11:31) and by James in
speaking of good works (James 2:25).
She protected Joshua’s spies and saved them from capture by lying to the king of
Jericho. James and the Hebrew writer were commending Rahab’s faith, not her methods.
Afterwards, she pleaded:
Now therefore, I pray you, swear unto me by the LORD, since I have showed you
kindness, that ye will also show kindness unto my father’s house, and give me a true
token: And that ye will save alive my father, and my mother, and my brethren, and my
sisters, and all that they have, and deliver our lives from death. And the men answered
her, Our life for yours, if ye utter not this our business. And it shall be, when the
LORD hath given us the land, that we will deal kindly and truly with thee. Then she
let them down by a cord through the window: for her house was upon the town wall,
and she dwelt upon the wall. (Joshua 2:12-15)
The spies told her, “Behold, when we come into the land, thou shalt bind this line of
scarlet thread in the window which thou didst let us down by: and thou shalt bring thy
father, and thy mother, and thy brethren, and all thy father’s household, home unto thee”
(Joshua 2:18). Rahab obeyed “and she bound the scarlet line in the window” (Joshua
2:21).
The people shouted with a great shout and the wall fell down flat, so that the
people went up into the city, every man straight ahead, and they took the city. And
they utterly destroyed everything in the city, both man and woman, young and old,
and ox and sheep and donkey, with the edge of the sword. And Joshua said to the two
men who had spied out the land, “Go into the harlot’s house and bring the woman and
all she has out of there, as you have sworn to her.” So the young men who were spies
went in and brought out Rahab and her father and her mother and her brothers and all
she had; they also brought out all her relatives, and placed them outside the camp of
Israel. And they burned the city with fire, and all that was in it. Only the silver and
gold and articles of bronze and iron, they put into the treasury of the house of the
LORD. However, Rahab the harlot and her father’s household and all she had, Joshua
spared; and she has lived in the midst of Israel to this day, for she hid the messengers
whom Joshua sent to spy out Jericho. (Joshua 6:20-25 NASB)
The New American Standard Bible uses clearer language in verse 22. The King James
Version is confusing here: “But Joshua had said unto the two men that had spied out the
country, Go into the harlot’s house, and bring out thence the woman, and all that she hath,
as ye sware unto her. And the young men that were spies went in, and brought out Rahab”
(Joshua 6:22-23a). Some commentators argue that since the KJV uses “had said,” verse
22 is reflecting back to the past. The statement may be reflecting back, but the actions in
verse 23 put it back into the flow of present events. Also, Joshua told the army to spare
Rahab just before the Israelites shouted and the walls fell (v 17). The NASB uses verb
tenses throughout the account that keep the events flowing in the present. The resulting
conclusion is that all of the walls of Jericho fell except for the section supporting Rahab’s
A Reason of Our Hope Page 62

house. One might argue: “If Rahab’s house was the only one left standing, then what was
the purpose of the scarlet thread in the window? It would have been obvious to the spies
which house was Rahab’s if it stood alone. Therefore, the scarlet thread would have been
unnecessary unless the rescue was performed before the walls fell. Besides, is there any
archaeological evidence that part of the wall remained standing?”
The scarlet thread or cord was tied in the same window that the spies escaped from.
The window was obviously facing the terrain outside the wall. Scarlet represented sin and
honor in the Old Testament (Isaiah 1:18; Daniel 5:29). Perhaps the scarlet thread
symbolized Rahab’s sinful culture and the honor she was bestowed for leaving it behind.
Or maybe, in the words of Clement in his letter of the Romans to the Corinthians (1
Clement - 95 A.D.), “And in addition they gave her a sign, that she should hang from her
house something scarlet—making it clear that through the blood of the Lord redemption
will come to all who believe and hope in God. You see, dear friends, not only faith but
prophecy is found in this woman.”
There could even be some connection with the scarlet thread and the blood on the
doorpost at the Exodus passover. Nothing is clear of what it may symbolize. One
important thing to consider is that the spies did not know the whole plan when they told
Rahab to tie the thread in the window. They just knew that the city would be taken by
force and that she and her family would perish in the battle. They were simply taking
precautionary measures since they promised her deliverance: “And whosoever shall be
with thee in the house, his blood shall be on our head, if any hand be upon him” (Joshua
2:19).
Dr. John Garstang, a director of the British School of Archaeology in Jerusalem,
excavated the ruins of Jericho from 1929 to 1936. He found evidence that the city had
been destroyed around 1400 B.C., which corresponds to Joshua’s time:
Dr. Garstang found that the wall did actually “fall down flat.” The wall was
double, the two walls being 15 feet apart; the outer wall, 6 feet thick; the inner wall,
12 feet thick; both being about 30 feet high. They were built, not very substantially,
on faulty uneven foundations, of brick 4 inches thick and 1 to 2 feet long, laid in mud
mortar. The two walls were linked together by houses built across the top, as Rahab’s
house “on the wall.” Dr. Garstang found that the outer wall fell outward, and down
the hillside, dragging the inner wall and houses with it, the streak of bricks gradually
getting thinner down the slope. The foundation wall of the palace, 4 courses of stone
high, remain, in situ, tilted outward.67
Kathleen Kenyon also led an excavation some years later in 1950 and made some new
discoveries. So far, we have no archaeological evidence that part of the wall was left
standing.
Whether there is scientific evidence or not is of no significance. Is there any
archaeological proof of the resurrection of Christ? We know it happened because His
death was witnessed and over five-hundred people saw Him afterwards (1 Corinthians
15:6). Do we dismiss the resurrection because no one actually witnessed it? Of course
not! We take it on faith because God said it through His Word. We know that Rahab, her
family, and her house were saved because God told us through Joshua (Joshua 6:22-23).
We need nothing more.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 63

My daughter said, “If God created everything, then He must have created sin. Why
would He create something that He hated so much?” Could you answer this in your
paper?

This is best answered with an illustration. When you decided to have a child, you
knew that the child would get hurt, get her heart broken, or possibly even be taken from
you. You decided to have the child anyway in spite of the dangers. You knew it was
worth it. Likewise, God knew that for man to be everything He wanted him to be, then sin
would have to be a part of his life. He would have to make his own choices, and
hopefully the right ones. Just as your child made it through the close calls in life, God
also knew that if man made it through the temptations in his life, he would live. God did
not create sin, He just allowed it. Could there have been a way for God to have made man
without sin? He did … in the garden of Eden. However, sin is a natural part of life.
Otherwise, we would now be robots without free choice.

Can you explain the differences between Matthew 27:5, where Judas “went and
hanged himself,” and Acts 1:18, where “falling headlong, he burst asunder in the
midst, and all his bowels gushed out”?

You have to look at the big picture in order to bring these two verses to
understanding. How did Judas die? He “went and hanged himself” (Matthew 27:5). Acts
1:18 says nothing of how he died. It is just a description of the body after decaying for a
period of time. A corpse that has not yet begun to decompose would not “burst asunder”
as Judas’ body did. Decomposition brings about distention of the body that would cause
his bowels to gush out. He was probably hanging long enough to cause whatever was
supporting him to break or give way. Summarizing, Matthew 27:5 tells the cause of
death, suicide by hanging, and Acts 1:18 relates what happened to an already decomposed
body.

In Mark 7:19, Jesus pronounced all foods clean. Peter still had a problem with this
when God caused him to dream before seeing Cornelius. Didn’t he remember the
words of Jesus?

The foods that were declared “unclean” are listed in Leviticus 11. Jesus was not
abolishing the law in this verse. He was showing His disciples that sin comes from the
heart.
Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it
cannot defile him; Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth
out into the draught, purging all meats? And he said, That which cometh out of the
man, that defileth the man. For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil
thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit,
lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come
A Reason of Our Hope Page 64

from within, and defile the man. (Mark 7:18-23)

The NASB and the NIV insert “(Thus He declared all foods clean.)” at the end of
verse 19. Obviously, the earliest and most reliable manuscripts contained this sentence.
Christ told the disciples that it is not the “unclean” food that defiles the man: it is his
rebellious and disobedient heart that defiles him.
In Acts 10:10-16 Peter is shown the vision of the unclean animals three times. The
voice told him, “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common” (Acts 10:15). Peter
continued to be perplexed by the vision even after it was shown to him three times; not to
mention the time Jesus told him in Mark 7:19. Do you kind of get the impression that
Peter was set in his Jewish ways? It is not until he travels to Caesarea, where Cornelius
and his relatives live, that he finally gets the message. Use a rock next time, why don’t
ya? Peter told them, “Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to
keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I
should not call any man common or unclean” (Acts 10:28). Peter had to be told by Jesus,
shown a vision three times, and be brought amongst the Gentiles before he could say, “Of
a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34). Let’s all learn from
this example. Do not let the traditions of men blind you from seeing God’s Will in your
life.

John says, “If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is
not in us” (1 John 1:10). He later says, “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit
sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God” (1
John 3:9). Why does he contradict himself?

Coffman had an excellent illustration to help clear up the many errors taught
concerning 1 John 3:9.
Once, when traveling, this writer stopped at the entrance of a city and asked a
policeman a question; and he volunteered the information that, “you cannot turn right
on a red light in this city,” not meaning in any sense whatever that it was impossible
to do so, but that it was illegal to do so. John’s words here may be viewed as exactly
the same kind of prohibition, meaning, “those who are begotten of God are forbidden
to sin;” it is against God’s law. In view of what John said in 2:1-2, there could hardly
be any doubt that this is exactly what he meant. “He cannot sin” is not a statement of
impossibility at all, but a declaration of what is forbidden. Those commentators who
see “impossibility” affirmed here favor the interpretation that makes “continuing in a
life of sin” to be the impossibility.68
The false doctrine of “Once Saved, Always Saved” manipulates this verse to support
its claim. Let John’s words speak to those who advocate this doctrine, “And hereby we do
know that we know him, if we keep his commandments” (1 John 2:3).
A Reason of Our Hope Page 65

Jesus said, “But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite
thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also” (Matthew 5:39). Why would
Jesus say “resist not evil?”

The verse you quoted is from the King James Version. It is clear that the Bible
teaches we are to resist evil. The original Greek is to ponero which means “the evil one.”
It is not poneria, meaning “evil,” as the KJV suggests.69 The New American Standard
Bible states, “But I say to you, do not resist him who is evil.” It is doubtful, considering
the context, that “him who is evil” is Satan. Rather, it is an evil man who tries to harm or
injure you. Jesus explained how to deal with such a man in the latter part of the verse:
“Whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also” (NASB).

Information

Does God authorize a paid preacher?

Absolutely. 1 Corinthians 9:14 states that “the Lord has commanded that those who
preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.”

We know that Peter was married. Did he have children?

Yes, look at 1 Peter 5:1. Peter states that he is a fellow elder. The requirements of an
elder or bishop are listed in 1 Timothy 3. Verse 2 says an elder must be “the husband of
one wife” while verse 4 asserts that he should be “one that ruleth well his own house,
having his children in subjection with all gravity.” Notice that Paul was not married and
he never claimed to be an elder.

When was the sabbath ever taken away?

We will discuss many New Testament references to the law and the sabbath so that
we may determine the truth in this matter. Pay close attention as you read and check the
context in your Bible to confirm that I am not misleading you. Put your thinking cap on
and let’s go straight to the source.
And you, being dead through your sins and the evil condition of your flesh, to you,
I say, he gave life together with him, and forgiveness of all our sins; Having put an
end to the handwriting of the law which was against us, taking it out of the way by
nailing it to his cross. (Colossians 2:13-14 BBE)
But before faith came, we were kept in prison under the law, waiting for the
revelation of the faith which was to come. So the law has been a servant to take us to
Christ, so that we might have righteousness by faith. But now that faith is come, we
are no longer under a servant. Because you are all sons of God through faith in Christ
A Reason of Our Hope Page 66

Jesus. For all those of you who were given baptism into Christ did put on Christ.
There is no Jew or Greek, servant or free, male or female: because you are all one in
Jesus Christ. (Galatians 3:23-28 BBE)
So the law which went before is put on one side, because it was feeble and
without profit. (Because the law made nothing complete), and in its place there is a
better hope, through which we come near to God. (Hebrews 7:18-19 BBE)
The old law was a servant (“schoolmaster” in the KJV) to take us to Christ. He is the
“Faith” that has come and the “Better Hope, through which we come near to God.” The
old law was “feeble and without profit,” was “against us,” was “put on one side,” and was
taken “out of the way by nailing it to His cross.” “When he says, A new agreement, he
has made the first agreement old” (Hebrews 8:13).
We now have “a better covenant” (Hebrews 8:6). “For where a testament is, there
must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men
are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth” (Hebrews 9:16-17).
The old law was no longer in affect when Peter read his Lord’s last will and testament on
the day of Pentecost.
The original Greek word used for “law” (“ordinances” in the KJV) in Colossians 2:14
is dogma, meaning in this case, “the rules and requirements of the law of Moses; carrying
a suggestion of severity and of threatened judgment.”70 Paul is showing us in this passage
that the Mosaic law put the Jews in debt to God with sin. They had to make continual
animal sacrifices to have their sins forgiven and rolled forward. Christ canceled that debt
by “nailing it to his cross.” He made full payment when He “offered one sacrifice for sins
for ever” (Hebrews 10:12).
Then I said, See, I have come to do your pleasure, O God (as it is said of me in the
roll of the book). After saying, You had no desire for offerings, for burned offerings
or offerings for sin (which are made by the law) and you had no pleasure in them,
Then he said, See, I have come to do your pleasure. He took away the old order, so
that he might put the new order in its place. By that pleasure we have been made holy,
by the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once and for ever. And every priest takes
his place at the altar day by day, doing what is necessary, and making again and again
the same offerings which are never able to take away sins. But when Jesus had made
one offering for sins for ever, he took his place at the right hand of God; And has been
waiting there from that time, till all who are against him are made a foot-rest for his
feet. Because by one offering he has made complete for ever those who are made
holy. And the Holy Spirit is a witness for us: for after he had said, This is the
agreement which I will make with them after those days, says the Lord; I will put my
laws in their hearts, writing them in their minds; he said, And I will keep no more
memory of their sins and of their evil-doings. Now where there is forgiveness of
these, there is no more offering for sin. (Hebrews 10:7-18 BBE)
The old law, written by the finger of God, was “blotted out.” Jesus “took away the old
order, so that he might put the new order in its place” (Hebrews 10:9). “For the law was
given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (John 1:17). “For whatsoever
things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and
comfort of the scriptures might have hope” (Romans 15:4).
A Reason of Our Hope Page 67

How is sin and transgression judged without the old law? Jesus brought us “a better
covenant” (Hebrews 8:6). For instance, the old law forbade anyone to covet his
neighbor’s wife or commit adultery. Christ updated that and said that lust was also
adultery (Matthew 5:28). He also updated the old law by saying, “love your enemies” as
well as “love thy neighbour” (Matthew 5:43-44).
Our Savior even went so far as to update the old law on murder. “Ye have heard that
it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in
danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother
without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment” (Matthew 5:21-22).
Jesus summarized the old law for us, which helps us to see the vital importance of the
new law. He said, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy
soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is
like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang
all the law and the prophets.” (Matthew 22:35-40). God had a reason for this. “Wherefore
the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ” (Galatians 3:24). The old law was a
teacher and Jesus updated that old covenant into a new testament, which is what mankind
will be judged by (Revelation 20:12; 22:18-19).
For this cause those who are in Christ Jesus will not be judged as sinners. For the
law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and
death. For what the law was not able to do because it was feeble through the flesh,
God, sending his Son in the image of the evil flesh, and as an offering for sin, gave his
decision against sin in the flesh: So that what was ordered by the law might be done in
us, who are living, not in the way of the flesh, but in the way of the Spirit. (Romans
8:1-4 BBE)
The law was limited because it sought to control the flesh instead of the heart. Our
weakness is in the flesh. Jesus overcame the law of sin by dwelling in the flesh. It is only
through His help that we might hope to achieve the righteousness dictated by the law.
“For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the
righteousness of God in him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).
Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-18, “Think not that I come to destroy the law, or the
prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven
and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.”
By “the law or the prophets,” He was not just speaking of the Pentateuch or the
prophets as listed in the Old Testament. This phrase also included all that the law and
prophets stood for—the ceremonial, domestic, and moral codes of Israel and the
predictions and precepts given through the prophets.
Jesus did not come to destroy or repeal the law or prophets, but to fulfill them. He
fulfilled the law by living its spiritual intentions. He fulfilled the predictions of the
prophets by dying as the final sacrifice for sin. All types of the law and the predictions of
the prophets were fulfilled through Jesus and His kingdom.
Even the minutest details—”jot” or “tittle”—of the law did not pass away until they
were fulfilled through our Savior. Neither the law nor the prophets changed until
everything that they conveyed was accomplished in precisely the way that God intended.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 68

When it was accomplished through the cross, the old Jewish nation was concluded and
the new spiritual kingdom was established in its stead.
Is the sabbath, then, still blessed and sanctified? “And the Lord spake unto Moses,
saying, Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall
keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know
that I am the Lord that doth sanctify you” (Exodus 31:12-13). There is no mention here of
Gentiles keeping the Old Testament sabbath.
Before Christ took the old law “out of the way by nailing it to His cross,” He and the
apostles obeyed it, including the sabbath. They worshipped God on the seventh day of the
week as all Jews did. The new testament began at “the death of the Testator,” Jesus. After
the old law was nailed to the cross of Jesus, the apostles and the early church gathered
together on Sunday and partook of the Lord’s Supper, listened to preaching, and gave of
their means (Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2).
Now, after the birth of the church on the day of Pentecost, why would the apostles
meet with Jews in their synagogues on the sabbath? Let’s look. In Acts 13:14-52, Paul
and Barnabas and their companions arrived in Pisidian Antioch. This city of Antioch was
actually in Phrygia, near the border of Pisidia. It was called this to distinguish it from the
larger Antioch in Syria (Acts 13:1). Paul and his companions stopped here on their
missionary journey to preach the Gospel to the Jews.
On the sabbath day, they went where the Jews would be gathered—the synagogue. I
don’t believe that Paul’s intent was to “remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy”
(Exodus 20:8). He was simply taking advantage of the large gathering of Jews on that day
so that he could preach Jesus to them. And he did.
In Acts 13:42 the people begged them to return on the next sabbath. Nearly the whole
city assembled the following week to hear the word of God; however, the Jewish leaders
tried to repudiate their teachings and rallied to persecute Paul and Barnabas. They then
told the Jews that they were “unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles”
(Acts 13:46) and “shook off the dust of their feet against them, and came unto Iconium”
(Acts 13:51).
In Acts 17:1-3 we see that Paul’s “custom” or “manner” was to always go to the
synagogue on the sabbath to preach about Christ. In these verses most of the Jews in
Thessalonica formed a mob to drive Paul and his companions out of the city. Paul and
Silas fled to Berea and were gladly received—again in the synagogue (Acts 17:10-12).
Paul is found in Corinth with Aquila and Priscilla in Acts 18:4, where “he reasoned in
the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.” No mention is
made in any of these verses that Paul or any of his companions were worshipping on the
sabbath. The very nature of his missionary journeys was to reach as many people with the
Gospel as possible. Paul simply used the convenience of this large gathering time to
persuade the Jews to obey the Gospel. Sometimes he was moderately successful.
Sometimes he was well received. But he was never there to “remember the sabbath day.”
He no doubt worshipped with his brethren on the Lord’s day, Sunday, and was very
well received. Worship is to “be done decently and in order” (1 Corinthians 14:40). Paul
would not have disrupted his brethren in worship. He was clearly refuting the Jews on the
A Reason of Our Hope Page 69

sabbath and causing contention and strife among them. He would not have done this if the
sabbath were the true New Testament day of worship.
History records that the apostolic fathers worshipped on Sunday and called it the
“Lord’s day,” as John did in Revelation 1:10. Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, was martyred
during the reign of Trajan around A.D. 110. He was a contemporary of John and wrote the
following in a letter to “the church at Magnesia on the Meander.”
Do not be deceived by strange doctrines or antiquated myths, since they are
worthless. For if we continue to live in accordance with Judaism, we admit that we
have not received grace. … Those who had lived in antiquated practices came to
newness of hope, no longer keeping the sabbath but living in accordance with the
Lord’s day, on which our life also arose through him and his death.71
The Epistle of Barnabas, written less than 60 years after the destruction of Jerusalem
in A.D. 70, says, “We spend the eighth day in celebration, the day on which Jesus both
arose from the dead and, after appearing again, ascended into heaven.”72 The eighth day is
Sunday, when Jesus arose from the dead.
These contemporaries of the apostle John worshipped on Sunday just as the apostles
did. It is scriptural. “And on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to
break bread, Paul preached unto them” (Acts 20:7). “Upon the first day of the week let
everyone of you lay by him in store” (1 Corinthians 16:2). The early church gathered
together on Sunday and partook of the Lord’s Supper, listened to preaching, and gave of
their means. We do not have the authority to do any differently now.
By worshipping God on Sunday, we are not following the traditions of men. We are
continuing “stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine,” just as the first church did (Acts 2:42).
After Peter preached to the Jews on the day of Pentecost, “they that gladly received his
word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand
souls” (Acts 2:41). The church began with three thousand people and continued to grow.
“And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:47). By
following the divinely inspired commands and examples of Peter, Paul, and the other
apostles, we are also following the commands of Christ. He said, “If ye love me, keep my
commandments” (John 14:15).
It is true that Jesus created the sabbath and “all things were created by him, and for
him” (Colossians 1:16). It is also true that He “took it out of the way, nailing it to his
cross” (Colossians 2:14). Sunday is now the Lord’s day, “created by him, and for him.”
He has the authority to change this day since He “is the head of all principality and
power” (Colossians 2:10) and “is Lord also of the sabbath” (Mark 2:28).
Yes, the sabbath existed before Mount Sinai. “And God blessed the seventh day, and
sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and
made” (Genesis 2:3). God blessed the seventh day as the sabbath to celebrate His rest
from the creation of mankind and the universe.
Now that we have a new testament, God has blessed a new day to celebrate the
resurrection of His Son! Jesus was resurrected on the first day of the week, so it is fitting
that He has now sanctified Sunday as the Lord’s day, “created by him, and for him.”
A Reason of Our Hope Page 70

I have provided biblically and historically conclusive proof of the fact that the sabbath
(Saturday) was replaced with the Lord’s day (Sunday). As noted before, Jesus upgraded
or improved the law in several instances. He summed up the old law with, “Love God and
love your neighbor.” He upgraded the law against adultery to a law against lust. He
improved the old law from hating our enemies to loving them. He changed the law
against murder to a law against unjustified anger. Notice that the old law simply
identified aberrant behavior. Jesus, however, identified the source and called it sin. He
knew that He could not change the flesh, but He could change the heart.

When exactly is the kingdom to come?

There are some who believe that the kingdom is yet future. But the Word of God
clearly shows us that the kingdom is now. The kingdom exists today as the church of
God. Remember in Matthew 16:15-19 when Christ asked the apostles who He was?
And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living
God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for
flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And
I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church;
and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of
the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in
heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Christ would build His church on the fact that He was the Son of God and would give
Peter the keys to the kingdom or church.
“And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand
here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with
power” (Mark 9:1). “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon
you” (Acts 1:8). “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 they were all filled with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:1-4). The kingdom
came with power on the day of Pentecost. If the kingdom has not come yet, then we have
some people who have lived for 19 centuries and can tell us first hand about these events
(Mark 9:1).
Peter described the rock, on which Christ would build His church, to the Jews at
Pentecost. “Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that
same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36). He used his keys
to open the way to the kingdom by saying, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in
the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy
Ghost” (Acts 2:38). “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same
day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. … And the Lord added to the
church daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:41, 47). The kingdom and the church are
both described as coming on the day of Pentecost.
Notice that before the day of Pentecost in Acts 2, the kingdom was referred to as yet
future. Listen to these comments made by Paul after Pentecost. “For the kingdom of God
A Reason of Our Hope Page 71

is not in word, but in power” (1 Corinthians 4:20). “Giving thanks unto the Father, which
hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath
delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his
dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins”
(Colossians 1:12-14). “That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his
kingdom and glory” (1 Thessalonians 2:12). We, the saints, are now in God’s kingdom.
The tense of the verbs is either present or past in the above passages. How could a future
kingdom be referred to in present or past tense?

Is it wrong to spend the Lord’s money on unbelievers as some believe?

First of all, let us establish what the Lord’s money is. “Every good gift and every
perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights” (James 1:17).
What is not the Lord’s money? We are but stewards of His riches. God has consigned His
belongings to us in order that we might do His will with them. Christians constitute the
church and each of us holds the Lord’s money. Individually, we must take great care to be
good stewards with His wealth. Also, the funds given to the church are God’s and should
be spent as He instructs.
Paul informs us in Galatians 6:10: “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good
unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.” God has instructed
us, through Paul, to do good unto all men. We are to take care of our fellow Christians,
primarily, but that does not exclude others in need. “Be not forgetful to entertain
strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares” (Hebrews 13:2). Christ did
not limit himself only to believers. Where would we be if He had?
Furthermore, if it is wrong to spend church funds on unbelievers, how could we
account for paying someone for building materials, electricity, water, and gas? The first
century church did not have these concerns but we must adapt to progress as long as it is
in accordance with God’s will.

On our fourth Sunday night singing, we allow boys to lead singing that are too
young to become Christians. Is this right?

Absolutely! They are in fellowship with God until they are old enough to become
accountable for their actions. Sin has not separated them from God yet if they are too
young. Therefore, just as God listens to their prayers, he hears their songs also.

Can a man who has adopted children qualify to be an elder, supposing they were
brought up in the Lord?

“A bishop then must be … one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in
subjection with all gravity” (1 Timothy 3:4). “Ordain elders in every city, as I had
appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not
A Reason of Our Hope Page 72

accused of riot or unruly” (Titus 1:6). We will assume that this man is qualified in every
way. Your question is concerning “adopted” children as opposed to “natural” children.
Let’s consider the example of Jesus. Who was Jesus’ father? Trick question. We
know that Jesus was the Son of God. However, when Jesus was left behind in Jerusalem
after the Passover, Mary said, “Behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing”
(Luke 2:48). “Is not this the carpenter’s son?” (Matthew 13:55). Joseph was Jesus’ legal
father on earth. God was Jesus’ physical Father in heaven. This relationship is very
similar to a man having an adopted child.
If a man has brought up children “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord”
(Ephesians 6:4), then he unquestionably has satisfied this specific qualification of an
elder. Whether the children are his by natural or legal methods, he has done what God’s
Word instructs.

It was dark from the sixth hour until the ninth at Jesus crucifixion. Is this 6:00 P.M.
to 9:00 P.M.?

“Now from the sixth hour there was darkness over all the land unto the ninth hour”
(Matthew 27:45). If this was referring to 6:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M., then how would they
know when the darkness was over? Those who lived in the first century referred to the
time of day from 6:00 A.M., so the sixth hour of the day was noon and the ninth hour was
3:00 P.M.. Notice how Peter uses this system. “For these are not drunken, as ye suppose,
seeing it is but the third hour of the day” (Acts 2:15). He was saying that it would take a
long time to become drunk and if it were 9:00 A.M., then the apostles would not have had
time to become inebriated. Therefore, darkness prevailed at the cross from noon until
3:00 P.M.; one of the many miraculous events that occurred at the crucifixion.

Who was Urim in Numbers 27:21?

“And he shall stand before Eleazar the priest, who shall ask counsel for him after the
judgment of Urim before the LORD: at his word shall they go out, and at his word they
shall come in, both he, and all the children of Israel with him, even all the congregation”
(Numbers 27:21).
A better question would be “What is Urim?”. We do not know exactly what it is, but
Exodus 28:30 tells us, “And thou shalt put in the breastplate of judgement the Urim and
the Thummim; and they shall be upon Aaron’s heart, when he goeth in before the LORD:
and Aaron shall bear the judgement of the children of Israel upon his heart before the
LORD continually.” The article, the, would indicate that Urim was an inanimate object.
We are not sure what it looked like, but it was placed in the “breastplate of judgement”
which was a square piece of linen folded in half and opened at the top like a pouch and
draped over the front of the ephod (a two-piece, sleeveless garment).
It was beautifully decorated with gold and twelve precious stones with the twelve
tribes of Israel engraved on them. The Urim and the Thummim were possibly two more
stones to be placed in the pouch worn by the priest. They might have been used as lots to
A Reason of Our Hope Page 73

determine God’s will. King Saul used them to communicate with God, as well as through
the prophets and his dreams (1 Samuel 28:6).

You said 1 Peter 3:19 meant “The Spirit of Christ was in Noah as he preached to the
antediluvians.” What about 1 Peter 4:6?

“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” (1 Peter
4:6). Consider Paul’s words on the same subject:
But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are
asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that
Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with
him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and
remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the
Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel,
and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are
alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord
in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-17)
Peter had to be referring to the “dead in Christ” that Paul mentioned. Furthermore, the
Greek word, kerusso, translated “preached” in chapter 3 verse 19 is not the same as
“preached the gospel” or euaggelizo in chapter 4 verse 6. The word kerusso means “to cry
or proclaim as a herald” which would certainly describe the method in which Noah
preached to his generation. Peter uses the word euaggelizo in 4:6 to designate that the
dead are not “spirits in prison” as in 3:19. The dead of which he speaks are the people
who had died since the Gospel was first preached. In other words, “them that are dead”
are deceased Christians. The Gospel was preached (euaggelizo) to those martyrs now
dead. They were “judged according to men in the flesh” and sentenced to martyrdom by
human standards, “but live according to God in the spirit” after death. If verse 4:6 alluded
to preaching to dead spirits, then God would be giving us a second chance after death. “It
is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgement” (Hebrews 9:27). There
are no second chances after death.

I have seen a symbol resembling a fish on car windows, etc. Someone told me it was
a religious symbol. What does it mean?

The early Christians were persecuted and killed in order to bring about their
extinction. Although some rejoiced in becoming martyrs, the preservation of the Gospel
necessitated the survival of believers in Christ. They devised secret codes and apocalyptic
language, such as in Revelation, to avoid being discovered. One such symbol was the
ιχθυς or ichthys which is Greek for “fish.” Each letter of the Greek word stood for a
different name of Jesus. In this way, the ichthys was translated into an acronym for
Christians that held almost as much hope as the symbol of the cross.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 74

ιχθυς

Greek letter Stands for English equivalent

Ι, iota Ιησους Jesus
χ, chi Χριστος Christ
θ, theta Θεου of God
υ, upsilon υιος Son
ς, σ, sigma σωτηρ Saviour

My mother is very sick with cancer. Elders from congregations in her area came
and prayed for her and anointed her with oil. They read James 5:14-16 before they
did this. She confessed her sins, also. Was the anointing really necessary?

“Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray
over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: And the prayer of faith shall
save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall
be forgiven him. Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may
be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much” (James 5:14-
16).
God designed the human body to bring about its own healing. He sometimes, if need
be, uses medicine or surgery to bring about healing. He has definitely manifested healing
in answer to prayer as shown in the above passage.
Perhaps the oil used for the anointing was considered medicinal in the first century.
The good Samaritan used it on the assaulted man: “And went to him, and bound up his
wounds, pouring in oil and wine” (Luke 10:34). Isaiah 1:6 tells of neglected wounds that
have not been “mollified with ointment” (KJV) or “softened with oil” (NASB). The
Hebrew word shemen is used here for “oil” which is equivalent to the Greek word elaion
used in Luke 10:34 and James 5:14. Apparently, olive oil was widely used for medicinal
purposes in biblical times. However, the twelve disciples “anointed with oil many that
were sick, and healed them” just after Christ sent them out (Mark 6:13). It is possible that
the olive oil was part of miraculous healing. The elders in James time would almost
certainly have had this gift of healing.
“And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to
his will, he heareth us” (1 John 5:14). Our prayers of faith to bring about healing are not
always answered in a positive way, as Paul has testified (2 Corinthians 12:8). The Lord’s
will is not always our will.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 75

James seems to be changing gears in verse sixteen. Perhaps he is speaking of someone

who is spiritually sick to confess their sins and be healed spiritually. Nevertheless,
praying, anointing, and confessing cover all the bases.
Now, back to your question. Anointing is not a command, inferred command, or
binding example; so it is not required to be practiced. However, there is nothing wrong
with doing this as long as it is done with an open mind and it is not bound on others as a
command. We commend those elders who prayed for your mother. They were trying to
follow God’s Word to the letter and were, obviously, very careful in interpreting James
inspired words.

Do we become physically sick because we sin? If so, is AIDS God’s punishment for
homosexuals and lesbians?

“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 hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the
works of God should be made manifest in him” (John 9:1-3). As Jesus has said, sickness
in our lives is not punishment for our sins. “If we walk in the light, as he is in the light,”
then “the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (1 John 1:7). However,
sometimes we have an inescapable repercussion from our sins, but it is not punishment. It
is just a result.
For example, a good person can get AIDS even from his first and only sexual act.
James said, “Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is
finished, bringeth forth death” (James 1:15). God does not punish us with sickness; He
just allows the results of our sins to follow us even after He has forgiven us. “Let no man
say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil,
neither tempteth he any man” (James 1:13). Indirectly, we do become sick because of sin:
for the original sin at the Fall resulted in death and pain for all mankind (Romans 5:14;
8:22).
Dr. James Dobson, president of Focus on the Family, was on an ABC television show
called “Growing Up in the Age of AIDS,” hosted by Peter Jennings. He was only allowed
to speak for 45 seconds. Needless to say, he did not have time to speak his mind.
Therefore, he spoke his mind in his newsletter, dated February 13, 1992. He had an
excellent example to illustrate the answer to your question, “Is AIDS God’s punishment?”
If I choose to leap off a 10-story building, I will die when my body hits the ground
below. It’s inevitable. But gravity was not designed by God to punish folly. He
established physical laws that can be violated only at great peril. So it is with His
moral laws. They are as real and predictable as the principles that govern the physical
universe. Thus, we knew (and He knew) with the onset of the sexual revolution back
in 1968 that this day of disease and promiscuity would come. It is here, and what we
do with our situation will determine how much we and our children will suffer in the
future.73
Parents, if your teenagers do not ordinarily read our article, after you’ve finished
A Reason of Our Hope Page 76

reading it, ask them to. The following information is vastly important to everyone,
especially teens. Here goes. The so-called “experts” have wasted our tax dollars on “safe-
sex” programs where the ultimate truth is being withheld from our teens. Promiscuous
teenagers think that condoms will protect them from disease because the media has lied to
them. Permit us to quote generously from Dr. Dobson’s newsletter. He speaks on the
subject of teaching our teenagers abstinence until marriage:
No other approach to the epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases will work. The
so-called “safe-sex” solution is a disaster in the making. Condoms fail 15.7 percent of
the time in preventing pregnancy among married couples. They fail 36.3 percent of
the time in preventing pregnancy among young, unmarried minority women. The
overall failure rate is as high as 44 percent in preventing pregnancy among unmarried
Hispanic women. The British Medical Journal, reported the failure rate due to
slippage and breakage to be 26 percent. Given these findings, it is obvious why we
have a word for people who rely on condoms as a means of birth control. We call
them … “parents.”
Remembering that a woman can conceive only one or two days per month, we can
only guess how high the failure rate for condoms must be in preventing disease,
which can be transmitted 365 days per year! If the devices are not used properly, or if
they slip just once, viruses, bacteria, yeast and fungi are exchanged and the disease
process begins. One mistake after 500 “protected” episodes is all it takes. The damage
is done in a single moment when rational thought is overridden by passion. Those
who would depend on so insecure a method must use it properly on every occasion,
and even then a high failure rate is brought about by factors beyond their control. The
young victim who is told by his elders that this little latex device is “safe” may not
know he is risking lifelong pain and even death for so brief a window of pleasure.
What a burden to place on an immature mind and body!
Then we must recognize, as implied above, that condoms cannot even be
accurately tested for AIDS protection, since the virus is one-tenth the size of the
smallest detectable hole. Viruses are 450 times smaller than sperm, and pass easily
through even the smallest gaps. Researchers studying surgical gloves made out of
latex, the same material in condoms, found “channels of 5 microns that penetrated the
entire thickness of the glove.” The HIV virus measures between .1 and .3 microns.
Given these findings, tell me what rational, informed person would trust his or her life
to such flimsy armor?
I’m sure this explains why not one of 800 sexologists at a recent conference raised
a hand when asked if they would trust a thin rubber sheath to protect them during
intercourse with a known HIV-infected person. I don’t blame them. They’re not crazy,
after all. And yet they’re perfectly willing to tell our kids that “safe sex” is within
reach and that they can sleep around with impunity.
There is only one way to protect ourselves from the deadly diseases that lie in
wait. It is abstinence before marriage, then marriage and mutual fidelity for life to an
uninfected partner. Anything less is potentially suicidal.74
Even more important than the physical consequences of promiscuity are the serious
spiritual penalties. Jesus said, “Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill
A Reason of Our Hope Page 77

the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell”
(Matthew 10:28). Paul told the church at Corinth, “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall
not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor
adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor
covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God”
(1 Corinthians 6:9-10). We cannot be “in Christ” and sexually promiscuous at the same
time.

In a recent article, you stated: “As Jesus has said, sickness in our lives is not
punishment for our sins,” using John 9:1-3 as a basis for this statement. Examine
the passage once again. Jesus did not say “sickness in our lives is not punishment for
our sins.” He merely said that the man was blind, not as the result of a sin, but that
the works of God should be made manifest in him. 1 Corinthians 11:27-30 tells us:
“Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy
manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord (emphasis
mine). A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the
cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats
and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are weak and sick,
and a number of you have fallen asleep (emphasis mine)” (NIV). How do you
reconcile your statement that “sickness in our lives is not punishment for our sins”
with this passage and James 5:15-16?

“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 hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the
works of God should be made manifest in him” (John 9:1-3). You are right. Our
statement in relation to this passage, “As Jesus has said, sickness in our lives is not
punishment for our sins,” was too broad a generalization. Jesus’ statement was more
specific than that. We feel that when Jesus said, “Neither hath this man sinned, nor his
parents,” He was dispelling the false belief that prompted the disciples’ question, “Who
did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?” Jesus’ next statement was even
more specific and applied only to this man; born blind from birth “that the works of God
should be made manifest in him.” Remember, “If we walk in the light, as he is in the
light,” then “the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin” (1 John 1:7). Our
sins are forgiven if we walk in the light. However, sometimes we have an inescapable
repercussion from our sins, but it is not punishment; it is just a result.
Concerning 1 Corinthians 11:27-30, it is obvious that you refer to verse 30 in defense
of your argument, but first, let us comment on the preceding verses. This passage includes
one of the most vital messages to Christians, and yet, it is one of the most misunderstood.
One misunderstanding is from the KJV where it states, “Whosoever shall eat this bread,
and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the
Lord” (v 27). The NASB and NIV state, “Whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the
Lord in an unworthy manner.” These superior translations make it clearer that it is not the
“worthiness” of the partaker that Paul speaks of; it is the “worthiness” of his manner as he
A Reason of Our Hope Page 78

partakes.
Indeed, who was ever worthy to eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of
God? The moment any man might suppose that he was “worthy” to do such a thing,
the presumption itself would deny it. Nevertheless, there is a real danger here. If any
person shall partake of this solemn rite without discernment of the event it
memorializes, or without regard to the obligations imposed by it, or without any
consistent effort to partake of it continually and faithfully throughout his life, or until
the Lord comes, or without the due reverence and appreciation due such an
ordinance—then such a person becomes guilty of the body and the blood of Jesus, the
meaning of this being that he, in a spiritual sense, has become a crucifier of the Lord
himself.75
“For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord’s death till
he come” (v 26). Not only do we look back to Calvary, we also look ahead to the second
coming of our Savior. As we do this, we should “examine” our motives when partaking
of the Lord’s Supper. This remembrance is not ordinary and should not be treated
casually. “Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the
flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my
flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day”
(John 6:53-54). “It is the central ordinance of Christianity; and the believer’s fidelity to it,
or infidelity, is fraught with eternal consequences.”76
These consequences are emphatically stated by Paul in verse 30: “For this cause many
are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.” Is he speaking of physical sickness and
death? It is true that God sent His divine wrath upon Ananias and Sapphira and possibly
others, too; nevertheless, would Paul have used the phrase, “many sleep,” if he had had
victims of divine wrath in mind? We feel that sleep is too mild a word to refer to physical
punishment by God. “The meaning which appears to be most likely is that Paul was
speaking of those who had become spiritually weak and sickly, some no doubt having
perished spiritually. If that was meant, then the condition of those asleep was terminal
and irrevocable.”77
Their eternal state was no different than that of Ananias and Sapphira. Paul’s soft
word, sleep, seems to have been written with tenderheartedness and sorrow for those who
had perished spiritually. Solomon once said, “The spirit of a man will sustain his
infirmity; but a wounded spirit who can bear?” (Proverbs 18:14).
“The prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have
committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. Confess your faults one to another, and pray
one for another, that ye may be healed” (James 5:15-16). The context of 1 Corinthians
11:27-30 appears to have been discussing those who were spiritually sick; however, the
above passage from James is undoubtedly speaking of physical sickness. Guy N. Woods
stated:
It is possible for children of God to get sick. Sickness is a physical ailment which
eventually comes to all, whether good or bad. The fact that one is sick does not mean
that such a one has been or is guilty of specific sin. Often, the most devout suffer from
prolonged illness; frequently those who live in open sin enjoy robust health. Paul was
possessed of great physical weakness; there were infirmities of the flesh which bore
A Reason of Our Hope Page 79

heavily upon him and he ever lived with the painful reminder of the thorn in his flesh.
(2 Corinthians 12:1ff.) There were sick people in the early church even as there are
many in this category among us today. Sickness is a burden all must, at one time or
another, bear.78
If you recall, Paul wrote to Timothy that Trophimus, a missionary companion to Asia,
“have I left at Miletum sick” (2 Timothy 4:20). Also, Timothy had chronic stomach
problems (1 Timothy 5:23). Was this man of “unfeigned faith” (2 Timothy 1:5) guilty of
chronic sin?

Are all sins equal in the eyes of the Lord? Is telling a lie just as bad as murder?

Yes and no. All sin is equal in that it separates us from God. Isaiah said, “But your
iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from
you, that he will not hear” (Isaiah 59:2). The lie and the murder both separate us from
God; however, the ramifications of our sins may vary in magnitude. For example,
someone may lie in order to accomplish murder; but if between the lie and the murder,
they repent, the lie can be forgotten. However, if that person commits the murder, the
repercussions will be felt by the victim’s family and friends for a long time to come. We
do not advocate a casual view of sin. Neither did James: “Sin, when it is finished,
bringeth forth death” (James 1:15).
“No mother ever judged the danger of a splinter in a child’s knee by the size of the
splinter. What a blunder to classify sins as mortal and venial. Everyone knows that the
tiniest lesion can produce disastrous consequences; and, in the spiritual life, any sin,
however counted by men as unimportant, can, if unchecked and unforgiven, lead to
eternal death.”79
Solomon said, “The way of the wicked is an abomination unto the LORD: but he
loveth him that followeth after righteousness” (Proverbs 15:9). We should avoid all sin
because it erects a rift between us and the Living God.

Are the “sons of God” in the Old Testament the same as the “sons of God” in the
New Testament?

Not really. The phrase “sons of God” is mentioned eleven times throughout the King
James Version of the Bible and refers to several different groups. The Old Testament
references to the “sons of God” are Genesis 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; and 38:7 with variations
in Psalms 89:6 and Daniel 3:25. The two verses in Genesis are speaking of the “sons of
God” taking the “daughters of men” as their wives and bearing mighty children. Many
scholars argue that these were the fallen angels marrying human women. It is unlikely
that the term “sons of God” in the Old Testament would be applied to Satan’s angels.
Furthermore, Jesus reveals in Mark 12:25 that angels do not marry or reproduce after
their own kind. Therefore, the “sons of God” in Genesis could not be the fallen angels
spoken of by Peter and Jude (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6).
If one simply looks at the context, the matter can be cleared up easily. Previously, in
A Reason of Our Hope Page 80

Genesis, chapters 4 and 5, the two classes of men had already been introduced. The sons
of Cain were obviously a lower class, which can be seen from his line of descendants in
chapter 4, verses 17-24. The higher class was the line of Seth, for after his son was born,
“then began men to call upon the name of the LORD” (Genesis 4:26). The “sons of God”
in Genesis were obviously those born of Seth. The “daughters of men” were probably
descendants of Cain that intermarried with descendants of Seth and, thus, caused
corruption and violence to spread upon the earth. Notice that men were punished with the
Flood; not fallen angels. The guilt rested on men, so angels had nothing to do with the
spreading of evil or the receiving of punishment in this case. Thus, once again, the “sons
of God” in Genesis 6 cannot be referring to angels.
However, the three verses in Job do seem to be alluding to angels presenting
themselves before the Lord, with Satan, also an angel, among them. DeHoff comments,
“As a great king would hold an assembly with all of his subjects coming to present
themselves before him, so God is represented as conducting an assembly of the ‘sons of
God’ or as the Septuagint has it ‘the angels of God.’ God is represented as speaking to
this counsel or assembly and Satan is represented as coming also into the midst of
them.”80 Furthermore, David refers to angels as “sons of the mighty” in Psalms 89:6.
Besides Genesis 6:2-4, Daniel 3:25 is the most misused passage concerning an angel
as a “son of God.” King Nebuchadnezzar called the fourth person in the fire with
Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego the “Son of God.” Most modern translations say “son
of the gods.” These translators argue that Nebuchadnezzar could not have known to say
the “Son of God” and accept his explanation in 3:28 as the correct interpretation of his
words: “Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his
angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him.”
To this, Coffman replies, “We are shocked that commentators prefer
Nebuchadnezzar’s opinion in such a matter and make it a basis of denying that here
indeed is a genuine Christophany of the OT.” He further states concerning verse 25, “The
translators get their perverted ‘sons of the gods,’ by mistranslating Elohim, the famous
OT plural title of Almighty God as used throughout the OT. If Elohim here means ‘gods’
in the sense of pagan gods, then the pagan gods may be said to have created the world!”81
It is certain that Nebuchadnezzar did not know the full meaning of his words, “like
the Son of God;” however, Caiaphas was also not aware that he prophesied about Christ’s
death in John 11:49-52. In both cases God put the truth into the mouth of the unbeliever.
Furthermore, the King of Babylon did know enough to say, “Shadrach, Meshach, and
Abednego, ye servants of the most high God” (Daniel 3:26).
The New Testament references to the “sons of God” are John 1:12; Romans 8:14, 19;
Philippians 2:15; and 1 John 3:1-2. John 1:12 states that “them that believe on his name”
become “sons of God.” If this were literally “sons of God,” the Greek would say hoi
whioi theou. However, the original text has tekna theou which means “children of God”
(NASB, NIV). Philippians 2:15 is also better translated “children of God.” Of the verses
in Romans, Ralph Earle states:
Literally this verse reads: “For as many as are led by God’s Spirit, these are God’s
sons.” In the Greek there is no definite article with “sons.” This makes it more
emphatic. The anarthrous construction (without the article) indicates character or
A Reason of Our Hope Page 81

kind. The statement means that those who are led by God’s Spirit have (perhaps also
display) the character or nature of God’s sons. They not only belong to the family but
act like it!82
The verses in 1 John also mean “children of God.” There is no article here in the
Greek text, so it emphasizes kind or quality. We are called the “children of God” because
“the world knoweth us not” (1 John 3:1) and we live righteous lives.

When the Pharisees said that Jesus cast out demons by the power of Beelzebub, He
said, “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” (Matthew 12:31). Since this was a special circumstance, can this unpardonable
sin be duplicated today?

Jesus continued to say, “And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it
shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be
forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come” (Matthew 12:32). Jesus
made a clear distinction between blasphemy of “the Son of man” and “blasphemy against
the Holy Ghost.” Mark’s parallel account says, “But he that shall blaspheme against the
Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation: Because they
said, He hath an unclean spirit” (Mark 3:29-30). The Pharisees claimed that Jesus “hath
an unclean spirit” by saying, “By the prince of the devils casteth he out devils” (Mark
3:22). They did not realize that the casting out of demons was the work of the Spirit.
They had forgotten the warning of Isaiah: “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good
evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet
for bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20). Their sin was due to a deliberate and continuous rebellion
against God.
This was a special circumstance; however, there is every indication that this
unpardonable sin can be duplicated today. Nevertheless, do not be afraid that you have
committed this sin or could commit it easily. Cranfield said, “We can say with absolute
confidence to anyone who is overwhelmed by the fear that he has committed this sin, that
the fact that he is so troubled is itself sure proof that he has not committed it.”83
The last phrase of Mark 3:29, “in danger of eternal damnation” (KJV) or “guilty of an
eternal sin” (NASB), indicates that the sin under consideration is not unique or special
after all. It is one of a class of sins which is suggested by the indefinite article, “an.”
The class of sins is composed of the sins which cause the spiritual death of the
sinner. … The sin against the Holy Spirit is therefore not a specific sin limited to any
form or circumstance, but any sin that destroys the spiritual life. It is the sin that
“quenches the Holy Spirit” (1 Thessalonians 5:19); the sin that ends in spiritual death
(1 Corinthians 11:30); the sin that marks a condition of the sinner described as being
“worse” than lost, the only conceivable state answering to such a condition being the
state of being lost without possibility of recovery (2 Peter 2:20-21); the sin that makes
the sinner “dead” while being alive physically (1 Timothy 5:6); the sin unto death (1
John 5:16); the sin from which “it is impossible” to renew the sinner (Hebrews 6:4-6);
the sin which results in the condition wherein there “remaineth no more sacrifice for
A Reason of Our Hope Page 82

sins” (Hebrews 10:26-27).84

Do animals have souls? Ecclesiastes 3:19-21 seems to say so.

“For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth
them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man
hath no preeminence above a beast: for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of
the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward,
and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth?”
Based on the modern translations, I can see where the question in verse 21 might
mislead someone: “Who knoweth the spirit of man whether it goeth upward, and the
spirit of the beast whether it goeth downward to the earth?” (ASV). We know that
Solomon believed the spirit of man “shall return unto God who gave it” (Ecclesiastes
12:7), so he wasn’t questioning that aspect. R. J. Kidwell states:
It is the Preacher’s purpose to convince his audience that once men begin
moving in the direction of wickedness and forsake justice and righteousness that
they become as beasts. … It is not a question of debate as to the differences
between men and beasts, or of the obvious destinies of each, but what Solomon is
saying is this, “Who can understand their spirits?” Or to put it differently, he is
saying, “It is difficult to believe that man can behave with such beast-like
characteristics! Who can understand the spirit of either?”85
I will leave you with E. M. Zerr’s comments on the spirit of the beast:
Its specific meaning is that part of a creature that enables its body to live and
think. Of course a beast cannot think as man does yet it lives and knows some
things. In that sense it also has a spirit without which it would be dead. … It is
clear why Solomon sets forth that no man can know the spirits of man and beast.
However, that need not keep us from accepting the inspired statement of Solomon
that at death the spirit of the beast goes down to earth with its body, but the spirit
of man goes upward as his body goes back to the earth.86

Terminology

Is the term “brotherhood” a biblical term?

Very much so. 1 Peter 2:17 bids us to “love the brotherhood.” It is a broad term that
includes all of our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Why do denominations call their preachers “pastors?”

The term “pastor” was used in the Old Testament interchangeably with “shepherd.”
God has always referred to His children as His “flock.” He tells Jeremiah to rebuke Israel
A Reason of Our Hope Page 83

to return to Him “and I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed
you with knowledge and understanding” (Jeremiah 3:15). But “woe be unto the pastors
that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture;” therefore, “I will set up shepherds over
them which shall feed them” (Jeremiah 23:1, 4). A pastor and a shepherd are the same
person.
“For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and
Bishop of your souls” (1 Peter 2:25). Peter calls Christ “the chief Shepherd” in 1 Peter
5:4. These verses show that the terms “shepherd” and “bishop” describe the same person:
Christ being the chief Shepherd and Bishop of our souls. In fact Peter lists the
qualifications of an elder in chapter 5 and links “elder,” “shepherd,” and “overseer” to the
same individual.
Paul tells Titus in Titus 1:5-9 to “ordain elders in every city” and he then gives him
guidelines to choose the men for the job. In this list of requirements, Paul states, “For a
bishop must be blameless …” The terms “elder” and “bishop” are applied in unison. Paul
sent for the elders of the church in Ephesus (Acts 20:17-38) and told them to take heed
“to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers.” Elders are
overseers.
Consider 1 Timothy 4:14. Paul writes Timothy in regard to his gift given through
prophecy. The KJV discloses that he obtained it “with the laying on of hands of the
presbytery.” The NIV reveals that he received this gift “when the body of elders laid their
hands on you [Timothy].” An elder is a presbyter and a member of the eldership or
presbytery.
In summary, an elder is a bishop, an overseer, a shepherd, a pastor, and a presbyter.
The simple answer to your question is that scripture has been misinterpreted. These terms
should not be misused as titles or names for other men. A pastor is not a preacher unless
that preacher happens to be an elder. For example, Peter was a preacher, an apostle, and
an elder (1 Peter 1:1; 5:1). Therefore, it would be correct to use the word “pastor” to
describe Peter.

Why don’t we use the name “reverend” for our preacher?

The term “reverend” is used only in describing God. Psalm 111:9 tells us “holy and
reverend is His name” in the King James Version. The New American Standard and New
International Versions say “holy and awesome is His name.” “Reverend” or “awesome” is
reserved for God … not man. Can you imagine telling a preacher, “That was a fine
sermon Awesome Jones.”?

Why don’t we just call ourselves “The Church” instead of “The Church of Christ”?

We could very well call ourselves that. In fact, Christ’s body is the church (Colossians
1:18). It is entirely Biblical to call ourselves the church as that is precisely what we are.
The restoration movement was conceived to renew us to the New Testament and the
original church. God vested all authority in Christ (Matthew 28:18). He is God’s
A Reason of Our Hope Page 84

spokesman (Hebrews 1:2) so only He has the authority to convey our instructions, and He
did that through the New Testament. The church of Christ is simply a Biblical descriptive
term for His body: “The churches of Christ salute you” (Romans 16:16). He is our only
high priest and authority. The church of God is also a scriptural term for Christ’s body.
Since we do not belong in the denominational world, we did not choose that name in
view of its association with an erroneous doctrine in our day and time.

All my life, I’ve heard, “We must obey the gospel.” What specifically is “obeying the
Gospel?”
Paul tells us the Gospel is “that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures” (1
Corinthians 15:1-4). He also proclaims, “The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven
with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and
that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8). We “shall be
punished with everlasting destruction” if we do not obey the Gospel (v 9). How can we
obey the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ? Consider Romans 6:1-7. We are
“baptized into his death” and “are buried with him by baptism” and “we shall be also in
the likeness of his resurrection” and “walk in newness of life.” Baptism is the means in
which we obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus!

Why is Barnabas called an apostle in Acts 14:14? I thought there were only twelve
apostles plus Paul.

“Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and
ran in among the people” (Acts 14:14). Paul and Barnabas were also referred to as
“apostles” in Acts 14:4. The only thing that we can presume from these references is that,
indeed, Barnabas was an apostle. However, we do not know if he was chosen by Christ as
Paul was. The Scriptures do not indicate whether he was or not.
The Greek word for “apostle” is apostolos. It is defined by Thayer as “a delegate,
messenger, one sent forth with orders, an apostle.” Paul described those missionaries with
Titus as “the messengers of the churches” (2 Corinthians 8:23). The word translated
“messengers” here is the same word translated “apostles” in Acts 14:4, 14. Likewise, Paul
and Barnabas were both sent by the church in Antioch on a missionary journey. They
were “messengers” or apostoloi of the church in Antioch. Therefore, Barnabas was an
apostle but, more likely, only in the “messenger” sense.

Every time someone wants to work with a congregation, people say they are
“placing membership.” Is this a Bible term?

The Christians at Ephesus wrote a letter of recommendation about Apollos to the

Christians at Achaia: “And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote,
exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, when he was come, helped them much which
had believed through grace” (Acts 18:27). This was not necessary but it helped him to
A Reason of Our Hope Page 85

continue his work of teaching and baptizing in another city (1 Corinthians 3:6). In our
modern times, a letter is replaced by a phone call. The term “placing membership” simply
means for one to “place” his membership from one congregation to another. It originated
in the 1960’s, so it is not a biblical term.
As you pointed out in your question, perhaps it would be more scripturally correct to
say, “This person has decided to work with our congregation.” God admits baptized
believers into His church (Acts 2:47). If we have been baptized for the remission of sins
(Acts 2:38), then we are a member of the church of Christ. However, we must choose
which congregation to worship with in order to perform the Lord’s work in that area. The
practice of “placing membership” is necessary in order to ensure that each person who
works with a congregation has been baptized and is “of sound doctrine.”

You mentioned that Justin Martyr wrote the Apologies in the second century. There
is a publishing company in the brotherhood called Apologetics Press. Why should
we apologize for the Gospel? I don’t understand!

Our English word apology was taken directly from the Greek word apologia. Strong’s
definition states, “clearing of self, defence.”87 This is the original meaning of apology. It
has now come to be known as “excuse.” In that sense, we should not apologize for the
Gospel! “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto
salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Romans
1:16). However, the early Christians defended the Gospel and, thus, became apologetics
or defenders. That is where our brothers, who publish Discovery and Reason &
Revelation, wisely chose there name. This article, then, is an apology; for we give an
answer to every man that asks us a reason of the hope that is in us. If you look at it in that
light, all Christians should be apologists.

I was thumbing through a book about the Dead Sea scrolls. It was obviously written
by someone who wanted to discredit the Bible. One comment that was made in it
bothered me. The author said that the name “Christian” was a derogatory term
made up by the citizens of Antioch. He quoted Acts 11:26. Shouldn’t we call
ourselves “disciples” or some other biblical name?

“And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church,
and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch” (Acts
11:26). The Greek word, Christianos, is used only three times throughout the New
Testament. The second occurrence is when “Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou
persuadest me to be a Christian” (Acts 26:28). Based on these verses, it is possible that
someone outside the body of Christ may have coined the term “Christian.” However, the
inspired apostle Peter tells us, “Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be
ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf” (1 Peter 4:16). Whether “the disciples
were called Christians first” by their enemies or by the disciples themselves, the Holy
Spirit guided Peter to use the title, thus showing God’s approval. Furthermore, Isaiah
A Reason of Our Hope Page 86

predicted, “Thou shalt be called by a new name, which the mouth of the LORD shall
name” (Isaiah 62:2). Of Christianoi, Henry Leo Boles replies:
Each of the three languages has contributed to the formation of this word. The
thought is Jewish, denoting the Anointed One; the root, Christ, is Greek; the
termination, ianoi, is Latin. So in the providence of God, the same three nations
whose differing dialects proclaimed above the cross, “Jesus the King of the Jews,”
now unite in forming a word which for all time shall be applied to those who follow
Christ.88
The Greek word for “called” in Acts 11:26 is chrematizo. It means “to constitute a
firm for business, bear as a title, be called.”89 This implies that “the disciples were called
Christians first in Antioch” because of their public business—“They assembled
themselves with the church, and taught much people.” There is no problem with calling
ourselves “disciples,” “believers,” “saints” and “brethren;” however, there is no better
descriptive term than “Christian” to proclaim to the world what our business is. Let us
wear this worthy title proudly, because Christ died to bestow it upon us. Let us close by
repeating Peter’s proclamation, “Yet if any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be
ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf” (1 Peter 4:16).

In Mark 7:24-30, what did Jesus mean by “children” and “dogs?”

This passage can be better understood by its parallel in Matthew 15:21-28:

Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. And, behold,
a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy
on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. But he
answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her
away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost
sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children’s bread, and cast it to dogs.
And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’
table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee
even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.
The “lost sheep of the house of Israel” were the “children” that Jesus referred to in
verse 26. He had confined His earthly ministry primarily to the saving of the Jews.
Perhaps He was testing the faith of the Greek woman, “a Syrophenician by nation,” and
displaying her faith before the disciples. Her faith proved to be great even though she was
of the Gentile race that the Jews considered to be “dogs.” Thus, Jesus’ reference to
“children” was the supposed, superior Jews, and the “dogs” alluded to the lowly Gentile
race. Jesus, of course, used this to further test her faith. He knew how much her faith
could bear, and used it as an example of faith to the Jewish race.

1 Corinthians 6:9 lists those that will not inherit the kingdom of God: “neither
fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves
with mankind.” Is Paul saying that men who have female or “effeminate”
A Reason of Our Hope Page 87

mannerisms will not go to heaven?

The last two “unrighteous” groups that “shall not inherit the kingdom of God” consist
of two Greek words that have similar meanings. The KJV has translated malakos to
“effeminate.” This Greek adjective, used as plural in this verse, means “soft.” It is used to
describe “soft raiment” or clothing in Matthew 11:8 and Luke 7:25. It was also used “of
persons soft, effeminate, especially of catamites, men and boys who allow themselves to
be misused homosexually.”90
The last group mentioned in verse 9 is “abusers of themselves with mankind.” This
entire phrase is one word in Greek, arsenokoitai. It is a compound form of arsen, “male,”
and koite, “bed,” meaning “one who lies with a male as with a female, a sodomite.”91
Paul describes this same sin in Romans 1:27: “And likewise also the men, leaving the
natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working
that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which
was meet.”
These last two groups described by the two Greek words, malakos and arsenokoitai,
obviously refer to the same type of person. The RSV combines both words into
“homosexuals.” The NASB translates them to “effeminate” and “homosexuals.” We
classify effeminate differently today than did the KJV translators in 1611. Webster
defines it as “having qualities more often associated with women than with men:
unmanly.” It is clear that Paul was not condemning “sissies.” The NIV offers the best
modern translation of “male prostitutes” and “homosexual offenders” for these two Greek
words.
Just as in the first century, the days before Noah’s Flood, and the days before the
destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, homosexuality is accepted in modern society.
Unfortunately, certain denominations have made their own rules and have officially stated
that homosexual relations between consenting adults should no longer be considered an
offense. There are even congregations of homosexuals in America. These “unrighteous”
groups claim that they are God’s children and should be recognized as such by all
Christians. The one thing they forgot to take into account was that God emphatically
condemns homosexuals throughout the Old and New Testaments. Sodomy was the sin
that caused God to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19. Paul listed
“them that defile themselves with mankind,” arsenokoitai, as “contrary to sound
doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:10). “Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the
kingdom of God?” (1 Corinthians 6:9).

Are people really “called” by God to preach?

We know that Paul was “called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God”
(Romans 1:1). The Greek word, kletos, used here means “appointed” and can also
mean “invited.”92 Therefore, Paul was appointed to be an apostle by God: he was
“called” to preach the Gospel.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 88

Also, God gave “some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers, for the
equipping of the saints for the work of service, to the building up of the body of
Christ; until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of
God, to a mature man” (Ephesians 4:11-13 NASB).
Clearly, God “calls” our leadership—evangelists (preachers and missionaries),
pastors (elders), and teachers—to prepare and equip us so that we, the saints, can do
God’s work. Although, God has appointed our leadership, they are not in place to do
all the work. They are there “to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the
body of Christ may be built up” (NIV). Elton Trueblood describes this situation with a
sport’s analogy: “There are 22 players on the field desperately in need of rest, and
80,000 people in the stands desperately in need of exercise!”
God still needs preachers, teachers and elders to build us up, particularly those of
us still on “the milk of the word” (1 Peter 2:2); however, each of us needs to apply the
“knowledge of the Son of God” to become “a mature man.” Yes, people really are
“called” by God to preach and to teach and to lead. If this is biblical, then it is also
biblical for us to “grow up in all aspects into Him” (Ephesians 4:15 NASB). We need
to get off the “milk” when we’re ready for “solid food” and start taking responsibility,
for “we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel” (1 Thessalonians
2:4 NASB).
You may say, “How do I know when I’m ‘called’ into service for God? I’m not
very talented.” First of all, God didn’t make any junk, and He didn’t start with you!
Secondly, “we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works”
(Ephesians 2:10). Each of us is “called” into service for God. Discovering how to use
our God-given talents is the only obstacle that stands between us and hearing Jesus
say, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant … enter thou into the joy of thy lord”
(Matthew 25:21).

Judgment

What does the Bible teach on where the soul goes after death until the day of
judgment?

“Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God
who gave it” (Ecclesiastes 12:7). “And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after
this the judgement” (Hebrews 9:27). Obviously, our soul, or spirit, is in God’s hands. We
know that we die and our spirit returns to God and then there is the judgment.
Jesus described Hades, the place of the departed spirits, in Luke 16:19-31. In this
parable of the rich man and Lazarus, Jesus told of the rich man being in torment while
Lazarus was in Abraham’s bosom in Paradise. The rich man was overcome in flame and
could see “Abraham afar off” (v 23). Abraham told him, “Between us and you there is a
great gulf fixed” (v 26). Hades, according to this parable, includes a place of punishment
separated from an exalted place by a vast gulf, as shown below.
The place of punishment is Torments (tartarus) and the exalted place is Paradise
A Reason of Our Hope Page 89

(paradeisos). Jesus told the thief on the cross, “To day shalt thou be with me in paradise”
(Luke 23:43). Apparently, Jesus went to the Paradise-side of Hades until His resurrection.
Abraham, Lazarus, Moses, Noah, Adam, Eve, and many more righteous people were
probably there to greet Him. If the rich man could see Lazarus across the gulf, then Judas
could probably see the One Whom he betrayed as well. That alone would be enough
torment to last forever.
After Jesus was raised from the dead and delivered the Great Commission to His
disciples, “he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God” (Mark
16:19). It is there that He reigns until His second coming, then He will judge us according
to His Gospel (Romans 2:16).
“And death and hell [hades] delivered up the dead which were in them: and they were
judged every man according to their works” (Revelation 20:13). The dead remain in
Hades until the judgment. After this, we will spend eternity either in heaven or hell. This
is all that God has revealed to us concerning our souls between death and judgment. “The
secret things belong unto the Lord our God: but those things which are revealed belong
unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law”
(Deuteronomy 29:29).

HADES (SHEOL)
HEAVEN
PARADISE Few Enter
Luke 23:43 Matthew 7:14
JUDGEMENT DAY

II Corinthians 12:4 LIFE EVERLASTING

GREAT FIXED GULF (Luke 16:26)

TORMENTS
PUNISHMENT
Tartarus
II Peter 2:4 GEHENNA
Luke 16:23-25 Second Death, Everlasting Fire
Revelation 21:8

Figure 1. Graphical Depiction of Hades

Are there degrees of punishment and reward?

“For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy” (James
2:13). James did not mention the consequences of judgment, but he implied that the one
who shows no mercy in this life will likewise find no mercy in God’s judgment. Jesus
said, “And that servant, which knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did
according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did
commit things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes” (Luke 12:47-48). Jesus
himself taught degrees of punishment. He spoke of those who would not regard His Word
by saying, “But it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the judgment, than for
you” (Luke 10:14). Peter discussed this issue further, “For it had been better for them not
A Reason of Our Hope Page 90

to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the
holy commandment delivered unto them” (2 Peter 2:21). Hebrews 10:29 also deals with
this subject. Therefore, there are degrees of punishment in hell but what about reward in
heaven? We simply do not know. But you’re missing the point; we’ve got to get there
first.

I was once told that an elder received a different crown than a martyr or a soul
winner. Are any of these crowns better than the others?

Let us investigate what God’s Word reveals on this matter. Peter said, “The elders
which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of
Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which
is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy
lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being
ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a
crown of glory that fadeth not away” (1 Peter 5:1-4). An elder that follows Peter’s
directions will receive an unfading crown of glory.
Paul related to the church at Corinth, “What is my reward then? Verily that, when I
preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge. … I am made all
things to all men, that I might by all means save some. … And every man that striveth for
the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but
we an incorruptible” (1 Corinthians 9:18, 22, 25). Those who win souls will acquire an
incorruptible crown.
Jesus said, “Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life”
(Revelation 2:10). His brother related, “Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for
when he is tried, he shall receive the crown of life, which the Lord hath promised to them
that love him” (James 1:12). Those of us who suffer temptation and prevail, even unto
death, shall inherit the crown of life!
Paul wrote to Timothy, “I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus
Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom. …
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” (2 Timothy 4:1, 8). He further related to the church at Thessalonica, “For what
is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord
Jesus Christ at his coming?” (1 Thessalonians 2:19). When we anticipate Christ’s coming
with joyful hearts, we shall receive a crown of righteousness and rejoicing!
Paul writes to the Corinthians concerning their error of placing faith in men instead of
God. “I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he
that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Now he
that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward
according to his own labour” (1 Corinthians 3:6-8). He further relates to the Romans, “So
we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. Having
then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us” (Romans 12:5-6). We all
have different talents to use in the church or body of Christ. We each depend on one
A Reason of Our Hope Page 91

another to use those gifts. God will judge us based on how we use them (Matthew 25:14-
30). However, we shall acquire our own reward corresponding to our own labor.
Even though we share in the work towards one purpose, we receive our own separate
reward. “For if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth
himself. But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in
himself alone, and not in another. For every man shall bear his own burden” (Galatians
6:3-5). Do the best you can with your talents and rejoice in that. Only compare yourself to
yourself—not to anyone else. Comparing yourself to others makes you feel inferior or
superior. You are neither. You are just you. If you have to compare, compare yourself to
Christ and imitate His behavior.
These crowns all describe the same thing. The one who has the crown of life also has
the crown of righteousness or rejoicing. The crown of glory and the incorruptible crown
are one and the same. What are these crowns? Heaven! Different crowns would cause us
to be puffed up like the Pharisees. “Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one
another, envying one another” (Galatians 5:26). It would cause envy and strife among us.
Different crowns do not fall in line with Bible teachings. These crowns are just different
names for the final reward of heaven.
Jesus told how the parable of the workers in the vineyard related to the kingdom of
heaven in Matthew 20. The householder hired laborers for his vineyard early in the
morning, then at the third hour, the sixth hour, the ninth hour, and the eleventh hour.
Those that were hired at the eleventh hour received the same pay as those that started
work early in the morning.
So when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the
labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first. And when
they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny.
But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they
likewise received every man a penny. And when they had received it, they murmured
against the goodman of the house, saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and
thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou
agree with me for a penny? Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this
last, even as unto thee. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own?
(Matthew 20:8-15)
Suppose that a man obeys the Gospel just days before he dies of cancer or a teenager
dies in a car wreck only weeks after accepting Christ. Have these people had time to teach
or become elders or win souls? Would they not receive the same level of reward as one
who is reared in the church and lives a full life in Christ? Would not a Christian who was
deaf, dumb and blind inherit an equal reward? No matter what point in your life you
become a Christian, Christ has told us in this beautiful parable that we will all receive the
same level of reward!
Teaching different levels of reward is going to tempt some to just get by on the least
that they can do. Just as some students try to slide by on a “D minus” and graduate
school, some Christians will only attend worship services once a month and assume that
they can enter the lowest level of heaven. We must try to do the best that we can do so
A Reason of Our Hope Page 92

that we will not become apathetic, only to fall away and lose our reward of heaven.
The opposite of love is indifference. Jesus despised this apathetic attitude. “So then
because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth”
(Revelation 3:16). Trying to stay hot instead of lukewarm is how we get to heaven; “not
of works, lest any man should boast” (Ephesians 2:9). Some of us have to fight harder
than others. The reward is heaven, plain and simple. Thus, God considers each situation
by the condition of the heart. “For the Lord seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on
the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart” (1 Samuel 16:7).
On the other hand, if we are aspiring to compete with one another to get a better
crown, we have missed the mark completely. We should be working together; not against
each other. Therefore, no crown is any better or different than the other. We need to
change our thinking and “consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works”
(Hebrews 10:24) and pray that we all reach the goal of heaven.

Does 2 Peter 2:20-22 indicate varying degrees of punishment in hell?

For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge
of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome,
the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them
not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn
from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them
according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow
that was washed to her wallowing in the mire. (2 Peter 2:20-22)
Peter is telling us of false teachers throughout the second chapter and how they will
not go unpunished; just as the angels that sinned, the world during the flood, and Sodom
and Gomorrah. “Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord” (Romans 12:19).
These false teachers are sinning willfully after knowing the truth. Paul warns us
against this.
For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there
remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgement
and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. … Of how much sorer the
punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the
Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified,
an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? (Hebrews 10:26-29)
This passage parallels Peter’s words. Paul is undoubtedly teaching a more dreadful
degree of punishment concerning those who have turned from God.
Jesus himself advocates varying degrees of punishment. “And that servant, which
knew his lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be
beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of stripes,
shall be beaten with few stripes” (Luke 12:47-48). Christ is talking about the same
situation: those that know God’s will and turn from it will be punished more severely.
Peter is telling us that leaving the truth makes our conscience restless and determines
a harsher punishment in the end. Therefore, we are miserable both in this life and in the
A Reason of Our Hope Page 93

hereafter when we make shipwreck of our faith. How are these people punished
differently? What could be worse than burning in hell for eternity? We do not know! Nor
do we want to find out. All we can know for certain is that “it is a fearful thing to fall into
the hands of the living God” (Hebrews 10:31).

Is Armageddon some future war on earth and will it be a sign of Christ’s second
coming?

Absolutely not! The theory that advocates this type of thinking is called pre-
millenialism. The theory teaches that there will literally be a battle in the valley of
Megiddo where Abraham’s seed will receive the land promised them in Genesis 12:1-3.
The “rapture” will then occur along with the resurrection of the dead. The “rapture” is
when all the righteous of the world will be taken up until after the seven year tribulation.
(Note that the word “rapture” never occurs in the Bible.) There will be conversions during
the seven year tribulation, so it is necessary for another “rapture” to occur. Christ will
then come to establish His kingdom and literally reign on earth for 1000 years, while
Satan is bound and thrown in the bottomless pit. At the end of this reign, there will be
judgment and Satan will be defeated. The above is just a brief summary of the pre-
millenialistic theory.
The first thing we have to establish is that Revelation is written in signs and symbols.
John wrote in figurative language to escape persecution. He also wrote it so the Jewish
Christians could understand it. They were familiar with this style of writing from Daniel
and much of the Old Testament. John, through inspiration, encouraged the persecuted
Christians by discussing victory throughout the book of Revelation. Everything in that
book meant something to the first century Christians. It was written to them so that they
might be uplifted in those times of trial.
John could have meant for Armageddon to symbolize some later battle. More likely,
he meant for it to denote the continuous battle between Christians and Satan. The
Christians of this time knew of Megiddo as a place of great battle and triumph. It was an
important north central Palestine city and strategic battle position. More battles have been
fought on this plain than any other. Gideon won a glorious victory there as told in Judges
7. Since the Old Testament mentioned this place so often as a place of conquest, John’s
message had more clout. Just as Zion represents heaven, Armageddon depicts struggle
and triumph. There is not a literal battle of Armageddon as the theory suggests. We fight
this battle daily against Satan, and John tells us that we will be successful.
Secondly, pre-millenialism suggests that Christ will come to activate His kingdom
following His second coming. Why would Paul, then, refer to the kingdom as past? “That
ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory” (1
Thessalonians 2:12). Christ came almost 2000 years ago to establish His kingdom—the
church (Matthew 16:15-19). The 1000 year reign of Christ is not a resolute amount of
time. Remember, Revelation is written in figurative language.
Thirdly, the promise of land to Abraham and his seed (Genesis 12:7) was fulfilled in
Genesis 13:14-17. “And the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give
unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein … all came to pass” (Joshua
A Reason of Our Hope Page 94

21:43-45). However, Deuteronomy 28 reveals the condition for which the Israelites could
keep this land. Joshua also relates this stipulation: “When ye have transgressed the
covenant of the Lord your God … ye shall perish quickly from off the good land which he
hath given unto you” (Joshua 23:16). The promise was based on keeping the Law of
Moses (Deuteronomy 30:1-10). However, the Law is now abolished in order to break
“down the middle wall of partition between” the Jew and Gentile “that he might reconcile
both unto God in one body by the cross” (Ephesians 2:14-16). For this reason, Paul wrote,
“Avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law;
for they are unprofitable and vain” (Titus 3:9).
Lastly, there are no signs of the second coming of Christ. “But of that day and hour
knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only” (Matthew 24:36).
“Behold, I come as a thief” (Revelation 16:15). No one knows when Christ will come
again, so let us stop worrying about tomorrow. “Take therefore no thought for the
morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day
is the evil thereof” (Matthew 6:34).

In reading the Bible through with the one year plan, I have come to Matthew 24 and
have ground to a halt. I understand that the disciples were confused about Christ’s
remarks on the temple and asked Him three questions in verse 3. This format flows
well and is understandable until I get to verses 29-35. It sounds as if the second
coming of Christ immediately follows the destruction of Jerusalem. I know this is
not true, but in studying the parallel passages, I have become more confused.
Matthew 24:33 and Mark 13:29 say, “He is near, right at the door” while Luke
21:31 says, “the kingdom of God is near.” These three Gospels all say the same thing
in the next verse: “Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all
these things take place.” These verses don’t appear to belong. How can you explain
them?

Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the
moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of
the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in
heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of
man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send
his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect
from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. Now learn a parable of the
fig tree; When his branch is yet tender, and putteth forth leaves, ye know that summer
is nigh: So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, even at
the doors. Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be
fulfilled. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
(Matthew 24:29-35)
Verse 34 does seem to confuse matters quite a bit. The explanation to this passage is
no less complicated. First of all, let us look at what confused the disciples in the first
place. Previously in Matthew 23:29-39, Jesus warned the scribes and Pharisees that, since
they and their fathers killed the prophets of God, upon them would “come all the
A Reason of Our Hope Page 95

righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of
Zacharias” (v 35).
This range encompasses every righteous man murdered within the Old Testament.
Christ further told them, “All these things shall come upon this generation” (v 36),
meaning the persecution of Christians and the judgment of the Jews (v 33, 34). “And
Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to show
him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things?
verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be
thrown down” (Matthew 24:1-2). It was the destruction of Jerusalem that the disciples
were inquiring about while inadvertently asking three separate questions. “And as he sat
upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, 1) when
shall these things be? and 2) what shall be the sign of thy coming, and 3) of the end of the
world?” (v 3).
With the judgment of the Jews in mind, let’s proceed. After Jesus specifies the signs
of the destruction of Jerusalem, which Josephus so accurately records in history, we now
come to the passage in question. This short blurb on His second coming is thrown in with
the collapse of Jerusalem and included with “this generation.” Henry H. Halley
commented on this situation:
Some would explain “this generation” (Matthew 24:34), to mean this nation, that
is, the Jewish race shall not pass away till the Lord comes. The more common view is
that he meant Jerusalem would be destroyed within the lifetime of those then living.
To one looking at two distant mountain peaks, one behind the other, they seem close
together, though they may be far apart. So in Jesus’ perspective, these two events, one
in some respects typical of the other, stood in close proximity, though there is a long
interval between. What he said in a sentence may be of an age. What happened in one
case may be a “begun fulfillment” of what will happen in the other.93
Jesus spoke of a long period of time lapsing after the fall of Jerusalem: “And they
shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and
Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be
fulfilled” (Luke 21:24). Paul supported this claim in Romans 11:25 where he replied “that
blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.”
Brother H. Leo Boles agrees with Halley and explains:
As the swelling buds and leaves of the fig tree indicate the near approach of
summer, so when Jerusalem is destroyed you may know that God’s judgment is sure
and swift and will be as certain in the last day. This destruction would come upon
Jerusalem during the lifetime of some who were present before that generation passes
away. This means that there would be some people living who would see the awful
destruction pronounced against Jerusalem; this destruction is a type of the destruction
of the final incorrigible wicked. Often prophetic language has a double significance.
Jehovah told Adam that he would die in the day that he ate the forbidden fruit
(Genesis 2:7); yet Adam lived 930 years. There was a primary fulfillment of this when
Adam was separated from the Garden of Eden, and a secondary fulfillment of it in his
death (Romans 5:12). Isaiah foretold the birth of Jesus from a virgin, yet added a
prophecy which confines it to his own generation (Isaiah 7:14-17). The prophet
A Reason of Our Hope Page 96

combined type and antitype in the same words. David spoke of the Messiah under the
type of Solomon. Words and events, new kingdoms and dynasties, are the prophetic
alphabet for spelling out the divine plan; so the destruction of Jerusalem becomes the
type of the final judgment and destruction.94
To summarize these capable commentators, the type and antitype method of prophecy
was used quite often in the Old Testament. This was an effective tool in proclaiming
prophecy. Jesus was saying that His second coming would be like the speed of the Roman
armies at the destruction of Jerusalem. “For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and
shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be” (Matthew
24:27). He then alludes to His second coming as a time of sorrow for those not of the
elect; just as “the tribes of the earth mourned” at the collapse of Jerusalem. The passage
in question existed for a very short time as a warning for Christians residing in Jerusalem.
It now serves to show us the swiftness and completeness of God’s judgment. Just as
Noah’s generation was warned, we have also been warned (v 37-39). There was no
excuse for the antediluvians in 2237 B.C. or the Jews in A.D. 70, and there is no excuse for
all mankind in A.D. 2000. The destruction of Jerusalem is the type of our future judgment
and the destruction of the earth (2 Peter 3:7).
Consider Jesus’ prediction of the church: “Verily I say unto you, There be some
standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his
kingdom” (Matthew 16:28). Although the Holy Spirit came on Pentecost in fulfillment of
this prophecy, Christ referred to this event as “the Son of man coming”—figuratively.
Could He have also been referring to “the Son of man coming,” figuratively, in judgment
on Jerusalem in A.D. 70? It is likely that He was speaking figuratively about coming in
judgment on Jerusalem; yet specifically about His second coming. Someday, He will
literally come in judgment on all mankind. Jesus’ use of the type-antitype prophecy was
very effective. Even by mentioning His second coming, Jesus never left the subject of the
temple’s ruination. He did not directly address the disciples’ second question until verse
36, where He said, “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of
heaven, but my Father only.” All previous verses were a discussion of “those days.”
The New American Standard Bible translates Matthew 24:33 and Mark 13:29 as
saying, “He is near, right at the door,” while rendering Luke 21:31 to say, “the kingdom
of God is near.” The ASV also reflects this. However, the NIV and the KJV say, “it is
near, even at the doors.” The oldest manuscripts indicate that “it” is the correct rendering.
The meaning is not much different either way, but the pronoun “it” helps us to understand
this passage better than “He.” “He” is too specific for the type-antitype prophecy that
Jesus was foretelling. The term “it” used in Matthew 24:33 and Mark 13:29 is obviously
referring to “the kingdom of God” in Luke 21:31 which is the antitype of the destruction
of Jerusalem. Jesus’ prophecy included the double fulfillment of the temple in ruins and
the yet, future, second coming by the use of the word “it.” Now, what is meant by “the
kingdom of God” in this context?
Paul said, “I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall
judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom” (2 Timothy 4:1). Paul was
already in the kingdom or church. Why would he refer to it in the future tense? Because
he was talking about the kingdom after the judgment. Jesus will “set the sheep on his
A Reason of Our Hope Page 97

right hand, but the goats on the left. Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand,
Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation
of the world” (Matthew 25:33-34). The “blessed” are already in the church or kingdom,
so Christ was referring to a future kingdom after the world is “burned up” (2 Peter 3:10).
Let us strive and pray to someday hear the words from our Savior, “Well done, thou good
and faithful servant … enter thou into the joy of thy lord” (Matthew 25:21).

Miracles

I have a friend who believes that gifts still exist in the church today, especially
tongues. Can you give exact scriptures that prove otherwise?

Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 13:8-10 that “charity never faileth: but whether there be
prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be
knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when
that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.”
Verse 10 states that these gifts will be done away or expire when “that which is
perfect is come.” What does “perfect” mean in this context? It is the same Greek word
used in James 1:4. “But let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect and
entire, wanting nothing.” The Greek word teleion is used in both cases and means
“complete.” We know that James wasn’t saying that man could be “perfect” as in
“sinless.” He was simply saying that we can be complete, whole, and “entire” Christians
if we persevere. “That which is perfect” cannot be referring to Christ as He is not an
inanimate object. The verse would have said, “He who is perfect” if it were referring to
our Savior.
So now the expiration date becomes a little clearer. The gifts will be done away when
something is completed. What do we have now that they didn’t have then? God’s Word!
It is “that which is perfect” and it has come. They didn’t have the complete Word of God
back then, so it was necessary for miracles and gifts to exist in order to glorify God. We
do not need these gifts anymore because we know God’s plan for us. We no longer know
“in part” as Paul and the first century Christians did. God has “given unto us all things
that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to
glory and virtue” (2 Peter 1:3).
The Bible was completed with the final writings of John in the last decade of the first
century. Due to three hundred years of unrelenting persecution and the slow means of
communication in the Roman Empire, the unanimous agreement of Christians on genuine
apostolic writings was delayed until the fourth century. However, the churches still had
these writings available over the centuries. The Council of Carthage formally accepted
the twenty-seven books of the New Testament as we know them in A.D. 397. Technically,
“that which is perfect” came at the close of the first century before the last apostle, John,
died.
In Acts 8:14-20 notice that Philip the evangelist could not pass on the gifts to the
Samaritans. (Also notice that he could not pass on the gifts to the Ethiopian eunuch.)
A Reason of Our Hope Page 98

Peter and John had to come to Samaria to pass on the gifts to them. Only the apostles
could perform laying on of hands to pass on the gift of God. If the apostles were the only
ones who could pass on the gifts, how could any of these gifts, signs, or miracles exist
today?
Even if the gift of tongues existed today, why has it changed from the time of the
apostles? “Every man heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed
and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans?
And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:6-8).
Verse 11 shows, “We do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God.”
The purpose of the gift of tongues or languages was to glorify God to the unbelievers so
that they might believe in Christ.
“Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe
not … Let all things be done unto edifying. If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it
be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be
no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself, and to
God. … For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the
saints. … Let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Corinthians 14:22-40).
Paul lists the order of importance of gifts in the church in 1 Corinthians 12:28. Notice
“diversities of tongues” was the last. Outside the assembly of the saints, tongues were
important as a sign to them that do not believe. Inside the assembly, tongues would have
made the saints look crazy to an unbeliever (1 Corinthians 14:23). “God is not the author
of confusion” (v 33).
If the gift of tongues existed today, then we would have some people who are a few
thousand years old. Remember that only the apostles could pass these gifts on. The gifts
are not needed today because we have God’s complete Word. He has “given unto us all
things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called
us to glory and virtue” (2 Peter 1:3).

I’m confused about Acts 2. Why did the crowd think that Peter and the apostles
were drunk when they were speaking tongues?

And they were all [the apostles] filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak
with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. … Now when this was noised
abroad, the multitude came together. … And they were all amazed and marveled,
saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galilaeans? And how
hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born? Parthians, and Medes,
and Elamites, and the dwellers in Mesopotamia, and in Judaea, and Cappadocia, in
Pontus, and Asia, Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about
Cyrene and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and Arabians, we do hear
them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. And they were all amazed,
and were in doubt, saying one to another, What meaneth this? Others mocking said,
These men are full of new wine. But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his
voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judaea, and all ye that dwell at Jerusalem, be
this known unto you, and hearken to my words: For these are not drunken, as ye
A Reason of Our Hope Page 99

suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. (Acts 2:4-15)
This was the day of Pentecost, so “there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout
men, out of every nation under heaven” (v 5). Note that sixteen different nations were
represented here. They spoke a total of eleven languages (excluding Hebrew which all
Jews spoke). That is one language for each apostle besides Peter. Peter did not speak in
tongues at this time in order that he might convince the Jews that the eleven apostles were
not drunk. Observe in verse fifteen how Peter excluded himself by saying “these are not
drunken.” Verse 14 indicates that Peter was sitting and waiting for his cue to speak.
Therefore, his purpose on the day of Pentecost was to open the way to the kingdom
(Matthew 16:18-19). The eleven apostles each spoke a native language of the multitude
through the Spirit, while Peter spoke the inspired Word of God in Hebrew (Aramaic,
Syriac, or Chaldean), the common Jewish language. The tongues were to captivate the
Jews so that Peter could guide them to the truth.

Table 1. Languages of the Nations Represented in Acts 2

Language Nation
Persian (Parthian or Farsi) Parthians, Medes, Elamites, dwellers in Mesopotamia
Phoenician (Punic) Judaea
Aramaic (Hebrew or Syriac) Judaea, Jews and proselytes
Galatian Cappadocia, Asia
Bithynian Pontus, Asia
Lydian Asia
Phrygian Phrygia, Asia
Lycian Pamphylia, Asia
Egyptian Egypt
Latin Libya about Cyrene, strangers of Rome
Greek Cretes
Arabic Arabians

The multitude was confounded because each apostle was speaking a language that
was foreign to himself and native to the crowd. For instance, James may have been
uttering Persian and Thomas could have been speaking Egyptian while Bartholomew
conversed in Latin, etc. An Elamite would understand James but he would think that
Thomas was drunk, because a Jewish Elamite would only understand Persian and Hebrew
(Aramaic). However, the Elamite could look around him and see the Egyptian listening to
Thomas, and the Roman understanding Bartholomew. Perhaps he could even pick out a
few key words of the other languages that would show him “that every man heard them
speak in his own language” (v 6).
A Reason of Our Hope Page 100

Why didn’t Philip pass on the gifts to the Samaritans or the Ethiopian eunuch in
Acts 8? Wasn’t he an apostle?

There was an apostle named Philip (Acts 1:13). However, the Philip in Acts 8 was
“Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven … and the same man had four
daughters, virgins, which did prophesy” (Acts 21:8-9). When the number of Jewish
disciples increased so greatly, the Grecians complained against the Hebrews that their
widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food. The apostles told them, “It
is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren,
look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom,
whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to
prayer, and to the ministry of the word” (Acts 6:2-4). Philip was one of the “seven men of
honest report” chosen to disperse food to the Grecian widows (v 5).
When Philip the evangelist performed signs and miracles and then baptized the
Samaritans, they immediately received the gift of the Holy Spirit. That is our promise
after baptism (Acts 2:38). Since Philip was not an apostle, he could not pass on the gifts
to them. Peter and John came and “prayed for them, that they might receive [the
miraculous power of] the Holy Ghost: (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only
they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus [and received the gift of the Holy Spirit
that was promised after water baptism]). Then laid they their hands on them, and they
received [the miraculous power of] the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw that through
laying on of the apostles’ hands [the miraculous power of] the Holy Ghost was given, he
offered them money, Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands,
he may receive [the miraculous power of] the Holy Ghost” (Acts 8:15-18). An apostle
was always present when the Holy Spirit “fell upon” anyone.
As Peter talked to the Gentiles of Cornelius’ household, “the Holy Ghost fell on them,
as on us at the beginning” (Acts 11:15). The apostles received the “filled” measure of the
Spirit which allowed the passing on of these gifts. The Holy Spirit only “fell on”
Cornelius’ household. The “gift of the Holy Spirit” at baptism and the Holy Spirit “falling
upon” believers were two separate indications of God’s power through His Spirit. The
purpose of the Holy Spirit “falling upon” Cornelius’ household was to prove to the Jews
that the Gentiles were also eligible to receive the gospel of Christ. There is no indication
that the Spirit ever “fell on” anyone else before they were baptized with water. God used
this as a powerful message to the Jews. “God is no respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34).
Only Christ could administer the measure of the Spirit that included passing on the
gifts to others (John 15:26-27). The apostles were chosen by Christ and they had to have
beheld Him after His resurrection. They were Peter, James, John, Andrew, Philip,
Thomas, Bartholomew, Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, Simon Zelotes, and Judas
the brother of James (Acts 1:13). Matthias and Paul were chosen later and did witness
Christ after His resurrection. The twelve apostles were given the Christ administered
measure of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Paul was also “filled with the Holy Ghost”
(Acts 9:17). How Paul received the Spirit is pure speculation. The point is that Christ
gave Paul the “filling” measure of the Spirit as He did with the other apostles.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 101

When the Holy Spirit would “fall upon” someone back in the first century, it was
separate and apart from salvation. When anyone is baptized as the Bible tells us, they
receive the gift of the Holy Spirit and their body becomes His temple. That is a promise
and a gift of God (Acts 2:38; 5:32; Galatians 3:2; 1 Corinthians 6:19). However, only the
apostles could pass on the miraculous measure of the Holy Spirit as seen with the
Samaritans in Acts 8:14-17. This power died out with the apostles. We cannot have these
gifts today, unless you know someone who is a couple of millennia old.
Let us review the terms used by the Bible in referring to the miraculous power of the
Spirit. First of all, Christ only administered the “filling” measure of the Spirit. The
apostles received this measure. They, in turn, could only delegate the “falling upon”
measure of the Holy Spirit. Those that received the gifts from the apostles could only use
them to glorify God. They could not pass on these gifts to others. That was the limit as to
how the miraculous power of the Spirit was dispersed among Christians in the first
century. They, as well as we, received the “gift of the Holy Ghost” when we were
baptized into Christ and became children of God.

You seem to be a cessationist. If miracles have indeed ceased, then what do you
think the purpose of miracles was? Did miracles authenticate Jesus, the apostles, or
the Scripture?

If you mean by cessationist that I believe miraculous gifts are no longer present, then I
will reluctantly wear that moniker. I am not a cessationist by choice. Not only would I
prefer that miraculous gifts exist today, I would love to be able to perform those same
miracles primarily performed in the Gospels and Acts. However, through my search of
the Scriptures, I cannot justify such a belief. I am a truth seeker and I have found no truth
in modern-day miraculous gifts.
You asked what their purpose was if they no longer exist. We can look at the
Scriptures to find the answer to that. Miracles confirmed the Word (Mark 16:20). They
showed that Jesus was sent by the Father (John 5:36). They were evidence of the approval
of God (Acts 2:22) and that God was with His Son (John 3:2). They proved “that the Son
of man hath power on earth to forgive sins” (Mark 2:10). They revealed that He was the
Son of God (Matthew 14:33). They “gave testimony unto the word of his grace” (Acts
14:3). It is obvious from Scripture that miracles authenticated Jesus and His message.
They did not authenticate the apostles or the Scripture: they authenticated the message
that would later become Scripture. The Holy Spirit exalts Jesus—through miracles in the
first century and through His Word now. What changed? Why doesn’t the Holy Spirit use
miraculous gifts today when the reasons for miracles during Jesus’ ministry and the birth
of the church are still valid?
The complete or “perfect” Word of God is what gives testimony of Jesus and His
message. The Bible now serves the same purpose that miraculous gifts served in the first
century. It confirms the Word, shows that Jesus was sent by the Father, gives evidence
that He approved of and was with His Son, proves that Jesus has the authority to forgive
sins, and reveals that He is the Son of God and the Messiah of prophecy. Miracles served
their purpose very well, but God’s Word serves its purpose even better.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 102

Clearly, miracles were not necessary to help people believe in the Gospel. “It is the
power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth” (Romans 1:16). Lydia and her
entire household were baptized simply by hearing the Gospel (Acts 16:14-15). No
miracles were necessary. The Gospel has the power to “prick” the heart all on its own
(Acts 2:37).
In the first century the gift of tongues was the gift of languages, as evidenced on
Pentecost when the church was born. “Every man heard them speak in his own language”
(Acts 2:6). Tongues in charismatic churches are not languages, but gibberish. This is not
the same gift that the apostles and other first-century Christians had. It makes me wonder
where this modern-day “gift of tongues” really came from.
Paul admonished, “Let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Corinthians
14:40). Modern charismatic churches seem to show exactly the opposite of this. Even if
gifts were actually present now, this commandment of Paul is being totally ignored by the
charismatic movement.
Healing, however, is still done today through the power of prayer and the wonderful
healing nature of our bodies that God created for us. If we treat our bodies as God’s
temple, we can enjoy tremendous health benefits without the need of the prayers of the
church. “What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in
you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price:
therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s” (1 Corinthians
6:19-20).

Salvation

Give me the exact Scriptures for proving baptism is necessary for salvation.

Certainly. Baptism saves us when we believe (Mark 16:16). Baptism brings about
forgiveness of sins after we repent (Acts 2:38). Baptism washes away our sins (Acts
22:16). Baptism symbolizes burial with Christ into his death and being raised up as He
was in “newness of life” (Romans 6:3,4 Colossians 2:12-14). When we “have been
baptized into Christ”, we “have put on Christ” (Galatians 3:27). Baptism saves us and
gives us “the answer of a good conscience toward God” (1 Peter 3:21). Baptism helps us
to reach the blood of Christ who “washed us from our sins in his own blood” (Revelation
1:5). Paul tells us in Colossians 1:18,24 that Christ “is the head of the body, the church.”
The church is the body of Christ. “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body” (1
Corinthians 12:13). “And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved”
(Acts 2:47). God adds us to Christ’s church or body when we are baptized.
“But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another,
and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. If we say that we have no
sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful
and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:7-9).
The blood of Christ continually cleanses us after we reach it through baptism. Can you
now see how essential baptism is to salvation? It is applied to our lives even after the
A Reason of Our Hope Page 103

actual act.
Paul tells us the Gospel is “that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures and
that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures” (1
Corinthians 15:1-4). He also proclaims, “The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven
with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and
that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8). We “shall be
punished with everlasting destruction” if we do not obey the Gospel (v 9). How can we
obey the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ? Consider Romans 6:1-7. We are
“baptized into his death” and “are buried with him by baptism” and “we shall be also in
the likeness of his resurrection” and “walk in newness of life.” Baptism is the means in
which we obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus!

If baptism is necessary, what about the thief on the cross?

“For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ” (John
1:17). “For whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that
we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope” (Romans 15:4).
“Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ” (Galatians 3:24). The
law was a teacher to prepare us for a better way. “For the law made nothing perfect, but
the bringing in of a better hope did by the which we draw nigh unto God” (Hebrews
7:19). We now have “a better covenant” (Hebrews 8:6).
The new law was brought “to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16).
Colossians 2:13-17 tells us that Christ blotted out the old law or “handwriting of
ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way,
nailing it to his cross.” Thus, the Gentiles, as well as the Jews, are under the New
Testament law. “For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the
testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all
while the testator liveth” (Hebrews 9:16,17). The New Testament came into effect at the
death of Christ on the cross. Therefore, the thief on the cross was under the old law
because Christ had not died yet.
You feel that since he was not baptized, then baptism must not be necessary for
salvation. Nothing could be further from the truth. “And he said unto them, Go ye into all
the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall
be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:15-16). Notice that Christ
gave this Great Commission after His death. The thief on the cross was saved before
Christ died when the Law of Moses was still in effect. “And he said unto Jesus, Lord,
remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say
unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:42-43).

Ananias called Paul “brother” before he was baptized. Cornelius’ household

received the Holy Spirit before they were baptized. This proves that baptism is not
necessary for salvation.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 104

It is true that Ananias called Paul “Brother Saul” (Acts 22:13). Yet Peter addressed
the crowd at Pentecost as “men and brethren” and told them “that God hath made that
same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:29, 36). Could Peter
have meant that those who had crucified his Lord were his brothers in Christ even before
they had repented? Of course not! The group of Jews asked the apostles “men and
brethren, what shall we do?” (v 37). Obviously, the term “brother” used in these
instances referred to their Jewish relationship, not to their level of salvation.
In Acts 10 the Jews witnessing Cornelius’ conversion were amazed because “on the
Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost” (v 45). The Spirit is a gift, not an
item of salvation. When the Jews heard these things, they “glorified God, saying then
hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life” (Acts 11:18). The purpose of
the Spirit, in this case, was to show the Jews that the Gentiles were also eligible to receive
salvation. Ultimately, the purpose was to glorify God.

“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel: not with wisdom of
words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect” (1 Corinthians 1:17).
Isn’t Paul saying that baptism is a false road to salvation?

You’ve taken this passage out of context. Read 1 Corinthians 1:11-17 to obtain the
whole meaning. Paul let others baptize under his supervision so that he could concentrate
on preaching with inspired authority. There were also brethren who puffed themselves up
by boasting of who baptized them. Paul did not want to cause division over something so
trivial. If you will notice, people were being baptized. The importance of baptism was not
diminished. Paul would be remiss in his duties if he didn’t baptize. He was under the
same Great Commission as we are today: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost”
(Matthew 28:19).

Speaking of the Great Commission, Mark 16:16 says, “He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Christ doesn’t
say, “he that is baptized not shall be damned.” Besides, Mark 16:9-20 is not
included in the two main manuscripts of the New Testament.

Belief is a fundamental part of baptism, which is obedience to the Gospel. Christ

stated this very clearly in Mark 16:16 as part of the Great Commission. If someone does
not believe in Christ, then why would he be baptized? Unbelief is the root of damnation.
Someone who does not believe would obviously neglect to obey the Gospel.
The manuscripts you referred to are the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus of the fourth
century. Nearly all the uncial and cursive manuscripts do contain Mark 16:9-20. The
Vaticanus also omits the book of Revelation, the letters of Timothy and Titus, and
Hebrews past chapter nine and verse fourteen. Do you also doubt the validity of these
books? The scribes who copied the Vatican and Sinaitic manuscripts both left a column
of blank space after Mark 16:8 and before the Gospel of Luke. It is highly questionable
A Reason of Our Hope Page 105

that Mark intended to end his Gospel with verse 8: “And they went out quickly, and fled
from the sepulchre; for they trembled and were amazed: neither said they any thing to any
man; for they were afraid.”

Maybe that’s true, but He’s not talking about water baptism. He’s really talking
about Holy Spirit baptism as Christ promised in Acts 1:5. All 120 disciples were
filled with the Holy Ghost and this was the fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy.

On the Mount of Olives before Jesus’ ascension, Christ told the apostles, “But ye
shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses
unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part
of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Jesus was specifically addressing the apostles. They would be
“baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence” (Acts 1:5). Acts 2:1 tells us the
specific day that Christ was referring to. “And when the day of Pentecost was fully come,
they [the apostles] were all with one accord in one place.” Our Savior’s words were
fulfilled in Acts 2:4: “And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost.” The one hundred
twenty disciples were not included in Jesus’ prediction as further evidence demonstrates.
“And they gave forth their lots and the lot fell upon Matthias and he was numbered
with the eleven apostles. 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” (Acts 1:26-2:2).
The last verse of chapter one mentions the twelve apostles. God had just chosen Matthias
to replace Judas Iscariot through the apostles’ prayer. When Pentecost came, the apostles
were probably in the same “upper room” where they had presided when they had first
arrived in Jerusalem (Acts 1:13). All nations of Jews were dwelling in Jerusalem, so the
upper room was probably the only place the apostles could stay. It is unlikely that they
had moved to another place since rooms would be taken by Jews celebrating Pentecost.
Therefore, the sound of the “mighty wind” filled the house where the apostles dwelt. This
is where the apostles were “filled with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:4). There could not have
been enough space for one hundred twenty people in this upper room.
Also there were twelve languages represented by the Jews: one for each apostle and
Hebrew for the spokesman, Peter. If one hundred twenty people were speaking tongues, it
would have been mayhem! “God is not the author of confusion” (1 Corinthians 14:33).
Joel’s prophecy spoke of the “last days” of which this was only the beginning (Acts 2:16-
21; Joel 2:28-32). The one hundred twenty disciples were included in this prophecy (as
well as many other people) but only the apostles started it off by speaking in tongues.
Only the apostles received the “filled” measure of the Holy Spirit that allowed them to
relegate the gifts to others (Acts 2:4; 9:17), so their encounter with the Spirit had to be
separate and unique from everyone else's.
Water baptism was the avenue that all Christians took to salvation after the apostles.
Romans 6:1-5 and 1 Peter 3:21 definitely teach water baptism, as well as the examples in
Acts 8:36; 10:47; 22:16. “There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one
hope of your calling one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is
above all, and through all, and in you all” (Ephesians 4:3-6). Paul tells us that there is
A Reason of Our Hope Page 106

only one baptism. If we had Spirit baptism, that would be two. The only baptism that can
scripturally exist today is water baptism. Teaching anything besides water baptism unto
the remission of sins is teaching a false doctrine.

Well, 1 Peter 3:21 says “the answer of a good conscience toward God.” That means
that baptism is only the response that a good conscience gives after one is already
saved or that it is an outward sign of an inward conviction.

Peter mentions Noah in the previous verse to show us the similarities of our salvation
and Noah’s family’s redemption. Only “eight souls were saved by water” in Noah’s
generation. They were Noah, Shem, Ham, Japheth, and their wives. The waters of the
flood separated Noah’s family from the antediluvians and the destruction of the world.
Likewise, the water of baptism separates Christians from the unsaved and the destruction
of the world as Peter said: “And corresponding to that, baptism now saves you - not the
removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience - through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21 NASB). Peter stresses that the resurrection of
Christ is what saves us. Obedience to the Gospel is simply the condition in which we can
reach redemption.
It is easy to see where you went wrong with “the answer of a good conscience toward
God.” The Greek word for “answer” (KJV) is better translated “appeal” (NASB). The
noun eperotema means “answer, interrogation, appeal, inquiry, craving, prayer, pledge.”
The meanings “answer,” “interrogation,” “inquiry,” and “pledge” do not support other
passages of Scripture. Only “appeal,” “craving,” and “prayer” could be correct so as not
to contradict Peter’s teachings elsewhere. “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be
baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye
shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38). Christ himself said, “He that
believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark
16:16). How else could we be buried into His death and “walk in newness of life”
(Romans 6:4)? The Scriptures clearly indicate that we are saved after baptism.

But Acts 2:38 says, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus
Christ for the remission of sins.” “For” means “because” which indicates we are
already saved after repentance.

The Greek word eis in Acts 2:38 means “to or into.”95 The KJV translates it to “for.”
It is the same Greek word translated “into” in Galatians 3:27: “For as many of you as
have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” Peter tells us in Acts 2:38 that
baptism places us “into” a state of forgiveness of sins. We cannot reach that state without
baptism. Paul states that we are “into” Christ with baptism (Galatians 3:27). He tells us
that forgiveness comes after baptism. Christians are “buried with him in baptism, wherein
also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him
from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh,
hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses” (Colossians
A Reason of Our Hope Page 107

2:12-13).

We’re saved by grace, not by works (Ephesians 2:8-9). Baptism is a work that is
unnecessary for salvation. Grace is God’s unconditional gift.

If grace is unconditional, then why even believe? Grace is not unconditional! God’s
love is. Grace has the condition of obedience to the Gospel. For example, “Now we know
that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will,
him he heareth” (John 9:31). Putting works before salvation is putting the cart before the
horse. Christians are saved by grace. We can’t work our way to heaven. The question is,
“How does one become a Christian?” Do not put works before salvation or even combine
works with salvation. Baptism is not a work. It is obedience. It saves us unto a clear
conscience (1 Peter 3:21). It washes away our sins (Acts 22:16). It is the closest we can
come to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (Romans 6:3-6).
When we are submerged in the water, we have died with Christ and are buried as He
was. When we emerge from that watery grave of baptism, we are resurrected like He was
to “walk in newness of life.” It is at this point that we have reached the conditional gift of
grace. Why is grace still conditional after baptism? “Christ is become of no effect unto
you, whosoever of you are justified by the law ye are fallen from grace” (Galatians 5:4).
There are strings attached even after we become members of the body of Christ.
Works apply to the Christian only. Peter told Cornelius in Acts 10:34-35, “Of a truth I
perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and
worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.” Just as baptism puts us into a state of
pardon, works put us into a state of righteousness where we are accepted by God. Now
that this is clear, how does one become a Christian? By obedience! Jesus said, “If ye love
me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15). “And being made perfect, he became the
author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him” (Hebrews 5:9). “By whom we
have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his
name” (Romans 1:5). We are saved by the grace of God but with the condition of
obedience to His will.

“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto
them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out
of my hand” (John 10:27-28). Christ said we can’t fall from grace because He won’t
let anyone take us.

Of course Christ will not let any man pluck Christians out of His hand! However, did
He say anything about Christians leaving the fold? We have the free choice to leave, but
if we want to stay, He will keep us safe. We can still make shipwreck of our faith (1
Timothy 1:19).

“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine
heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the
A Reason of Our Hope Page 108

heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto
salvation” (Romans 10:9-10). This doesn’t say anything about baptism.

Remember, Paul was writing to the church at Rome, under the persecution of Nero.
These people were already baptized. If he was addressing Christians, what type of
salvation was Paul writing about in Romans 10:10? Since we can fall away from grace
and lose our salvation (1 Timothy 1:19,20; Galatians 5:4), he could have been talking
about our eternal resting place. Paul supports this claim later in his epistle: “And that,
knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation
nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore
cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light” (Romans 13:11-12).
He is obviously speaking in the transcendent eschatological sense or of our final salvation
in heaven. The Greek word used here and in Romans 10:10 is soteria. It means “rescue or
safety” but is nearly always translated “salvation.”96 One has to look at the context to
determine whether the word salvation occurs before or after baptism.
Paul is talking to the Greeks about the salvation of Israel in Romans 10. How can we
know that verse 10 is addressing Christians? Notice in verse eight where he uses “thee”
and “thy.” “The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of
faith; which we preach; that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt
believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For
with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made
unto salvation” (Romans 10:8-10). He is describing to the Romans that they have the
righteousness based on faith; not on the law. This “word of faith” is already in their heart
and mouth. If they confess the gospel and continue to believe, they will find an eternal
place in heaven. Even if this passage could be applied to salvation before baptism, it does
not require a formal confession of faith before an individual obeys the Gospel.

There are more verses on “belief” than there are on “baptism.”

“Remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than
to receive” (Acts 20:35). Why didn’t the Gospels mention these wonderful words of
Christ? How could Paul have quoted these words of Christ when he had only met Him on
the road to Damascus? Because Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit and was meant to
speak these words of Christ. “And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the
which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not
contain the books that should be written” (John 21:25). There is too much information
for it all to be contained in the Scriptures. Therefore, even if it is only mentioned once, it
is still important. “Belief” is stressed more because it is necessary before putting on the
Lord in baptism.

John 3:16 is the most common verse quoted for salvation. It makes no mention
whatsoever of baptism. How do you explain that?
A Reason of Our Hope Page 109

“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever
believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life” (John 3:16). You are
correct. This popular verse omits any mention of baptism. Notice that John says,
“whosoever believeth in him should not perish.” He does not say that believers “will not
perish” or “shall not perish.” I hope you realize that even Satan and his demons believe
that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest
well: the devils also believe, and tremble” (James 2:19). Does that make the father of lies
saved (John 8:44)? Of course not!
John also neglects to mention “repentance” in John 3:16. Peter does not mention
“belief” in Acts 2:38. We know that both belief and repentance are necessary for
salvation. Many passages only mention one step. Which ones are necessary? All of them!
For the logically minded, I have prepared a table that transforms Bible verses into
mathematical equations. Maybe this will clear up any confusion.

Table 2. Salvation Illustrated Through Equations

Scripture Action Result

John 3:16 Belief Should Have Everlasting Life
Acts 2:38 Repentance + Baptism Forgiveness + Gift of Holy
Spirit
Mark 16:16 Belief + Baptism Salvation
Acts 22:16 Baptism Forgiveness
1 Peter 3:21 Baptism Salvation
Galatians 3:27 Baptism Putting on Christ
Romans 6:3-5 Baptism Obedience to the Gospel
1 Corinthians 15:1-4 Gospel Death, Burial, & Resurrection
of Christ
Sum of Total Belief + Repentance + Baptism Forgiveness + Salvation + Gift
of Holy Spirit + Putting on
Christ + Obedience to the
Gospel (the Death, Burial, &
Resurrection of Christ)

Again, Satan and his fallen angels believe in Christ, but they have not repented or
obeyed the Gospel through baptism. That is why they are not saved. Belief alone,
obviously, cannot save us. “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into
the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven”
(Matthew 7:21). Only through obedience to God’s will can we be saved. Jesus Himself
said, “If ye love me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15). He clearly commanded us
to be baptized. Why should we change the Word of God for our own convenience?
The Standard Manual for Baptist Churches says:
A Reason of Our Hope Page 110

It is most likely that in the Apostolic age when there was but “one Lord, one faith,
and one baptism,” and no differing denominations existed, the baptism of a convert
by that one act constituted him a member of the church, and at once endowed him
with all the rights and privileges of full membership. In that sense “baptism was a
door into the church.” Now it is different: and while the churches are desirous of
receiving members, they are wary and cautious that they do not receive unworthy
persons. The churches therefore have candidates come before them, make their
statement, give their “experience” and then their reception is decided by a vote of the
members. And while they cannot become a member without baptism, yet it is the vote
of the body which admits them to its fellowship on receiving baptism.97
If “now it is different,” who made it different? Did God give anyone permission to
change His Word? Absolutely not! “Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee,
and thou be found a liar” (Proverbs 30:6). “For I testify unto every man that heareth the
words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add
unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from
the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of
life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book”
(Revelation 22:18-19).
Who has the right to judge whether someone is added to the church “by a vote of the
members” because “they are wary and cautious that they do not receive unworthy
persons”? “For there is no respect of persons with God” (Romans 2:11). “And the Lord
added to the church daily such as should be saved” (Acts 2:47). Membership in the Lord’s
church is not “voted” on, it is done immediately upon baptism into Christ. How can we be
members of His body without being “baptized into Christ” (Galatians 3:27)? “So we,
being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another” (Romans
12:5). “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or
Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit” (1
Corinthians 12:13). “And he is the head of the body, the church” (Colossians 1:18). Only
those who follow the commandments of Christ will be saved and added to His church.

Is it necessary for salvation that the confession mentioned in Romans 10:10 be made
before baptism?

“The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith;
which we preach; that if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt
believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For
with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made
unto salvation” (Romans 10:8-10). Brother David Lipscomb, former editor and writer for
the Gospel Advocate, answered a similar question concerning confession:
This [Romans 10:8-10] is the scripture requiring confession. It is addressed to the
Christians at Rome. Whether it refers to a formal confession before baptism, I
somewhat doubt, for the following reasons: In the commission, in its fulfillment on
the day of Pentecost, and in the examples of conversion, presented in Acts of
Apostles, there is no example of a formal confession being required as a precedent to
A Reason of Our Hope Page 111

baptism, unless the case of the eunuch be regarded as such. In reference to this, it is
claimed by the textuary critics generally that the confession there recorded is an
interpolation. The context and circumstances would indicate that just such a
confession was made. It is also clear that Philip was not seeking a formal confession,
but evidence of faith. Whatever confession was made came in response to this
seeking. The natural evidence of faith in the heart is the confession with the mouth.
When Philip said, “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest,’ the natural
response would be: ‘I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.” But it was made to
manifest the presence of faith, not to make a formal confession.
But if this does not require the confession, the singular fact is presented that in the
Scriptures a condition of salvation is left out of all the precepts and examples
concerning remission, and is to be found only in a reference in a letter to Christians as
to what had been required. Then it is necessary that at every step of the religious life,
even after one has grown old in the service of the Lord, with the mouth confession
must be made unto salvation, and with the heart he must believe unto righteousness.
He must live by and walk through faith unto the end. It is just as necessary that man
should believe unto righteousness with the heart the last day he lives as the first. By
faith man is led forward at every step in the path of righteousness, and at every step
man must confess his faith in the Savior. It is necessary that confession of Christ
should be made at all times or Christ will not own us. But that any specific or formal
confession was required before baptism, more than at any other step of his religious
life, is not clear. Confession of Christ in our words is necessary. It is necessary in
coming to Christ. It is necessary in all the Christian life. I am sure the questions and
obedience on the day of Pentecost was an acceptable confession. So at the house of
Cornelius and in all other instances.
People become very easily ritualistic. Once an old lady, infirm in body, sent for
me to baptize her. In telling why she sent for me, she said, in the presence of a
number of persons: “I have believed in Jesus as the Savior for some time and have
been hoping to get able to be baptized.” On this statement I baptized her without
asking a formal confession. After it was over, a brother came to me and said: “You
forgot to take the sister’s confession.” I told him that she did not forget to make it,
and referred to her statement before us all. He still seemed to be doubtful because I
had not followed the ritual of asking the question and making her repeat the answer.
He valued the form above the substance. I do not believe there is a necessity for a
formal confession, so the actions and conversation declare it and there is no shrinking
from confessing it before all men wherever occasion offers. It is needful when a man
baptizes another that he have assurance that the subject believes in Jesus as the Christ.
The easiest, most direct way to learn this is to ask him the question; but this should
not grow into an essential form, a ritualism.98
The “interpolation” that Brother Lipscomb mentioned was Acts 8:37 where the
eunuch confessed his belief. “And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou
mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” (Acts
8:37). The manuscript(s) that King James’ translators used was much more recent than
what most modern translations had available. Many ancient manuscripts have been
discovered since 1611. As a rule, the more recent the manuscript; the less reliable it
A Reason of Our Hope Page 112

becomes because of copyist errors, prejudice, and so forth. The American Standard
Version of 1901 used much older and more reliable manuscripts in its translation. It
completely omits verse 37 from Acts 8. The New American Standard Bible brackets verse
37 and footnotes it saying, “Most manuscripts do not contain this verse.” The New
International Version omits it but quotes the verse in a footnote. Brother Lipscomb was
saying that the manuscript(s) the KJV translators used contained an interpolation based
on the eunuch’s question, “What doth hinder me to be baptized?” Whether this verse was
inserted by a copyist or was written by the inspired Luke, it is still not a formal confession
that is required before baptism.
Christ said, “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess
also before my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 10:32). “Nevertheless among the
chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess
him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue” (John 12:42). Christians were afraid of
peer pressure from the Jews, as well as persecution from the Roman empire. In spite of
this, John had strong warnings for Christians who denied Jesus. “Who is a liar but he that
denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.
Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: [but] he that acknowledgeth the
Son hath the Father also” (1 John 2:22-23). How do we know he was talking to Christians
instead of unbelievers? Look at the previous verse. “I have not written unto you because
ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth” (1 John
2:21).
The word translated “confess” is homologeo. It means “assent, acknowledge.”99
Webster defines acknowledge as “to admit the existence, reality, or truth of.” In essence,
Christ was saying, “Admit that you know Me. Do not deny Me.” This message was
clearly meant for those who already knew Christ. In addition to the Greek meaning of the
word confession, Paul was evidently talking to the persecuted Christians in Rome when
he said, “With the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Romans 10:10). Teaching
confession as a step before baptism is being somewhat dogmatic; however, asking the
future convert to verify his allegiance to Christ doesn’t hurt anything. It reassures those
witnessing the baptism that he has been taught properly.

If a person is baptized only because they know Jesus commanded it (Matthew

28:19), even though they do not understand that it is for the forgiveness of their sins,
are they saved at that point? Why or why not? At what point of knowledge are they
saved?

Paul asked certain disciples in Ephesus, “Unto what then were ye baptized? And they
said, Unto John’s baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of
repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come
after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name
of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 19:3-5). Evidently, John’s baptism was terminated and
rescinded, null and void, on the day of Pentecost since these people were required to be
re-baptized. How much did they know when they were re-baptized “in the name of the
Lord Jesus?” Paul had simply said, “John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance,
A Reason of Our Hope Page 113

saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that
is, on Christ Jesus.” However, “John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the
baptism of repentance for the remission of sins” (Mark 1:4). Thus, the people in Acts 19
knew that John’s baptism was “for the remission of sins.” They, more than likely,
understood that being “baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus” was also for the
forgiveness of their sins.
For example, when my oldest daughter was two years old, she was present when I
baptized my mother on Mother’s Day in 1992. We discussed it with Amanda and she
understood that Jesus wants us to be baptized. She didn’t quite understand what sin was,
though. She kept saying, “I’m gonna blow your sin away.” Amanda has no sins to wash
away; however, she now knows that Jesus commands baptism. Would you consent to
baptize her when she has no understanding of why? Just as a child can know Jesus
commanded baptism, the hypothetical person you described in your question also
understands as a child. A child must grow in knowledge to the point of understanding sin
and that Jesus died to wash those sins away. In the same manner, a grown person must
also understand the Gospel before obeying it. What is the Gospel?
Paul tells us the Gospel is “that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures and
that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures” (1
Corinthians 15:1-4). He also proclaims, “The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven
with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and
that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ” (2 Thessalonians 1:7-8). We “shall be
punished with everlasting destruction” if we do not obey the Gospel (v 9). How can we
obey the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ? Consider Romans 6:1-7. We are
“baptized into his death” and “are buried with him by baptism” and “we shall be also in
the likeness of his resurrection” and “walk in newness of life.” Baptism is the means in
which we obey the Gospel of our Lord Jesus.
Peter proclaimed the Gospel of Christ to the Jews at Pentecost. “Him, being delivered
by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked
hands have crucified and slain: Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of
death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it. … Therefore let all the
house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have
crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:23-24, 36). What was the crowd’s response to
the Gospel? “Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto
Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (Acts 2:37).
What was Peter’s response? “Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every
one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the
gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38). At what point of knowledge were they saved? After
understanding the Gospel and obeying it through baptism “for the remission of sins,”
3,000 Jews had their sins washed away.

John the Baptist baptized. The disciples and apostles baptized. Why didn’t Jesus
baptize?
A Reason of Our Hope Page 114

Perhaps this can best be illustrated by Paul’s comments to the Corinthians. “Now this
I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of
Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of
Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say
that I had baptized in mine own name” (1 Corinthians 1:12-15). He later states, “Who
then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord
gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then
neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the
increase” (1 Corinthians 3:5-7). Paul felt it more important to preach the Gospel of Christ
than to baptize (1 Corinthians 1:17). He left that to Apollos. Even so, the brethren of
Corinth puffed themselves up about who baptized them. Can you imagine the “envying,
and strife, and divisions” that would have occurred if Christ, Himself, had baptized
people?

How old should a child be before he or she is baptized?

The Bible is not specific in this area. However, God’s Word still gives us the answer.
To attain salvation, the Bible outlines certain steps to follow in which baptism is the last.
In order for a child to be saved, he or she has to understand these steps to obtain this
extraordinary goal. Obedience to the Gospelis a result of understanding the Gospel.
In the book of Acts, it is obvious through example that people did not know very
much at all before being baptized. Three thousand Jews at Pentecost were baptized the
first time they heard the gospel of Christ. The Ethiopian Eunuch and the Philippian jailer
were baptized immediately following their knowledge of the truth. The same would apply
to a child as long as he comprehends that he is a sinner and that he can be saved through
repenting of his sins and being baptized to wash away those sins. Therefore, the age of the
child varies depending on his knowledge and acceptance of the Gospel. After that, the
process of learning is a continuous and lifetime endeavor.

What are the seven baptisms and which ones are in effect today?

1) Baptism of Moses—“All our fathers … were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and
in the sea” (1 Corinthians 10:1-2). This baptism expressed obedience of the Israelites to
Moses.
2) Baptism of John—“John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of
repentance for the remission of sins” (Mark 1:4). This was to prepare the way for Christ
and was only temporary. Notice that those who had been baptized by John were later
“baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Acts 19:1-7).
3) Baptism of suffering—Jesus told James and John, “Ye shall drink indeed of my
cup, and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with” (Matthew 20:23). Christ
was immersed in suffering as they crucified Him (Matthew 27:35). “But rejoice,
inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed,
ye may be glad also with exceeding joy” (1 Peter 4:13). He brought us a better hope
A Reason of Our Hope Page 115

(Hebrews 7:19).
4) Baptism of the Holy Spirit—“Ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many
days hence. … And they [apostles] were all filled with the Holy Ghost” (Acts 1:5; 2:4).
Jesus was the administrator of Spirit baptism by sending the Comforter (John 15:26).
5) Baptism of water—“Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized,
which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?” (Acts 10:47). “In the days of
Noaheight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also
now save us” (1 Peter 3:20-21). Water baptism is still in effect today and brings us to
salvation. It washes away our sins (Acts 22:16).
6) Baptism of fire—John the Baptist said, “He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost,
and with fire. … He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire” (Matthew 3:11-12).
Jesus will baptize the worthless with fire by casting them “into hell, into the fire that
never shall be quenched.” (Mark 9:43). This is yet future after the judgment.
7) Baptism for the dead—“Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if
the dead rise not at all?” (1 Corinthians 15:29). It is believed that Paul was referring to a
tradition of the first century that involved baptism for the dead. This was done because
they believed in the resurrection of the dead and baptism symbolized their resurrection.
Paul was not teaching or condoning this custom; he was simply using it to teach that
Christ was risen. Mormons mistakenly practice this belief today.
“There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;
one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and
through all, and in you all” (Ephesians 4:3-6). Paul tells us that there is only one baptism.
The only baptism that can scripturally exist today is water baptism.

Authority

Can you describe where we get our authority for items of worship? A friend of mine
says that a piano and organ are fine since Christ did not say “Thou shalt not use
mechanical instruments of music.”

Webster defines authority as “the power to command, determine, influence, or judge.”

There are two types of authority. The first is primary authority, such as the President. The
other is delegated authority. This authority is passed down for others to take over. For
example, God delegates the power of His Word through the Holy Spirit. God gave all
power to Jesus Christ (Matthew 28:18; Hebrews 1:1-2; 1 Corinthians 15:4; John 12:48).
Christ delegated some of that power to the apostles (Matthew 28:19-20; John 17:8, 14,
18; Matthew 16:19; 18:18; John 16:13; 1 Corinthians 14:27). The Holy Spirit was sent to
make sure the apostles’ words were correct. The Word was confirmed by miraculous
signs (Acts 2:22; Mark 16:20; Hebrews 2:3-4). The Word of God is now complete (John
12:48; 2 Timothy 3:16-17; 2 Peter 1:3, 19-21; Jude 3; Galatians 1:8).
Our authority is the New Testament. It is the written word of God’s authority. We
must obey God’s Word and we have no right to change it at all. “And Nadab and Abihu,
the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense
A Reason of Our Hope Page 116

thereon, and offered strange fire before the Lord, which he commanded them not. And
there went out fire from the Lord, and devoured them, and they died before the Lord”
(Leviticus 10:1-2). The results of disobedience are fatal! “Add thou not unto his words,
lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar” (Proverbs 30:6).
“And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving
thanks to God and the Father by him” (Colossians 3:17). There are three ways to
determine authority in the Bible: command, example, and inference. A false authority
arises from binding where God has not bound. Rationalism is a type of false authority.
One might explain away God’s authority on a certain subject in order to justify his
feelings. However, we are to “trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto
thine own understanding” (Proverbs 3:5).
There are two types of commands: generic and specific. The generic command allows
any method to reach the scope of the ultimate goal. For instance, Christ administers the
Great Commission in Matthew 28:19 and Mark 16:15. He tells the apostles to go and
teach the gospel. He did not specify how to go. Therefore, we can use whatever mode of
transportation necessary to spread the Gospel of Christ. The specific command tells us
exactly how to achieve the final objective. Peter told the Jews at Pentecost to repent and
be baptized in order to be saved (Acts 2:38). There are no generics to this command.
Peter is very specific.
Another way to determine authority is by example. There are binding examples of
worship found in the New Testament. “And on the first day of the week, when the
disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them” (Acts 20:7). “Upon the
first day of the week let everyone of you lay by him in store” (1 Corinthians 16:2). The
early church gathered together on Sunday and partook of the Lord’s Supper, listened to
preaching, and gave of their means. We do not have the authority to do any differently
now. We cannot add to God’s Word by using mechanical instruments of music in
worship because there is no example found in the New Testament.
The third way to determine authority is by inference. Consider Paul’s conversion
mentioned in Acts 9:18 and 22:16. The text says that he was baptized. It does not mention
that he repented. We know that he repented because it is a command to obey before
baptism (Acts 2:38). This is necessary inference. Unnecessary inference is assuming
something that is not implied. Some people wrongly infer infant baptism onto Acts 16:15.
This tells the story of Lydia’s conversion. “And when she was baptized, and her
household, she besought us.” Lydia’s household was baptized, but this passage does not
imply that infants were baptized into Christ. Infants do not have sins to repent of; nor do
they have the knowledge to believe or understand the gospel. Let each of us abide in the
doctrine of Christ (2 John 9). Do not add to or take away from His Word (Revelation
22:18-19).
Since Jesus did not specifically say, “Thou shalt not,” Catholics have validated the
office of Pope, the wearing of robes, the counting of beads, and the lighting of candles in
worship. Because Christ did not say, “Thou shalt not,” denominations have adopted titles
for clergy out of descriptive terms (pastor, bishop, reverend, etc.). Even though the Bible
did say, “Thou shalt not,” Episcopalians have allowed women to preach in the pulpit and
have accepted homosexuals without remorse. Even though Christ did say, “He that
A Reason of Our Hope Page 117

believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mark 16:16), denominations have discounted
the necessity of baptism. Is there no end?! Why should we even use the Bible as our
guide if we are going to follow man-made doctrines and creeds? When we start doing
things because the Bible doesn’t say not to, we will eventually start doing things that the
Bible forbids. “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Romans 14:23). Jesus said, “But in
vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Matthew
15:9). Can you hear His cries now?

If we do not permit instrumental music in our worship because “there is no

authority for it in the Bible,” how can we justify having a church building? The
Bible never indicates that collected money can be used to purchase a building.

There are binding examples of worship found in the New Testament. “And on the
first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached
unto them” (Acts 20:7). “Upon the first day of the week let everyone of you lay by him in
store” (1 Corinthians 16:2). The early church gathered together on Sunday and partook of
the Lord’s Supper, listened to preaching, and gave of their means. We do not have the
authority to do any differently now. We cannot add to God’s Word by using mechanical
instruments of music in worship because there is no example found in the New
Testament.
Paul said, “I kept back nothing that was profitable unto you, but have showed you,
and have taught you publicly, and from house to house” (Acts 20:20). A generic
command allows any moral method to reach the scope of the ultimate goal. For example,
Hebrews 10:25 commands us not to forsake “the assembling of ourselves together.” It
does not tell us where to assemble. The early Christians assembled in houses and public
places (Acts 20:8-9, 20). It does not matter where we assemble, as long as we come
together and worship according to God’s Word.
With a large congregation, it is inevitable that a sizable place be rented or bought in
order to accommodate the size and growth of the membership. The elders are overseers of
the flock (Acts 20:28). As long as they are acting in harmony with God’s will, we should
meet in the times and places they have set forth for us to assemble. However, your input
will not be ignored. Feel free to make suggestions to the elders. An elder must be “as the
steward of God” (Titus 1:7), so they have been chosen to serve, as well as rule.

Is there any biblical reason for making “approved apostolic examples” into church
doctrine?

Luke, the first church historian, wrote, “The former treatise have I made, O
Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, Until the day in which he was
taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the
apostles whom he had chosen” (Acts 1:1,2). He further wrote about the 3,000 converted
Jews: “And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in
breaking of bread, and in prayers” (Acts 2:42). Paul said, “God hath set some in the
A Reason of Our Hope Page 118

church, first apostles” (1 Corinthians 12:28). He claimed, through the Spirit, that “ye are
no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household
of God; And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ
himself being the chief corner stone” (Ephesians 2:19-20). Concerning the Gentiles, Paul
wrote to Ephesus, “Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the
mystery of Christ. Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is
now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; That the Gentiles should
be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the
gospel: Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given
unto me by the effectual working of his power” (Ephesians 3:4-7). There is no question as
to the divine authority of the apostles to set forth the doctrine of God.
“As Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for,
See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to thee in the
mount. But now hath 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”
(Hebrews 8:5-7). Jesus Christ, “the mediator of the new testament” (Hebrews 9:15),
would have us do “all things according to the pattern showed to thee” by the apostles. He
had told his disciples, “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will
send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance,
whatsoever I have said unto you” (John 14:26). If they were guided by the Spirit as to
what should be done and were approved by God, would it not follow that we should copy
the example of the apostles wherever it may apply?

What is a “necessary inference?” What makes it “necessary?” Where is the biblical

precedence for making regulations from these “inferences,” and condemning those
who disagree?

One way to determine the authority of the Bible is by inference. Consider Paul’s
conversion mentioned in Acts 9:18 and 22:16. The text says that he was baptized. It does
not mention that he repented. We know that he repented because it is a command to obey
before baptism (Acts 2:38). This is necessary inference. Unnecessary inference is
assuming something that is not implied. Some people wrongly infer infant baptism onto
Acts 16:15. This tells the story of Lydia’s conversion. “And when she was baptized, and
her household, she besought us.” Lydia’s household was baptized, but this passage does
not imply that infants were baptized into Christ. Infants do not have sins to repent of; nor
do they have the knowledge to believe or understand the Gospel. Let each of us abide in
the doctrine of Christ (2 John 9). Do not add to or take away from His Word (Revelation
22:18-19).
Where do we draw the line? The problem seems to lie with unnecessary inference.
Binding an opinion as a command is being contentious. If a scripture is not a command,
example, or inferred command, then we must not bind it on a brother. This practice is the
essence of contention and, thus, the beginning of division. We must not compromise
God’s Word in matters of faith. We must maintain unity. However, in matters of opinion,
A Reason of Our Hope Page 119

let there be liberality!

Where is the biblical authority for having a church treasury? For letting the elders
make every financial decision for the church?

“Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath
prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come” (1 Corinthians 16:2). “Lay by in
store” means “put in the common treasury.” Of necessity, the money was collected in a
common treasury to store up for Paul’s visit. The poor Christians in Jerusalem were the
planned beneficiaries of this contribution. Elders should take note and use the same
caution as Paul did in suggesting that the church at Corinth choose their own carriers or
treasurers of the money collected (1 Corinthians 16:3).
If Paul deemed it wise to place himself above suspicion, and to avoid giving even
the most malicious the opportunity of calling his integrity and honesty in question, as
is intimated here, and expressly stated in 2 Corinthians 8:19-21, it must be wise for
other men to act with equal caution. If called upon to disburse the money of others, or
of the church, let that money, if possible, be disbursed in cooperation with others, that
they may know that it is handled honestly and used as directed.100
It is evident that even Jesus’ followers required a treasury and a treasurer. Judas
Iscariot protected (actually pilfered) their money box (John 12:6). Funds for this money
box were contributed by supporters out of their private means (Luke 8:3). These funds
from the treasury went to buy the things they needed and to help the poor (John 13:29).
The logical choice for a church treasurer would be a successful businessman. This would
ensure that the financial affairs of the church would be equally successful. The church
treasury should be budgeted and used wisely in order to further spread the Gospel. The
elders were chosen to lead the flock (Acts 20:28). This leadership includes making
financial decisions; however, significant ventures are usually discussed with the men of
the congregation. As long as the elders are acting in harmony with God’s will, we should
submit ourselves to their leadership (1 Peter 5:5). Your input, though, will not be ignored.
Feel free to make suggestions to the elders, for each one is a “steward of God” (Titus
1:7).

If the Bible is silent about a particular subject (like Sunday School or Children’s
Bible Hour or instrumental music in worship), is this silence permissive, prohibitive,
or neither?

The bottom line is whether a command or example has left the “how” up to the
reader. When a generic command is presented, it allows any moral method to reach the
final goal. Sunday School and Children’s Bible Hour both are methods that obey the
commandment: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them [baptized believers] to
observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:19-20). Christ didn’t
specify how to teach. We know teaching was a part of public worship in the first century
A Reason of Our Hope Page 120

because of the many examples found in Acts. Also, Paul listed teachers as servants of the
church in 1 Corinthians 12:28 and again in Romans 12:7. In every case we are told what
to teach—the commandments of Christ. The where, when and how are left up to
Christians. Sunday School and Children’s Bible Hour, as well as Vacation Bible School,
Bible Study Sessions, and Devotions, obey the what of Christ’s commandment and are
effective methods to accomplish the goal of teaching members of the church.
What happens to the church when teaching the commandments of Christ has been
neglected? The Hebrews fell into this unenviable trap: “For when for the time ye ought to
be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the
oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat”
(Hebrews 5:12). How can this situation be avoided? Paul said, “Therefore, brethren, stand
fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle”
(2 Thessalonians 2:15). By obeying Paul, great leaders will come out of our midst: such
as a deacon or elder, “holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be
able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers” (Titus 1:9).
“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing
one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to
the Lord” (Colossians 3:16). “Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual
songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord” (Ephesians 5:19). These
verses state a specific command. Who? Paul is addressing Christians. Where? In the
assembly. When? During public worship. What? Psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.
Why? To teach and admonish. How? By singing! Paul’s ordinance is unmistakable!
Brother David Lipscomb stated:
Singing is one means of getting the word of Christ into the heart of hearers. By
speaking in songs they are to teach and admonish one another, by bringing the
thoughts and feelings of the heart into harmony with the sentiment of the songs. These
are the ends and purposes of the worship of the song service. To present the sentiment
in song helps to carry the impression to the heart. The thoughts contained in the words
do the teaching and admonishing; the song is the vehicle by which the sentiments are
conveyed to the heart of those who hear and understand.101

Recently on Sunday night, it was preached that the introduction of the instrument
was wrong if for no other reason than the fact that it caused a split in the church. If
this is a sufficient reason within itself, what about other practices that might be
objected to? Wasn’t the inference from the teaching on Sunday night that anything
that splits the church is wrong?

We have Wayne Kilpatrick of International Bible College to thank for getting us into
this mess. Just kidding. His lessons on church history are invaluable! On Sunday, August
11, 1991, concerning the instrument of music, he actually stated:
Let me stop here and preface something, and don’t misunderstand what I’m
saying: Even if the Bible did justify it on the matter of expediency, which it doesn’t,
but even if it did; and we introduced that into services over the objections of most of
the congregation to the point of dividing the congregation; that within itself would kill
A Reason of Our Hope Page 121

it. That would make it wrong. Would it not? Paul says, “All things are lawful but not
all things are expedient,” and he goes on to explain that causing someone to be
offended by an act that even the Bible admits or allows—if you go ahead and force
that upon someone—he says it becomes wrong. But we know the Bible does not
justify the instrument of music in worship.” The passage that Brother Kilpatrick spoke
of was 1 Corinthians 10:23-33 where Christians were offending weaker brothers to
the point of contention.102
“But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the
churches of God” (1 Corinthians 11:16). “But unto them that are contentious, and do not
obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath” (Romans 2:8). Take
Brother Kilpatrick’s historical illustration for example. He told of a gospel meeting held
at the church of Christ in Thorp Springs, Texas in 1872, where Addison Clark brought in
the instrument of music in order to satisfy the whims of a visiting preacher. His father
circulated a petition and gained most of the signatures of the congregation.
But Addison Clark was not to be outdone. He went ahead and used the instrument
anyway, and when they started playing the instrument, Joseph Clark, the old father,
got up and turned around and walked out of the congregation and about 75% of the
people with him. That was the extremes they went to introduce the instrument of
music, yet trying to say it’s a matter of opinion. Well if it was a matter of judgment, it
sure was bad judgment to tear a congregation apart in that sense.103
Addison Clark was contentious. We are not obligated to follow one man, especially if
he is contentious. Paul says, “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause
divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them”
(Romans 16:17). He further tells the church at Corinth, “Now I beseech you, brethren, by
the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no
divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the
same judgment” (1 Corinthians 1:10). Brother Kilpatrick was careful to articulate this
point but he was misunderstood anyway. He pointed out that if we introduced anything
“into services over the objections of most of the congregation to the point of dividing the
congregation, that within itself would kill it. That would make it wrong.” The key words
are “over the objections of most of the congregation.” If most of the members are against
something, then that is a pretty good indication of what is best.
Where do we draw the line? Binding an opinion as a command is being contentious.
If a scripture is not a command, example, or inferred command, then we must not bind it
on a brother. This practice is the essence of contention and, thus, the beginning of
division. We must not compromise God’s Word in matters of faith. We must maintain
unity. However, in matters of opinion, let there be liberality!

Are there any Scriptures in the New Testament which indicate that we are to pray to
God to heal the sick? Is God presently healing sickness or is this something which
occurred only during New Testament times? During my life-time, I have never seen
evidence that God has made a blind person see or a deaf person hear. If God is not
healing sickness, why do we pray for Him to do so?
A Reason of Our Hope Page 122

Let’s answer all three of your questions separately. First of all, are there any
Scriptures in the New Testament which indicate that we are to pray to God to heal the
sick? “And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if
he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him” (James 5:15). God wants us to pray
for the sick, but remember in your heart; it always depends on His will. “If we ask any
thing according to his will, he heareth us” (1 John 5:14). Our prayers of faith to bring
about healing are not always answered in a positive way, as Paul has testified (2
Corinthians 12:8). The Lord’s will is not always our will.
Secondly, is God presently healing sickness or is this something which occurred only
during New Testament times? Although Paul and the other apostles could miraculously
cure diseases in the first century, we now have the God-given technology to prevent many
diseases from even occurring. God is concerned with our lives just as He was in New
Testament times; however, He works differently. You said, “During my life-time, I have
never seen evidence that God has made a blind person see or a deaf person hear.”
Recently, an ophthalmic surgery was televised. A blind person was allowed to see again
as a result of the surgeon’s skill and the medical technology available to him. Do you
think that God had a hand in this? Certainly. God can and does use modern technology to
heal us, but by far the best method is to treat our bodies as His temple (1 Corinthians
6:19). We must strive to lead a healthy lifestyle in order to avoid chronic illness.
Lastly, why should we pray for God to heal sickness? “And this is the confidence that
we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us” (1 John
5:14). Think about it. God is omnipresent. The present and the future are as one to God.
For example, a star explodes in a distant galaxy. That information may not reach the
earth’s telescopes for a long period of time. Similarly, if God were to tell us a star would
explode, it would be our future, but His present. God is not bound by time. Therefore,
when you pray for God to heal a sick person, even though they may have been ill for
many years, God has already taken your prayer into consideration. Conversely, your
absence of prayer has been taken into consideration, also. Your prayer does make a
difference. “Pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a
righteous man availeth much” (James 5:16).

Is the Holy Spirit the Bible, or a living entity?

Both. It is tempting to leave the answer at that; however, we shall explain further.
Brother Leo Boles published a chart showing that “the Holy Spirit and the word of God
are inseparable.”104 The chart is reproduced below:
Table 3. Holy Spirit and Word of God

Holy Spirit Action Word of God

Genesis 1:2, Job 33:4 In creation Hebrews 1:2, 2 Peter 3:5
2 Corinthians 3:6 Gives life James 1:18
John 3:8 Born of 1 Peter 1:23-25
Titus 3:5 Salvation James 1:21
1 Corinthians 6:11, 2 Thessalonians 2:13 Sanctification John 17:17
A Reason of Our Hope Page 123

Romans 8:11 Dwells in Colossians 3:16

1 John 5:6 Spirit is truth John 17:17
Romans 15:13 Power of Hebrews 1:3

Whatever is declared of the Holy Spirit is also declared of the word of God. The
Holy Spirit was present in creations and so was the word of God; by divine fiat God
brought into existence the material creation. The Spirit gives life and the word of God
gives life; we are born of the Spirit and born of the word of God. There are not two
births, but one. We are saved by the Holy Spirit; we are saved by the word of God;
there are not two salvations mentioned here, but it is one action; the Holy Spirit saves
through the word of God. Christians are sanctified through the Holy Spirit; they are
sanctified through the word of truth; the Holy Spirit dwells in Christians; the word of
Christ dwells in us richly. The Spirit is the Spirit of truth; the word of God is the
truth. There is power in the Holy Spirit; there is power in the word of God. The Holy
Spirit in no instance has dispensed with the truth, whether it be in the new birth or in
the sanctification of saints. No man can intelligently and successfully affirm himself
to be conscious of a divine fiat of the Holy Spirit that is not expressed by the word of
God. The power of the Holy Spirit, both in conversion and sanctification, is so
blended with the force of the word of God that no intelligent mind can separate them.
No one can logically express an article of faith that does not come through the word
of God. The Holy Spirit and the word of God are inseparable.105
Is the Holy Spirit a living entity? Brother Boles had more to say on this subject:
A “person” has life, thought, volition, action, individuality, character, and
influence. The Holy Spirit has all of these; he lives; he wills; he acts; he has a separate
individuality, a particular character and possesses influence. The Holy Spirit has all of
the marks of personality; he is one, and is always spoken of, like God and Christ, in
the singular number. The Holy Spirit has life; the Spirit gives life (Galatians 6:8).
“The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” (Genesis 1:2). In this the Holy
Spirit is set forth as having a part in the creation of the material universe. The Spirit
thinks and acts; these are attributes of a divine person. Since the Holy Spirit jointly,
with God and Christ, formed the Godhead, he must be of the same nature and essence
as God and Christ; since they are divine personages, the Holy Spirit must be so
considered.106

James 5:16 teaches that we should confess our sins one to another. Shouldn’t we
confess all sins publicly then?

“Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed.
The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much” (James 5:16). The context
of this passage has nothing to do with a formal worship. It does not authorize cheapening
the worship service by airing private sins. As a rule, confession of sins should follow the
same extent to which they were committed. For example, the sin of lust should be
confessed in private to your Maker. Correspondingly, an angry word to an individual
should be handled only with that individual and anyone else involved; while public
A Reason of Our Hope Page 124

drunkenness should be confessed before the congregation and any other parties
implicated. All sin should be confessed privately before God.

There are many things over which we as a group (the church of Christ) have
divided. Some of these things include: Children’s Bible Hour, the number of cups
used in communion, church support of orphanages, and kitchens in the church
building. Why is this? What makes something a “doctrine” other than a direct
statement from God Himself? Have we split so often because we make doctrines out
of biblical silence?

“Children’s Bible Hour, the number of cups used in communion, church support of
orphanages, and kitchens in the church building” are all the “how” of a generic command.
When a generic command is presented, it allows any method to reach the scope of the
final goal. Where do we draw the line? Binding an opinion as a command is being
contentious. If a scripture is not a command, example, or inferred command, then we
must not bind it on a brother as doctrine. This practice is the essence of contention and,
thus, the beginning of division. We must not compromise God’s Word in matters of faith.
We must maintain unity. But in matters of opinion, let there be liberality!
The bottom line is whether a command or example has left the “how” up to the
reader. Children’s Bible Hour is one method that obeys the commandment: “Teaching
them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you” (Matthew 28:20). Christ
didn’t specify how to teach. We know teaching was a part of public worship in the first
century because of the many examples found in Acts. Also, Paul listed teachers as
servants of the church in 1 Corinthians 12:28 and again in Romans 12:7. In every case we
are told what to teach—the commandments of Christ. The where, when and how are left
up to Christians. Children’s Bible Hour obeys the what of Christ’s commandment and is
an effective method to accomplish the goal of teaching our young ones—the church’s
future.
You also mentioned kitchens in the church building. “And they, continuing daily with
one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with
gladness and singleness of heart” (Acts 2:46). “And how I kept back nothing that was
profitable unto you, but have showed you, and have taught you publicly, and from house
to house” (Acts 20:20). It’s a pretty silly idea to imagine the early Christians saying, “Oh
no! Not only do I have to worry about being beheaded for worshipping Christ, but the
brethren are worshipping in my house this week and I have to destroy the kitchen!”
Remember, a generic command allows any method to reach the scope of the ultimate
goal. For example, Hebrews 10:25 commands us not to forsake “the assembling of
ourselves together.” It does not tell us where to assemble. The early Christians assembled
in houses and public places (Acts 20:8-9). These places had kitchens and people ate in
these buildings. It does not matter where we assemble, as long as we assemble and
worship according to God’s Word.
One example you stated was “the number of cups used in communion.” “And he took
the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves: For I say
unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. …
A Reason of Our Hope Page 125

Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood,
which is shed for you” (Luke 22:17-18, 20). Christ did not say how to divide the cup. The
point is that we must partake of the “fruit of the vine” which represents the life cleansing
blood of the Lamb. Is Christ saying that He shed the cup in verse 20? It is obvious that He
means the contents of the cup represent His blood, not the cup itself. Do you imagine the
cup or the precious blood of Jesus when you partake of the Lord’s Supper?
Finally, you referred to “church support of orphanages.” Paul informs us in Galatians
6:10: “As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto
them who are of the household of faith.” God has instructed us, through Paul, to do good
unto all men. We are to take care of our fellow Christians, primarily, but that does not
exclude others in need. “Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have
entertained angels unawares” (Hebrews 13:2). Christ did not limit Himself only to
believers. Where would we be if He had?

Attendance

Why should we try to attend every service?

“And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not
forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting
one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching” (Hebrews 10:24-25).
“Ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Corinthians
1:9). We have fellowship with Christ through His church and receive encouragement
from one another. We should desire this. Note that John calls Sunday “the Lord’s day”;
not the Lord’s hour (Revelation 1:10).

The elders have set the times for us to worship at Sunday morning, Sunday night,
and Wednesday night; but the Bible talks about the saints gathering together on
Sunday and then only once. Is it a sin to miss on Sunday nights, Sunday Bible
classes, Wednesday nights, and the meetings?

Since you were not specific about why you would miss assemblies other than Sunday,
due to the nature of your question, we have to assume that you just do not want to go. In
that case, yes, it is a sin. By not wanting to go, it shows that your heart is in the wrong
place. Why should you go? “So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of
God” (Romans 10:17). Paul was talking to Christians in this epistle. We grow in faith by
hearing His Word and fellowshipping with the saints. The church is God’s family
(Romans 12:5). If you don’t want to be with the saints on earth, what makes you think
you will want to be with them in heaven?
The elders have chosen Wednesday night as a recharge in the middle of the week to
bring us to Sunday. And boy do we need it! You need to change your heart to the attitude
of anticipation for each assembly. Not wanting to come Wednesday night is only the
beginning of falling away. Gospel meetings are simply a rejuvenation or, to coin a
A Reason of Our Hope Page 126

denominational term, a “revival” of our spirits. The elders have scheduled these
assemblies for the benefit of our souls. They are wise to watch over the flock in this way.
Remember, the apostles were “continuing daily with one accord” (Acts 2:46) and “ceased
not to teach and preach Jesus Christ” (Acts 5:42) so that churches “increased in number
daily” (Acts 16:5). What you must do is change your thinking and come to all scheduled
assemblies and do it quickly lest the Lord should come this very night.
“And let us consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works: Not
forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting
one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching” (Hebrews 10:24-25).
“That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in
love, May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and
depth, and height; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye
might be filled with all the fulness of God” (Ephesians 3:17-19). Don’t let guilt interfere
with this process and don’t feel burdened for not wishing to be present. Just coming to
Bible study and meetings will alleviate that guilt until it becomes an instinct to fellowship
with the saints. It will begin to feel abnormal to miss any assembly, but it won’t happen
overnight.

General Worship

My daughter prays at bedtime, “I pray to Jesus, my soul to keep.” It started me

thinking. Do we pray to Jesus or God?

Jesus commands us to pray to the Father, and the apostles always prayed to God.
Therefore, we have a binding command and example to follow in our prayer to God.
Prayer is part of our worship, so it is very important that we perform it correctly. Jesus
said, “Pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall
reward thee openly” (Matthew 6:6). “And he said unto them, When ye pray, say, Our
Father which art in heaven” (Luke 11:2). Christ himself prayed to God. “And I will pray
the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter” (John 14:16). Paul tells us to “let
your requests be made known unto God” (Philippians 4:6).
We are to pray to God, yet in the name of Jesus. “Verily, verily, I say unto you,
Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you” (John 16:23). Christ
is our mediator. “For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man
Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time” (1 Timothy
2:5,6). He “ever liveth to make intercession for” us (Hebrews 7:25). Jesus can empathize
with us “for in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them
that are tempted” (Hebrews 2:18). “For we have not an high priest which cannot be
touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are,
yet without sin” (Hebrews 4:15). Never forget the overwhelming importance of Christ!
He is reigning with the Father until He hands the kingdom over to Him in the last day (1
Corinthians 15:20-28).
A Reason of Our Hope Page 127

The only reference I have found of anyone praying to Jesus occurs in Luke’s account
of the first Christian martyr: “But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up stedfastly
into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God. …
And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit”
(Acts 7:55, 59). He still called upon God as he prayed to Jesus in the Spirit, so,
obviously, our prayers should involve the entire Godhead.
The children’s Bible song, Family of God, says, “God is my Father, Jesus is my
Brother, and the blessed Holy Spirit is my Guide.” Maybe children tend to pray to Jesus
because they see Him as a brother or a friend. That is as it should be. Encourage your
daughter to develop a relationship with her Heavenly Father as well. A strong relationship
with the Godhead early in life will keep her faithful even through the rough trials in her
life. Continue to cultivate her prayer life and read the Bible to her everyday so that she
will “hunger and thirst after righteousness” (Matthew 5:6).

1 Corinthians 16:1-2 indicates that a “setting aside” was to be done every first day
for needy saints in another town. Since our reason for taking a collection every first
day is based on this passage, why do we use our collection for purposes other than
the one spoken of by Paul in this passage?

“Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of
Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in
store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come” (1
Corinthians 16:1-2). As seen in subsequent verses, the poor Christians in Jerusalem were
the planned beneficiaries of this contribution. The “collection for the saints” mentioned
by Paul was a result of the prediction by the prophet Agabus. He came from Jerusalem to
the church at Antioch “and signified by the Spirit that there should be great dearth
throughout all the world: which came to pass in the days of Claudius Caesar” (Acts
11:28). Hearing this, the Gentile Christians at Antioch, “every man according to his
ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judaea: Which also
they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul” (Acts 11:29-30).
Paul’s primary intention, even above the temporary comfort that the donation would give,
was “to soften the prejudices of the Jewish Christians against their Gentile brethren.”107
The underlying purposes of this collection for “the brethren which dwelt in Judaea”
were to assist those who were persecuted for teaching the Gospel; to demonstrate to the
scattered Christians that they were members of the church, not simply a congregation; to
stress giving as an essential doctrine of Christianity; to show the importance of servitude;
and to strengthen the givers in the faith of Christ. Since “every good gift and every perfect
gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights” (James 1:17), we are but
stewards of His riches. God has consigned His belongings to us in order that we might do
His will with them. Christians constitute the church and each of us holds the Lord’s
money. Individually, we must take great care to be good stewards with His wealth. Also,
the funds given to the church are God’s and should be spent as He instructs. What does
God instruct concerning giving? Shown below is a list of Greek words that have been
translated to an equivalent form of the word “giving” (i.e. collection, liberality, gift,
A Reason of Our Hope Page 128

abundance, ministering, service, liberal distribution, bounty, and offerings):

Logia (1 Corinthians 16:1) means “a special collection” (Churches which do not like
special appeals, take note).
Charis (1 Corinthians 16:3) means bounty or “free gift freely given.”
Koinonia (2 Corinthians 8:4; 9:13; Romans 15:6) means “fellowship.”
Daakoma (2 Corinthians 8:4; 9:1, 12, 13) means practical Christian service.” Our
word “deacon” is related to it.
Hadrotes (2 Corinthians 8:20) means “abundance.”
Eulogia (2 Corinthians 9:5) means “bounty” in the sense of what is given joyfully.
Leitiurgia (2 Corinthians 9:12) means giving of money or services voluntarily,
especially some large gift.
Eleemosune (Acts 24:17) is the Greek word for “alms.” Our word “eleemosynary” as
applied to charitable institutions comes from this.
Prosphora (Acts 24:17) means “offering or sacrifice.” Thus what is given to the
needy, or to the church, is a sacrifice or offering to God.

“In the whole matter of Christian giving, these verses indicate that (1) all should
participate, (2) according to the ability of each, and (3) that it should be done regularly
and continually.”108 Paul stated, “For the administration of this service not only supplieth
the want of the saints, but is abundant also by many thanksgivings unto God; Whiles by
the experiment of this ministration they glorify God for your professed subjection unto
the gospel of Christ, and for your liberal distribution unto them, and unto all men” (2
Corinthians 9:12-13). The Christian act of giving yields “many thanksgivings unto God.”
“The Lord’s name would be glorified, souls convinced of the truth of the gospel, and
converts won for Christ; but, beyond all these objective achievements of their liberality,
there would be the multiplication of grace within the hearts of the givers themselves.”109
Giving is our “professed subjection unto the gospel of Christ.” It is a necessary part of our
faith and worship.
The examples found throughout the New Testament show that giving was done to
help the needy saints of the church in order to glorify God, to spread the Gospel, to
strengthen the faith of the giver, and to unify the church. The collection now is no
different. A portion of our contribution goes for benevolence—both inside and outside of
our congregation, and both inside and outside of our faith (Galatians 6:10). A portion is
allotted for the building, maintenance, utilities, and staff so that we can glorify God and
spread the Gospel. We help missionaries financially and institute local campaigns to teach
the Word. We help other congregations get started or reinforced all over the world with
the money collected in order to unify the churches of Christ. Knowing that your
contribution is used for these worthy activities should enrich your faith.

Is there a difference between “corporate” worship and “personal” worship?

To clarify the meanings of these two forms of worship, let us consult Webster.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 129

Corporate means, “combined into one body: joint.” Personal is defined as, “of or
pertaining to a person: private.” Is there a difference in our formal worship gathered in the
assembly and our worship in private? Brother Leo Boles has ably written an explanation
of these two forms of worship. We now leave this matter in his skillful hands:
It [worship] is divided into two classes—public worship and private. Public worship
is that worship to which the public is invited or may attend; it is the worship of a group of
worshipers. Public worship requires some leader; this leader guides the group in the
different acts of worship. There is opportunity for those who worship only in the public
assembly to neglect the all-important acts of worship; the individual may lose himself in
the group and fail to worship. The general items of public worship are prayers, praises,
meditations or reading the Scriptures, exhortations, teaching or preaching, the fellowship
of giving, and eating the Lord’s Supper. It is easy to see how one in a large group could
neglect to worship in any of these public acts. If one is guided by the Holy Spirit, that one
will engage in all of the acts which are required by the Holy Spirit. While some of God’s
people are singing praises, others may be silent; while some of them may give liberally,
others may not give at all. They do not worship.
We mean by “private worship” that worship which is done in private. This is an act of
worship where the individual is alone; it is the opposite of public worship. There is no
opportunity for one to play the part of hypocrite in private worship. He is alone with God;
he goes into the closet and gets away from all others; he shuts the door, thus shutting the
world out and shutting himself in with God. This is a solemn and sweet act of worship.
No pretense or hypocrisy, sham or make-believe, is practiced in the solemn presence of
God. The soul appears there stripped of all things and stands naked before God with all of
its defects in the gaze of the all-seeing eye of God. The spiritual growth may be measured
by the amount of time spent in private worship. Of course, there are items that belong to
the public worship which are not included in the acts of private worship.110
The typical elements of private worship are prayers, praises, meditations, and reading
the Scriptures.

Lord’s Supper

Someone recently wrote an article on the Lord’s Supper. He wrote, “There is no

way you can serve a meal at noon and it be called ‘The Lord’s Supper’. According
to the dictionary, any meal served at noon is called dinner. Jesus did not mean for
this meal to be eaten at noon. If he had, he would have called it dinner. … Some of
you are sick … because you have not served the Lord the way he told you to (1
Corinthians 11:30).” Comment on this please.

Mr. Reese has totally taken this passage out of context. First of all, he called the
Lord’s Supper a meal. Notice that Paul condemns using the Lord’s Supper as a meal:
When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s
supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry,
and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? …
A Reason of Our Hope Page 130

Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if
any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation.
(1 Corinthians 11:20-22, 33-34)
Secondly, even Jesus was not specific about the time of day to remember Him in
communion. “This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me” (v 25). Lastly, all
we know is that we are to partake of the Lord’s Supper “upon the first day of the week”
(Acts 20:7). The time of day is left to the elders as long as it is “done decently and in
order” (1 Corinthians 14:40).

Why do we use grape juice at the Lord’s table instead of wine?

People in the early 1800’s had a problem with this, too. They chose to use
unfermented grape juice at that time. No distinction is made between fermented wine or
unfermented grape juice in God’s Word. The Greek word, oinos, signifies the juice of the
grape. Thayer interprets oinos as “wine, must, new wine.”111 Noah Webster defines
“must” as “the unfermented or fermenting juice expressed from fruit, esp. grapes.”
Therefore, the Greek word which is translated “wine” in the Bible can mean either
fermented or unfermented grape juice.
However, the term used in reference to the Lord’s Supper is not wine (oinos) anyway.
The Greek phrase used, gennema ampelos, is most literally translated as “fruit of the
vine,” such as in Matthew 26:29. Jesus and His disciples were celebrating the Passover
during that Last Supper. According to the rules of the feast, God stipulated, “Seven days
shall there be no leaven found in your houses. … Ye shall eat nothing leavened” (Exodus
12:19-20). Any leavening agent, such as yeast, that caused fermentation was not allowed
in the Jewish household during Passover. They could not eat or drink anything leavened
or fermented during this feast.
Therefore, at the Last Supper, the bread had to be unleavened and the wine had to be
unfermented. Jesus blessed these items to represent His body and blood in the Lord’s
Supper (Matthew 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; 1 Corinthians 11:23-39). We are to use
nothing else when we gather around His table in remembrance of Him.

Music

The word “psalms” comes from the Greek psalmos meaning a song sung to the harp.
Ephesians 5:19 mentions singing “psalms” to God. Is using mechanical instruments
of music authorized then?

No. Action is controlled by the verb of the sentence. The noun receives the action.
Despite the meaning of the word “psalms,” we are told to sing and make “melody … with
grace” in our hearts to the Lord (Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16). The verb is “sing”
which implies using the voice to produce musical tones. We are only authorized to use
our voice as an instrument of music; while our hearts amplify that music in our praise to
God.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 131

If Psalms dictated our worship, we would only be authorized to sing psalms while
dancing and accompanied by the harp, lyre, and tambourine (Psalms 33:2; 149:3). Paul
said in Ephesians 5:19 that singing is what is to be done with the “psalms, hymns, and
spiritual songs.” To do any differently from this is not authorized by God in New
Testament worship.

Psalm 150:3-5 says: “Praise him with the sounding of the trumpet, praise him with
the harp and the lyre, praise him with tambourine and dancing, praise him with the
strings and flute, praise him with the clash of cymbals, praise him with resounding
cymbals” (NIV). How can we sing “psalms” as the Bible says (Ephesians 5:19,
Colossians 3:16), but be unwilling to do what the Psalms say? Should we not praise
God in the way specified by the Bible?

Of course, we should praise God in the way specified by the Bible. Let’s look at those
specifications. “How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a
psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all
things be done unto edifying” (1 Corinthians 14:26). Paul tells us to come together with a
psalm. The Greek word used here is psalmos, meaning “a striking or twanging of the
chords of a musical instrument.”112 David Lipscomb had the following to say about this
definition:
All the varied sounds and all the multiplicity of intonations of the human voice are
made by the tension and vibration of the vocal cords within the throat and mouth. The
word psalmos then would, and did from the beginning, embrace the music of the
voice as well as that made by stringed instruments of man’s invention. The voice is a
stringed instrument of God’s make. … Hence it was necessary to connect with
psalmos the instrument used to determine what instrument accompanied the singing
or whether any was used save the human voice. So the word unqualified in New
Testament times came to mean only to sing.113
Furthermore, the first century Christians did not use mechanical instruments of music
in their worship. The first historical record we have of a mechanical instrument being
used in services was in the thirteenth century. If Psalm 150:3-5; Ephesians 5:19;
Colossians 3:16; and 1 Corinthians 14:26 are commandments to use mechanical
instruments, then the apostles and other Christians of the first century directly disobeyed
God!
Paul tells us also in 1 Corinthians 14:26 to edify each other. Edify means to educate,
enlighten, improve, illuminate, teach, instruct, or to guide spiritually. As Christians, we
should be doing this with our children, families, friends, and even ourselves, but Paul
commands us to edify with our singing as well. That is why it is so important for us to be
aware of the words we are singing. (This is also applicable with secular music.)
“Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making
melody in your heart to the Lord” (Ephesians 5:19). Paul commands us to sing to each
other. Again, Paul commands us to sing, which implies using the voice to produce
musical tones. No mechanical instrument is mentioned. He also tells us to make melody
in our hearts. If our voice is the instrument, then our heart is the amplifier. Our hearts
A Reason of Our Hope Page 132

amplify the music in our praise to God. If you can’t carry a tune in a bucket, don’t worry,
the melody comes from the heart. Remember, David didn’t call singing a “joyful noise”
for nothing. Lastly, Paul instructs us to direct our praises, psalms, hymns, and spiritual
songs directly “to the Lord.” Not only should we pay attention to the words we are
singing, we should recognize where the words are being directed.
“Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing
one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to
the Lord” (Colossians 3:16). Paul purposely said to “let the word of Christ dwell in you
richly” to remind us to understand and choose what we are singing and test it against
Scripture. Although the melody and harmony of a song may be beautiful, if the words are
unscriptural, we must not sing it.
Paul wants us to teach and admonish by singing to each other as well. These psalms,
hymns, and spiritual songs are also tools for teaching and admonishing other Christians.
Admonish, noutheteo, means “to warn or exhort.”114 It also means to advise, caution, or
counsel; therefore, our singing not only teaches God’s Word, it also gives warnings for
not obeying it.
We are to sing with grace in our hearts. If our voice is the instrument and our heart is
the amplifier, what gives power to our amplifiers? The “grace” or thankfulness in our
hearts! We have so much to be thankful to God for, not the least of which is His Son!
That is all the more reason for us to sing “to the Lord.” Let the thankfulness in your heart
amplify your praise to God.
Paul said that singing is what is to be done with the psalms, hymns, and spiritual
songs. To do any differently from this is not authorized by God in New Testament
worship. We sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs to teach, admonish, and edify each
other, as well as to praise and worship our Creator.

Is Christian Contemporary Music wrong?

Paul said that singing is what is to be done with the psalms, hymns, and spiritual
songs (Ephesians 5:19, Colossians 3:16). We are only authorized to use our voice as
an instrument of music, while our hearts amplify that music in our praise to God.
Thus, we sing these “praise and worship” songs to teach, admonish, and edify each
other, as well as to praise and worship our Creator.
Does Contemporary Christian Music (CCM) fit the bill? Whenever a CCM artist,
or anyone, uses mechanical instruments of music in a “praise and worship” song, I
believe it is sin. There are those in the brotherhood who would disagree, including
Gus Nichols; however, if you’re in doubt, lean to the right. I would prefer to err on the
conservative side, myself.
Recognize, however, that not all of CCM is praise and worship music. Quite a bit
of it is what I would classify as “moral pop/rock.” Songs in this category include love
songs, crossovers, stories, ballads, history, etc. Artists who sing such songs also sing
praise and worship songs, though. There is no doubt that CCM is far better than the
valueless garbage found on top-forty radio, but unfortunately we must monitor it as
A Reason of Our Hope Page 133

well. It is simple enough to turn off the radio or fast-forward the tape or skip the song
on a CD. Just be aware of what goes into the minds of your children and family.
Establish criteria for what music is allowed to play in your household. Choose a
wide variety of music that would be acceptable in God’s eyes. Instrumental music can
be beautiful but keep it separate from praise and worship music. If you want worship
music, there are plenty of a cappella and split-track tapes available.
Also, be discerning about music concerts. The atmosphere at CCM concerts is far
better than secular concerts. No alcohol is served. No one is doing drugs. Whole
families are there. The entertainers are usually good role models. But, you have no
control over what is played. I have been to a CCM concert and it violated my
conscience terribly. One of the warm up bands was an alternative rock band that
screamed the words and gyrated all over the stage. What’s the difference between that
and some secular heavy metal group? What good are better lyrics if you can’t
understand them? Plus, the concert was turned into a praise and worship session with
mechanical instruments of music. We’ve already established that Scripture forbids this
(Ephesians 5:19; Colossians 3:16).
Just like everything else in our lives, we must be aware of Satan’s influence. If he
can distract us during worship services, Bible studies, our job, time with our family, or
television viewing, you can bet he is working heavily in the music arena. Questionable
musical artists and lyrics exist even in CCM. Try to glean some good from this
reasonably moral source of entertainment by testing it against Scripture daily (Acts
17:11).

Women’s Roles

Why can’t women serve the Lord’s Supper? It is a position of servitude.

“And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a
murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in
the daily ministration. Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them,
and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables.
Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy
Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business” (Acts 6:1-3). The apostles
approved seven “men,” chosen by the multitude of disciples, to distribute food fairly
among the Christians. Although these men were not chosen to distribute the Lord’s
Supper, it does show the apostles’ and the Spirit’s preference in “the daily ministration”
of serving tables. All positions of authority include servitude. An elder must be “as the
steward of God” (Titus 1:7). The highest authority of all, our Lord Jesus Christ, was a
humble servant who “came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life
a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28).

I was raised to believe that women were not allowed to speak out in the assembly. 1
Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Timothy 2:11-12 say women are to keep silent, yet
A Reason of Our Hope Page 134

women continue to speak out during announcements to give information. This is still
part of worship since we haven’t been dismissed. Is this wrong?

If you read the verses you mentioned at face value, it is obvious where you drew your
conclusions. “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto
them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And
if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for
women to speak in the church” (1 Corinthians 14:34-35). “Let the woman learn in silence
with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the
man, but to be in silence” (1 Timothy 2:11-12). Let us examine these verses further so
that we might put things in the correct perspective.
First of all, consider the subject that Paul was talking about throughout the entire
chapter of 1 Corinthians 14: the superiority of prophecy over tongues. Speaking in
tongues had become a fad. At the top of the list of those promoting this fad were the
women of Corinth. They so forcefully supported speaking in tongues, that they even
rebelled against their husbands. The problem was not so much their voices being heard in
the assembly, but their unlawful undermining of their husband’s authority.115
The same Greek verb for “speak” in verses 34 and 35 is used in verses 27 and 29,
where tongues and prophecy are arranged in an orderly structure. That verb is laleo,116
which is a compound form of lego.117 They both mean “speak, say, tell, utter;” however,
laleo more fully means “an extended or random harangue” which is a very long and
elaborate speech. This form of the Greek verb is applied throughout chapter 14.
Coincidentally, each time it is used in this chapter, it is referring to “speaking in tongues”
or “speaking in prophecy.” Therefore, the verb for “speak” in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 is
alluding to the speech of “tongues” or “prophecy.” Paul was forbidding the Corinthian
women to speak in tongues or prophesy in the assembly, because it usurped the authority
of the man and confused the order of worship.
He said, “they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.” The law
always stipulated the subordination of the woman to the man. God created woman as a
“help meet” for man (Genesis 2:18). After the fall, God told Eve, “thy desire shall be to
thy husband, and he shall rule over thee” (Genesis 3:16). God intended from the
beginning that authority be placed in the possession of the man. However, there were
many exceptions to the rule which God allowed and approved. For instance, “Miriam the
prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out
after her with timbrels and with dances” (Exodus 15:20). Also, “Deborah, a prophetess,
the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time … and the children of Israel came up
to her for judgment” (Judges 4:4-5). Further, “Hilkiah the priest, and Ahikam, and
Achbor, and Shaphan, and Asahiah, went unto Huldah the prophetess, the wife of
Shallum the son of Tikvah, the son of Harhas, keeper of the wardrobe; (now she dwelt in
Jerusalem in the college;) and they communed with her” (2 Kings 22:14). These Old
Testament prophetesses used their gift publicly for kings and priests.
That’s the old law. Were there any exceptions in the New Testament? Let’s look.
“And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser …
which departed not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers night and
A Reason of Our Hope Page 135

day … and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem” (Luke 2:36-
38). Peter quoted the prophet Joel at Pentecost, “Your sons and your daughters shall
prophesy” (Acts 2:17). Those who accompanied Paul to Caesarea “entered into the house
of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the seven; and abode with him. And the same
man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy” (Acts 21:8-9). Thus, we can apply
Paul’s statement, “Let your women keep silence in the churches” only if we allow a few
exceptions; as long as it is not “to usurp authority over the man.” J. W. McGarvey said,
“The gift of prophecy no longer exists; but, by the law of analogy, those women who have
a marked ability, either for exhortation or instruction, are permitted to speak in the
churches. … The law is permanent, but the application of it may vary. If man universally
gives woman permission to speak, she is free from the law in this respect.”118
When Apollos “spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, knowing only the
baptism of John,” Aquila and Priscilla “took him unto them, and expounded unto him the
way of God more perfectly” (Acts 18:25-26). Therefore, women are allowed to teach
when it does not “usurp authority over the man.” However, the instruction of Apollos was
done in private or in a modest setting. Paul tells us, “I will therefore that men pray every
where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that
women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety … with
good works” (1 Timothy 2:8-10). He is continuing his thought to the women by saying
“in like manner.” He tells them to wear modesty, shamefacedness, sobriety, and good
works; praying in private rather than “every where” as he wills men to do (v 8).
Therefore, women can teach, speak, and pray in modest or private settings away from the
assembling of the saints (such as with husband or family). In the assembly, further
examples would include women teaching children’s and lady’s classes while a man is not
present.
Women, however, cannot be elders, deacons, preachers or evangelists. One reason is
that it would put her in a position of authority over the man, which is unacceptable. The
other reason is that she will never meet the qualification of “husband of one wife” (1
Timothy 3:2, 12). Preachers and evangelists are commanded to “reprove, rebuke, exhort
with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Timothy 4:2). George DeHoff replied, “She cannot
be an evangelist for the reason that an evangelist must rebuke with all authority, the very
thing the inspired apostle Paul has forbidden her to do (1 Timothy 2:11-12); but women
who are faithful Christians may certainly teach God’s word in [children’s and ladies’]
Bible classes, at home or in the meeting house.”119

Are women allowed to speak or teach in the church?

“Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to
speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they
will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to
speak in the church. What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you
only?” (1 Corinthians 14:34-36).
Apparently, women were not allowed to use their gifts in the assembly. We know that
Philip the evangelist had four daughters who prophesied, so women did receive gifts
A Reason of Our Hope Page 136

(Acts 21:9). Paul commands them to keep silent in the church. He says in 1 Timothy
2:11-12, “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to
teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”
Yet he tells Timothy, “When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee,
which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded
that in thee also” (2 Timothy 1:5). Apparently, Timothy was taught by his grandmother
and mother as a child. No doubt, they led an excellent example for him to follow. Also,
Aquila and Priscilla taught Apollos “the way of God more perfectly” (Acts 18:26).
Priscilla was obviously instrumental in correcting Apollos from “knowing only the
baptism of John” (Acts 18:25). Is this a contradiction? Paul will not suffer a woman to
teach, yet he salutes Priscilla (Romans 16:3, 2 Timothy 4:19) and Timothy’s mother and
grandmother.
There is one difference in these cases. The instruction of Timothy and Apollos was
done in private or in a modest setting. Paul tells us, “I will therefore that men pray every
where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting. In like manner also, that
women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety … with
good works” (1 Timothy 2:8-10). He is continuing his thought to the women by saying
“in like manner.” He tells them to wear modesty, shamefacedness, sobriety, and good
works; praying in private rather than “every where” as he wills men to do (v 8).
Therefore, women can teach, speak, and pray in modest or private settings away from the
assembling of the saints (such as with husband or family). It is not to be done in a way
that will “usurp authority over the man” (1 Timothy 2:12).

I’m confused about 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. Does this passage mean that men
shouldn’t have long hair? Are women to wear veils in worship?

This is a very confusing passage to summarize; therefore, we must examine each

verse carefully. First, we will consider what Paul had in mind when he wrote this
Scripture, and then we will discuss some background before attempting to study each
verse.
Paul was undoubtedly referring to the interference of social customs with church
worship and fellowship. These customs were intruding upon the basic relationship
between the man and the woman as we will discuss later. The subject of Paul’s chagrin
was not clothing, but hair. A veil cannot be “shorn or shaven.” This passage seems to be
easily misunderstood because of cloudy interpretations, prejudiced by the Roman
Catholic custom of veils during the Middle Ages.120
Brother David Lipscomb is of the opinion that “Whether the woman prays in the
closet at home, or in the assembly, she should approach God with the tokens of her
subjection to man on her head.”121 Although we often quote Brother Lipscomb and we
highly respect the great work he has done for the brotherhood, we are opposed to him on
this view. A “token veil” indicates a basic misunderstanding of this passage. If Paul had
really required women to be veiled, then a hat or a doily placed on top of a woman’s head
would not suffice. A veil, back then, “was a large loose mantle which the woman
wrapped around her head and face, leaving only the eyes visible, and sometimes only one
A Reason of Our Hope Page 137

eye.”122 It was not a custom for Hebrew women to constantly wear a veil; however, it
seems that one was worn to aid in harvesting. “Bring the veil that thou hast upon thee,
and hold it. And when she held it, he measured six measures of barley, and laid it on her”
(Ruth 3:15). Let us now analyze this confusing passage in the eleventh chapter of 1
Corinthians.
Verse 2: “Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the
ordinances, as I delivered them to you.” Much of the doctrine, or “ordinances,” was
delivered orally by the apostles to the first century churches.
Verse 3: “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.” Paul’s soul purpose for
opposing long hair for men and shaved hair for women was that it compromised the
relationship between Christ, husband and wife. He opens his discourse with the
affirmation that just as God is the head of Christ, man is the head of woman. This is
necessary for human redemption to function correctly as well as the family unit. This
subjection does not deny the equality of Jesus with God, or the equality of husband and
wife “in Christ.” Unity is alluded to in this verse.
Verse 4: “Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth
his head.” The misunderstanding of this passage begins at this verse. The phrase “having
his head covered” is a commentary, not a translation. The correct translation of the sense
is “having something down from his head.” This, logically, refers to “long hair,” which is
in accord with Paul’s comment in verse 14 that “if a man have long hair, it is a shame
unto him.” Long hair suggested a male being effeminate back then. It is to be understood
that “dishonoureth his head” has a double meaning: long hair dishonors the man and the
head of the man, Christ. “Covered” could not be referring to a type of veil, for men never
wore any such mantle as far as history reveals. Clement of Alexandria, a contemporary of
John, attempted to define the length of hair that Paul might have meant, “The hair of the
head may not grow so long as to come down and interfere with the eyes … cropping is to
be adopted … let not twisted locks hang far down from the head, gliding into womanish
ringlets.”123
Verse 5: “But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered
dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.” The word
“uncovered” is the Greek word akatakaluptos, which is a general word meaning “not
completely covered.”124 This does not imply any type of garment at all. “Uncovered”
refers to the shameful behavior of the Corinthian women who cropped their hair in the
same manner as the Corinthian prostitutes or priestesses of Aphrodite. This was just as
disgraceful as the woman shaving her head and dishonoring her “head,” the husband.
Today, styles which are considered immoral or degrading would violate what Paul is
teaching here.
Verse 6: “For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame
for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered.” Paul is simply repeating that
women who adopt the Aphrodite hair style might as well shave their heads. Paul will
soon tie this thought together in verse 15 where he says, “her hair is given her for a
covering.” Keep in mind that the sin here was not cutting the hair off; it was cutting it off
in order to conceal the sexes or to mimic the prostitutes of the pagan temples. The
A Reason of Our Hope Page 138

shaving of the head was normally a sign of deep mourning or sometimes a punishment for
adultery (Numbers 5:12-18). Job “shaved his head” in mourning for his children. God
commanded Aaron, “Uncover not your heads, neither rend your clothes,” when Nadab
and Abihu were burned (Leviticus 10:6). In all instances where the expression “uncover
the head” occurs in the Old Testament, it means “remove the hair.”
Verse 7-9: “For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the
image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the
woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the
woman for the man.” A man should not have long hair as discussed above. Paul reasserts
the principles of the woman’s subjection to her husband.
Verse 10: “For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the
angels.” Paul is still not talking about clothing or a veil, but hair. Since Paul is discussing
the subordination of women, “because of the angels” may be a reminder for women not to
go beyond the limits of their creation as the angels did. “And the angels which kept not
their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under
darkness unto the judgment of the great day” (Jude 1:6).
Verse 11-12: “Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman
without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by
the woman; but all things of God.” In speaking on the subjection of women, Paul gives
men a gentle reminder that they are dependent on women and that both are from God.
Verse 13: “Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered?”
He asks, “Does a woman with a prostitute’s hair style have any business praying to God?”
Verse 14: “Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a
shame unto him?” What does “nature” mean in verse 14? Is it an intrinsic characteristic
of a man to have short hair? Is it instinct for him to be ashamed when his hair gets too
long? Although nature is the literal translation of the original Greek language, it is
unlikely that it refers to an inbred quality of a male. Rather, Paul is alluding to custom
instead of human nature. History dictates this fact. “At this period, civilized men,
whether Jews, Greeks, or Romans, wore their hair short.”125 The terms long and short are
relative to custom or culture; therefore, custom determines the difference between long
hair and short hair.
Verse 15: “But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her
for a covering.” For the first time in this passage, “covering” means “veil.” The Greek
word paribolaion, mentioned only once in this passage, means “something thrown around
one, a mantle, veil.”126 The literal meaning of the latter part of this verse is “for the long
hair instead of a covering is given to her.”127 A woman’s hair is a wonderful asset that
God gave to her as the proper covering for worship instead of a veil.
Verse 16: “But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither
the churches of God.” Paul was concerned with conformity to Christian behavior; as his
central theme of this passage was proper submission of women to their husbands. We
should not show off social customs just for the sake of being different. J. W. McGarvey
said, “One who follows Christ will find himself conspicuously different from the world,
without practicing any tricks of singularity.”128 It boils down to a condition of the heart. If
our motives are pure, long or short hair is relative to the predominating opinion of the
A Reason of Our Hope Page 139

people in our society.

False Doctrines

What is the New Age Movement and how does it effect us as Christians?

“The New Age movement is a loosely structured network of individuals and

organizations who share a vision of a New Age of enlightenment and harmony and who
subscribe to a common ‘worldview.’”129
The common worldview that Mr. Rhodes spoke of is based on a oneness with God
and the universe. Most of them believe that all nature, animals and humans are one
(monism), that everything is God (pantheism), and that we can encounter oneness with the
divine (mysticism). This is expressly forbidden in the Scriptures: “Who changed the truth
of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is
blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections” (Romans
1:25).
This is a rerun of the ancient philosophy where pagans believed that self was god. The
ancient ways and the New Age Movement both teach that a higher self can be attained by
transforming from a physical nature to a spiritual nature. “As a result meditation, astral
projection, reincarnation, ascended masters, astrology, witchcraft, visualization, hypnosis,
and other methods are used to escape the mundane home of the physical by plummeting
one’s self into the depths of the unknown.”130
New Agers deny that Jesus is deity because they believe that a god is an accumulation
of all that exists. They see God as some aloof energy force and only use His name to
describe the wholeness of mankind with nature. New Agers seek to acquire harmony
(Nirvana of Buddhism) inside the body and then with the universe.
What does this mean to us? Well, as absurd as this movement seems, Satan would
love to repackage his teachings to deceive the Christian. Remember, “Satan himself is
transformed into an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14) and the father of all lies (John
8:44). His most popular deception at this time is the temperament theory, which shares
common roots with astrology. This is the premise that all of us fall under one or more
personalities: choleric, melancholy, phlegmatic, and sanguine.
Various sincere religious authors have promoted this New Age concept, such as Tim
LaHaye, John Trent and Florence Littauer. Your temperament type (choleric, melancholy,
phlegmatic, or sanguine) is determined from a list of positive and negative personality
traits. After you have chosen which traits fit you best, you are then categorized under a
temperament. Due to our complex personalities, we are rarely categorized under one
temperament; therefore, there are twelve possible combinations … exactly like the
personality portrait used in professional astrology!
These traits, shown below, also correspond to John Trent’s nomenclature of Lion
(choleric), Beaver (melancholy), Golden Retriever (phlegmatic), and Otter (sanguine). As
innocent and helpful as these may sound, they are based in mysticism and astrology. We
denounce astrology and the occult, yet accept temperament doctrine, upon which
A Reason of Our Hope Page 140

astrology was launched. Also, “the temperament theory teaches reliance on the self as the
foremost power to change the personality, and second, … the Word of God.”131

Table 4. The Four Temperaments

Originator Temperament Name

Littauer Powerful Perfect Peaceful Popular
Astrology Choleric Melancholy Phlegmatic Sanguine
Idolatry Yellow Bile Black Bile Phlegm Blood
Trent Lion Beaver Golden Retriever Otter

Teachers of the temperament philosophy claim that Jesus is a perfect blend of all four
personalities, with only the strengths. How can we, the creation, place limiting, fleshly
principles on the divine nature of our Creator? We should “worship God in the spirit, and
rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh” (Philippians 3:3).
“Continually concentrating on fleshly incompatibilities blinds Christians to the real
reason for disagreements or problems. We have problems in our flesh because we are not
walking in our Christlikeness.”132 Paul said, “Are ye so foolish? Having begun in the
Spirit are ye now made perfect by the flesh?” (Galatians 3:3).
The temperament theory was conceived by ungodly men of ancient Babylon. How can
we learn spiritual truths from such a group? Remember, “Satan himself is transformed
into an angel of light” (2 Corinthians 11:14), so we need to be acutely aware of all the
new doctrines and theories that might infiltrate the body of Christ and weigh them against
Scripture. If it doesn’t come from God, it is not of God.
We have discussed a lot about the New Age Movement, but time does not allow me
to go into great detail. I would, however, like to summarize what signs you might look for
in order to determine if someone you know is delving into New Age mysticism. Of
course, anyone may be involved with one or two of these facets without being a New
Ager. Let me stress that this information should not be used to initiate some modern-day
witch hunt. Christians simply must be aware of this pervasive movement in order to
guard their souls against Satan’s machinations.
We have already mentioned meditation, astral projection, reincarnation, ascended
masters, astrology, witchcraft, visualization, and hypnosis. The less obvious aspects are
martial arts, holistic health, ESP, liberal politics, gender blending, and ambiguous morals.
It is not impossible to separate Eastern mysticism from martial arts, but it is extremely
difficult. Be very careful that you get a Christian instructor who is firmly grounded in
Scripture. Holistic health includes acupuncture, some chiropractic, iridology, applied
kinesiology, rolfing, therapeutic touch, and biofeedback. Be wary of anyone who attempts
to use any of these methods to heal you.
If you personally know a New Ager and you would like to guide him to the truth, find
some common ground with him, such as ecology, patriotism or human rights. After
establishing rapport, ask him, “What if that which you assume to be genuine ‘god-
consciousness’ is in fact less than God, or at worst Satan, the great impersonator of God
A Reason of Our Hope Page 141

and the father of lies?”133

“The god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that they might not
see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Corinthians
4:4 NASB). The very fact that New Age revelations contradict the Bible proves that Satan
supplies the deceit.
Point out to the New Ager that absolute morals are fundamental to the God of the
Bible. He does not approve of “every man doing whatever is right in his own eyes”
(Deuteronomy 12:8 NASB). Show him how reincarnation is inconsistent with Scripture:
“It is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment” (Hebrews 9:27 NASB).
It also contradicts their own monistic worldview. If all is one, then how can an individual
soul be reincarnated into another life form? Be sure to gently instruct your New Age
friend instead of quarreling with him.

Could it be possible that Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon church, was really
inspired by an angel?

Joseph Smith claims that an angel inspired him to write the Book of Mormon. Let us
look at Galatians 1:6-10. Verses 8 and 9 tell us, “But though we, or an angel from
heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let
him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other
gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”
Notice how Paul emphasizes twice that we should believe no other gospel than what
the apostles have taught us. Joseph Smith also claims that he saw God and Jesus side by
side. The Lord told Moses, “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me,
and live” (Exodus 33:20).
Mormonism is a false and misleading doctrine. Beware of men who claim to be
inspired today. We are already “thoroughly furnished unto all good works” through God’s
Word (2 Timothy 3:17).

Jehovah’s Witnesses have been coming to my door a lot lately. I can’t seem to
convince them that their Bible has been misinterpreted. What can I do about it?

Jehovah’s Witnesses were first incorporated in 1884 by Charles Taze Russell. Joseph
F. Rutherford was made President after Russell died in 1916. Under his leadership, the
New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures was printed by The Watchtower Bible and
Tract Society of New York. This is a biased translation of God’s Word based on the
teachings of the Watchtower Society. Before 1931, this group was called Millennial
Dawnists, International Bible Students, and Russellites. They meet in Kingdom Halls and
are highly missionary and zealous.134
Jehovah’s Witnesses believe that Christ is only a created being … not the Son of God.
They base this on their version of the Bible. It states, “In the beginning the Word was, and
the Word was with God, and the Word was a god” (John 1:1). They deny any equality of
Jesus with God. This is a prime example of the inadequacy of their interpretation. Other
A Reason of Our Hope Page 142

verses are translated similarly.

They will tell you that the kingdom came in 1914. Here is one of many verses that
Rutherford forgot to misrepresent. Mark 9:1 states in his translation, “Furthermore, he
went on to say to them ‘Truly I say to you, There are some of those standing here that will
not taste death at all until first they see the kingdom of God already come in power.’”
They will say that Christ is talking to the 144,000. Colossians 1:13 in the NWT says, “He
delivered us from the authority of the darkness and transferred us into the kingdom of the
Son of his love.” Point out the church at Colossi was already in the kingdom according to
Paul—based on the past tense of “transferred.”
Continue to show them verses that say the same thing in God’s correctly translated
Word. They expect to find an explanation in their NWT Bible and when they see the
same verse that is in ours, they are confused. Ask them how they explain John 10:30.
Their NWT expresses, “I and the Father are one.” That shows that Christ is equal with
God. Also, when Thomas touched Jesus’ hands and side, the NWT relates, “In answer
Thomas said to him: ‘My Lord and my God!’” (John 20:28). They cannot deny these
things when they are found in their own misinterpreted Bible. It will at least put doubts in
their minds as to the infallibility of their translation.
Have them explain these things fully before you get into their line of studying. Some
additional verses that are interpreted the same in the NWT are John 5:18; John 14:6-9;
John 17:11, 22; Acts 4:12; Romans 11:36; and 1 Corinthians 15:20-28. Matthew 28:19
and Acts 2:38 are translated similar to our reliable versions except that it does not
capitalize “Holy Spirit.” Jehovah’s Witnesses do not acknowledge the trinity. There is
much more to say but room will not permit. Just remember to use your own words and
set up a Bible study with them if you want. Take great care not to get angry or impatient.
Show them their mistakes with love and patience. If you ask them, they may even give
you a copy of the New World Translation, or they might at least let you borrow one. That
will give you an excuse to invite them back into your home. You can even return it to
them if you desire. Remember, “let brotherly love continue” in everything you do
(Hebrews 13:1).

I watch televangelists on TV. Surely, they would not mislead the public purposely.
Can they all be wrong?

I don’t know if they are all wrong, but a great majority of them are. Paul warned the
church in Corinth:
For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the
apostles of Christ. And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of
light. Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the
ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. (2
Corinthians 11:13-15)
We should be very careful when listening to these TV evangelists. Far too many of
them are out for a buck. Chances are that if they are begging for money, that is their prime
motivation. These “deceitful workers” will be punished “according to their works.”
A Reason of Our Hope Page 143

Endnotes

1
Asheri, Michael. Living Jewish. New York: Everest House, 1978. 281-284, 385.
2
Benton, Michael J., Ph.D. On the Trail of the Dinosaurs. New York: Crescent Books,
1989. 8.
3
Ibid. 18.
4
Whitcomb, John C. & Henry M. Morris. The Genesis Flood. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Baker Book House, 1961. 240.
5
Whitcomb 243.
6
Crichton, Michael. Jurassic Park. New York: Balantine Books, 1990. 106.
7
Bromling, Brad T. DISCOVERY - A Monthly Paper of Bible and Science for Kids
(January 1990).
8
Benton 15.
9
Ibid. 10, 16.
10
Strong, James. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. Peabody, Mass.:
Hendrickson Publishers. 2663.
11
Gannon, Robert. Popular Science. “How Old Is It?” November 1979. 81.
12
Patterson, C., G. Tilton, & M. Inghram. Science. “Age of the Earth.” Vol. 121, January
21, 1955. 74.
13
Faul, Henry. Nuclear Geology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1954. 295.
14
Plass, Gilbert N. American Scientist. “Carbon Dioxide and the Climate.” Vol. 44, July
1956. 314.
15
Whitcomb 344.
16
Humphreys, Russell, Ph.D. Starlight and Time. Green Forest, Arizona: Master Books,
1994. 46-48.
17
Ibid. 11-13.
18
Ibid. 21-22.
19
Ibid. 19.
20
Ibid. 22-24.
21
Ibid. 24-25.
22
Ibid. 26.
23
Ibid. 28-29.
24
Asheri 281-284.
25
Whitcomb 240.
26
Ibid. 243.
27
Ramm, Bernard. The Christian View of Science and Scripture. Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdman’s Publishing Co, 1954. 244.
28
Smith, Hobart Muir. Reptiles of North America. New York: Golden Press, 1982. 208.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 144

29
Strauss, James D. Bible Study Textbook Series: Job. Joplin, Missouri: College Press,
1976. 435.
30
Smith 208.
31
Taylor, Paul S. The Great Dinosaur Mystery and the Bible. El Cajon, California: Master
Book Publishers, 1987. 48-49.
32
Smith 209.
33
Taylor 46.
34
Ibid. 46.
35
Gish, Duane T., Ph.D. Dinosaurs: Those Terrible Lizards. El Cajon, California: Master
Book Publishers, 1977. 51.
36
Ibid. 51-53.
37
Ibid. 30.
38
Ibid. 49.
39
Ibid.
40
Smalley, Gary. Love Is a Decision. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1989. 183.
41
Earle, Ralph. Word Meanings in the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker
Book House, 1986. 396-397.
42
Strong, James. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. Peabody, Mass.:
Hendrickson Publishers. 3206.
43
Ibid. 3318.
44
Ibid. 7921.
45
Ibid. 611.
46
Ibid. 2270.
47
Ibid. 7523, 5407.
48
Ibid. 1286.
49
Ibid. 7626.
50
Dobson, James. The New Dare to Discipline. Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House, 1992.
61.
51
Lightfoot, Neil R. How We Got the Bible. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House,
1988. 109-112.
52
Ibid. 130-133.
53
Halley, Henry H. Halley’s Bible Handbook. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1965.
54
Earle.
55
Time. August 17, 1981. 47.
56
Temples, John. Gospel Advocate. “Christ’s Forty-Day Fast: A New Perspective.”
November 3, 1983. 648.
57
Dowly, Tim. Eerdman’s Handbook to the History of Christianity. Grand Rapids,
Michigan: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1977.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 145

58
Lightfoot, J. B., and Harmer, J. R. The Apostolic Fathers. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Baker Book House, 1989.
59
Latourette, Kenneth Scott. A History of Christianity. New York, New York: Harper &
Brothers Publishers, 1953.
60
Dowly.
61
Halley.
62
Zerubavel, Eviatar. The Seven Day Circle. New York: Free Press, 1985. 12-14, 20.
63
Denis-Boulet, Noële M. The Christian Calendar. New York: Hawthorn Books, 1960.
97-100.
64
Shepherd, J. W. The Church, The Falling Away, and The Restoration. Indianapolis,
Indiana: Faith and Facts, Inc., 1929.
65
Earle, Ralph. Word Meanings in the New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker
Book House, 1986. 285-286.
66
McGarvey, J.W., and Philip Y. Pendleton. The Fourfold Gospel. Cincinnati: The
Standard Publishing Foundation. 701.
67
Halley, Henry H. Halley’s Bible Handbook. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1965. 161.
68
Coffman, James Burton. Commentary on James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1, 2 & 3 John, Jude.
Abilene, Texas: ACU Press, 1979. 401.
69
Earle 5.
70
Strong’s 1378.
71
Lightfoot. 95.
72
Ibid. 183.
73
Dobson, James C., Ph.D. Focus on the Family Newsletter, February 13, 1992.
74
Ibid.
75
Coffman, James Burton. Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Abilene: A. C. U. Press,
1974. 183-184.
76
Ibid. 184.
77
Ibid. 185.
78
Woods, Guy N. A Commentary on the Epistle of James. Nashville, Tennessee: Gospel
Advocate Co., 1982. 300.
79
Coffman, James Burton. Commentary on Mark. Austin, Texas: Firm Foundation
Publishing House, 1975. 67.
80
DeHoff, George W. DeHoff’s Commentary: Volume III-Poetry: Job, Psalms, Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes, Song of Solomon. Murfreesboro, Tennessee: DeHoff Publications, 1977. 11.
81
Coffman, James Burton. Commentary on Daniel. Abilene, Texas: ACU Press, 1989. 57.
82
Earle 178.
83
Cranfield, C. E. B. The Gospel According to St. Mark. Cambridge: The University
Press, 1966. 142.
84
Coffman. Commentary on Mark. 66.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 146

85
Kidwell, R. J. Bible Study Textbook. College Press. Joplin, Missouri. 1977. 86-87.
86
Zerr, E. M. Bible Commentary-Volume Three. Guardian of Truth Publications. Bowling
Green, Kentucky. 1954. 214.
87
Strong, James. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. Peabody, Mass.:
Hendrickson Publishers. 627.
88
Boles, H. Leo. Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles. Nashville: Gospel Advocate
Co., 1989. 185.
89
Strong 5537.
90
Arndt, W. F. & F. W. Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979. 489.
91
Thayer, J. H. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. New York: American
Book Company, 1886. 75.
92
Strong 2822.
93
Halley, Henry H. Halley’s Bible Handbook. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan
Publishing House, 1965. 446.
94
Boles, H. Leo. Commentary on Matthew. Nashville: Gospel Advocate Co., 1987. 471-
472.
95
Strong, James. Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible. Peabody, Mass.:
Hendrickson Publishers. 1519.
96
Ibid. 4991.
97
Hiscox, Edward T., DD. The Standard Manual for Baptist Churches. Philadelphia:
American Baptist Publishing Society, 1936. 22.
98
Lipscomb, David. A Commentary on Romans. Nashville: Gospel Advocate Co., 1986.
190-191.
99
Strong 3670.
100
Lipscomb, David. A Commentary on First Corinthians. Nashville: Gospel Advocate
Company, 1935. 250-251.
101
Lipscomb, David. A Commentary on Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians.
Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1939. 298.
102
Kilpatrick, Wayne. 1991 Summer Lectures on Church History at Madison Church of
Christ. Sponsored by International Bible College.
103
Ibid.
104
Boles, H. Leo. The Holy Spirit: His Personality, Nature, Works. Nashville: Gospel
Advocate Company, 1942. 192.
105
Ibid.
106
Ibid. 29.
107
Lipscomb. A Commentary on First Corinthians. 248.
108
Coffman, James Burton. Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. Abilene: A. C. U. Press,
1974. 274-275.
A Reason of Our Hope Page 147

109
Ibid. 435.
110
Boles. The Holy Spirit: His Personality, Nature, Works. 284-285.
111
Thayer, J. H. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. New York: American
Book Company, 1886. 75.
112
Strong 5568.
113
Lipscomb. A Commentary on Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians. 107-108.
114
Strong 3560.
115
Coffman. Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. 238.
116
Strong 2980.
117
Ibid. 3004.
118
McGarvey, J. W. Commentary on First Corinthians. Cincinnati: Standard Publishing
Co., 1916. 143.
119
DeHoff, George W. Sermons on First Corinthians. Murfreesboro, Tenn.: The Christian
Press, 1947. 100.
120
Coffman. Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. 176.
121
Lipscomb. A Commentary on First Corinthians. 167.
122
Coffman. Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. 176.
123
Ante Nicene Fathers—Volume 2. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans
Publishing Co., 1956. 286.
124
Coffman. Commentary on 1 and 2 Corinthians. 169.
125
Plummer, Alfred & A. T. Robertson. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
First Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1911. 235.
126
Strong 4018.
127
Interlinear Greek-English New Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book
House, 1987.
128
McGarvey 110.
129
Rhodes, Ron. New Age Movement. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 1995. 7.
130
Miller, Shirley Ann. Temperamysticism. Lancaster, Pennsylvania: Starburst, 1991. 40.
131
Ibid. 29.
132
Ibid. 142.
133
Rhodes 79.
134
Meadows, James. A Study of Different Religions and Religious Errors. Montgomery,
Alabama: Bible & School Supply, 1975.