Can you explain what’s going on in John 20:22-23 where Jesus appears to give His disciples the power to forgive or not forgive sins?  Other Bible verses like Hebrews 4:16 and 1 John 1:9 seem to indicate that it is God who directly forgives sins.

Sincerely,
Got The Power?

Dear Got The Power,

The passage in Jhn 20:23 is more easily understood when we look at the original Greek.  It is very rare that going back to the Greek is a big deal, but in this case, it adds a lot of color.  When Jesus says, “Whatever sins you retain, they are retained”, the verb used for ‘are retained’ is a Greek perfect verb.  A perfect verb is a verb used when the action has already happened and the effects of that action are still with us.  The most accurate translation of that passage is “whatever sins you retain have already been retained, and the effects are still with us”.  Of course, that translation is a little bit cludgy, so most translators shorten it up a bit to what you read in the average translation.  It isn’t wrong to shorten it, but it does lose a little bit of the color that makes it easier to appreciate Jesus’ words.
Jesus was telling His apostles that they were going to be guided by the Holy Spirit, and the things that they were going to say wouldn’t be of their own opinion.  When they taught, they taught God’s pre-appointed laws.

      When Jesus died on the cross, what happened to Him?  Was He just dead, or did His spirit go heaven for some time and then return to His body once He was resurrected?  Sorry if this is a stupid question.

Sincerely,
Where’d He Go?

Dear Where’d He Go,

It isn’t a stupid at all – many people have the same question.  Jesus went to Paradise when He died – He said so.  Jesus told the thief on the cross that they were both going to Paradise after they died (Lk 23:43).  Some say that Jesus went to hell when He died.  That argument refers to the verse where it states Jesus would spend three days and three nights in “the heart of the earth” (Matt 12:40).  However, that verse is simply stating that Jesus’ body would be buried for three days.  Jesus’ spirit was separated from His body at death (Jas 2:26).  Jesus’ body went into the ground, and His spirit went into Paradise.

In Matthew 19:28, Jesus said to Peter that His disciples would certainly sit on the twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.  Then, in Matthew 20, the mother of John and James asked Jesus if her sons could sit on the two thrones next to Him.  In Matthew 20:23, Jesus told her that those places were reserved for the persons His Father selected.  I’m confused about this because Jesus said they would sit on the thrones.  Could you please explain this?  Thank you.

Sincerely,
Reservations

Dear Reservations,

Jesus said in Matt 19:28 that the apostles would lead the church… a concept that is reiterated in Eph 2:20, but in Matt 20:21, James and John asked for a specific level of authority – to be the two most powerful men other than Christ.  Jesus’ first answer to their question was that they had no idea what they were asking for (Matt 20:22).  As we see later in the Scriptures, leadership in God’s kingdom is a lot different than leadership in a business or politics.  It isn’t about power; it is about service (Matt 20:25-28).  James and John were looking for power – but they didn’t know what they were talking about.
The second part is that Jesus said it was the Father’s decision, not His.  That isn’t a contradiction of Matt 19:28; it is just a clause.  Jesus said they would rule, but He clarified in Matt. 20 that the apostles would rule as the Father saw fit… Jesus wasn’t in charge of that particular decision.

     The Bible says in the old times men had two or three wives.  How can that be true because of the Ten Commandments?

Sincerely,
Two Many

Dear Two Many,

The Ten Commandments, which are found in Ex. 20:1-17, never address the issue of polygamy and polygamy was part of life in the Old Testament.  The New Testament teaches that Christians should honor God through monogamy (1 Cor 7:1-2, 1 Tim 3:2).  There are scores of examples of monogamy being God’s preference for man:

1. Adam & Eve were designed monogamously (Gen. 2:24).
2. No polygamy existed until 7 generations after Adam (Gen 4:19).
3. Noah, the last righteous man of his day, had only one wife (Gen 7:13).
4. Qualification for an elder (Tit 1:6)
5. Qualification for a deacon (1 Tim 3:12)
6. Qualification for a worthy widow (1 Tim 5:9)
7. Every New Testament command for a husband or wife assumes monogamy in the commandments (Mk 10:12, 1 Cor 7:3, Eph 5:33, etc.).
8. The comparison of Christ and the church to a husband and wife relies on a monogamous design for marriage (Eph 5:22-23).

What does Galatians 6:8 mean?

Sincerely,
Looking For Logic

Dear Looking For Logic,

Gal. 6:8 explains that what we put into life is what we get out of life.  If we sow spiritual things, we reap spiritual things.  If we sow worldly things, we will reap worldly things.  ‘Sow’ is a farming term that means ‘to plant’, and ‘reap’ means ‘to harvest’.  When a farmer plants corn seeds, he can expect to harvest corn.  If he plants potatoes, he can expect to harvest potatoes.
Our lives are the same way.  If we spend our lives on things that don’t matter and things that are sinful, we will reap meaningless and sin-cursed futures.  Instead, God wants us to invest in our souls and the eternity that awaits those who plant the Bible deep in their hearts and lives.

      Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading?  Does this refer to preachers not getting paid?  Or people in the ministry serving?  Not being compensated?  Forgive me, but I don’t have the context of what Paul is saying here.

Sincerely,
Cattle Call

Dear Cattle Call,

In 1 Cor 9:9, Paul says, “Don’t muzzle an ox when he is treading out the grain.”  Oxen were often used to break up the grain and grind it using a giant wheel or other similar methods that employed animal power to break up the grain.  In the Old Testament, God commanded that an ox that was being used to work the grain should be allowed to eat while it worked (i.e. it shouldn’t be muzzled – Deut 25:4).  In 1^st Corinthians 9, Paul is comparing that command given for the benefit of working animals to the attitude we should take toward those who are preaching the gospel (1 Cor 9:10-11).  Just like an ox that treads the grain deserves a bite of that grain from time to time, preachers who dedicate their lives to the gospel have every right to be paid for their work (1 Cor 9:14).

     At what age was Jesus baptized?

Sincerely,
Water Wonderer

Dear Water Wonderer,

Jesus was baptized right before He began preaching.  In Luke 3:21-22, we see that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.  Luke 3:23 says that Jesus was about thirty years old when He was baptized and started preaching.

About the prodigal son in Lk. 15, you said that it is important to God that we all come back, so He can forgive us.  But then why can’t all people just be, like, crazy, and in the end of their lives, go to God and ask for forgiveness and all will be fine?  What is the argument that keeps someone from doing that?

Sincerely,
Last Minute Convert

Dear Last Minute Convert,

The easiest way to answer this question is by referring to Gal 6:7 which says that God can’t be “mocked”.  This means that we can’t trick God or fool Him into believing we have changed when we really haven’t.  Rom 8:27 says that God searches our hearts, and 1 Jhn 3:20 says that God knows all things.  When we come to God for forgiveness, God expects us to not only want forgiveness, but to change our mind about sin.  The word ‘repent’ means ‘to change your mind’, and repentance is a requirement for salvation (Acts 2:38).  If we attempt to live a sinful life and just “fool” God by asking for forgiveness at the end, it won’t work.  God knows whether or not we have truly repented of our sins and are truly sorry for the sins we have committed.  It isn’t enough to want forgiveness; you have to hate sin and really believe that you were in the wrong.  Our faith in God must be a sincere faith (1 Tim 1:5).  If it isn’t sincere, God will know, and He won’t be tricked.

      Isaiah 43:27, Romans 5:12, 14, and 19 all say that sin started with Adam. But 1 Timothy 2:14 seems to say that Eve started it first.  So who is to blame?

Sincerely,
Is It Her Fault?

Dear Is It Her Fault,

Well, if you asked Adam and Eve, it was the other one (Gen 3:11-13).  Though Eve was the first to eat of the fruit (Gen 3:6), Adam was the patriarch and the first created human.  Rom 5:12-19 is simply saying that from the generation of Adam until the days of Christ, sin reigned.  The sins of Adam and Eve were so tied together that you might as well say that they sinned at the same time.  Like two robbers in the same heist – their sins are intertwined.

     In tracing the apostles’ calling, one of the gospels says Andrew was with John the Baptist and then went and found his brother Simon Peter to tell him.  Another book says they both were in their boat when Jesus called them.  Please explain.

Sincerely,
Two Places At Once?

Dear Two Places At Once,

If all we do is read Matt 4:18-20, it is easy to get the impression that when Jesus told Andrew and Peter to leave their boat and follow Him that it was the very first time they had met Jesus, but that wasn’t the case.  By the time Jesus called those two men to leave their fishing and become “fishers of men”, they were already well-acquainted with Jesus, and they knew exactly who they would be following.

In Jhn 1:35-42, we see the very first encounter that Andrew and Peter had with Jesus.  As you said, Andrew was told about Jesus because he had been listening to John the Baptist preach, and Peter found out because Andrew told him.  This happened right when Jesus first began to preach and teach… He hadn’t even performed a miracle yet (we won’t see that miracle until Jhn 2:1-11).

When we read in Matt 4:18-22, Mk 1:16-20, and Lk 5:9-11 of Peter and Andrew leaving their boats and following Christ – this was a totally different level of commitment that happened later.  Peter and Andrew knew who Jesus was at this point, and now Jesus was calling them to not just listen to Him, but to help Him in His preaching.

     In Acts 1:20, Peter quotes Psalm 109:8.  Can it be said that Psalm 109, especially verse eight, serves as a prophecy as well as a hymn by King David?

Sincerely,
Pointing To Prophecy

Dear Pointing To Prophecy,

Sometimes, Old Testament verses are quoted in the New Testament because they are prophecies that are being fulfilled – like Peter did in Acts 2:16-21.  However, we must also remember that the Old Testament does more than just prophecy about Christ and His kingdom.  The Old Testament is full of examples and principles that are useful to us (1 Cor 10:11).  In the case of Acts 1:20, Peter and the rest of the apostles had to decide what to do about Judas’ death.  Should they leave his position vacant?  Should they replace him with another apostle?  How should they handle the void created in the apostleship by this wicked man?  Peter quotes Ps 109:8 because that Psalm addresses the principle that it is a good thing when a good man replaces the office of a bad man.  Peter referred to Ps 109, not because it was prophetic about their specific circumstance, but because it is a universal truth that good people should take the place of bad people in positions of authority.

Did Jesus marry Mary Magdalene?

Sincerely,
Wedding Bells?

Dear Wedding Bells,

There is ZERO reason to believe that Jesus had a relationship with Mary Magdalene… that is just apocryphal mumbo-jumbo.  Apocryphal books are books outside of the Bible that were written years after the Bible was completed… most of them hundreds of years after.  Read “Books of the Apocrypha” to better understand that topic.

Ever since Jesus lived, people have been trying to create stories to alter His life and smear His reputation.  However, when we go to the Bible, we see that Jesus was never married.  Mary Magdalene was one of many women that followed Christ and supported Him in His preaching, but He was not married to her (Lk 8:1-3).

     Please explain Mathew 25:31-46.

Sincerely,
Context Combing

Dear Context Combing,

Matt 25:31-46 is a description of what will happen on the Day of Judgment.  All mankind will be gathered before Jesus, the King of Kings, and judged for the choices they have made in this life.  Those who have lived wickedly and have not served Christ (the goats) will be cast into eternal punishment (Matt 25:41), and all those who have faithfully served Christ will enter into eternal life (Matt 31:46).  At the end of time, God will righteously separate the good from the bad, and there will be no mistakes.

     What is truth?  Please explain John 8:31-33.

Sincerely,
Define It

Dear Define It,

Jesus says that if we live our lives in the truth, we will be free.  In Jhn 17:17, Jesus says that God’s Word, the Bible, is truth.  The truth that will set us free is the truth that can only be found in the Bible.  Rom 1:16 says that the Bible is God’s power to save mankind.  When we use the Bible as our instruction manual for life, we will be saved.  If you would like to know what the Bible says you must do to be saved, please read our post, “Five Steps To Salvation”.  The Bible is God’s roadmap for our lives.

     How do I get into the Bible and how do I read the Bible?

Sincerely,
Starting To Study

Dear Starting To Study,

The key to any kind of worship or Bible study is to make it a regular habit. Daniel had a habit of praying (Dan 6:10). Make a decision to put Bible study into your day first (Matt 6:33) and schedule other things around it. Most people fail to study their Bibles because it isn’t a part of their regular life. Make it a part of your morning routine, your lunch break, or bedtime ritual. Somehow schedule it into your life and make it a habit.

After you do that, it is just a matter of what you want to learn first. Many people read a Psalm a day, a chapter of Proverbs each week, or use a ‘read the Bible in a year program’, or you grab one of those five things you want to look at and read away. Any of these is a perfectly acceptable system. In fact, you can buy Bibles that are organized, so that you read a little of the Old Testament and a little of the New Testament every day. For new Bible students, I often recommend reading the gospel of Matthew or the gospel of John first, so that you become acquainted with Christ’s life; then follow that up with the book of Acts and familiarize yourself with the first century church.

The goal is to study your Bible, not just read it. God tells us to study to show ourselves approved (2 Tim 2:15) and to meditate upon God’s Word (Ps 119:15). You could read through an entire book of the Bible in an hour or so but fail to appreciate any of it. Read your Bible with a notepad beside you and a pen or highlighter in hand. Write down your questions and get them answered. Highlight meaningful verses. If you don’t understand something, don’t move on until you do. It is more important that you understand than that you read a large portion of text. And lastly, enjoy your Bible reading time; you are reading the most influential and meaningful book on the planet!

     Today’s Bible reading took me to Obadiah 18. That verse reads, “So that there will be no survivor of the house of Esau, for the Lord has spoken.”  Reading the footnote, I go to Amos 9:12 and Acts 15:17.  Those verses refer to the remnant of Edom (Esau) that is absorbed into the church.  Can you suggest how to reconcile the inconsistency?  If there are no survivors, how do they who don’t exist become part of the New Testament church?

Sincerely,
Tracing Trees

Dear Tracing Trees,

Obad 1:18 is dealing with the physical destruction of the nation of Edom, Amos 9:12 is discussing the enfolding of people with Edomite ancestry into the church, and Acts 15:17 doesn’t mention Edom at all – the word used there is just ‘gentile’, a generic term for all non-Jews.
In Obadiah, the prophecy is that Esau’s people, the nation of Edom, would be destroyed by the house of Jacob (Israel).  Historically, Edom’s destruction began with the Chaldean invasion under Nebuchadnezzar and was completed by the Jews in the second century BC.  The Edomites, as a nation, ceased to exist and were forced to accept circumcision and the Jewish religion.  By the time Jesus walked this earth, the Edomites had lost all national identity and had been completely absorbed into other nations and cultures.  However, their bloodline continued even when their nation didn’t.  Ironically, the most famous people of Edomite lineage were the Herods.
On the other hand, Amos 9:12 addresses the spiritual enfolding of the people of Edom into the family of David (Amos 9:11).  How did this happen?  When people with Edom’s bloodline converted to Christianity, they became a part of David’s family because they became followers of Jesus.  Jesus was a descendant of David.

     When God returns for the seven-year trial on Earth from Revelation, and they say that in order to eat, you have to get the devil’s signature… if you do that to feed your kids, do you go to hell for getting the signature, or do you still go to heaven?

Sincerely,
For The Children

Dear For The Children,

The tribulation taught by many denominations is based off of a misinterpretation of Matthew chapter twenty-four.  Matt 24 is dealing with the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Jewish temple that would happen in 70 AD.  If we carefully pay attention to the context, Jesus is talking about the Jewish temple’s destruction, not a worldwide trial thousands of years in the future (Matt 24:1-2).  Jesus specifically said that the tribulation would occur within that generation’s lifetime (Matt 24:34).

There will be a day when all the faithful are caught up to meet Christ in the heavens.  The day He returns (Acts 1:11), all mankind will be judged at the same time (Jhn 5:28-29).  In that great day (Jude 1:6), the whole world will be burned up with fire (2 Pet 3:10-12).  There will be no post-tribulation, pre-tribulation, semi-tribulation, etc.; there will only be the great Day of Judgment (2 Pet 3:7, 1 Jn 4:17).  If you would like a more in-depth look at the book of Revelation, we have a series of classes on the book that can be found at sermons.mvchurchofchrist.org.

     2 Timothy 3:6 says, “For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts.”  What does the word ‘divers’ mean?

Sincerely,
Scuba Steve

Dear Scuba Steve,

‘Divers’ is the old English way of spelling ‘diverse’, and it has nothing to do with aquatic spelunking.  The Greek word in 2 Tim 3:6 literally means ‘of various sorts, a variety’.  Paul is telling Timothy that there is a type of person that leads people astray in a variety of different ways, and they follow a myriad of different lusts.

     The New Testament reference to ‘being asleep’ before Christ returns means what?  I have a friend who thinks souls are asleep in the grave waiting until His return.

Sincerely,
A Little Tired

Dear A Little Tired,

The term ‘fallen asleep’ used in 1 Thess 4:14-15, as well as other places, means that the person has died.  ‘Fallen asleep’ is a metaphorical saying that even Jesus used.  In Jhn 11:11-13, Jesus said that Lazarus had fallen asleep, and then clarified that meant that Lazarus had died.  Just like we sometimes refer to death as the ‘big sleep’, the people of Jesus’ day used that kind of language to refer to death.  It has nothing to do with their souls literally sleeping in the grave.  When we die, we immediately go to Paradise or torments (Lk 16:22-23), and our soul is separated from our physical body (Jas 2:26).

     Hello, AYP.  I thought after they walked on water, Jesus and Peter climbed into the boat in Matt 14:32.  Why does Mark 6:51 say that only Jesus climbed into the boat?  Help me please before I consider this a contradiction.

Sincerely,
Wanting The Dots To Connect

Dear Wanting The Dots To Connect,

Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all are narratives of Christ’s life, but they each tell things from different perspectives.  As you may have noticed, Matthew doesn’t include all the same stories as Luke, and John tells things differently than Mark… the books are designed to give different angles to Jesus’ life here on Earth.  In fact, John said it would be impossible to tell of everything that Jesus said and did on this planet – so they only told us the details that were important for their particular purposes (Jhn 21:25).
This brings us to your question about Jesus walking on water.  Matthew covers the entire story of Jesus walking to His disciples upon the water, but Mark simply sums up that particular occurrence by saying, “He went up to them in the boat” (Mk 6:51).  Mark isn’t contradicting the story of Peter that Matthew tells; he just omitted that section of the story.  In the end, they tell the same story… Matthew was just more detailed.

     I’ve read Leviticus 11:9-12 which says, “And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you.”  Help; I love shellfish!  Please advise.

Sincerely,
Crabby

Dear Crabby,

Under the New Covenant, all food is clean.  God sent Peter a vision of unclean beasts and told Peter to “kill and eat” (Acts 10:13).  Peter told God that he would never eat anything unclean (Acts 10:14), and God informed Peter that He had cleansed all meat (Acts 10:15).  Jesus also specifically said that all food is clean in the New Testament (Mk 7:19).

Later on, the apostle Paul reiterates this idea and says that all meat is clean unless it offends your conscience (Rom 14:20).  So, feel free to eat pork, rattlesnake (if you dare), and clams without fear of sin.

     I have to ask you something.  Why does Jesus tell His disciples to steal?   Matthew 21:2-3: that breaks the eighth commandment.  Also, Matthew 24:26 contradicts Matthew 28:7.  The first says don’t go if someone tells you He’s here or there.  Then the other verse says they were told to go, and they went.  Why are we supposed to look up to the apostles?  Jesus always had to get on to them about faith, told them they needed to be like children, they all betrayed Him, one turned Him in, one kept denying Him, and they all abandoned Him.  Sounds to me like He picked the wrong ones.  Please help.  I love God, but the Bible has lots of problems with contradictions.

Sincerely,
Appalled At The Apostles

Dear Appalled At The Apostles,

There are three questions here, and we’ll answer them each in turn.  In Matt 21:2, Jesus told His disciples to go and fetch a colt that was tied up – but He specifically said that if the owners of the colt asked about what they were doing, they should reply, and then the owners would give them permission (Matt 21:3).  Jesus didn’t tell His disciples to steal; He had supernatural knowledge of someone willing to give their colt to His disciples.  There is no contradiction.

Matt 24:26 does say that they shouldn’t believe people when they said that the Christ had come back… but the time context is very important.  In Matthew 24, Jesus is addressing what to do when people other than Him say that they are the Christ (Matt 24:4-5).  In Matt 28:7, the angel is saying that they can find Jesus in Galilee because He had risen from the dead.  One verse deals with false christs that would come after Jesus; the other verse is a command to seek Jesus Himself.  No contradiction, just different contexts.

Lastly, we’ll address the apostles.  We are told to imitate the apostles inasmuch as they imitate Christ (1 Cor 11:1).  There is no doubt that not everything the apostles did was right – they admitted they were just men and not worthy of worship (Acts 10:25-26).  However, the apostles were Jesus’ chosen servants to preach and teach His message.  The apostles were men of great bravery and faith – men that failed and got back up again to fight another day.  We should also follow the apostles because they were led by the Holy Spirit.  The Holy Spirit gave them perfect remembrance of Christ’s life (Jhn 14:26) and perfect knowledge of what God needed mankind to know (Lk 12:11-12).

Did Stephen feel pain when he was stoned?  It said he looked as if he had seen an angel and then he fell asleep.

Sincerely,
Pain Free?

Dear Pain Free,

There is nothing in the text that would lead us to believe that Stephen didn’t feel pain when they stoned him to death.  When Stephen was dragged off to that kangaroo court, it says that his face looked angelic (Acts 6:15).  It doesn’t say that he had seen an angel.  However, Stephen did see the glory of God and Jesus looking down at him from the heavens (Acts 7:55-56).  Certainly those things gave him a great deal of comfort and peace as the end came, but that doesn’t remove the pain of having your body bludgeoned to death by rocks.  Stephen was a great man of faith and he paid the ultimate price for that faith.

     What churches did the apostle Paul plant?  And approximately when were they planted?

Sincerely,
Church Farmer

Dear Church Farmer,

Here is a rough timeline for when the apostle Paul started various congregations (all dates are approximate):

1. Various congregations in Cyprus – 48 AD (Acts 13:5-12)
2. Churches in the cities of Antioch Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe – 48 AD (Acts 13:14 – Acts 14:24)
3. Philippi – 51 AD (Acts 16:12-40)
4. Thessalonica – 51 AD (Acts 17:1-10)
5. Berea – 51 AD (Acts 17:10-14)
6. Corinth – 51-53 AD (Acts 18:1-17)
7. Ephesus – 53 AD (Acts 18:19-20)

Paul may very well have started other congregations, but those are the ones we can specifically attribute to Paul’s labors.

      Many people think that after Saul was saved and regained his sight, he began his ministry without interruption.  But in fact, he later says he was sent to the desert for three years.  I remember reading it, but I don’t know where to find it.  Can you help me with that verse please?

Sincerely,
Stuck In The Desert

Dear Stuck In The Desert,

The verses you are thinking of are Gal 1:15-18.  After Saul’s conversion in Damascus (Acts 9:17-19), Saul (more commonly known as Paul) left Damascus and went into Arabia for three years.  It is during this three-year time period that Paul had his vision of Paradise (2 Cor 12:2-4).  It is only after those three years that Paul eventually visited Jerusalem.

      Why is there a New Testament if God never changes?

Sincerely,
Traditionalist

Dear Traditionalist,

God never changes, but humans do, and mankind wasn’t ready for Christ’s law in the beginning.  Gal 3:24 says that the Old Testament law was a tutor to lead people to Christ.  Just like beginning arithmetic must be taught before you dive into calculus, the Old Law prepared people for a greater and more perfect law.  The Old Testament taught people about sin (Rom 3:20), and it showed that all mankind had sinned and fallen short of God’s glory (Rom 3:23).  The Old Testament law was added because of sin and as a preparation for Jesus’ entrance into the world (Gal 3:19).  The Old Law could never save people because all a law can do is condemn the law-breaker – only the gift of Christ’s blood can provide forgiveness for the sinner (Gal 3:13).  The New Testament combines God’s laws with a plan to provide forgiveness for those who break those laws.

According to Mark 11:17, Jesus was angered by the venders selling doves and other merchandise (assumingly for sacrifice) outside and in the Temple. But isn’t it true that those who came afar would sell livestock that they would normally sacrifice and bring money to the temple to buy a sacrifice?  This being favorable over traveling with a live sacrifice that might not survive a journey?  It is easier to travel with money than live animals that could easily be bought at the temple.  Today, we have Christian stores attached to churches that sell trinkets, jewelry, license plates, decorations, etc.  Is this also wrong?

Sincerely,
Peddlers for the People?

Dear Peddlers for the People,

Jesus wasn’t just angered that they were selling things but that they were doing it at the temple and in its courtyards… a place that was supposed to be focused on worshipping God and prayer (Lk 19:46).  On top of that, Jesus said that they were “robbers” because the people who were selling things were charging a premium to make money off of the foreign travelers who couldn’t bring their own livestock ­– a bit like popcorn at the movie theater costs a whole lot more because they can get away with charging it.  Furthermore, Matt 21:12 mentions that there were moneychangers there.  The Jewish priesthood instituted a rule that you could only contribute Jewish money to the temple, so they could make more money off of people who had to convert their Roman currency to Jewish coins.  They made money off of the exchange rate.  It was all about making money.

Separate, but similar, churches that are making money off of various things like coffee stands in the foyers, book sales, jewelry, etc. are exploiting people for more money.  God says how the church should collect funds – through a voluntary offerings from christians on the first day of the week (1 Cor 16:1-2).

What is the first commandment of God?

Sincerely,
Beginning At The Beginning

Dear Beginning At The Beginning,

Jesus said that the first and greatest commandment was to love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind (Matt 22:37-38).  In the Ten Commandments, the first commandment is “you shall have no other gods before Me” (Ex 20:2).  The first commandment a child is given by God is “honor your father and mother” (Eph 6:2).  Each of these are first commands from God.

    I have a friend who claims Christians must be baptized by full immersion.  I was wondering why in Luke 11:38 when Jesus ate at a Pharisee’s house, “the Pharisee was astonished to see that He did not first wash [baptizo] before dinner.”  Since I’m pretty sure they did not practice full bodily immersion before dinner (tradition indicates that they just washed their hands), Scripture seems to indicate ‘baptizo’ can mean cleansing or ritual washing as well as immersion.

Also, in Ezek 36:25-27, “I will SPRINKLE clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleanness, and from all your idols, I will cleanse you.  A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you… and I will put My Spirit within you…” Doesn’t this Old Testament verse pre-figure baptism?

Sincerely,
Just A Dash Please

Dear Just A Dash Please,

The word ‘baptizo’ means ‘immersion’, but context tells us what is being immersed.  In Lk 11:38, the Pharisees would immerse their hands in water to wash them.  In Jhn 3:23, John the Baptist was immersing their entire bodies, and that is why he needed “much water”.  The word doesn’t ever mean sprinkle, splash, or any other type of washing other than full immersion.  In fact, the word ‘baptizo’ is the word that was used by sailors to describe a sunken ship because it had become immersed under the sea.  Your friend is right; we do need to be baptized by full immersion.

As for the verse in Ezek 36:25-27, that is a reference to how God would cleanse the Jewish nation from idolatry.  Ezekiel isn’t referring to literal sprinkling of water; he is referring to the lesson they would learn by spending seventy years in captivity.  When Israel came out of captivity, they would have learned not to worship idols.  Yes, that prophecy pre-dates the New Testament, but no, it doesn’t contradict or alter God’s command to be baptized (1 Pet 3:21, Acts 2:38, Mk 16:16).

In previous posts, you said that you had to be baptized to be saved.  What about the thief on the cross?  Wasn’t he saved?  And what about those that accept Jesus by grace on their deathbeds?  Are they in Hell today because they never were baptized?  Isn’t baptism a work?  Then how do you interpret Rom. 11:6 and Eph. 2:8-9?

Sincerely,
By Grace Alone

Dear By Grace Alone,

The thief on the cross is a bit of a different issue than Rom 11:6 and Eph 2:8-9.  Read our post “The Thief On The Cross” for a full answer to the baptism issue in regard to the thief.  Now, let’s address the issue of baptism being a “work”.

Baptism is a work – it is a work of faith.  Romans and Ephesians are addressing people who think they can be saved by working hard enough to earn salvation.  Rom 3:28 says that a man isn’t saved by the works of law, but Jas 2:18-20 says that there is such a thing as works of faith, and without works of faith we can’t be saved.  Works of the law are when people try and earn salvation by living perfect or “good enough” lives.  We are told that this won’t work because if we stumble in even one area of live, we are now sinners and guilty as law breakers (Jas 2:10).  However, when we admit that we sin and seek to live a life of faith in Christ, we still must show obedience to what the Word of God says (Rom 10:17).  The difference is that we aren’t expected to be perfect anymore, instead we are told to admit our sin and move forward (1 Jn 1:9).  The Bible says that we must be baptized to be saved (1 Pet 3:21, Mk 16:16, Acts 2:37-38, Rom 6:4, Gal 3:27).  If the Bible says it is a requirement, then we must each faithfully accept God at His Word.  We should leave the deathbed confessions to God’s judgment and make sure that we are baptized and ready before it gets to that point.  Thankfully, God is the final judge of such situations, not us (2 Tim 4:1).

     I have been talking to four or five theologians, and none of them know as much about the Bible as you guys do.  I had one tell me something that wasn’t even right.  I showed him Scripture.  But anyway, I thought you guys might appreciate the fact you know more about the Bible than theologians. My question is: 1 Peter 3:19, who are the spirits in prison?

Sincerely,
Looking For The Key

Dear Looking For The Key,

Thanks for the kind words!   We’re just glad we can be of help.  1 Pet 3:18-19 is a very difficult passage, and there are a number of different interpretations of what it means that Jesus “preached to the spirits in prison”.  Some believe it refers to Jesus literally descending into the darkest depths of Hades to preach to those awaiting eternal punishment, but this directly contradicts other Scriptures where Jesus specifically says He was going to Paradise (Lk 23:43).  Either Jesus was wrong, or that interpretation of 1 Pet 3:19 is wrong – we here at AYP will trust that Jesus knew where He was going after death.

The other options for that verse are numerous, but the two most likely are:

1. That the spirits in prison were the people that Jesus preached to before or after His resurrection.  Those enslaved to sin are most definitely imprisoned spirits (Jhn 8:34).
2. The other likely option is that Jesus, through Noah (2 Pet 2:5), preached to the pre-Flood world and showed longsuffering to them, just as He does to us today.  After all, 1 Pet 3:20 identifies the “spirits in prison” as those who were disobedient during the days of Noah.  Most likely, 1 Pet 3:18-20 is making the case that Jesus has always been patient with the disobedient (even before He lived on this planet as a man), but unless we choose Christ, we will perish just like those of the pre-Flood world.

The five miracles that the Scripture speaks of are: multiplying of the fish, turning water into wine, walking on water, raising the dead, and healing the sick.  Now, if a person could preform one of these miracles, should they be able to do all of them?  I know they can’t today… but in the first century.  What were miracles for, and when did they stop?  Thanks for the answers.

Sincerely,
Stumped By Supernatural

Dear Stumped By Supernatural,

The Scriptures also talk about the miraculous ability to speak in different languages (Acts 2:4-6), prophetic wisdom and supernatural recall of events (Jhn 14:26), and a host of other things.  Not everyone could perform every type of miracle.  In fact, Paul specifically said that in the first century church, different people had different miraculous abilities (1 Cor 12:28-30).  The gifts of the Holy Spirit were given to the apostles (Acts 2:1-4), and the apostles were able to pass on these gifts to others by laying their hands on them (Acts 8:18).  The apostles were the only ones with the ability to pass on the gifts.  Therefore, when the last person that the last living apostle laid hands on died… the gifts ceased to exist.  God intended for this to happen.

Miracles were needed to prove that Jesus and His apostles were sent from God (Acts 14:3, Acts 2:22, Jhn 9:16).  Miracles were used as a proof that what the disciples said was truly God’s Word (Acts 8:6).  Now that we have the perfect and complete Bible, we no longer need those miracles – which was Paul’s point in 1 Corinthians.  When the “perfect” of 1 Cor 13:8-10 happened, the church no longer needed miracles to further the message of Christ.  After the Bible was completed, the church was able to fully see God’s message of salvation (1 Cor 13:12) without further need of prophecies and miracles.

     Is it correct to use the word ‘church’ in place of ‘ekklesia’?

Sincerely,
A Little Wordy

Dear A Little Wordy,

‘Ekklesia’ is a Greek word, and ‘church’ is an English word.  It isn’t wrong to translate the Bible from its original Greek into other languages.  In fact, Jesus quoted from a Greek translation of the Old Testament called the Septuagint (the Old Testament was originally written in Hebrew).  The word ‘ekklesia’ means ‘the called out’ and refers to a group that is called together for a specific purpose.  In modern English, we use words like ‘church’ and ‘assembly’ to express the same definition.  The church of Christ is a group of people who have heard and heeded the call of Jesus Christ.

     Around the tomb of Jesus, why does it read that there were two angels in Luke 24:4 and John 20:12… but only one in Mark 16:5 and Matt 28:2-5?

Sincerely,
Head Count

Dear Head Count,

This is a great example of why we have multiple accounts of Jesus’ life.  Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John all record the life of Christ, but they each do it from a different perspective, and they each emphasize different things.  Luke and John pointed out both angels at the tomb, but Matthew and Mark only focused on the angel that spoke.  This isn’t a contradiction; it is simply a matter of only including the details that are pertinent to their particular narrative.  Matthew and Mark never said there was only one angel… they just talked about the angel that spoke because that was all that was important for their accounts.

     We apply the four gospels to our life today, but, of course, Jesus had not died yet during the time of His preaching.  So are the gospels still under the Mosaic Law?

Sincerely,
Timeline Troubles

Dear Timeline Troubles,

Jesus was a Jewish man who lived under the Jewish law, and His life records that fact.  Jesus commanded His fellow countryman to obey the Mosaic laws for cleansing and sacrifices (Lk 17:12-14).  He taught that Moses’ law was right and good, even when the Pharisees and scribes weren’t (Matt 23:1-3), and He answered questions regarding Moses’ laws – like the laws concerning divorce (Matt 19:3-9).  So if Jesus’ entire life was a Jewish one, why are the gospels part of the New Testament?  The answer: Jesus’ preaching.

Jesus lived as a Jew, spoke to Jews, answered Jewish questions, and preached Christianity.  Jesus preached the good news of the kingdom which was to come.  Matt 4:23, Matt 9:35, Matt 11:5, Mk 8:35, Lk 4:18-19, and Lk 7:22 all say that Jesus came preaching the gospel to His kinsmen.  Jesus preached that there was a change coming and that all the world needed to be prepared for it.  Jesus preached the message of a kingdom that was soon to be, the kingdom of Christ that He would buy with His own blood (Acts 20:28).  Another reason that the four gospels are part of the New Testament is that we are commanded to be imitators of Christ (1 Cor 11:1).  The way Jesus lived is the way christians should live.  Jesus preached about a new law, He lived as an example for those under the new law, and He died that we might have a new law.  The four gospels are all accounts of the life of the Man that gave us the New Testament.

     I was reading in Rev 22:19, and I firmly believe that once saved, always saved, but I’m having a tough time figuring this verse out.  What are your thoughts on it?

Sincerely,
Conflicted

Dear Conflicted,

We wouldn’t be so quick to hold firm to the teaching “once saved, always saved”.  The idea that you can’t ever lose your salvation is a warping of Christ’s message in Jhn 10:27-29.  “Once saved, always saved” is a basic doctrine of Calvinism (read “Calvin And Sobs” for more details on the errors of Calvinism).

The Bible clearly says that you can lose your salvation.  Heb 3:12 says that we must be wary and protect our hearts because an evil, unbelieving heart can fall away.  2 Pet 3:17 says that we can lose our salvation if we get caught up in false teaching (1 Tim 4:1 also states this).  If we return to a life of ungodliness, then we crucify Christ again (Heb 6:4-6).  Rev 22:19 is another great example of how our lives must be faithful unto death if we wish to receive the heavenly prize (Rev 2:10).

     My husband and I have really noticed a major increase in signs of the end times.  It seems people are blatantly ignoring the truth.  Do you think we as a society are living in the book of Revelation?  Do you believe any of the seals have been opened?  If so, which ones?  Thanks!

Sincerely,
Mrs. Prepared

Dear Mrs. Prepared,

There are a great many opinions about when the world will end, but the truth is nobody knows because God doesn’t say.  God told the Thessalonians that the end would come “like a thief in the night” (1 Thess 5:2).  If anything, the one thing you can count on is that it won’t be when people say it is.  In truth, a christian shouldn’t worry about when the end will come… we should live every day like the end could be today.

Paul told the Thessalonians (who were quite fixated with the return of Christ) that they should live every day soberly, as if any day might be the day (1 Thess 5:4-6).

People have been using details from the book of Revelation to “predict” the end of time for centuries.  Unfortunately, the book of Revelation has nothing to do with the end of time.  Revelation is a book dedicated to what would “shortly come to pass” (Rev 1:1).  Specifically, Revelation dealt with the coming persecution that the church of the first century was about to face.  It is a figurative and symbolic book (Rev 1:1 – notice the word ‘signified’, that means ‘symbolic’) that God used to prepare those saints for the trials they had ahead of them (see our post “Left Behind” for more details).  Using the book of Revelation to “forecast” the end of time is using the book out of context.

The other thing that we must be aware of is that every generation and every individual (us here at AYP included) is convinced that things are getting worse.  Every generation has felt that things were getting so bad with the world that the end of the world must be soon.  God warns us about the habit of constant pessimism (Eccl 7:10).  There will come a time when the world is so wicked that God will destroy this earth, but that will only happen after He has given as much time as is needed for mankind to repent of their sins (2 Pet 3:9-10).  Since we do not know when that day is, let us live every day with holy living and godliness (2 Pet 3:11-12).

    After Christ’s sacrifice, the Old Testament law things were done away with (like circumcision and animal sacrifices), so then, why does James say to abstain from blood in Acts 15:20 and also in a letter saying the same thing in Acts 15:29 if this, too, was part of the Old Testament law?  And is this after Jesus’ death?

Sincerely,
Legal Trouble

Dear Legal Trouble,

Not every Old Testament law was done away with in the New Testament.  For example, murder is wrong in both the New and Old Testament (Rom 1:29, Ex 20:13).  Christians are not bound to follow the Old Testament law because we are no longer under that law (Gal 3:24-25), but if an Old Testament law is repeated in the New Testament, that means the rule is applicable to christians.

The Old Testament laws concerning what could and could not be eaten can be found in Lev. 11, but there is only one type of food that christians still cannot eat – blood (Acts 15:29).  When an animal is killed, some cultures will strangle the animal so as to keep the blood in the meat (as opposed to draining the blood out).  Things like blood sausage, blood soup, blood stew, etc. are popular dishes in some countries, but eating them is wrong.  All other food is clean for New Testament christians… Jesus said so Himself in Mk 7:19.

     If baptism is required, then the criminals on the cross next to Jesus are not in heaven?

Sincerely,
What About Those Guys?

Dear What About Those Guys,

There are four explanations for Christ’s pardon of the crucified thief in Lk 23:39-43 (He only pardoned one of them; the other one continued to hurl abuse at Jesus – Lk. 23:39).  All of them fit in perfect harmony with the necessity of baptism and the New Testament teachings that salvation begins at baptism (1 Pet 3:21, Acts 2:37-38, Mk 16:16, Rom 6:3-4).

1. 1. This thief may very well have been baptized by John the Baptist (Mk 1:4) or one of Jesus’ disciples (Jhn 4:1-2).  We simply don’t know enough about this thief to say whether he was or wasn’t baptized.  It is always faulty to build a doctrine off an assumption.  To say that we don’t need to be baptized because that thief wasn’t baptized is an assumption.
2. The thief was physically unable to be baptized.  2 Cor 8:12 tells us that God only holds us accountable for what we are physically able to do.  That thief didn’t have the capability to get off that cross and be baptized.  The argument could be made that he was excused from the law of baptism the same way that a mute man would be excused from the command to “confess Christ with your tongue” (Rom 14:11).  This isn’t the best argument of the four, but it is a valid point worth considering.
3. While Jesus was here on earth, He had the authority to forgive sins as He saw fit (Matt 9:6).  This thief was no different than any of the other people whose sins were verbally forgiven by Christ as He walked this earth (Lk 7:48-49, Lk 5:20).  Since Jesus is no longer on this earth… baptism is the only other way to have your sins removed.
4. The command to be baptized for salvation is a New Testament command.  Those who are baptized become a part of the church (Acts 2:41).  If we are being technical (and there is a time for technicalities), the church and the New Testament law didn’t come into effect until after Jesus died and rose from the grave.  Until Jesus’ death and resurrection, the laws of the Old Testament would have still been in effect.  That thief wasn’t bound to the law of baptism (a New Testament law) because Jesus hadn’t yet died.

No matter which argument seems the sturdiest to you (they all have merit), the thief on the cross example doesn’t negate the necessity of baptism today.

     Has God ever approved of polygamy?

Sincerely,
Double Vows?

Dear Double Vows,

Polygamy is never expressly condemned in the Bible.  It is also never treated as the standard… only the exception.  There are scores of examples of monogamy being God’s preference for man:

1. Adam & Eve were designed monogamously (Gen. 2:24).
2. No polygamy existed until seven generations after Adam (Gen 4:19).
3. Noah, the last righteous man of his day, had only one wife (Gen 7:13).
4. It is a qualification for an elder (Tit 1:6).
5. It is a qualification for a deacon (1 Tim 3:12).
6. It is a qualification for a worthy widow (1 Tim 5:9).
7. Every New Testament command for a husband or wife assumes monogamy in the commandments (Mk 10:12, 1 Cor 7:3, Eph 5:33, etc.).
8. The comparison of Christ and the church to a husband and wife relies on a monogamous design for marriage (Eph 5:22-23).
9. God clearly states it as His design for marriage in the New Testament (1 Cor 7:2).

On the same hand, there are multiple examples of the pitfalls of polygamy:

1. Sarah and Hagar fought (Gen 16:4).
2. Rachel and Leah fought over Jacob (Gen 29:30-31).
3. Hannah and Penninah’s rivalry (1 Sam 1:2-6)
4. Solomon’s idolatrous wives (1 Kings 11:4)

God allowed polygamy in the Old Testament because the Old Testament was a tutor designed to lead people toward a better and more permanent covenant (Gal 3:24-25).  David lived in a time when God allowed polygamy even though it wasn’t His long-term preference for mankind.  In the New Testament, we are told God desires for marriage to be between one man and one woman (1 Cor 7:2).

How do the gospel writers reapply the Law of Moses for the New Testaments communities of faith?  Also, what aspects of the Law, if any, are still in operation, and what aspects are no longer binding over God’s people? Thanks.

Sincerely,
Law Learner

Dear Law Learner,

Jesus was born a Jew (Matt 1:17), lived under the Jewish law (Lk 2:41-42), and even taught His fellow Jews to obey the Old Testament law (Matt 23:1-3).  Judaism was the right religion, until Jesus died on the cross and replaced Judaism with Christianity.  The Old Testament, the law the Jews followed, was a tutor to lead people to Christ, but after Jesus came, mankind was supposed to follow Him instead (Gal 3:24-25).  The Jewish law said that someday there would come a Messiah who would save them from their sins – Jesus was that Messiah (Jhn 1:45).  The Jewish law taught mankind that they needed a Savior, and that they should prepare for His coming.  Jesus came providing the grace and truth that wasn’t possible under Jewish law (Jhn 1:17).  Jesus’ death made a permanent sacrifice for sins that none of the Old Testament animal sacrifices ever could (Heb 10:1-4).

The Old Testament was a tutor to lead us to Christ (Gal 3:24), but now that Christ is here, He has fulfilled the law, and we are no longer bound by its laws (Gal 3:25).  The Old Testament still provides many wonderful examples and lessons of morality (1 Cor 10:11), but its specific laws no longer apply.

Help me try to harmonize these Scriptures (Matt 27: 3-8 and Acts 1: 18-19) about Judas when one says that he purchased a field, and the other says he left the money.

Sincerely,
Questioning Accounts

Dear Questioning Accounts,

Matt 27:3-8 and Acts 1:18-19 are two sides to the same story.  Matt 27:3-8 says that Judas threw the thirty pieces of silver back at the chief priests and elders.  The chief priests said that they couldn’t put the money back into the temple treasury because it was “blood money” (Matt 27:6), so they instead used the money to purchase the potter’s field (Matt 27:7).  In the Acts account, we see that they purchased the field using Judas’ silver, and they purchased it in Judas’ name (Acts 1:18).  That particular field was purchased because it was the one that Judas had hung himself in.  The field became synonymous with blood money and death because of the grisly details surrounding its purchase and Judas’ demise (Acts 1:19).

     Why are women no longer required to cover their hair when they come into a church?  Are we being disrespectful to God and our husbands by not covering our hair?

Sincerely,
Lady In Wonder

Dear Lady In Wonder,

Women must always have their heads covered while praying (1 Cor 11:5), but God has built into every woman a permanent head-covering – her hair (1 Cor 11:15).  God designed men and women differently… this should be no surprise to anyone that has ever dealt with the opposite gender!  Men are to be the leaders in the home (Eph 5:23) and the church (Tit 1:5-6).  Women are the heart of the family (Tit 2:4-5), and men are not complete without them (1 Cor 11:12).  Both genders are equal heirs of salvation, but they are designed with different strengths and roles (1 Pet 3:7).  One way that God signifies this is by having men look different from women.  When women have long hair and men have short hair – it pleases God (1 Cor 11:14-15).  There are varying degrees of long and short hair, but ultimately – men are to look like men, and women are to look like women.  This principle is even borne out in the Old Testament (Deut 22:5).  The teachings of 1 Cor 11:1-16 are simply teaching that a woman’s long hair is a God-given covering for her head, and men are not to have that same covering due to their varying roles in leadership.

     Jesus said “Get behind me, Satan!” in Matt 16:23 and Mark 8:33, but throughout the whole chapters of Matthew 16 and Mark 8, there are no details given if the devil is literally present at this scene or of him taking any action or starting a dialogue.  It just says Jesus mentioned the word “Satan.”  A buddy tells me that Peter is possessed by the devil, but I’m not so sure about that because he doesn’t act like a demoniac, and also Peter seems so concerned about Jesus after Christ telling him about His suffering and death.  Another buddy suggests that since Matt 16:23 says “Jesus turned and said to Peter…”, Christ is calling Peter a “Satan” or, more literally, an adversary, but how do you explain this?

Sincerely,
A Little Help Please

Dear A Little Help Please,

The word ‘satan’ literally just means ‘adversary’.  Context decides whether or not ‘satan’ is referring to the great adversary or just a normal adversary or opponent.  The latter part of Matt 16:23 makes it clear that Jesus is telling Peter that he is opposing God’s will and being an adversary to God’s plans.  There is no reason to believe Peter was possessed – Peter just wasn’t respecting God’s wishes.

     What is The Feast of Dedication that is mentioned in John 10:22?

Sincerely,
I Like Parties!

Dear I Like Parties,

The Feast of Dedication was a national Jewish holiday – but not one instituted by God.  Just like Americans have Veteran’s Day, Independence Day, etc., the Jews had several holidays that they regularly observed that had nothing to do with Old Testament law.  Judas Maccabee, a famous Jewish warrior (his nickname was Judas the Hammer), instituted the Feast of Dedication in 164 BC in commemoration of the day when they cleansed the temple after it had been defiled by Antiochus Epiphanes.  The feast began on the 18^th of December and lasted eight days.

      I have a friend at work that has raised a thought to ponder I have never heard of:

1. If Jesus Christ wrote any part of the New Testament, my friend speculated that those writings were destroyed.
2. If Jesus Christ did not write down any part of the New Testament (other than in the sand), then my friend’s question was: “Why not?” and are there any passages that answer that question?

Sincerely,
Caught Off Guard

Dear Caught Off Guard,

What your friend is doing is bringing up a hypothetical assertion and expecting you to disprove it.  That is the exact opposite of how the Bible works.  If someone wants to assert that Jesus wrote a part of the New Testament and that Jesus’ writings were later destroyed, he must come with evidence to back up such a claim.  The responsibility is on him to prove that point.

As far as why Jesus never wrote part of the New Testament, anything we say would be purely speculation.

    Was Mary, mother of Jesus, a physical descendant of David like her husband Joseph?  If not, then who did she descend from?

Sincerely,
Tracing The Tree

Dear Tracing The Tree,

Yes.  Mary was a descendant of David.  If you look at the two genealogies given for Jesus (one in Matt 1:1-17 and another in Lk 3:23-38) they aren’t exactly the same.  The reason for this is that one lineage for Jesus follows Joseph’s family and the other one follows Mary’s.

I am reading the Bible in one year.  I am 50% through and very proud of myself for finally making this commitment.  However, with reading the Bible, I have come across several confusing and contradicting things… too many to mention.  In Romans, it talks about how God chooses to show mercy to some and chooses to harden the hearts of others, so they refuse to listen.  Doesn’t this contradict our free will?

Sincerely,
Feeling Robotic

Dear Feeling Robotic,

The chapter you are referring to is Romans 9, and the controversial verse is Rom 9:18.  The point of this chapter is that God decides whom He wishes to show His mercy to – it is His decision, and those who are saved are saved because of His purpose and generosity.  The apostle Paul, the writer of Romans, gives three examples of how God’s purposes and plans are what matter:

1. God chose Jacob instead of Esau to be the one that Christ’s lineage would come through (Rom 9:10-13)
2. God used Pharaoh, even though he was a wicked man, to glorify His name (Rom 9:17)
3. God, as the master potter, decides what clay (in this case, people) to use and what purpose to use them for (Rom 9:20-21)

This chapter is often confusing to folks because it seems as if the point is that people don’t have freewill, and God manipulates us arbitrarily – however, that isn’t the case.  All of these examples teach that God decides who receives His mercy and who won’t.  Now, here is the B-I-G question:

Who does God say will be blessed?

The answer – “Blessed are they that hear the Word of God, and keep it.” (Lk 11:28)

God will bless all those who choose to live by faith in His Son and follow His Word – we can’t be saved by any other method.  God has decided who He will save.  He will save christians (Jhn 14:6).

The last shall be first, and the first shall be last… what does this mean?  Does it mean those who suffer, but keep their faith, will have priority over those who believed enough to get in heaven but had wealth on earth?

Sincerely,
Poor In Spirit

Dear Poor In Spirit,

One of the best explanations of that statement can be found in Mk 10:28-31.  Peter asked Jesus what would happen to the apostles because they had left everything to follow Him.  Jesus stated that those who sacrificed things in this life to serve God would receive a hundredfold more from Him as well as eternal life.  This is what it means for the first to be last and the last first – those who sacrifice to serve the Lord will be blessed by God for their service and faith.  God exalts the humble and brings the proud down (Matt 23:12).

     What does it mean in Matt 7:7 where it reads, “Knock and the door shall be opened unto you”?

Sincerely,
Who’s There?

Dear Who’s There,

Matt 7:7-11 is addressing our relationship with God and how God is willing to bless us if we will seek Him out.  In Acts 17:27, Paul said that we should seek God, and if we do, He is not far from us.  God wants to bless us and open His arms wide to us.  If we want to be saved and we want to be forgiven, all we have to do is reach out to Him.  If you want God to open the door, all you have to do is knock.  Read “Five Steps To Salvation” for how simple it is to become a christian and find forgiveness in Jesus.