Search
Whoever has questions concerning the Bible and the spiritual things can write to the editors; we will try our best to answer them. Please understand that unprofitable questions will not be answered.
Question: In Matthew 25:31-32 the Lord comes down to judge all the nations (referring to the Gentiles) to separate the sheep from the goats (referring to the saved ones and the unsaved ones). But at that time, how will the Gentiles be saved? Is it through faith (believing in the Lord Jesus as their Savior) or through works (done unto the least of the brothers)? If through works, then will the unbelievers who treat the believers well at this time be saved? Please explain in detail. (Yu, Kwangtung)
Answer: At the beginning of the great tribulation, the watchful saints will have already been raptured (Rev. 3:10). The saints who are not raptured and a small number of godly Jews will preach to the whole world the gospel of the kingdom of the heavens (somewhat different from the gospel of grace). Naturally, they will be persecuted. At that time, whoever treats these sent ones of God kindly will be saved. They will be saved because of their works; but we dare not say that they will not have any faith. By that time, the Lord Jesus will treat them according to the following principle: to receive the ones He sent, is to receive Himself. Today there is no other way to be saved except to believe in the Lord Jesus. Those who try to be saved by treating the believers well will still perish. Today is the age of grace; God only deals with man in grace. Because it is of grace, as long as you believe, you will be saved. But at the time of the great tribulation, it will be the age of law, and God will deal with man according to the law. Because it will be of the law, it will be a matter of works. Today it is utterly impossible for anyone to be saved through works (Gal. 3:11). Just as today men cannot be saved through the sacrifices (the Old Testament way of salvation), in the same way they cannot be saved through treating the believers well (the coming age's way of salvation).
Question: In Matthew 24:36 the Lord said, "But concerning that day and hour, no one knows, not even the angels of the heavens nor the Son...." Since the Son and the Father are one, why does the Father know something but the Son not know it? Perhaps the number of the saved ones is not fulfilled, and the Father's will is not yet accomplished, and therefore, the day and the hour depend on the Father's satisfaction. Please explain in detail. (Yu, Kwangtung)
Answer: In the four Gospels this word was recorded only in Mark 13:32. (Please read the footnote on Matthew 24:36 in Joseph Shih's (?) translation.) This fully matches the nature of the Gospel of Mark which portrays the Lord Jesus as a servant. The reason the Lord said these words was not that He knew the time but would not say it, nor that the time will be decided when the Father is satisfied. In reading the Bible, the hardest thing for us to do is to differentiate between the divine nature and the human nature of the Lord Jesus. Sometimes we can differentiate between the two; at other times we cannot do it. Sometimes it seems as if we can make a distinction, and at other times it seems as if we cannot do it. Here the Lord Jesus was referring to His humanity; it shows that He Himself was a fully humble servant, who knew nothing except to accept His Master's will. When we read the four Gospels, the most important thing is to remember that the Lord Jesus has both the divine and the human nature. Sometimes they only speak of His human nature, sometimes they only speak of His divine nature, and sometimes they speak of both His divine and human natures. Those who understand this will be saved from many misunderstandings.
Question: The number of gospel preachers has increased in recent years. They all use the name Jesus as their entrance into preaching. But what do the "false prophets" mentioned in the Bible refer to? What is the way to identify them? (Ju, Chekiang)
Answer: If we know what kind of persons the false prophets are, we will know how to identify them. Our Lord spoke of them (Matt. 24:24), Paul spoke of them (Acts 20:29-30; 1 Tim. 4; 2 Tim. 3), Peter spoke of them (2 Pet. 2:1), John spoke of them (1 John 2:4), and Jude also spoke of them. The characteristic of the false prophets is to tell lies! Please read Jeremiah 14:14; 23:25; 27:10, 14; Ezekiel 13:8. False prophets deviate from the Bible and reject it (Jer. 5:13; 23:16, 26, 30; 29:9; Ezek. 13:3, 6, 17). They promise people vain and fleeting prosperity and pleasure (Jer. 6:14; Ezek. 13:19; Jer. 14:13, 15-16; 23:17, 21; 27:9; 28:16). They are greedy (Jer. 6:3; Micah 3:11). The message that they preach is somewhat religious on the surface, but it actually helps people to do evil (Jer. 5:31; 23:14, 27, 32; Ezek. 13:22). Today the false prophets in the church are those who call themselves "modernists"; actually they are atheists. All their behavior is exactly the same as that of the false prophets spoken of in the Bible. They speak lies. They do not believe in the Bible. They tell people to reform themselves, and they give people empty hopes. They are greedy for glory from man. Their doctrines are only covered with a religious cloak but will cause people to perish. The Bible commands us to love our enemies, but regarding those who preach heresy, there are also some instructions (2 John 10; Jude 3). May we be faithful.
Question: Those who have received the Holy Spirit now speak in tongues. But others do not understand their tongues. Are these tongues the same as the tongues spoken of in the Bible? (Ju, Chekiang)
Answer: Some of the tongues mentioned in the Bible are not understood by others (1 Cor. 14:7-9), but they are still human languages (v. 21). Lately, the tongues spoken by those who claim they can speak in tongues are not dialects of any people in any country or in any place; they are merely a kind of yelling and shouting. These are not the tongues spoken of in the Bible.
Question: I wonder how one should view the new, recently established True Jesus Church established by Barnabas Chang.
Answer: First, we should not criticize others, but for the sake of the truth we must reject heresy. Our present need is to speak the truth in love. The True Jesus Church is a heretical organization. They put aside the salvation of the cross and do not preach it. They emphasize only the Holy Spirit; but what they have actually received are evil spirits. Their exposition of the Bible is a hodgepodge of unrelated texts, an arbitrary, nonsensical speaking that is not even worthy for the knowledgeable ones to laugh at. We should contend against their various heresies (Jude 3), but our speaking should be seasoned with salt (Col. 4:6). On our part, we should pray for the ones deceived by the devil that they be set free. If there is a believer who believes that the spirit he has received is genuine, you should ask him to do according to 1 John 4:1 and 2. This assembly is totally Satan's deceiving work. What a shame that the deceived ones are not aware of this.
Question: How do you explain "appointed" in 1 Peter 2:8? Some say that those who stumble at the word were all appointed by God, just as the believers also are appointed by God. Some others say, "Not so, God can only appoint people to be saved; God cannot appoint people not to be saved. Some stumble because God allows them to misuse their own right. So the word `appointed' here really means that God already has established the principle that whoever trusts in Him will not be put to shame, but whoever does not obey will surely be stumbled." Which of these two explanations is correct, and which one is wrong? Please instruct me in detail, or offer another explanation. (Song, Anhwei)
Answer: God predestinated believers to be saved. The teaching of predestination is never applied to unbelievers. God never predestinated people to perish. It is wrong to say that "God can only appoint people to be saved," and it is also wrong to say that "God cannot appoint people not to be saved." God only predestinated people to be saved; He did not predestinate them not to be saved. The word "can" should be deleted from both sentences. The first one is wrong, because God wants all men to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4) and does not appoint anyone to perish. The problem of 1 Peter 2:8 is a mistake. In Acts 13:48 the original word for appointed is tasso. In Romans 8:29-30 and Ephesians 1:5 and 11, the original word for predestinated is proorizo. But here in 1 Peter 2:8, appointed is neither tasso nor proorizo but tithemi. The meaning of this word is not "ordained." The world-famous Greek scholar Mr. Young said the meaning of this word is "to set," "to place." So the meaning here is this: no one has been predestinated to be disobedient; hence, all disobedient ones are therefore appointed to (in the sense of being set or placed in) a place of stumbling. Whoever stumbles on this stone shall be broken; on whomever this stone shall fall, it will break him into pieces (Matt. 21:44).
Question: Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10 record the story of a centurion asking for healing; why is one written in a subjective way and the other in an objective way? (Sang, Yangzhou)
Answer: What is recorded here is not two incidents. Neither is it one incident in two contradicting records. The fact is that: the centurion first sent someone to see the Lord, then later he himself came. The sequence is as follows. First is Luke 7:3-5, where he sent men to Jesus, then is Luke 7:6a, where the men came back. Next is Luke 7:6b-8 and Matthew 8:8-9, where he himself went also. This way of recording is completely in harmony with the nature of Matthew and Luke. Matthew deleted the record of the centurion sending the other Jews, but Luke did the opposite. Matthew deleted all that would make the Jews proud. Luke wrote to the Gentiles and related the goodness of the centurion through the mouth of the Jews. This is written for their benefit.
Question: What does corpse in Matthew 24:28 refer to? And what do vultures refer to? I am looking forward to receiving your instruction soon. (Chao, Reho)
Answer: The corpse refers to those who join Antichrist. The vultures refer to sins or judgment. Please read the answer to Mr. Lui in the seventh issue of this magazine.
Question: What does the phrase under the earth in Philippians 2:10 mean? Is it the same as your explanation for 1 Peter 3:19 in the first issue of this magazine? (Wong, Chekiang)
Answer: Hades (of which Paradise is a part) is under the earth. We have the following verses to prove it: Acts 2:31 compared to Matthew 12:40; Numbers 16:30-33. Tartarus (hell in 2 Pet. 2:4) means the deepest pit. Naturally, it is also under the earth. The bottomless pit is also under the earth (Rev. 9:1-2). So Philippians 2:10 means that the Lord Jesus is the Lord over everything in heaven, on earth, and under the earth, for there is a spirit world under the earth.
Question: How to explain Ephesians 4:8-10? (Wong, Chekiang)
Answer: In the preceding verse Paul was speaking of the gift of the Lord Jesus. Now he wants to show that the Lord is the Giver of the gift, and the gifts are for men. "When He ascended up on high, He led the one who captures men captive" (original text). Who was the Lord Jesus' captive? The one who captures men is Satan (Heb. 2:14; Col. 2:15). When the believers died, they would have been imprisoned by the devil. This is the meaning of captivity. Therefore, the devil is called "the one who captures men." But when the Lord Jesus resurrected and ascended, He captured the men-capturing Satan, thus enabling the saints, though in Hades, to escape from the power of the devil. (This is why (1) the gates of Hades shall not prevail against the church, (2) the keys of Hades are in the Lord's hand, and (3) Hades becomes Paradise to the saints (Luke 23:43)). Matthew 27:52-53 is a proof of this. "And gave gifts to men." Before Christ resurrected and ascended, He did not give gifts to men. He first warred, then He won the victory. These gifts are the gifts of the Holy Spirit mentioned in Ephesians 4:11. He died, He won the victory, and He gave gifts to men. But from where did He "ascend"? He first "descended into the lower parts of the earth." He died, descended into Hades, and overcame Satan and the power of death; then He ascended. "He who descended, He is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens." The One who descended is also the One who ascended. What was the purpose for Him to do all these things? It is for the purpose that He would "fill all things." When He descended, He gained all under the earth; when He ascended, He gained the heavens. The meaning of the whole passage is that since the Lord Jesus died, resurrected, ascended, overcame the enemy, and filled all things, He is able to give gifts to men. These words are a quote of Psalm 68:18-19. He had to ascend on high to take the enemy captive before He could give gifts to men. (In Psalm 68:18, "the rebellious" refers to the Jews. Because this second part of the verse has nothing to do with the Gentiles, the apostle only quoted the first half of this verse). In Ephesians 4:9 and 10 the apostle proves that the Lord Jesus is that One who ascended and who took captives.
Question: Jehovah promised David that He would establish his kingdom forever, that his throne would be established forever, and so forth (2 Sam. 7). God simply wanted to fulfill this word in Christ (Acts 13:23; Matt. 2:5-6). Later, David gave the seal of the kingdom to his son, Solomon, who succeeded him on his throne as the bona fide king (1 Kings 1 --2). If this were the case, his throne should have continued until Christ, according to the Lord's promise. However, as we see in Jeremiah 22:30, because Jeconiah committed sins, Jehovah cut off his seed and did not allow him to be king to sit upon the throne of David! How then could his descendant, Jesus, sit upon the throne of David?
Answer: This matter shows that the Lord Jesus had to be born through the virgin Mary. It does not mean that Jeconiah did not have any sons. Jeremiah 22 merely says that his sons cannot be king. Matthew 1:12 even says that he begot Salathiel. Matthew 1:16 says, "...Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ." Christ was not born of Joseph. Joseph was the descendant of Jeconiah (Matt. 1:12-16), but the Lord Jesus was not the descendant of Joseph. Hence, He was not the descendant of Jeconiah and could therefore sit upon the throne of David. If, according to the modernists, the Lord Jesus had been born of Joseph, then they would not have the right to call Him Christ.
Question: According to 1 Chronicles 3:15-16, 2 Kings 24:17, and 2 Chronicles 36:10, is Zedekiah Jehoiakim's uncle or brother?
Answer: Zedekiah was Jehoiakim's uncle (2 Kings 24:17). Wordsworth said that in the original text of 2 Chronicles 36:10, the words his brother could be translated "his father's brother," that is, his uncle. Concerning 1 Chronicles 3:15-16, we should know the way in which the writer wrote the genealogy. Zedekiah was Josiah's third son (v. 15). But why was Zedekiah also the son of his nephew Jeconiah? (Verse 16 should be translated, "Jehoiakim's son is Jeconiah. Jeconiah's son is Zedekiah.") It is because the sons here are like the Chinese succession of rulers: a person appoints his uncle to succeed him as the ruler, so the uncle becomes his son. Here is a record of the genealogy of all the legal rulers. Zedekiah succeeded Jeconiah as king, so his name was recorded twice. If this is not the explanation, how can it be possible that the same person is recorded wrongly from one verse to the next! If we understand the style of the Bible, we will have fewer doubts.
Question: The Bible only asks people not to become drunken, but it does not ask people to abstain from drinking. Furthermore, Jesus changed water into wine, and He Himself also drank wine (Matt. 11:19). Should Christians try their best to abstain from drinking, or can they drink? Actually, in the church today some even drink wine openly. What should we do?
Answer: It is true that the Bible has not asked people to abstain from drinking. The New Testament commandment is to not be drunk with wine (Eph. 5:18). It is permissible to drink a little, but the concern is that a little may become a lot. As to what the Lord Jesus changed the water into, it was new wine. I myself do not drink wine, but neither do I abstain from wine, that is, from the cooking wine. If there is a drunkard in the church, he should be excommunicated (1 Cor. 5:9-13). Concerning this matter, we should follow 1 Corinthians 8:13.
Question: I heard that a great American Bible expositor found out through his research that the Lord's death indeed occurred in A.D. 30, on Wednesday, April 5th, from 9 o'clock in the morning to 6 o'clock in the afternoon. Yet now the church always commemorates the Lord's death on Fridays. Furthermore, according to John 19:31 it should clearly be Friday. However, since John 20:1 says that on the first day of the week (that is Sunday), early in the morning while it was yet dark, they could not find Jesus in the tomb, I think He must have resurrected about midnight. If it was really on Friday, then the Lord Jesus died on that day in the late afternoon, and I think it must have been late at night when He was buried in the tomb. According to this calculation, how could the Lord have been in the tomb three days and three nights? Actually, it was only one day and one and a half nights. Which of these two dates is the correct one?
Answer: The idea that the Lord Jesus died on Friday is from the Roman Catholic Church. The saints who believe in the Bible have already denied this. But what a shame that the average person is still defenseless under the lasting effect of this poison. As far as the idea of a Wednesday death is concerned, Bible expositors from many countries also have this thought, but this would put the Lord Jesus in the heart of the earth for more than three days and three nights. The word of the Bible is the most reliable. Let us look at the Bible's own testimony. Matthew 12:40 says, "So will the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights." And 16:21 says, He will "on the third day be raised." Putting these two verses together, we know that the three days and three nights the Lord Jesus spoke about are not absolute. Rather, they refer to the third day. Luke 24 says that on the day of His resurrection the Lord Jesus met two disciples while they were on the way to Emmaus. As they talked about the death of the Lord Jesus, the disciples said, "Today is the third day since these things were done" (KJV). "Today" is the resurrection day. The Lord Jesus was resurrected the third day after He died. This is what Luke 24:21 says. The Lord Jesus was resurrected on the first day (Sunday) of the seven days. Three days ago was the fifth day of the seven days, which is our Thursday. The Lord Jesus died on Thursday. Hence, there is no contradiction between "the third day" and the word concerning three days and three nights. Part of Thursday, Friday, and Saturday constitute three days; and Thursday night, Friday night, and Saturday night constitute three nights. There also is no conflict between "After three days He will rise" (Mark 9:31) and "on the third day be raised." In 1 Kings 12:5 the king told the people to depart "for three days." Verse 12 says that according to the king's word they came back "the third day." Therefore, according to the biblical reckoning, "the third day" equals "after three days." The Bible does not command us to keep the so-called Good Friday or "Easter." These are just worldly pretenses to entertain the flesh, and they are altogether unprofitable for the spiritual life. The Bible only commands us to remember the Lord at His supper (1 Cor. 11:24-25).
Question: In Luke 22:36 and 38 the Lord Jesus asked the disciples to sell their garments and buy swords. The disciples answered that there were two swords there. The Lord said that it was enough. But in Matthew 26:52 the Lord told the disciples not to use a sword. Is there any contradiction in these two portions of the Bible? How can one interpret Luke 22 which says that it was enough to have two swords. Please explain to me in detail. (Hsu, Kwangtung)
Answer: This question is one that Christians understand the least. We can examine and investigate it in detail. The passage where the Lord Jesus commanded the disciples to buy swords is recorded in Luke 22:35-38. This passage of the Bible has two problems that we must first resolve before we can begin to examine and investigate it. (1) Can we spiritualize the interpretation of these two swords? (2) If we cannot spiritualize it, then did the Lord Jesus ask the disciples to use the swords for fighting?
(1) We cannot interpret these two swords in a spiritual sense because, when the Lord Jesus commanded the disciples to prepare things, He did not command them to buy only swords. Verse 36 says, "Let him who has a purse take it, likewise also a bag; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one." The Lord here commanded them to prepare three things. If the sword signifies something, then the purse must also signify something, and so must the bag. If the purse is the purse and the bag is the bag, then the sword must also be the sword. We cannot say that the two swords refer to the New and the Old Testaments, or to the two robbers, or to any other things. A sword is a sword; we cannot interpret it in a spiritual sense. How unfair it is if every time we come across a difficult verse that we do not understand, we try to interpret it in a spiritual sense! (2) If the sword is a sword, then was it the intention of the Lord Jesus to ask them to buy swords and use them for fighting? No. There are three reasons: (a) There were eleven disciples besides Judas. If the Lord Jesus were to ask them to solve the problem by force, how could two swords be enough for eleven people? When the disciples said that there were two swords, the Lord Jesus stopped and did not say anything more. He did not ask them to buy nine more, which shows that it was not His original intention to buy swords and use force. (b) If the Lord Jesus' original intention was to use force, then Peter had already done so; he had tried to solve the problem by force already. Nevertheless, the Lord Jesus opposed him, saying, "Return your sword to its place, for all those who take up the sword will perish by the sword" (Matt. 26:52). (c) If the Lord Jesus had wanted them to use force, then this would have been entirely contrary to the teaching that says "not to resist him who is evil" (5:38-44).
We have concluded that (1) the sword is a sword and that (2) buying the swords was not for the purpose of using force. What then was the Lord Jesus' intention in saying what He said? How do we get the true interpretation? To get the true interpretation, we must first know a few things: (1) Although the sword the Lord Jesus spoke of was a real sword, His intention was not regarding the sword. If He really wanted the disciples to buy swords, but they had only two swords, should they not buy more so that there would be enough? (2) The Lord Jesus' heart was not set on the sword only. What He spoke of was the purse, the bag, and the sword. The sword is just one of the three. (3) At that time in Judea there were many robbers on the public roads (Luke 10:30), so that almost every Jew carried a sword. Swords at that time were just like today's walking sticks. (4) This whole passage (Luke 22:35-38) is concerning the events of that night. Verse 37 seemingly has no connection with the rest of the passage. If we do not understand verse 37, then we surely cannot interpret this portion of the Scripture. To interpret the Bible we should take care of the context of the verses. We cannot carelessly delete a verse that we do not understand, and then go on to interpret the rest. (5) We should know the background behind the Lord Jesus' word in verse 36. Why would the Lord Jesus say this? When did the Lord Jesus say this? We must know these things. (6) We must remember that we cannot interpret this portion of the Word in a spiritual sense, and that the sword is not for fighting.
Now we can follow these points to slowly examine and investigate these verses. Verse 35 says, "And He said to them, When I sent you without purse and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you? And they said, Nothing." Here the Lord Jesus reminded them of the way He first sent them out. When they went out at that time, they had no purse, no bag, and no shoes. But neither had they any lack. Why did they not lack anything? This record of sending is recorded in Luke 9 and Matthew 10. Matthew's record is in more detail, so let us read it here. At that time the Lord Jesus sent them out to preach the gospel of the kingdom to the house of Israel. At that time, the Lord Jesus demonstrated His authority as the Messiah. When the disciples went to preach, they preached for the purpose that men would receive Him as the Messiah. The worker is worthy of his food (Matt. 10:10). Hence, they did not have to prepare their own sustenance (v. 9) and would have no lack (Luke 22:35). This was the result of the authority of the Lord Jesus as Messiah. What about now? The Lord Jesus had already manifested Himself to the children of Israel. But they would not receive Him. Rather, they rejected Him again and again. What should He do now? "He was counted with the lawless" (v. 37). He was to be crucified. Not only did men not want Him to be the Messiah, they swore to kill Him. (This is the meaning of verse 37.) Now He was about to fulfill the Scriptures to suffer and to lose the authority of the glorious Messiah. As such, He could no longer exercise His Messianic authority to make preparations for His sent ones. Although earlier they were without lack even when they did not make preparations for the purse, the bag, or the shoes, by that time, it could not be so any longer. "But now, let him who has a purse take it, likewise also a bag; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one" (v. 36). "Because I will be crucified and rejected by men as the Messiah, the supply and protection that you received before on account of My being your Messiah will now be stopped (temporarily). You have to prepare for yourselves." This is what the Lord Jesus meant in these three verses.
The first part of verse 36, "But now," is most important. It shows us that by then the time had changed. "But now" refers to that period of time from the beginning of the supper to the time of crucifixion. During this period of time the Lord Jesus was in fact rejected by the world. The real intention of the Lord Jesus in speaking to His disciples was not that they would pay attention to their purses, bags, or swords, but that they would understand the position He was in at that time and that they would know that He was soon to be crucified. But the disciples did not understand what He meant. Instead, they thought the Lord Jesus was actually referring to the purse, the bag, and the sword. Their thoughts were totally dominated by material things. Even up to this time, they still had no spiritual knowledge. (Please read John 21:22-23.) Also, deep within them, they were inclined to use force and to exercise the weapons of the flesh. This is why they answered the Lord, saying, "Lord, behold, here are two swords" (Luke 22:38). They thought that the Lord really wanted the swords! The Lord answered, "It is enough." What does this word, It is enough really refer to? First, it definitely does not refer to the swords. How can the two swords be enough for eleven people? The meaning of the Lord's word was not that the two swords were enough. Otherwise, when Peter used one of the swords, why did the Lord rebuke him? Therefore, the "enough" must refer to something else. The Lord Jesus knew that His disciples were still not able to receive His word; their thoughts were still in the old creation. What He was saying was, "It is enough --there is no need to say anything more. You cannot understand My word." "It is enough" here has the same meaning as the Chinese expression, "That is all," but with more gentleness and less coldness and harshness. What a pity that just as the disciples did not understand on that day, in the same way people do not understand today. The disciples did not understand the Lord's word. That is why later they asked, "Lord, shall we strike with the sword?" (v. 49). Today, those who do not understand the Lord's word (Matt. 5) still foolishly ask the same question. To the disciples' astonishment the Lord answered, "For all those who take up the sword will perish by the sword." There should be no "Christ-soldiers" on this earth!
