Dale Robbins

• About this site

• About this site

A mini coloring book and small posters to help the Sunday school teacher tell the story of Elijah ascending to heaven in a chariot of fire.

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

Could we support the thought of a paid overseer, who “labours in the Word and doctrine,” from 1 Timothy 5:17, 18;" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:17, 18; 1 Peter 5:2-4" TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 5:2-4? and why the mention of “filthy lucre,” if the pastorate were not a paid office?

The word translated, “honour,” (time) in 1 Timothy 5:17," TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:17, is in forty occurrences, out of fifty, so translated; in eight others, “price”; “sum” in Acts 7:16," TARGET="_blank">Acts 7:16, and in 1 Peter 2:7," TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 2:7, “precious.” It is always, “honour,” in the Epistles to Timothy (see 1 Timothy 1:17;" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 1:17; 1 Timothy  6:10, 16; 2 Timothy 2:20, 21)." TARGET="_blank">2 Timothy 2:20, 21). There does not appear any necessity to change the word here: “honour,” “respect,” “consideration,” are quite adequate. However, even if we adopted the sense of monetary payment, it would only be in recognition of spiritual services rendered, not as a fixed salary.

The form of the exhortation seems to preclude the idea of money due, whether the services have been well done or perchance left undone. “Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who LABOUR in the word and doctrine.” The principle that a teacher or evangelist has a right to “live by the gospel” is clearly taught in the Scriptures (see 1 Corinthians 9:7-14)," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 9:7-14), provided he teaches or evangelises.

There is no idea of a “living” or ecclesiastical title or office. Assemblies which utilise their brethren’s gift are quite right to remember these adequately, and not to take too easily for granted that the preacher does not need anything beyond his bare expenses. As for the “Peter” passage, we can see no hint that what the questioner calls “the pastorate” was to be filled by a salaried official.

The elders, in the plural, are addressed here, as in the other passage, nor can we find the idea of the “presiding elder” or of “the pastor” of a church in this or in any other Scripture. Here the exhortation, “not for filthy lucre,” seems to preclude a stated salary. A servant of the Lord truly looking to Him for his support, is not serving for filthy lucre. The man who is receiving so much salary according to an arrangement, is bound, if he is a conscientous man to give a good money’s worth. The only man that I can find in the Scriptures, who agreed to do so much spiritual work (in this case as “a priest”) for so much pay, was Jonathan, the grandson of Moses (though not of the family of Aaron), and his salary was ten shekels of silver per annum, a suit of clothes and his meals (Judges 17:10)." TARGET="_blank">Judges 17:10). He broke the contract, only when a better living was offered him (Judges 18:19)." TARGET="_blank">Judges 18:19).

W.H.

• About this site

Is it scriptural to suggest that King Saul is now enjoying the rest of heaven?

Though we should shrink from usurping God’s prerogative in such matters, I fear I know no Scripture which would certainly justify such a statement. It is true he was chosen of God to be King over His people, at their demand, as indeed to-day “the powers that be are ordained of God,” but without any guarantee as to spiritual condition. He was chosen, but it was to suit the people’s choice; he was not a man after God’s own heart. He certainly manifested pleasing traits, now and again, especially at the commencement of his reign, when he comes before us as “a choice young man” :—in fact one of Adam’s best! and he was religious, too, as long as it was convenient, but as soon as any other interest intervened, he broke down lamentably, e.g., in the case of Amalek. He did prophesy on two occasions, but Matthew 7:21-23" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 7:21-23 declares plainly that even this is compatible with a dead faith.

Like the apostates of Hebrews 6," TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 6, he tasted of spiritual powers, but he was deprived of these for his sins. He could easily pass over disobedience to God’s commands (e.g., 1 Samuel 14:32)," TARGET="_blank">1 Samuel 14:32), but when, in the same chapter, the victor Jonathan innocently disobeyed his trivial prohibition, he would have slain him on the spot, had he had his way. The characteristic fruits he bore were envy, jealousy and a murderous spirit to all who opposed him. He had the whole house of Aaron mercilessly and unrighteously butchered in one day, though one of them did escape. He attempted David’s innocent life again and again. He deliberately broke God’s law in consulting the witch of Endor, and he died by his own hand, without any sign of repentance. It is a sad record. The fact that Samuel’s spirit said, “To-morrow thou and thy Sons shall be with me,” is not out of harmony with the belief that till our Lord’s resurrection the Paradise of the departed saints formed one compartment of Hades, the intermediate abode of all the dead.

W.H.

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

What is the difference in Isaiah 9:6" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 9:6 between the expressions the “child born” and the “Son given”?

There is an important difference, I believe, and one which the exponents of what they term “the New Light,” as to the Eternal Sonship of our Lord, would do well to consider. Why is the “child” said to be “born,” but the “Son” not born, but “given”? We read in Isaiah 7:14" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 7:14 that God had been pleased to offer to king Ahaz a sign to confirm his doubting soul, that the line of David would not be superseded by the son of Tabeal, according to the Satanic design of Rezin and Pekah, which would have set aside the purpose of God regarding His future King, who must be of the seed of David according to the flesh. Ahaz had liberty of choice; he might ask for any sign in the depth, that is commensurate with the drying up of the Red Sea, or in the height commensurate with the standing still of the sun in answer to Joshua’s prayer. The king who was continually tempting God by his disobedience, refused this offer: He would not tempt the Lord, he said. Very well, then, the Lord will give a sign greater than any other known so far in the history of the world—the Virgin Birth of Him who was God:
“Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call His name Immanuel” (v. 14). A great effort of unbelief has been made to show that the word,” ‘almãh,” translated “virgin,” should be rather rendered “young married woman.” Such an objection hardly shows unusual scholarship, so much as a lack of common sense; for the fact of a young married woman having a son would be no sign at all. In this verse, in the phrase “a virgin shall.. . bear a son,” the same verb is used as in Isaiah 9:6," TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 9:6, “a child is born.” Here the Son is viewed as the Son of
Mary in the sense of Matthew 1:25" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 1:25 “She brought forth her first-born Son.” Why then is the “Son” said to be “given” in Isaiah 9:6" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 9:6? The reason is that there the One born is viewed as the One who had already been Son from all eternity. He could not become that by human birth. The child was born, but God gave His Eternal Son.

W.H.

• About this site

Free Printable Bible Lessons

at Gospel Hall dot org include the following pages:

- 3d printable objects such as the printable model of the tabernacle for use in a single Sunday school class session.  This printable paper craft can be done in about one hour with the help of a team of students working cooperatively.  Other printable sunday school lessons in this section include the Exodus from Egypt to Canaan wilderness journey, the woman at the well 3d printable lesson, and a craft for the 12 disciples in a boat during the storm.

- Sunday school worksheet puzzles include Crossword, wordfind, fill in the blank, and coloring pages.

Key words - Sunday School lesson printables, paper models, puzzles, games, children bible crafts.

• About this site

When did the 2,300 days in Daniel 8:14" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 8:14 commence and end?

What sanctuary was to be cleansed at the end of that period?

No doubt, all questions concerning what it has pleased God to reveal to us, have their importance, and so with these, but they gain a certain fictitious importance, whether the questioner knows it or not, owing to the use or rather misuse made of the above passage by the so-called Seventh-day Adventists, to build up their arbitrary and altogether unscriptural system of interpretation, which nullifies the atoning work of Christ in its present application to the believer, and justification by faith alone. The originator of the system was a certain W. Miller, who foretold the return of the Lord to the earth on a certain day in 1844. His followers in white garments were expecting the event on that day. When it failed to realise, Miller was himself rid of his idea and confessed his error, and the whole system would have collapsed had not one of Miller’s adepts, a certain Mrs. Ellen ‘White imagined a way of escape to account for the evident failure of Miller’s prophecy. A mistake had been made, she affirmed: the Lord had come, not to earth, however, but to the most holy place of the sanctuary in heaven to complete, (!) the work of atonement. He had till then (i.e., up to 1844) been “pleading in the first apartment” of the sanctuary on behalf of penitent believers, and thus securing their pardon and acceptance with the Father, yet their sins still remained upon the books of record. So that, according to this heory, the sins of believers, though pardoned, still remained upon the books of record, and are supposed to be constantly defiling the heavenly sanctuary. Could anyone imagine a more arbitrary, selfc9ntradictory, or unscriptural system? It rejects the efficacy of His blood to cleanse from all sin. It denies that God has not only forgiven, but has also blotted out His people’s sins from the book of His renembrance—”Their sins and their iniquities will I remember no møre.” The whole theory of “the sanctuary” being in heaven, and that ou Lord was up to 1844 in the “first apartment” of it, is pure imagination, In any case, “the veil was rent at the cross from the top to the bottom”, so that since then, the sanctuary could be no more divided into two apartments, that is, into Holy Place and Holy of Holies. Moreover,, Heb. 8." TARGET="_blank">Heb. 8. i and 9. a. tell us that the place of our Lord’s priestly work is where He is now and has been since His ascension—”on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens”; “in heaven itself now to appear in the presence of God for us.” That was true when “Hebrews” was written, and there is not a line to prove that any other entrance into any other part of the heavenly sanctuary was ever contemplated or took place, still less that such an event would occur in 1844. I believe the prophecy of Daniel does not deal directly with the church at all, but with God’s earthly people, Israel. The sanctuary that is spoken of in chap. 8. 13-14 is the literal sanctuary of the temple at Jerusalem, and “the 2,300 days” are, in fact, days, not years. This passage ought to be read with chap. 9. 27, where we see that the period in question is the last “week” or period of seven years, of the 70 weeks of years (lit. Heb., “seven of sevens”*), during which the covenant will be made between the Man of Sin, the last governmental head of the revived Roman Empire, who is called in Daniel 9:26" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 9:26 “the Prince that shall come”, and the last false King of Israel, the Antichrist. This covenant will be broken in the midst of the week (v. 27), that is after 3 years: the daily sacrifice will be taken away and the Sanctuary of the Temple will in some way be defiled (see Daniel 11:31)" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 11:31) by what is called “the abomination of desolation”, or in more usual language, the image of the beast set up in it, “standing in the holy place” (Matthew 24:15)." TARGET="_blank">Matthew 24:15). It is this vile image which will defile the sanctuary, and it will only be cleansed at the coming of the Lord at the end of the 2,300 days. Seven prophetic years is a period of 2,520 days, so that the time will be 220 days, or a little more than 7 months, short of this. This may be accounted for by God’s shortening of the days of persecution by the two Beasts for the elect’s sake, according to Matt. 24. 22." TARGET="_blank">Matt. 24. 22. There are those who fancy that Seventh-day Adventism is a more or less harmless system taken up with perhaps strange views on the Coming of the Lord. It is a deadly heretical  system which denies the fundamentals of the faith, nullifies the atone-, ment, attributes a sinful nature to our Holy Lord, makes Satan the ultimate bearer of Christians’ sins, and insists on his final annihilation and that of all the wicked dead. W.H.

* This is not the same as the day-year theory that every day can be taken for a year, because
the siord for “week” ia period of “seven”, it may b days, weeks or years.

• About this site

Using a special deck of Bible game cards that you can download from this site , you can help your Bible class students learn the Books of the Bible through games.  Seven card Games for learning the names of the books of the Bible.

1. Memory print two sets of these cards. Turn them face down and find the pairs. Use only New Testament cards for a shorter game.

2. Go Fish or Old Maid Print two sets of Bible cards. Shuffle and deal. Use the traditional rules. Use only New Testament cards for a shorter game.

3. Lay them straight. Sequence race Shuffle the deck and give each team (or player) 10 cards. When the dealer says “go”, lay them out in order. The first team to put them in order wins.

4. Uno or SkipBo inspired game - similar to the popular card game except with fewer rules and different cards from books of the Bible.

5. Phase 10 inspired game - similar to the popular card game, but with Bible cards and different phase goals.

6. Solitaire - adapted from the classic single player game, but with Bible books.

Check out the other 200+ games, puzzles and Bible lessons in the Sunday school seciton of this site.

• About this site

Are we to believe that God the Father has angels (Revelation 3:5)," TARGET="_blank">Revelation 3:5), Christ some (2 Thessalonians 1:7)," TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 1:7), and Michael some (Revekation 12:7)?

Or are they all the same?

Though we recognise in the Scriptures that the Divine Persons are co-equal, co-eternal, and co-substantial, that is that each possesses the whole Divine essence in the Unity of the Godhead, we equally see distinctions between the Persons, and differences of relation and function; also conditions of subordination between them for mutual purposes, and this not only since the Incarnation, but eternally and necessarily so by the Divine law of their Being. Thus the Father is revealed as Source—the Fountain of all things. He originates, He purposes, He is the Creator of all things. He is the Father of Spirits, and therefore of the angels, who belong to the spiritual creation, so that they may with the utmost propriety be termed “The Father’s angels.” Then on the other hand, the Son was the Agent in Creation—”All things were made by Him,” including “all things that are in heaven,’ and in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, or principalities or powers: all things were created by Him and for Him” (John 1: 3;" TARGET="_blank">John 1: 3; Colossians 1" TARGET="_blank">Colossians 1:i6). He, too, is said to be “Head of all principality and power” (Colossians 2:10)." TARGET="_blank">Colossians 2:10). In such phrases are inclusively described “the innumerable company of angels—the general assembly” (Hebrews 12: 22, 23)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 12: 22, 23). These may then be equally called Christ’s angels. To say that they are the Father’s and not the Son’s, or the Son’s not the Father’s, is to ignore our Lord’s words, “All that the Father hath are Mine” (John 16: 15)," TARGET="_blank">John 16: 15), or “All Mine are Thine and Thine are Mine” (John  17:io). That is, even when the Father is said to give anything to the Son, it does not cease to be the Father’s. In the cases cited above— Revelation 3" TARGET="_blank">Revelation 3: , the Lord is speaking of His Father and naturally He speaks of the angels in relation to Him (His angels), but in 2 Thessalonians 1: 7," TARGET="_blank">2 Thessalonians 1: 7, the Spirit is describing the return in glory of the Son, and here the angels are spoken of, as we should expect, as His angels, because related to Him. But we do not for that conceive of the angels as divided into two companies, the Father’s and Christ’s. The case of Michael’s angels is very simple and quite distinct. They are not his in the same sense as above, but they are the angels put under his command for a certain purpose. Michael is five times mentioned in the Bible—thrice in Daniel 10:13" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 10:13 “One of the chief (“the first” of marg.) princes”; v. 21, “your prince”; and Daniel 12:1" TARGET="_blank">Daniel 12:1 , “the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people.” Then in Jude 1:9" TARGET="_blank">Jude 1:9 as “the archangel”; and lastly, in Revelation 12" TARGET="_blank">Revelation 12: 7 as the leader in the war in heaven, when Satan and his angels (those who followed him in his fatal choice), will be cast down. Satan is always the bitter enemy of Israel, God’s earthly people, and Michael, the archangel (he is the only one so named) is specially seen as opposing him, and is, as leader of the angelic hosts, called to fight against him. In this sense they are Michael’s angels, that is, under his leadership. W.H.

• About this site