Eric Walberer

• About this site

Tom Bentley

• About this site

Eternal Security

• About this site

Bonnie Sharp

• About this site

Printable Activity: 8 page mini coloring book and full-sized pictures to tell the story of Peter preaching the gospel for the first time to Gentiles - Cornelius and his family.

• About this site

101 Ways to Teach a Memory Verse

• About this site

Is the name Jesus enough to refer to Christ or does he have a fuller title like "Lord Jesus Christ, Emmanuel,  King of Kings, Lord of Lords, Father of Eternity"?   These, and many more titles, are not sufficient to capture the fullness of him who is "the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation." Colossians 1:15." TARGET="_blank">Colossians 1:15.

Last names, or surnames, were not used in Jesus' time. It wasn't common in Europe for people to use them until the middle ages.

Surnames were initially based on who the father was (Mike Thomson), the occupation that one had (Mike Miller), or what town a person lived in (Mike Berlin).

Jesus might have been named Jesus bar Joseph, Jesus Carpenter, Jesus Nazareth if they used surnames. Yeshua bar Yosef (Aramaic name form) of Nazareth (Jesus son of Joseph of Nazareth).

A common way to refer to Christ is to use the three, short, but descriptive titles "Lord Jesus Christ" or "Jesus Christ".  There is no one single formula used in the Bible.  The appropriate name is used in all situations to emphasize something about Him.  Sometimes, the name Jesus is used to emphasize his humble birth and earthly life (Acts 9:27;" TARGET="_blank">Acts 9:27; Acts 19:15;" TARGET="_blank">Acts 19:15; Acts 21:13;" TARGET="_blank">Acts 21:13; Acts 26:9)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 26:9).  

Jesus is his earthly name, used to emphasize that he is the Savior (Matthew 1:21)." TARGET="_blank">Matthew 1:21).  The Bible refers to him as simply Jesus in many of the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.  Certainly they show no respect to him for using his earthly name.  He is referred to more fully in the epistles as Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 6:23" TARGET="_blank">Romans 6:23

For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.  

The name of Christ is "one who is anointed" by God which has the idea of being chosen or the Promised One.  John 4:25-29" TARGET="_blank">John 4:25-29

 John 4:25-29" TARGET="_blank">John 4:25-29

(25)  The woman said to him, "I know that Messiah is coming (he who is called Christ). When he comes, he will tell us all things." (26)  Jesus said to her, "I who speak to you am he." (27)  Just then his disciples came back. They marveled that he was talking with a woman, but no one said, "What do you seek?" or, "Why are you talking with her?" (28)  So the woman left her water jar and went away into town and said to the people, (29)  "Come, see a man who told me all that I ever did. Can this be the Christ?"

He is Lord, in the full sense in that he is God.  Acts 2:36" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2:36

Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified. 

Shad David Sluiter 

• 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

PARADISE

Is there any truth in the idea that the Lord, when He arose, changed the place of the Old Testament saints from some Paradise below, to be with Himself in a Paradise above?
 
We may eliminate from this consideration, Enoch and Elijah, who are clearly exceptional. Exactly into what part of the heavenly sphere they were introduced is not revealed. Even did we know, it would tell us nothing about the dead. It is clear, however, that the Old Testament saints did not go at death to be “with Christ,” not for the reason alleged by some, that they were not forgiven, etc., for they clearly were (see Psalm 32:1-2)," TARGET="_blank">Psalm 32:1-2), and that on the ground of the work of Christ, yet to be accomplished.

The reason was that as yet there was no Christ, in the Theanthropic sense, for them to be with. He had not yet died and risen nor “brought life and immortality to light, through the gospel,” though ever in the bosom of the Father as the only-begotten Son of God. As for those who died in Old Testament times, such expressions are met with as, “He slept with his father,” “He fell on sleep,” “Descended to the grave,” the idea being that the dead went down into Sheol, the unseen world (Hades of New Testament). See Jacob’s words (Genesis 37:35)," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 37:35), where he could not have meant a literal grave, as he believed Joseph devoured, and so, not buried.

In Numbers 16:33" TARGET="_blank">Numbers 16:33 we read that Korah, Dathan and Abiram went down alive into the pit (Sheol). The case of Samuel (1 Samuel 28" TARGET="_blank">1 Samuel 28:) may occur to some. The Scriptures do not say that the witch brought up Samuel. On the contrary, when she saw the strange apparition, she cried out, presumably in fear. I have no doubt that God in his sovereignty did bring Samuel’s spirit up from Paradise (not his body, for that was buried at Ramah, fifty miles away), for the express object of conveying to Saul the news of his approaching end, On the morrow, Saul and his sons would be with Samuel in the unseen world.

Sheol never** represents the literal grave, but some other word is always used of it, like “Qeber” or “akath.” Psalm i6. to makes it plain that the Lord in spirit went to Sheol, and His body to the grave. That saint and sinner went to one general place, before the resurrection, is clear from Luke 16," TARGET="_blank">Luke 16, where our Lord lifts the veil of the unseen world in the intermediate state. The word there is “Hades.” True the saved were far-off from the lost, there being “a great gulf” fixed between the Paradise of the blessed and the place of torment, but still they were within seeing and speaking distance. Why should this be incredible, even if we had not our Lord’s words for it?

The Tower of London was for a long period in two sections—a royal palace and a state prison. It meant everything, which part a man went to, It was into Paradise that the Lord descended in Spirit, and where He welcomed the repentant thief. Can we suppose that only three days after, He left this trophy of grace behind? Did no benefits accrue to the saints confined there? The resurrection of Christ had mighty effects on the universe—He filled it: on the Church—He bestowed on her His spiritual gifts: on the Old Testament saints—”He led captivity captive,” that is, I believe, He set them free from their cabined and confined condition, and took them to be with Himself, henceforth in the Paradise above. This may throw light on the words in Hebrews 2:14," TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 2:14, “to deliver them who through fear of death,” etc. The word here translated, “deliver,” depotes usually a change of place, a release, a removal. The change did not mean, of course, that they were raised, but translated to be “with Christ” in a new sphere. Thither Paul was caught up, temporarily (2 Corinthians 12:4)," TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 12:4), and permanently at His decease ”Absent from the body . . . present with the Lord,” awaiting the perfect condition of glory at the resurrection
day. W.H.

** Psalm 141." TARGET="_blank">Psalm 141. 7 (though the Authorised Version gives “grave” for “sheol”) is no exception. Bones are not scattered at the grave’s mouth, but buried in it. The idea is rather of bones left unburied, on the brink of Hades—the unseen world, where the owners of the bones had entered. Dr. Tregelles trarilate, sheol here as elaewhere—Hades

• About this site

Man is composed of spirit, soul, and body. When he dies where does the spirit go?

The spirit and the soul must not be confused, nor yet divided. They together form the spiritual part of man. When a believer falls asleep he only does so as regards his body. The spiritual part of him, with which the personality is really connected, goes at once to be with Christ (see a 2 Corinthians 5: 8)." TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 5: 8). “Absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.” This, of course, cannot refer to the resurrection state, as then no believer will be absent from the body. Paul describes dying as departing to be with Christ which is far better (Philippians 1:23)." TARGET="_blank">Philippians 1:23). It is a most serious denial of God’s truth to describe the condition of the believer who dies, as that of sleep, except as regards his body.

W.H.

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

THE HOUSE OF GOD

Do you think that the House of God is regarded in Scripture as “the place of profession,” as is sometimes taught?  That is, the "profession" of one who is not saved, but is a part of church culture.

A good deal is taught on this subject, which we do well to test by the Word of God. It is sometime erroneously taught that the House of God is the place of Christian profession, and that God recognises this as a “third something” between the true Church and the world. What is known as Household-Baptism, for instance, thus seeks to justify the baptism of children and unconverted household servants. These are brought, they assert, into the House of God—they are “in the ambit of the Church of God,” as the strange expression goes. They are there on the ground of profession; but what profession can infants make? And if unconverted persons make any, it can only be false. That man has made a mixed thing of it by carelessness in reception, or by neglect of Scriptural discipline, is sadly true; but to make out that God is responsible for, or connives at such a state of things is indeed serious.

Now, the expression “House of God” refers in the Old Testament, if we except Genesus 28:17, 22, where Jacob uses the expression in a figurative sense, to the Tabernacle or to the Temple, and though uncleanness and even idols (2 Chronicles 33: 7)" TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 33: 7) might invade that House, they never formed part of it, and at every revival were drastically removed and cleansed away (e.g., 2 Chronicles 24:13;" TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 24:13; 2 Chronicles 29:16;" TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 29:16; 2 Chronicles 33:15)." TARGET="_blank">2 Chronicles 33:15).

Paul in writing to Timothy speaks of his knowing “how to behave himself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.” This is the local aspect—the Church of God, viewed as the place of responsibility. Undesirable elements did incorporate themselves, alas too easily, in the local “house” (see Jude), but though the condition was detected, it was not approved of. Ecciesiastics justify the sad lack of discipline in their organisations by the parable of the tares and the wheat—”Let both grow together until the harvest”—but they seem to forget that “the field is the world,” not the church. Undesirable visitors, thieves, and such-like, may find entrance into a house, but it is contrary to the desire of the head of the house, and they form no part of the household and must be removed as soon as detected. In Hebrews we read, “But Christ as a Son over His own house: whose house are we, if we hold fast the beginning of our confidence firm unto the end” (Hebrews 3:6)," TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 3:6), that is, those who continue in the way prove themselves to be the House of God, the rest have no part in it.

It is indeed a blessed privilege of the people of God no longer to be “strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God” (Ephesians 2:19)." TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 2:19). And this is His purpose in gathering saints to Christ —“To whom coming as unto a Living Stone. . . chosen of God and precious; Ye also as living stones are built up a spiritual house” (1 Peter 2:4," TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 2:4, ). “Ye are God’s building.. . ye are the temple of God” (1 Corinthians 3:9, 16)." TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 3:9, 16). When the apostle speaks of the “House of God,” does he then view it as possibly or even probably including “false brethren crept in unawares,” or ideally? I believe the latter, for whatever is not God’s building is an extraneous element to be purged out. For instance, in Hebrews 10:21," TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 10:21, Christ is presented as “High Priest over the house of God”—surely He is not the High Priest of false worshippers—trespassers in that house. Again, Peter reminds us that “judgment must first begin at the house of God.” Has he in view the heterogeneous company, that some seem to see almost exclusively, in the place of profession—a mixture of believers and unbelievers, because they all profess and call themselves Christians? I think the context shows rather that the true House of God is in view—contrasted with those that “obey not the gospel of God,” and paralleled in the following verse with the righteous—”If the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?” (1 Peter 4:17, 18)." TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 4:17, 18). Where is there room in this verse for a third something, neither righteous nor ungodly, but “professors.” The original from which this quotation is taken bears this out: “Behold, the righteous shall be recompensed in the earth; much more the wicked and the sinner” (Proverbs 2:31)." TARGET="_blank">Proverbs 2:31).

These latter, including false professors, will be recompensed not now, but in the future. But someone will say, “Does not Paul speak of ‘the great house of Christendom’ in his Second Epistle to Timothy?” Certainly not in so many words, though such a form of words has been dogmatically attributed to his writings. What he does say, I believe parenthetically, is, “But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour and some to dishonour” (chap. 2. 20). This passage and the ‘parable of the tares seem to be the sheet anchors of ecclesiastics to justify their mixed systems. To them “the great house” is “the Church” in their broad sense of a great ecclesiastical, christened organisation, reciting the apostles’ creed and practising “the sacraments.”

Others, as we have seen, understand Paul to mean “the great house of Christendom,” though I believe such an idea springs from a misreading of the passage. I submit again that verse zo is in the nature of a parenthesis, explaining the use the apostle is about to make of the term, “vessel unto honour” in verse 21. “In a great house” (that is in any great house in Rome, where he was in prison, or in Ephesus, where Timothy is supposed to have been), there are vessels of various materials and of varied uses. At this point the apostle resumes his exhortation, “If a man purge himself from these”—the evil things and men above referred to—he shall be something corresponding to the literal material vessels of gold and silver of any great house, namely a spiritual vessel unto honour in the House of God, “sanctified and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work.”

One does not wish to dogmatise, but I would ask my readers, who desire to be still subject to the Word of God, apart from the glamour of great names, carefully to weigh above with the Scriptures.

W.H.

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site