How do the covenants of the Bible relate to future events?

God's "Old Covenant" with Israel was conditional (Exodus 19:5)" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 19:5) and broken (Jeremiah 31:32)." TARGET="_blank">Jeremiah 31:32). God has, however, confirmed at least five unconditional covenants which will determine the course of earth's history. The Noahic Covenant (Genesis 6:18; 9:1-11)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 6:18; 9:1-11) assures that government and its responsibility for justice is entrusted to man. The Abrahamic Covenant (Genesis 15:18; 17:2-9; 22:16-18)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 15:18; 17:2-9; 22:16-18) assures a Seed (Christ: Galatians 3:16)" TARGET="_blank">Galatians 3:16) Who will have everlasting possession of the Land and bring blessing to the nations. The Davidic Covenant (2 Samuel 7:12-16; 23:5;" TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 7:12-16; 23:5; 1 Chronicles 17:11-14)" TARGET="_blank">1 Chronicles 17:11-14) assures David's throne to his Son (Christ: Hebrews 1:5)." TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 1:5). The New (Everlasting) Covenant (Jeremiah 31:33-34;" TARGET="_blank">Jeremiah 31:33-34; Ezekiel 16:60;" TARGET="_blank">Ezekiel 16:60; 37:2 6 ) assures Israel and Judah of a new heart conforming to God's law. That reborn nation assures that the conditions of the Palestinian Covenant (Deuteronomy 29:1-30:10)" TARGET="_blank">Deuteronomy 29:1-30:10) will be met, thus unconditionally assuring the re-gathering of that once disobedient nation from "all the nations, whither the Lord thy God hath scattered thee," which has not yet been fulfilled.

God's immutable covenants assure Christ's reign over a literal kingdom in Israel, peopled by a re-gathered and spiritually transformed nation, and bringing justice and blessing to the world.

D. Oliver

Other pages in this section

About this site

Is our Bible with its sixty-six books complete?

Is our Bible with its sixty-six books complete?

It would be difficult to find a verse to prove that 66 books complete the Bible. However, careful research of the material shows that it is indeed complete with no other books to be added.

The Scriptures came not "by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved" by the Holy Spirit (2 Peter 1:21)." TARGET="_blank">2 Peter 1:21). Thus, the inerrant Word is divine and inspired (2 Timothy 3:16)," TARGET="_blank">2 Timothy 3:16), making it authoritative and binding.

God superintended the compilation of these manuscripts, so that 40 writers over approximately 1500 years produced the Bible.

The Lord quoted from these writings during His temptations (Luke 4:4, 8, 12)." TARGET="_blank">Luke 4:4, 8, 12). After His resurrection, He expounded "in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself" (Luke 24:27)," TARGET="_blank">Luke 24:27), proving that these writings are the inspired Word of God.

Other versions such as the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old Testament) and the Vulgate (the Latin translation of Old and New Testaments from the original languages) include a "collection of religious writings" known as the Apocrypha. However, there is no record that the Lord ever quoted from the Apocrypha. This, in itself, indicates these are only historical writings and not divinely inspired.

Thus these 66 books are a unique and complete volume, dovetailing perfectly without contradictions or errors. Let us value and study them, as God’s complete and inspired Word.

S. Wells
Other pages in this section

About this site

Should Christian women wear pants?

Be the first to give an answer to this question. Write an answer in the comment section below. Please provide your name and if you have a website or blog, be sure to include the URL and email address in your answer.

Answers will be reviewed.

Other pages in this section

About this site

What is the history of the Apocrypha?

What is the history of the Apocrypha?

This collection of 14 books added to the Old Testament (and around 50 lesser known books related to the New Testament) is called the Apocrypha, a Greek word meaning "hidden" and indi-cating that the source of these books is disputed. Josephus, a contemporary of the apostles, refers to only 22 Old Testament books (our 39 books in their Hebrew arrangement). Cyril of Jerusalem (bom 315 A.D.) distinguished the Apocrypha from the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament), which in its earliest existing manuscripts included the Apocrypha. Jerome (scholarly fourth century translator of the Vulgate) wrote, "the Church... doth not apply them (the Apocryphal books) to establish any doctrine." These writings were likely inserted into the Old Testament between 300 and 400 A.D. The Greek branch of Christendom (Council of Laodicea, 363 A.D.) denied they were inspired, yet the Roman branch includes the Apocrypha in its Bible. In 1546, its Council of Trent equated tradition and the Apocrypha with the authority of Scripture, indicating that until that time the Apocrypha was not considered part of the canon. The Geneva Bible (1560) was the first edition since the fourth century to omit the Apocrypha. These books were included in the first King James Version (1611), but omitted after 1629. (S. Collett, "All About the Book," F.H. Revell Company, pp. 35-48; H. Mackay, "The Story of Your Bible," Walterick, p. 17.)

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Does Mark 16:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Does Mark 16:16" TARGET="_blank">Mark 16:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

In Acts 10:47," TARGET="_blank">Acts 10:47, Peter commanded people to be baptized who had already received the gift of the Holy Spirit. According to Romans 8:9," TARGET="_blank">Romans 8:9, those who have the Spirit are born of God (John 3:6)," TARGET="_blank">John 3:6), so the new birth is independent of baptism. Being "born of water and of the Spirit" (v. 5) therefore cannot refer to baptism. The Greek construction could be translated, "born of water, even the Spirit." This is consistent with John’s explanation of the Lord’s words in 7:39: rivers of living water symbolize the Spirit.

Further, the New Testament presupposes that obedience characterizes those who are saved (Romans 6:17;" TARGET="_blank">Romans 6:17; 1 Peter 1:14)." TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 1:14). Since in Acts 10" TARGET="_blank">Acts 10 Peter commanded believers in Cornelius’ house to be baptized, we should rightly expect every believer to be baptized. Mark’s gospel emphasizes that actions substantiate truth (1:27; 16:20), therefore those who believe will demonstrate their faith by obedience.

A more cogent response, though, may come from observing that Mark 16:16" TARGET="_blank">Mark 16:16 describes two classes of people: those who believe and are baptized; those who do not believe. A third possible classification, those who believe but are not baptized, is not mentioned. Some of the many passages stating that those who believe (with no mention of baptism) are saved include Acts 16:31;" TARGET="_blank">Acts 16:31; Romans 10:10;" TARGET="_blank">Romans 10:10; John 3:36; 5:24; 6:47; 20:31." TARGET="_blank">John 3:36; 5:24; 6:47; 20:31.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Does Isaiah 45 teach that God made the earth "without form"?

Doesn't Isaiah 45:18" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 45:18 prove that God did not create the earth "without form"?

In the New Scofield Reference Bible, the editors moved the note on the Gap Theory from its place in the old edition (Genesis 1:2)" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 1:2) to Isaiah 45:18," TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 45:18, since this verse seems to offer stronger proof for the theory than any other. Isaiah 45:18" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 45:18 states that God did not create the earth "without form" (tohu), but Genesis 1:2" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 1:2 states that the earth was "tohu." Thus it would seem that the earth became formless some time after the initial creation. But to understand Isaiah's meaning, we must look at 45:18 in its context. The last phrase of the verse explains the point. Isaiah is speaking of God's design in creation. God did not create the world to be an empty place, but formed it to be inhabited. It was never God's purpose to have an empty world, so He filled it with inhabitants. In Genesis 1:2," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 1:2, therefore, the formless and empty state of the earth on the first day was simply the beginning, not the goal of creation. During the five days of creation that followed, God progressively finished the earth's shape and filled it with creatures. By the end of the sixth day, the earth was no longer "tohu." God had achieved all that He intended, and rested on the seventh day. Further, the context of Isaiah 45:18" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 45:18 shows why the prophet discusses this truth here. What God starts, He finishes (see 55:11; 66:9). Israel's salvation is guaranteed, because (according to 45:17) it is eternal. It was planned "from the foundation of the earth," and therefore must come about-despite present appearances. Just as God accomplished His creative purpose for the earth in six days, so He will perform His saving purpose for Israel in due time.

D. Vallance
Other pages in this section

About this site

How should a woman respond to a husband's immoral beharvior?

For an assembly couple, what is a wife's responsibility when she knows her husband's behavior has adversely affected the assembly's testimony?

Such behavior requires correction. If mentioned in 1 Corinthians 5" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5: fornication, covetousness, idolatry, railing, drunkenness or extortion, the sin requires her husband to be put away from the fellowship. Loyalty or love for her husband must not interfere. If the wife has clear proof of his wrong behavior and fails to make it known to the elders, she becomes an accessory. Consider Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5" TARGET="_blank">Acts 5: By urging her husband to confess the matter, she promotes an easier solution than going to the brethren herself. If he will not do so, her higher duty is to her Lord. "We ought to obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 5:29).

If it is a lesser matter, such as unbecoming speech or business practices, she need not act condescendingly when she encourages him to repent and make things right with those affected.

J. Slabaugh

Other pages in this section

About this site

Should consideration always make room for the ministry of visiting brothers?

Should consideration always make room for the ministry of visiting brothers?

No. If a man doesn’t occasionally give profitable ministry in his home assembly, his distance from home will not transform him or his ministry. Being a visitor doesn’t give a man the right to minister. On the other hand, Christian courtesy would rarely fail to consider a visitor. The principle in 1 Corinthians 14:32" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 14:32 seems to indicate this. The Spirit of God would not cause a man to act without considering others.

Visiting another assembly, especially a smaller company, is more than a convenience for breaking bread, however. It is an opportunity to give the believers some spiritual help with warm and uplifting ministry. They are likely tired of hearing themselves and will greatly appreciate the lift.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Why does the Bible say that Christ was an angel?

Is the Lord Jesus sometimes spoken of as an angel?

How can this be, seeing He is the Son of God, higher than the angels, and the Object of their worship?

We cannot be too jealous for the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. The first chapter of Hebrews establishes His superiority over the angels in various ways, which we need not recapitulate. He has a place, a relation, prerogatives, and glory far transcending those of the highest of angelic beings. But the Hebrew word, “malak,” from a root “to depute,” and the Greek word, “angelos,” from a root meaning, “to announce,” both usually translated “angel,” are also frequently translated “messenger,” e.g., Genesis 33:3;" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 33:3; Numbers 20:14;" TARGET="_blank">Numbers 20:14; 1 Kings 19:2;" TARGET="_blank">1 Kings 19:2; 2 Kings 5:10;" TARGET="_blank">2 Kings 5:10; Haggai 1:13;" TARGET="_blank">Haggai 1:13; Isaiah 42" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 42: 19 (presumably of Christ Himself); and in N.T., Matthew 9:10," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 9:10, referring to John Baptist; Luke 7:24," TARGET="_blank">Luke 7:24, messengers of the Baptist; Luke 9:52;" TARGET="_blank">Luke 9:52; 2 Corinthians 7:7;" TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 7:7; James 2:25." TARGET="_blank">James 2:25.

So that when we affirm that there are places where the words “malak” and “angelos” represent the Lord Himself, we are not bringing him down to the level of His own creatures, the angels, but emphasising the fact that He was the MESSENGER OF JEHOVAH. There is indeed a number of O.T. passages where we are obliged to understand the angel mentioned as a Divine Being. In Genesis 48:16," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 48:16, for instance, could it be a mere angel of whom Jacob speaks as His Redeemer, whose blessing he invokes on his grandsons? Is not this to place an angel on the level of God?

Then in Exodus 3:2," TARGET="_blank">Exodus 3:2, “the angel of the Lord” becomes “God” in v. 4. Later on Jehovah speaks of sending an angel before Israel, and adds, “Beware of him and obey his voice; provoke him not, for he will not pardon your transgressions, for My Name is in him” (Exododus 23:21). Could all this apply to a mere angelic being? In the case of Manoah, how could anyone but a Divine Person dare to identify Himself with the burnt offering? Certainly Manoah and his wife believed they had seen God (Judges 13:20-22)." TARGET="_blank">Judges 13:20-22). To assert that God made Himself known by merely angelic beings is a flagrant denial of the truth of the words, “The only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, HE hath declared Him” (John 1:18)." TARGET="_blank">John 1:18). He did not cease to dwell there. When thus revealing God, the Son of Man was in heaven, though on earth (John 3:13)." TARGET="_blank">John 3:13). Blessed paradoxes! Human reasonings stumble at them; faith bows to God’s word and adores.

To close I would refer to Malachi 3" TARGET="_blank">Malachi 3: , where the word “malak” is translated twice “messenger”—(1) as applying to John the Baptist, (2) to the Son of God manifest in flesh as the Messenger of the covenant,” exactly the same Hebrew expression as is used in the rest of the O.T. for the “angel of the covenant.” Is it not conclusive then that this Being is Divine, and represents Him whom we know to-day as the Lord Jesus Christ?

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

If a damaging rumor about a believer proves to be false, should the person be cleared publicly?

If a damaging rumor about a believer proves to be false, should the person be cleared publicly?

If the inaccurate rumors were dealt with publicly (for example, by a public rebuke, 1 Timothy 5:20)," TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:20), they should be cleared publicly. Otherwise, as is more usually the case, those who become aware that what they have heard or repeated is false should be as diligent to correct and contain the damage as they were to further it. They would do the right thing if they apologized to the individual, too. As far as the wronged believer is concerned, he may kindly request the believers who have told others these inaccuracies to repair the damage to the assembly's testimony by correcting their mistakes. Beyond that, the wronged believer should leave it to the Lord to vindicate his name (Proverbs 20:22)." TARGET="_blank">Proverbs 20:22). It's a safe "rule of thumb," that when a believer can trust the Lord to clear his name he is in the right; when he insists that others clear his name, he casts suspicion on his cause.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu