Is going to the doctor a sign of a lack of faith?

• About this site

 Woollen and Linen

• About this site

Avrell Bowden - "If I die tonight, where will I be? Heaven or hell?” People make commitments to God an confessions of faith that sometimes have no reality.  At age 6 I made a false profession of salvation. That is, I told people I was saved. (more)

• About this site

Marta Shutt

• About this site

Jim Sluiter

• About this site

Printable Scale Model of Noah's Ark

• About this site

RESURRECTION AND RAPTURE
THE “AT ANY MOMENT” VIEW

Will Christ come secretly (as a surprise) for his church or will he come in shining glory and "every eye shall see Him"?

What about verses that indicate that he will come FOR His saints “immediately after the tribulation of those days”? Matthew 24;" TARGET="_blank">Matthew 24;  Mark 13" TARGET="_blank">Mark 13:, or Luke 21" TARGET="_blank">Luke 21: don't appear to have any verse where Christ said He would come SECRETLY or “at any moment.” Please throw light upon this subject.

The Lord's coming in glory is quite distinct from the descent of the Lord from heaven to take away His sleeping and living saints from the earth, to be for ever with the Lord, as is revealed in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18." TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.

Many verses take into account the differences between these two comings (e.g., John 14:1-6;" TARGET="_blank">John 14:1-6; Philippians 3:20-21;" TARGET="_blank">Philippians 3:20-21; 1 Thessalonians 1:10)." TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 1:10). 1 Corinthians 15: 51-54," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 15: 51-54, where the “mystery” of this first stage of the Lord’s return is revealed: “Behold, I shew you a mystery, we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye.” This is not referred to in Matthew 24," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 24, etc., for the good reason, that the time had not come to reveal it.

The coming there described is that of the “Son of Man” to the earth, to deliver Israel, which was not a mystery at all, but had been plainly revealed in the Old Testament, e.g., Zechariah 14:4-5." TARGET="_blank">Zechariah 14:4-5. where we read that “His feet shall stand upon the Mount of Olives, and that “all His saints will be with Him,” that is clearly all the saints already caught up to be with Him.

It is true that the words “secret rapture” do not occur in scripture, but if, as is stated, the whole event will be over in “the twinkling of an eye,” clearly only those taken away will know of it at the time, though their absence will doubtless be noticed later. They will be delivered thus from the Great Tribulation.

• About this site

• About this site

What warrant have we for insisting on a “gap” or parenthesis in Daniel 9:26," TARGET="_blank">Daniel 9:26, between verses 26 and 27?

There must be a gap, if not between the two verses, at least between V. 27 and the great events in the early part of v. 26, with the consequent scattering of the Jews. This verse seems to work itself out in a long defined period of war and desolation. Then comes v. 27, showing us some one king making a covenant with the many “for a week.” Who is this but the prince of v. 26, whose people destroyed Jerusalem centuries before? And who are “the many” but part of the scattered Jews
restored to their land, and recognised as a nation? This restoration is taking place before our eyes, for the first time for 1850 years; but no “prince” has yet appeared to make the seven years’ covenant, so v. 27 is still future. Neither party will imagine why the covenant will be specially for “one week,” but “the wise will understand.”

W.H.

• About this site

THE SPIRIT’S GUIDANCE

Is the Breaking of Bread meeting open for ministry, etc., under the Spirit’s guidance, in a way which would not equally apply to a Conference, a Gospel meeting or a Prayer meeting?

I certainly think it is; but in order to understand why, it is necessary to apprehend the special character attaching to meetings of different kinds. Each has in effect its special character, which predominates, though there is a certain latitude, and other things may have their place up to a point. Thus a Gospel meeting is for the preaching of the good news to sinners; that should characterise the meeting, though a short word to believers present may sometimes be in place and cannot be forbidden. A teaching meeting is for teaching the truth of God to believers, and need not be taken up too much with long prayers and hymn singing; an exhortation meeting is for exhortation, also to believers. In these cases it is a question of the exercise of gift manward. All are not evangelists or teachers; all are not called to exhort, etc. “He gave some, evangelists, some, pastors and teachers” (Ephesians 4:11);" TARGET="_blank">Ephesians 4:11); and in Romans 12:6" TARGET="_blank">Romans 12:6 we are reminded that “we have gifts differing according to the grace given,” either for prophesying (a foundation gift that no longer exists) or for ministry of various kinds—teaching, exhortation, etc. To apply the principle of equality of opportunity to all in such cases is clearly to set on one side the Lordship of Christ, who has given gifts according to His own will. We may invite men known to be qualified to evangelise or teach to the more general meetings for teaching (wrongly called “conferences,” for rarely does anyone confer). Where there are several teachers present, unless some special brother has been invited to minister the Word, there may well be an opportunity for open ministry, not however to all present, but only to those known to possess the gifts needful for edification.

Too often what is called “the open platform” has been abused, either because of too much liberty granted by elder brethren convening the meetings, or because of too much liberty taken by brethren present, who are not truly qualified to teach, but who get up on the plea of “the liberty of the Spirit,” and waste valuable time by unedifying talk. Let those who are gifted to teach wait on their ministry, and consider their brethren. The liberty of the Spirit is not anybody’s liberty to do as they like, but for the Spirit to do as He wills and use whom He chooses. The breaking of bread meeting is quite different; it is not primarily for ministry, though there may be secondary opportunities for this, when the true object of the meeting is over, which is to “shew the Lord’s death” (thus remembering Him in the breaking of bread), and to worship the Father. The object of those present is not to receive instruction, but to obey the Lord’s command, and as priests to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. As all believers, by the fact of the new birth, are constituted priests, the meeting is left open for all present to worship the Father, whether silently or vocally.

In the 1 Corinthians 11" TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 11:  passage there is not a hint of any arrangement of speakers for ministry, and much less of anyone to preside and, as clergyman, minister, or pastor, “administer the sacrament” or “dispense the elements.” The bread is “the bread which we break,” the cup is “the cup of blessing which we bless.” These are terms which make breaking the bread and giving thanks for the cup a general privilege, rather than an ecclesiastical monopoly. The same principle applies to a prayer-meeting. All may pray, the women silently (1 Corinthians  14:34), the men “everywhere lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting” (1 Timothy 2:8);" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 2:8); that is, it is they who lead in prayer. How can a prayer-meeting be rightly anything but “open” for the Spirit’s guidance? He alone knows the state of each soul; He alone knows the particular needs, and can make known that need to each and give suitable words to express it. Accordingly, there is not a hint in 1 Timothy 2" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 2: of anyone presiding over or directing the prayer-meeting.

W.H.

• About this site

In Genesis 11:26" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 11:26 we read, “Terah lived seventy years and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran,” and in V. 32, “and the days of Terab were two hundred and five years and Terah died in Haran.” Now, taking 70 from 205, would make Abram 135 years when Terah died, while we know from Gen. 12:4" TARGET="_blank">Gen. 12:4 that Abram was 75 years old when he left Haran, and from Acts 7:4" TARGET="_blank">Acts 7:4 that he did not leave Haran till Terah died.

It is not necessary to believe from Genesis 11:26" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 11:26 that Abram, Nahor, and Haran were all born in the same year, but simply that Terah had no children till he was 70, and then had three sons born at intervals. In Genesis 5:32," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 5:32, we have an instance of the same thing, when we read that “Noah was five hundred years old, and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth,” and yet Genesis 10:21" TARGET="_blank">Genesis 10:21 tells us Japheth was older than Shem. It is equally clear that Abram was not the eldest of the three brothers. He and Shem are put first because of their importance as the progenitors of the chosen race and the Messiah. It is generally held that Haran was the eldest, born when Terah was 70, and that Abram came into the world 6o years later. This would account for the fact that he and his nephew Lot, son of Haran, seem to have been much of the same standing. Besides, we are distinctly told that Abraham was 75 when at the death of Terah, he departed out of Haran. He was born, therefore, when his father was 130 years of age.

W.H.

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

Funny Bible Questions grouped into eight categories:

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site