Joel Hovey

• About this site

Personal Story of Becky Kew - "In our small town of 800 people, it seemed as if drinking was all there was to do. I remember times when my Mom and Dad fought. I used to wonder: Why do they love this brown bottle so much when it brings so much misery? Why don't they love me? Is this all my fault?  One time he had her pinned down on the coffee table and I really thought that this time, he would kill her." (more)

• About this site

 The Encourager

• About this site

Jane Aubry - I remember one day in the 1970's playing my guitar, looking up to heaven, and saying, “If there is a God, I want to know Him.” When I met Roger, my husband to be, he told me he was “saved”.  I had never heard the word before.  I had thought we could only “hope” to go to heaven. He told me how he was saved and that was the end of talking about it for a time. more...

• About this site

Albert Hull

• About this site

Gathering Unto His Name - The New Testament contains a clear pattern for how a church should operate. This book summarizes relevant scriptures to what a church is and how it affects our modern day practices.

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

THE “FLESH” AND THE “BODY”
Explain the difference between the terms “flesh” and “body”? What is meant by the “redemption of the body”?

If the inquirer can examine, in any good Lexicon of New Testament Greek, or better still, in Mr. Vine’s Expository Dictionary, the great variety of meanings which each of the two words “sarx” (flesh) and “soma” (body) may bear, according to the context in which they occur; he will realise that it would be difficult to reply to his question adequately, within the bounds of this page. And if he can avail himself of a Young’s or Wigram’s Concordance to go through all the occurrences of each word, he will probably glean more help in that way than he would from any formal answer.

The fact is that, as used in some passages, there is little or no difference between the two words; and yet in certain other passages a clear distinction is made between them. For instance, in 2 Corinthians 4:10" TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 4:10 we have the phrase, “that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our BODY”; while in the parallel statement of the next verse it is, “that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our mortal FLESH.” Here the two words are practically synonymous. The opposite extreme may be seen in Colossians 2:23" TARGET="_blank">Colossians 2:23 (R.V.), where one can show “severity” to the BODY, and at the same time be showing “indulgence” to the FLESH.

Taken in its most literal sense, the “body” is the physical or material part of man, viewed as an organised whole (see 1 Thessalonians 5:23)." TARGET="_blank">1 Thessalonians 5:23). The “flesh” is the substance of which this body is to a large extent composed (see Luke 24. 39)." TARGET="_blank">Luke 24. 39). But either word may be used to represent the entire man, as “body” in Luke 20: 36," TARGET="_blank">Luke 20: 36, and “flesh” in Luke 3:6." TARGET="_blank">Luke 3:6.

It is when the thought of evil, either in state or in tendency, is suggested, that a deeper distinction is at times made between the two words. For example, the expression “in the flesh” may be employed as in Romans 7:5" TARGET="_blank">Romans 7:5 and 8:8, , of the moral standing of the unsaved, but “in the body” is never so used. The latter phrase may refer to one’s bodily presence in some particular place, as in 1 Corinthians 5:3," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 5:3, or to the present earthly life of man, as in 2 Corinthians 5:10;" TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 5:10; but this is not distinctive of it, for “in the flesh” may also have either of these meanings, as in Colossians 2:1" TARGET="_blank">Colossians 2:1 and in Philippians 1:24." TARGET="_blank">Philippians 1:24.
Again, “tendency to evil” may sometimes be signified by the term “the flesh,” especially in such phrases as “after the flesh,” etc.; but “the body” is not so used, except in a few remarkable expressions, “the body of sin” (Romans 6: 6)," TARGET="_blank">Romans 6: 6), “the body of this death” (Romans 7:24)," TARGET="_blank">Romans 7:24), “the deeds of the body” (Romans 8: 13)," TARGET="_blank">Romans 8: 13), and “the body of the sins of the flesh” (Colossians 2:11)." TARGET="_blank">Colossians 2:11).

The body is frequently spoken of as capable of being used for God (Romans 12:1)," TARGET="_blank">Romans 12:1), and so are its members (Romans 6: 12, 13);" TARGET="_blank">Romans 6: 12, 13); but this is never predicated of the flesh (see Rom. 7. 25)," TARGET="_blank">Rom. 7. 25), the members of which seem rather to be those named in Col. 3. 5." TARGET="_blank">Col. 3. 5. Moreover, the body of the saint is called a temple of the Holy Ghost and a member of Christ (1 Corinthians 6:15, 19)," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 6:15, 19), but it is his “flesh” that lusteth against the Spirit (Galatians 5:17)." TARGET="_blank">Galatians 5:17). Finally, the saint’s body, having been “bought with a price” (1 Corinthians 6:20)," TARGET="_blank">1 Corinthians 6:20), awaits its full “redemption” when our Lord Jesus comes again (Romans 8:23)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 8:23). Then He “shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of His glory” (Philippains 3:21 R.V.); and when He has done so, “WE (not merely our bodies) shall be like Him” (1 John 3:2)." TARGET="_blank">1 John 3:2).

W.R.

• About this site

• About this site

Why in 2 Samuel 24" TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 24 was it counted a sin in David to number the children of Israel, whereas Moses was commanded by God to do so? (Exodus 30:12)." TARGET="_blank">Exodus 30:12).

Perhaps the very point our questioner notes as to Moses having been commanded to take the census of the people goes some way toward solving this difficulty. A thing may be commanded at one time, and not at another. For instance, the Feast of Tabernacles was commanded to be observed on the I 5th day of the seventh month, but to keep the feast in the 8th month, as Jeroboam did “out of his own heart,” was a flagrant offence (1 Kings 12:32)." TARGET="_blank">1 Kings 12:32).  So, spurious imitations of God’s ordinances to-day become positive acts of disobedience; for instance, baptising infants, or making of the breaking of bread an idolatrous act, the “eucharist” or the mass. Moses was commanded in Exodus 17:6" TARGET="_blank">Exodus 17:6 to smite the rock, but when he did this in Numbers 20:11-12," TARGET="_blank">Numbers 20:11-12, it was counted a sin unto him. In Exodus 30." TARGET="_blank">Exodus 30. 12 the Lord gives a direction to be followed when an occasion arose for numbering the people—each one was to give a half shekel as a ransom for his soul unto the Lord. It was, so to speak, a recognition before the Lord that the life numbered was in reality forfeited and needed to be ransomed. There is no mention of this being observed in David’s case, though that was a command to the people in general. In Numbers 1:2, 3," TARGET="_blank">Numbers 1:2, 3, Jehovah commanded Moses to take the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel—”From twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel.” It was clearly a matter of order and importance that the number of the people should be known at the commencement of their desert journeyings, and it is given as 603,550. Then again in chap. 26, Moses and Eleazar were commanded to number the people at the close of their wanderings. They actually shewed a decrease of nearly 2,000, surely an eloquent commentary on the effect of their disobedience. Had they taken possession of the land when this was proposed to them they would, no doubt, have shown a large increase over a like period. In the case of David’s census, we read that “the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel and He moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah” (2 Samuel 24:1)," TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 24:1), of which census a man of the world like Joab, and also the captains of the host, saw the futility. Joab’s words are remarkable; he expresses the desire that God might add a hundred-fold to the people, that the king might see the increase, i.e. without any need of a census. In 1 Chronicles 21:1" TARGET="_blank">1 Chronicles 21:1 we read, “Satan stood up against Israel,” which simply means that Jehovah in inflicting judgment on His people for their transgression, allowed Satan to move in the matter as His agent. Men may make difficulties and cavil at God’s ways, but He is Sovereign and He will be justified by all, when His ways and the secrets of men are known. In reality there was no command to David from Jehovah to number the people. It was an arbitrary act of self-will and self-glorying, resulting in the infliction of the plague on the very ones on whom God would inflict judgment. We see, then, in the “Samuel” account God in government carrying out His judgment on David and the people—He is the ultimate cause; but in the “Chronicles,” Satan is presented as the instrumental cause—He tempts David to engage in the path of self-will, and the King allows himself to be led astray and is responsible, as he admits himself (2 Samuel 24:17)." TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 24:17). David, however, knows the grace of God, as well as His government, and his prayer is: “Let me fall now into the hands of the Lord; for His mercies are great: and let me not fall into the hands of man” (v. 14); and so he is led to build an altar unto the Lord and offer burnt-offerings and peace- offerings, typical of the sacrifice of Christ.

W.H.

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

• About this site

Please explain Matthew 12:43-45," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 12:43-45, and Luke 11:24-26;" TARGET="_blank">Luke 11:24-26; also why does Mr. Newberry insert the word, “it”, in his margin for the word, “he”, in Luke 11:24" TARGET="_blank">Luke 11:24?

Mathew 12:43-45  When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none.  (44)  Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished.  (45)  Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation.

Luke 11:24-26" TARGET="_blank">Luke 11:24-26  When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came out.  (25)  And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished.  (26)  Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.
 

There are certain important words in this section which, if understood, will enable us to grasp the general meaning of the passage.
The “house” refers, I believe, to the house of Israel. “Generation” refers to the class of people then living, a people hostile to the Lord Jesus. The unclean spirit is, I believe, the spirit of idolatry which once found a resting place in Israel, but of which Israel were cured as the result of their Babylonian captivity. That idolatrous spirit will find no resting place save in apostate Israel, to which house it will later return, leading them to worship a mere man—the Man of Sin—the worst form of idolatry. This will bring upon them a far more severe judgment than ever hitherto they have known and so their last end will be worse than the first.
What has been effected by Christ Who came to that house is that he swept and garnished it, turning out from it things that hitherto occupied it. The spirit of idolatry in full force (with seven other spirits) will return to that house with, as I have said, disastrous consequences. The “generation” will persist until the end. They would not have Him Who came in His Father’s Name: another shall come in his own name and him theywill receive.

W.R.

• About this site

Help will be valued upon Genesis 4:4, 5," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 4:4, 5, where we read that God had “respect” to Abel and his offering and not to Cain and his, and Romans 2:11," TARGET="_blank">Romans 2:11, where it is said that there is “no respect of persons with God.”

We can be quite sure that this latter verse is ever and absolutely true. The Greek word, “to have respect of persons,” means, “to receive the face of a person,” i.e. to look at the outward appearance—at the gold ring and the gay clothing, at the feature and the stature, etc., whereas we know that “God looks, not at the outward appearance, but at the heart.” When, therefore, we read that God had respect to Abel and his offering, we must divest ourselves of any idea of favouritism or unfair preference on His part. In fact, the Hebrew word in Genesis 4," TARGET="_blank">Genesis 4, “to have respect,” has no thought of respect of persons, but of looking to someone, or something. The word is used in Psalm 119:117" TARGET="_blank">Psalm 119:117—”I will have respect unto thy statutes continually”; again in 2 Samuel 22:42" TARGET="_blank">2 Samuel 22:42—”They looked but there was none to save,” and also in Isaiah 17:7" TARGET="_blank">Isaiah 17:7—”In that day shall a man look to his Maker.” We may be sure that had it been righteously possible, God would have accepted Cain as well as Abel. The key to the verse is in Hebrews 11:4" TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 11:4—”By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain . . . God testifying of his gifts.” It was not that Abel was “more excellent” than Cain, though very likely he was, but that his sacrifice was more excellent; so that God simply had respect to Abel because of his sacrifice. The expression, “by faith,” shows, I think, conclusively that God had revealed how his creatures were to approach him, “for faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” No doubt, Cain’s sacrifice was beautiful enough, but it was Cain’s way, not God’s. It was merely the work of his hands-of the same vegetable kingdom as the fig-leaves of which Adam and Eve had made themselves aprons. Abel offered from the first-fruits of  the flock and of the fat thereof, i.e. the slain lamb. In Abel’s offering there were two things : there was something which spoke of his repentance, it was as though he admitted that he deserved the death of the victim; and there was something, too, which spoke of the lamb of God, without blemish, slain before the foundation of the world. How far Abel apprehended the truth we cannot say; he obeyed and allwas known to God. We are blessed according to His appreciation of the infinite Person and work of Christ, not according to ours, which, however, does determine our enjoyment of our blessings.

W.H.

• About this site