King's Business - 1964-01

'y

N

y

means cessation of existence, but sepa­ ration. The prodigal son was separat­ ed from his father and his father’s house. The father said of him: “ This my son was dead and is alive again” (Luke 15:24). Of course he did not mean physical death, but separation from him in -that far country where he had lived in sin. Paul has the same thought in mind in Ephesians 2:1: “You hath he quick­ ened, who were dead in trespasses and sins.” This is spiritual death, alienation from God. Physical death means separation of the spirit from the body. “ The body without the spir­ it is dead” (Jas. 2:26). The second death is everlasting separation of both body and spirit from God and those who reject the Lord Jesus Christ as Saviour will ex­ perience this terrible fate throughout eternity. Jesus gave His life that no human being might be lost and suf­ fer the second death but as He is “ the way, the truth and the life,” those who by-pass the cross of Calvary have no other means of salvation. This is what John 3:16 means: “ God so loved the world that He gave His only be­ gotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish [suffer eternal hell, the second death] but have everlasting life.” BODILY RESURRECTION Q. In His resurrection did the Lord Jesus actually come forth bodily from the dead? A. Yes. Otherwise there would have been no resurrection at all. Our Lord predicted His bodily resurrection in John 2:18-22. The words are either true or false. If they are false, then He either knowingly - or ignorantly told a falsehood; and in either case He could be no one’s Saviour. Make no mistake in supposing the doctrine of the resurrection of Christ to be un­ important. It is a vital part of our faith, and without it there is no faith worth mentioning. Note how Paul deals with it as a basic doctrine in I Corinthians 15.

Word of God turns out to be not only perfect agreement with other Scrip­ ture, but is also a further revelation of the wondrous fact that “ holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Pet. 1:21), and that the original text was not com­ posed by man. TIME AND HOUR OF CHRIST Q. Do you think there is any differ- ance in the meaning of the two state­ ments often used by Christ: “My time is not yet come r” and “Mine hour is not yet come” ? A. Yes, I think His “ time” was His earthly life. In John 7:6, when He was asked if He were going to the feast of tabernacles, He told them His time was not yet come. Every step of His earthly life was ordered by the Father. He lived a second at a time! I believe His hour always re­ fers to the cross, where He in His own body on the tree accomplished His atoning work and made salvation possible for sinners. WHERE IS EDEN? Q. Have we any idea from the Bible where the Garden of Eden might have been located? A. Yes, while the exact boundaries are not given, the general location is pretty clear. Genesis 2 gives us four proper names: “ Ethiopia, Hid­ dekel (the ancient name for the Tigris River), Assyria, t h e river Euphrates” w . 13, 14. Secular history calls the Tigris-Euphrates valley, or Mesopotamia, “The cradle of civiliza­ tion,” and rightly so, according to the Genesis theory of creation. THE SECOND DEATH Q. W ill you please tell me what “ the second deathi” is? A. Yes, it is the lake of fire, everlast­ ing hell, eternal punishment, separa­ tion forever from God. (Read Rev. 2:11; 20:6; 20:14.) Death — physical death. — never

CONFUSION ON TITLE Q. W ill you please explain why the superscription on the cross is not the same in all four Gospels? In Matt. 27 :37 it says: “ This is the King of the Jews;” in Mark 15:26: “ The King of the Jews;” in Luke 23:38: “ This is the King of the Jews;” and in John 19:19: “Jesus of Nazareth the King of the Jews.” A . The explanation of this is very simple. You will note that in the account Luke gives he states, “ And a superscription also was written over him in letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew . . Hebrew for the Jew, Latin for the Romans who ruled Rome, the politicians, etc. and Greek, the universal language understood by most of the people. This was the civil charge against Christ, the religious charge (for which the Romans would not have killed Him) being that He claimed to be the Son of God, equal with the Father. Matthew, writing especially to the Jews, quoted the su­ perscription as it appeared in He­ brew; Mark, who addressed his Gos­ pel particularly to Romans, gave the Latin version; and Luke, whose Gos­ pel was meant primarily for the Greeks, told how it was rendered in Greek. John, who wrote for the spe­ cific purpose of convincing all men of the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, (John 20:31), and of identifying Him, gives the full Roman super­ scription: “ Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews.” If there still appears a difficulty because of the apparent discrepancy between the reports of Mark and John, we must keep in mind that Mark did not state that he was giving the full wording of the superscrip­ tion. His expression is interesting: “The superscription of His accusa­ tion was written over” and of course the charge was contained in the words, “ The King of the Jews” and the residence of Christ — Nazareth — had no bearing on the matter. In the case, as so often happens, what seems to be a contradiction in the

30

THE KINO'S BUSINESS

Made with FlippingBook Online newsletter