Battle Creek Bible Class, April 18, 1868.
By J. H. W.
The following questions were first taken up: 1. Is it a right application of the Scripture that represents the people as now being in the valley of decision? Joel iii, 14. R. F. C. A. It is not correct to apply that prophecy to the present time, but to a short period immediately preceding the coming of Christ. Verse 2 brings in a gathering of the people. But as this gathering is under the plagues, and in the day of the Lord, Rev. xvi, this probably gives cause for effect. The day of the Lord has already commenced when this prophecy applies, but its effects, in the plagues and last battle, fall at that time and place. A. It was admitted by all that there are difficulties in Isa. lxv, especially in verse 20, which no version or exposition yet seen has satisfactorily solved. The following seems to be the best light we have at the present time: The subject is the creating of new heavens and new earth, and a very brief description of some of the glories of that state is given. Verse 20 appears to be located at the close of the 1000 years of Rev. xx, when the camp of the saints—the beloved city—has come down, the wicked dead are raised, and judgment about to be executed by fire from heaven, from which the subject of this prophecy—the new earth—will come forth. The contrast between that time and the present is given. The following rendering of the Septuagint is presented; but we are not able to state whether the LXX gives the idea of the original of the prophecy more nearly than the common version. “There shall be no more thence an untimely birth, or an old man, who hath not filled out his days; [i. e. no premature old age, or decrepitude;] for the person of a hundred years shall be a youth, [the Lord’s people have their youth renewed in immortality;] but the hardened sinner of a hundred years, dying shall even be accursed.” [the second death.] This does not state that the righteous will put on the appearance of youthfulness in immortality at that time, but merely gives the condition in contrast with that of the wicked. REMARK.— While we fully believe that all Scripture is profitable, there are some texts, like the above, which, through the faults of transcribers or from some other cause, are exceedingly difficult, and they who have developed by their studies most of present truth and duty have spent the least time on them. 3. If it is wrong to ornament our persons with gold and silver, is it not equally wrong to ornament our horses and carriages with the same? J. B. L. A. It is wrong. With this answer, however, it was moved and voted that some one be requested to make some remarks for the benefit of extremists and faultfinders, who are apt to make a bad use of such answers. We shall expect an article to that effect. A. On 2 Chron. xxii, 2, Matthew Henry says: “Many good expositors are ready to allow that this, with some few more such difficulties, arises from the mistake of some transcriber, who put 42 for 22, and the copies by which the error should have been corrected, might be lost. Many ancient translators here read it 22. Few books are now printed without some errata, yet the authors do not therefore disown them, nor are the errors of the press imputed to the author, but the candid reader amends them by the sense or by comparing them with some other part of the work as we may easily do this.” Dr. Clarke says: “Ahasiah might have been twenty-two years according to 2 Kings viii, 20, but he could not have been forty-two, as stated here. The Syriac and Arabic have 22, and the Sept. in some copies, 20. And it is very probable that the Hebrew text read so originally; for when numbers were expressed by single letters it was easy to mistake mem, 40, for caph, 20. And if this book was written by a scribe who used the ancient Hebrew letters, now called the Samaritan, the mistake was still more easy and probable, as the difference between caph and mem is very small, and can in many instances be discerned only by an accustomed eye.” The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world! Q. What is referred to by “next day?” A. The next day after his interview with the Pharisees. Q. Was this before or after Christ’s baptism? Q. Why is he called the Lamb of God? A. He was the offering God provided for man’s sin. Q. What is meant by his taking away the sin of the world? A. The original means “to take, carry, bear,” &c. He bore our sins. Heb. ix, 28. It may also be rendered, remove, or take away, but it would be most correctly rendered to leave out the word “away.” Whiting’s translation, and Bernard’s, have it, “That beareth the sin of the world.” This is, doubtless, the correct rendering. Q. It is often said that the scape-goat is a type of Christ; does not this seem to favor that idea? A. There are several things to which the words bear or take away might refer; as the scape-goat bearing them to the wilderness; the high priest bearing them from the sanctuary to the scape-goat; or the other goat bearing them as a sin-offering. This text refers to the latter, as it points to Jesus as the lamb, or offering, and Paul said he was “offered to bear the sins of many; Heb. ix, 28; and Peter says: “Who his own self bear our sins in his own body on the tree;” or cross. 1 Pet. ii, 24. Q. Did he bear the sins of the whole world? A. He did; the original of the world is Kosmos, which Robinson defines: “Genr., the world, the universe, the heavens and earth. Meton., the universe, for the inhabitants of the universe,” &c. It is often used in the N. T. for the world or creation, and representatively for the inhabitants of the world. But it would certainly be incorrect to use it thus if it were designed to represent or express only a small part of the inhabitants of the world. Q. Did Christ bear the sins of the wicked as well as the righteous? A. “He died for all;” and on the cross he bore the sins of all, without distinction of character. Q. Does that show that all will be saved? A. It does not; Christ was unconditionally offered for all, to open a way for their pardon and salvation; but we must accept the offering and bring it to the Father by faith, or we shall not receive the benefit of it. This is shown by such expressions as the following: Whosoever believeth in him, might not perish; ye will not come that ye might have life; how shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation? work out your salvation with fear and trembling; give all diligence to make your calling and election sure; &c., &c. Q. We are said to be bought with a price, the blood of Christ; how far does that purchase extend? A. Some say only to his church; but 2 Pet. ii, 1, shows that it extends to all. Q. Did Christ die for all in the sense of suffering the full penalty of their sins? On this question much discussion arose. It was held that he did not, as the penalty is eternal death, while Christ was dead but three days. But they will eventually fall back on Satan who will suffer eternal death and so suffer the full penalty. To this it was replied that the penalty is death; not temporal, eternal, first, nor second; but simply death, that Christ died, and of course suffered the penalty; that he bears sin in our behalf. But the scape-goat, or Satan, is never said to bear our sins; die for us; purchase us with his life; be made sin for us; nor be an offering for us; because the judgment of the saints is passed, and they are acquitted before the sins are put upon the scape-goat. As the investigation assumed more the form of conversation than of question and answer it is not possible to report it, unless at length, which is not admissible. There are many points of great interest to us as a people on this subject, some of which need much and careful study. A tract will soon be issued from the Review Office, which will doubtless be examined with care, and criticised as the case may demand.