Question Corner

Pacific Press Publishing Association · Mountain View, California · Mar 17, 1909

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 36, No. 11.

[All proper questions on Bible and history will be answered on this page as soon as possible after receiving them. This will sometimes mean a month or more. We can not promise to reply to the same question often. Let those who ask read other answers; they may find reply to their own. Always enclose stamp if answer is required. Those outside our Bible Band, please enclose ten cents. This does not begin to meet expenses oftentimes. “Foolish . . . questions avoid.”]

2769.—The New Covenant.

Please explain Heb. 8:7-13. H. G.

The passage is largely a quotation from the 31st chapter of Jeremiah. Jeremiah predicts the making of the new covenant. Hebrews records what has taken place in Christ Jesus. The first covenant was the covenant made at Mount Sinai recorded in Exodus 19 and in Exodus 24. That was a faulty covenant, because it was no stronger than the weakest promise which it had—the promise of the people. Note, “For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second; for finding fault with them.” It was the people who were at fault. The new covenant which was the everlasting covenant given to Abel, to Noah, to Abraham, and to Israel, was based upon the promises of God. Man’s part was simply the yielding to those promises and the receiving of them. And when men do that, God promises not to compel them to obey, but to so place His law in their hearts and in their minds that they would have no other desire than to obey. They would love God and keep His commandments. All this is comprised in the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is, in other words, stating God’s great plan of salvation through faith. The old covenant, apart from its national view, was man’s effort to save himself through promise; the new covenant carries us clear over into the new state when sin shall be forever banished, and the children of the covenant shall bask in the smiles of God forever.

Gal. 4:24-31 also touches upon these two covenants. Hagar is the type of one, Sarah is the type of the other; the child of Hagar, the type of those who are brought in through human scheming; the child of Sarah a type of those who are brought in solely through the promise of the Lord Jesus Christ. Hagar bore children to bondage; for she was a bondmaid; so all those who are endeavoring to save themselves by any scheme of man are in bondage. They never can break their bondage themselves, and all they save or convert to such a system as that are children of bondage. On the other hand, Sarah was a free woman, and her children were free. She represents God’s order, and all those who are saved according to God’s order, with faith in the promises of the Lord Jesus, are children of freedom. The two things are represented by earthly Jerusalem and heavenly Jerusalem. The earthly Jerusalem is representative of that kingdom which Israel tried to establish in their own righteousness under constant rebellion against God; but the New Jerusalem to whom the children have not yet come, is the Jerusalem that is made wholly after God’s order and is free; and is therefore called the mother of the children of freedom. Therefore Paul concludes that we who have believed in Christ are as Isaac was—the children of promise. Isaac was persecuted by Ishmael, the child of the bond servant; so God’s true children will meet persecution from those who are following the schemes of men, but in the glorious outcome God will save His children and cast out those who are not of Him.

2770.—The Garden of Eden.

Where was the Garden of Eden planted? W. S.

All that we know about it is that it was upon this earth. There are those who try to locate it definitely now; some in Asia, some at the North Pole. Two of the latest attempts are in the United States, we believe, one in Louisiana, and one in Kansas, where they have found four rivers that seem to fill the description given of the four rivers in Genesis 2. Those rivers would make it seem almost as if the Garden of Eden was located in Asia; but the names are there given because of their meaning and not as proper names to indicate locality. Why we say we do not know is because the world at that time was different from what it is now, or has been since the Deluge. How much change took place, of course, we can not say, but the apostle Peter tells us that men in speculating over these things wilfully forget that “there were heavens from of old, and an earth compacted out of water and amidst water, by the word of God; by which means the world [cosmos, arrangement] that then was, being overflowed with water, perished.” 2 Peter 3:5, 6. Now if the “arrangement,” or the “cosmos” that then was perished, we certainly have no right to endeavor to use the present cosmos, or arrangement of the earth’s surface as proof of where some locality was then.

2771.—The Fate of Judas. Mark 14:21.

Jesus said, “Good were it for that man if he had never been born.” Since all the heathen, in fact, and the great mass of mankind for whom Christ died have never heard during this present evil world of the only Name under heaven given among men, by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12), would not the above statement of our Lord apply to them also? H. E. H.

So far as the above statement is concerned, it will apply to every soul that is eventually lost; it would be better for that soul if he had not been born. So far as not hearing the actual word “Jesus” is concerned, that is another matter. Men may hear that name and still be lost. Men may take that name as a fetish or a charm and still be lost. They may be named with that name and still be lost. The hope lies not in the word nor in the sound, but in the character. The name of Jesus means absolute self-emptiness, in order that God may fill us, and every soul that knows that character, whether he knows the transferred Greek word Jesus or not, knows God. Again, it is well to recall that one single ray of light followed will lead to the great central source of light. One ray of spiritual truth followed will lead to the great source of truth—God. On the other hand we may hold a mass of light and truth and yet if we reject one single ray of light, one single living truth, that is sufficient to condemn. This constant endeavor to fix up things for God utterly ignores some of the great statements which God has given in His word. Here is another of them: “For the eyes of the Lord run to and fro throughout the whole earth to show Himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward Him.” Acts 15:14-17 refers to the very work that the apostles were then doing in the preaching of the Gospel among the Gentiles.

2772.—Roman or Jewish Reckoning. Acts 20:7.

A preacher stated not long ago that Luke wrote after the Roman reckoning had begun; hence the eve of the first day would be Sunday evening. Please explain.

We have no reason whatever to understand otherwise than that Luke wrote after the Bible reckoning. This is generally so considered by commentators. Those who wish to prove first-day sacredness are anxious, of course, to get anything whatever upon which they can hang the semblance of an argument. Acts 20:7 mentions the first day of the week and of a meeting being held on the evening of that day, and the breaking of bread on that day; therefore it is argued that that day must have been a holy day and Paul must have been keeping it as such. Now, if it was Sunday evening when that meeting was held, according to Roman time the breaking of bread did not come till after midnight; consequently the Lord’s Supper was held—if breaking of bread means that—on Monday morning instead of Sunday night; and if this one instance establishes the custom, that is the time that it ought to be held now. On the other hand, according to Jewish time, that evening was what we would call Saturday evening. The breaking of the bread did come on the first day of the week, but the remainder of that day was used by the apostle in doing ordinary work. Looking upon it in either way, there is absolutely nothing in the text which would indicate that it was a holy day in any wise or that it was a day for regular meetings. It simply states that the apostle on his journey to Rome held a week’s meeting with the people at Troas, and this closing meeting of his came on our Saturday night, after the Sabbath day. The meeting would probably not have been mentioned at all were it not for the noted miracle which Paul wrought on that occasion in raising Eutychus from the dead.

2773.—Permission to Eat Meat.

W. S.—The permission to eat meat in Gen. 9:3 could have reference only to the clean beasts, because there were enough only of the unclean saved to perpetuate the species; while of the clean, God provided for man’s necessity by preserving fourteen of each. Acts 15:28, 29 simply prohibited certain things in which the Gentiles were likely to fall, the special sins that seemed in their eyes not at all wrong. Doubtless they were instructed as were other converts in the law of life and health, but some things were so inbred in their very nature for years that God found it necessary to prohibit them by special warning. The Lord makes no difference with His people; this He tells us over and over again. God is no respecter of persons. The same God is rich unto all that call upon Him, whether Jew or Greek. Read Romans 10.

2774.—The Two Witnesses. Revelation 11.

Will you please explain who and what the two witnesses are in Revelation 11? I have been told that it is the Old Testament and the New Testament. J. G. L.

And this is true. It is the Old and the New Testament. See for explanation “Daniel and Revelation” on the text, and also “Great Controversy,” chapter 15. In our own day it may take a far fuller application even than that. The one witness, God’s word; the other witness, the word as manifest in the lives of His own children. Upon this we hope to have more to say when we study the book of Revelation.

2775.—In Early Times.

W. S.—As to Cain and Abel and other people who lived upon the earth, we must take this into account always that they lived to a great age. The Bible gives us one or two events in their life; those events may have occurred many years apart, and during these years other men and women may have been born and peopled the earth. Adam’s children, sons and daughters, may have been grown-up men and women before many of these events which are named occurred.

2776.—The Cities of Judah.—Matt. 10:23.

W. S.—The twelve disciples would not have gone over all the cities in the land of Palestine until Jesus Himself should follow them, we understand to be the meaning of the text. The cities of Israel were the cities which they themselves knew, and the coming was His coming to those cities themselves; His visiting of those cities, and not His second coming.

2777.—Circumcision.

W. S.—Circumcision has nothing whatever to do with baptism. Men who try to draw from the former a commandment for the latter are doing it without any warrant of Scripture. Bible baptism is believers’ baptism. Nowhere are we told to baptize children, but “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.”

2778.—Ishmael.

W. S.—The twelve princes which were to come from Ishmael were foretold simply because that would be the case. He should have twelve sons who would become princes, and not that this was to mean any definite particular thing as regarding the twelve; the Lord simply told him what would be.