Question Corner

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Oct 16, 1901

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 27, No. 42.

1176. Zachariah 13.

Will you kindly explain Zechariah 13. The first verse, I suppose, refers to the first advent of Jesus. How much time does this chapter cover? J. L.

This department is too limited to explain so large a scripture. In general it may be said that the chapter is a prophecy of the restoration of Israel from the Babylonian captivity; and that this restoration is itself a type or prophecy of the greater restoration from the later Babylon and this world. We hope ere long to print a series of articles on Zechariah. The one who is writing them is an extremely busy man, but we hope he will soon have them all out.

1177. Disfellowshiping a Member.

Can a church disfellowship one without first laboring with him when such a one is willing to be labored with? And is such a one still a member of the church of God? INQUIRER.

We do not know to what particular denomination this inquirer belongs; that makes no difference, however. The business of a church is the business of her Lord,—to save life, not destroy it. It is the duty of the church of Christ to do all in her power to heal the spiritually sick, restore the spiritually lame, bind up the wounds made by Satan’s fiery darts; to strengthen the bruised reed, to fan the smoking flax into a flame. She has no right to disfellowship a member until she has exhausted every resource of her power to save him. When the church does that, and fails to help the wandering one, it is manifest to all that he leaves the church, not the church him. The action of the church is its recognition of this.

Whether a man is a member of the church of God depends on his relation to Christ Jesus. If he has been baptized into Christ, he is a member of Christ’s body. If a church passes wrong judgment upon him, that does not affect his connection with Christ. In spite of all wrong judgment of men, he may be “holden up; for ‘God is able to make him stand.’” Rom. 14:4. On the other hand, let the lost sheep come back to the fold. If he has sinned, let him confess and forsake his sin without any regard to what others have done or may do. If he does this truly, faithfully, whole-heartedly, condemning no others, accusing no others, excusing not himself, we know that God will receive him; and surely that church must be in an awful condition which will not gladly welcome the wanderer home.

1178. Sunday and Its Origin.

Please inform me what was the original nature or character of Sunday? How . . . did it take the place of the Sabbath in the Roman churches? and greatly oblige an old subscriber. C. H. C.

1. Sunday, as was aptly expressed by a writer sometime ago in the North British Review, is “the wild solar holiday of all ‘pagan times.’” It was originally dedicated to the sun as a festival day, and observed with all the looseness and lewdness inculcated in sun-worship.

2. The apostolic church early found itself filling up with half-converted heathen philosophers, teachers, and people of the common sort. Many of these came into the church retaining their ancient customs. As the teachers of the church lost their power, they began to devise ways and means to secure converts. Among these were the retention of heathen customs, the transference of these customs to the Christian church, dedicating them to Christ, etc., that they might the more easily win the heathen. Sunday was one of these heathen institutions which most of the pagan world regarded. It came into the church as a compromise. See Bible Student’s Library, No. 80, “Sunday: Origin of Its Observance in the Christian Church,” 15 cents; No. 134, “The Lord’s Day, the Test of the Ages,” 15 cents; Apples of Gold Library, No. 45, Historical “Facts and Incidents Relative to Sabbath and Sunday,” price 2 cents. The fullest for the question is the first-named.

1179. “Of the Seed of David.”

Will you please inform me how to explain from the Scriptures that Christ was of the seed of David through Mary? Also can you give me proof outside of the Bible that Mary was of the seed of David, as well as proof in the Bible? MRS. B. D.

The best way to explain it is the simple statement that Jesus Christ “was made [R.V., ‘born’] of the seed of David according to the flesh.” Rom. 1:3. That is very plain, isn’t it, to any one who believes the Bible? If they do not believe it, no explanation will help them. See also Acts 2:29-31; Heb. 7:14; 2 Tim. 2:8; Acts 13:22, 23; Luke 1:30-32. Certainly this would indicate that Mary was the seed of David. Moreover, it is again and again declared that Joseph was of the seed of David. Luke 1:27; Matt. 1:1-16. Joseph and Mary were married, the twain one flesh,—the posterity counted after the husband. On the side of His reputed father He was of the seed of David, and would be so counted in Jewish law. The record in Matthew is generally understood as giving the genealogy of Joseph; Luke, that of Mary. Schaff (Bible Dictionary) says that “Mary is always called by the Jews ‘the daughter of Heli.’” Then Heli (Luke 3:23) was the father of Mary, the father-in-law of Joseph. “Matthew, writing for the Jews, gives the legal pedigree of Jesus (which was always reckoned in the male line) through Joseph, his legal father, in the line of Solomon.” Is not this sufficient?