Question Corner by Editor

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Mountain View, California · Oct 10, 1906

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 32, No. 39.

Question Corner

By Editor

1898.—Mistakes in Copy and Conception.

Please harmonize 2 Chron. 22:1, 2 with chapter 21:20. These Scriptures show that the son was two years older than the rather. S. A. B.

The mistakes have evidently been made in copying. A mere dot or a dash sometimes makes a great difference. Very few of these have crept into the Scriptures as compared with other ancient works, yet doubtless there have been some mistakes of this kind made. 2 Kings 8:26 reads instead of "forty and two years," "two and twenty years," which is probably the correct reading.

2. In the reference to the three days and three nights in the heart of the earth, would say that the term "day and night" is a common expression in Jewish parlance for a day. There is no reason for thinking that three days and three nights meant absolutely three full days and three full nights. Look up the various expressions concerning the trial and crucifixion of our Lord. Note where one evangelist uses "the third day," or "on the third day," or "this is the third day," and another uses the expression "after three days," and these are all parallel. Again, there is no reason for contending that "in the heart of the earth" meant in the grave. We have no right to say just what it does mean, inasmuch as that is the only place where it is used. The power which controlled the earth at that time was the Roman power. Up to the very time of Christ's betrayal, no power on earth could have any control over Him; but when He was apprehended by the Romans, He declared: "This is your hour and the power of darkness." Then He was delivered of the Father to the power of evil, and that extended until He broke the power of the sepulcher and went forth in the glorious liberty of the resurrection. If His betrayal were upon Thursday evening, the three days would include the night of Friday and the day of Friday, the night of the Sabbath and the day of the Sabbath, the night of Sunday with the early morning; and so we read that His own disciples declared on that first day, Sunday, "To-day is the third day since these things were done." The common usages of the language it is well worth while to consider.

1899.—What Kind of Sabbath? Lev. 26:34.

Is this the seventh-day Sabbath as spoken from Mount Sinai, or is it a ceremonial Sabbath? Is the Sabbath as spoken of in Lev. 26:34 the same as 2 Chron. 36:21? B.

The Sabbath in Lev. 26:34 included all the Sabbaths. It was God's design that every seventh year should be a Sabbath of the land. It was man's duty to keep every seventh day. So man's Sabbath upon the land was every seventh day, God's weekly rest day. Besides this there were several ceremonial Sabbaths which occurred yearly. See Leviticus 23. Then there were the Sabbaths of the land, as before mentioned, coming every seventh year. The Sabbath of 2 Chron. 36:21 is evidently the same as that of Lev. 26:34. It is well to remember, however, that the Sabbath of the land depended upon man's keeping faithfully God's Sabbath. Had man been faithful to God in the weekly rest day, there would have been no question but that he would have been faithful to God in the Sabbath of the land.

1900. When Was Christ Hungry? Matt. 4:2.

In Matt. 4:2 it says: "When He had fasted forty days and forty nights, He was afterward an hungered." Are we to understand from that that He was not hungry until the termination of the forty days and nights. And did he have water to drink? ONE UNCERTAIN.

Christ's agony in wrestling with the temptations of the evil one during the forty days seems to have been so great as to make Him forget all bodily needs and longings. But physical powers could not always be denied. When victory came at the close of the period of forty days, a keen hunger-sense returned. Then came again the devil with, "If Thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread." Doubtless He was faint and weary all through the forty days, but He did not feel as He did afterward. Whether He had water or not, I can not say. Probably not. Read the accounts in Mark 1 and Luke 4.

1901. The Book of Esdras.

Can you tell me why the Books of Esdras were rejected from the Canon? There seems to be a remarkable prophecy concerning the latter days in Second Esdras. J. M. P.

Because in language (Greek) and chronology (long after Malachi) they were similar to the other books of the Apocrypha. The word "Esdras" is another form of "Ezra." In some versions they are called the third and fourth books of Ezra, Nehemiah being reckoned the second. Some scholars have counted them both canonical. Second Esdras is altogether different from First Esdras. It is supposed by some critics to be a translation from the Hebrew or Chaldee. The date of the books is placed from B.C. 100 to A.D. 100. There are those who believe it to be predictions of the last days.

1902. The Tares. Matt. 13:38.

Please explain Matthew 13:38: "The tares are the children of the wicked one." Would this imply that there are certain people who are created by the devil? Of course, we know that the devil himself is a created being. See Eze. 28:13. H. A. D.

Not at all. If you will call to mind, you will note that those are called children of various personages who are like them in character. For instance, Jesus said that the devil was father of the disobedient Jews (John 8:44); "children of Belial," we continually read of (1 Sam. 10:27; 1 Kings 21:13, etc.), "children of disobedience," etc. (Eph. 2:2, 3). "The tares are children of the wicked one," drinking in from him their elements of wicked character. Satan can create nothing; he can only pervert what God has created; and when responsible souls turn from their Creator and choose Satan and his service, they thereby become his children.

1903. The Beginning of the Law.

Did the law of God, the Ten Commandments, exist before the world was made? R.

God gives no law for the moral conduct of His children which is apart from Himself. He could not do it if He would. All His commandments are righteousness. "Holy and righteous is He." He does not have two standards of righteousness; He says, "I am Jehovah, I change not." His law therefore in any, in every, age is the expression in words of His own character. What that law enjoins in one age, it enjoins in every age. What it requires in one age, it requires in every age. The Ten Commandments are the reflect of God's character in a largely negative form to the children of men. The great original is in heaven. God's great Gospel purpose is to write in living characters on the hearts of His children what He wrote with His own finger on tables of stone. Every one of the precepts of the Decalogue is referred to as existing and binding before we come to the speaking of the Decalogue from Mount Sinai. Read the book of Genesis and Exodus with this thought in mind.

1904. Uniting Believers and Unbelievers.

Is it right for Christians to marry those who are not Christians? If it is not, is it right for a Christian minister to perform such a ceremony? A. D.

As to the first question, read 2 Cor. 6:14, 15: "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers; for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? And what communion hath light with darkness? and what concord hath Christ with Belial? and what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?" Surely, this is clear and explicit. Such marriages are everywhere condemned in God's Word, and almost invariably work out ill. The second question is answered by the first. We do not see how a Christian minister can join together what God has said should be kept separate.

1905. How Is the "Mark" Received? Rev. 13:16, 17.

Will you please explain Rev. 13:16, 17? Does this mean a real mark in the forehead or in the hand? C. E. O.

We have not space in this department for a full explanation of this prophecy. It should be studied with Rev. 14:1-5 and chapter 7. God's children are sealed with His seal in their forehead; they have the Father's name in their foreheads. This is one and the same thing. It does not mean a literal mark, but that as the forehead stands for the seat of the intellect, the mind, His children are subject to His will, have His law written in their mind, and are as truly bond-slaves of His infinite love and service as were ever branded slaves in the Roman galleys the slaves of those whose brands they wore. "The mark of the beast" is that by which the worshipers of the beast are distinguished from the worshipers of God. It makes the difference between the law of God and the law of the beast, or church and state. The seal of God centers in the Sabbath; the mark of the beast will center in the man-made counterfeit or Sunday as enforced by law. Some will yield their full assent to this, and receive it in their minds; they will have the mark in their forehead. Others will yield to it simply because it is human law, and render that law their service, as expressed by the hand, the chief instrument of service. In the mania for badges, marks, labels, uniforms, etc., humanity may devise some literal mark for church-and-state adherents, just as we have numbered teamsters and union cards.