Q&A – Page 100 – Church of the Eternal God

Would you please explain Matthew 28:1?

April 15, 2005

Some, in an attempt to teach a Sunday morning resurrection, have used Matthew 28:1 in support of such a teaching. We do know, however, that Jesus Christ was resurrected on Saturday afternoon, around sunset, after having been in the grave for three days and three nights. He was killed on a Wednesday, and placed in the grave on Wednesday afternoon, just around sunset.

We have set forth in detail the Biblical and historical proofs for a Wednesday crucifixion and a Saturday resurrection in our free booklet, “Jesus Christ — A Great Mystery.” In that booklet, we have also explained the correct understanding of Matthew 28:1, as follows:

“We read in Matthew 28:1-6 (Authorized Version): ‘In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it… And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for HE IS RISEN, AS HE SAID.’

Is it a sin to eat in a restaurant on the Sabbath?

April 8, 2005

The Church of the Eternal God in the USA and its corporate affiliates in Canada and Great Britain have consistently taught that it is not wrong to eat out on the weekly Sabbath or annual Holy Days (which are also called “Sabbaths” in the Bible), depending on the circumstances. At the same time, we must always keep firmly in mind that whatever we do or say or think on the Sabbath should be in realization of the fact that we are spending time that God has set aside for a holy purpose (Isaiah 58:13-14).

Quoting from our booklet, titled, “God’s Commanded Holy Days,” pages 21 and 22, we have said:

“It was Jesus Christ-the LORD of the Sabbath-who created the Sabbath, following the directive and command of God the Father. It is God-both the Father and the Son-who expects man to keep the Sabbath holy. Only God has the right to tell us how to keep the Sabbath holy. In Matthew 12:1-8, Christ tells us that mercy allows for a hungry person to get and eat food on the Sabbath. We see here a very important distinction to the time when God did not provide ancient Israel with manna from heaven on the Sabbath. In Christ’s day, food was available. The disciples could pluck heads of grain from the field. Under the law, the landowners were not allowed to harvest completely all grain, but they had to leave some of it in the field, so that those who were hungry could pluck and eat it.

Can you identify the seven Church eras, as described in the book of Revelation?

April 1, 2005

In the second and third chapters of the book of Revelation, John received a message for the “angels of the seven churches” (Revelation 1:20). As we have pointed out before [compare the Q&A in Update 157], these messages were to be meant for seven existing local Church congregations in seven distinct cities at John’s time, but they were also directed to all Christians at all times (compare Revelation 2:7, 11, 17, 29; 3:6, 13, and 22), and they included messages for seven consecutive Church eras, beginning at the time of John, and ending at the time of Christ’s Second Coming (compare Revelation 1:19-20).

The seven Church eras can be briefly described as the eras of Ephesus (Revelation 2:1-7); Smyrna (Revelation 2:8-11); Pergamos (Revelation 2:12-17); Thyatira (Revelation 2:18-29); Sardis (Revelation 3:1-6); Philadelphia (Revelation 3:7-13); and Laodicea (Revelation 3:14-22).

Q How do you explain Luke 22:35-38? Doesn't this passage allow, if not command, Christian warfare?

April 1, 2005

_A Luke 22:35-38 reads in context: “And He said to them, `When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?’ So they said, `Nothing.’ [God took care of them.] Then He said to them, `But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: “And He was numbered with the transgressors.” For the things concerning Me have an end.’ So they said: `Lord, look, here are two swords.’ And He said to them: `It is enough.'”

This passage cannot be used to justify participation of a Christian to fight in war. In fact, the passage teaches the exact opposite. First of all, “two swords” would hardly be enough for Christ’s disciples to defend themselves against the coming Roman persecution. Secondly, Christ Himself makes clear why they were to buy swords. It was so that the prophecy regarding Him could be fulfilled. What specific prophetic saying had to be fulfilled? “And He was numbered with the transgressors.” What transgression did the disciples – who had swords – become guilty of?

Did God ORDER Ancient Israel to SIN?

April 1, 2005

_{Q Although there are examples in the Old Testament when men decided to go to war, other passages show that God ordered them to war. If human warfare is always wrong, did God order men to SIN?}

_A To answer this question, it would be helpful to recall that sin begins in the mind – many times, long before the physical act is committed.

If a man lusts after a woman in his heart (mind) he has already committed the sin of adultery, in the eyes of God (compare Matthew 5:27-28). If a person hates another in his heart (mind), he has committed murder already, in the eyes of God (compare Matthew 5:21-22). The law has already been broken. Sin has already been committed.

Thus, in David’s and in ancient Israel’s situations, both had already broken God’s law and committed sin against Him, in their hearts, when they desired to go to war. They had already become men of war, in their hearts – sinners, who had chosen to live contrary to God and His Way (but they might not have even realized that fighting in war is sin).

Q Please explain Romans 13:3, stating that "rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil." I could think of many rulers who are a terror to good works. Also, do we have to obey civil rulers and their laws in everything?

April 1, 2005

_A Paul is talking here about rulers in general who uphold certain laws to guarantee a civil and peaceful and harmonious lifestyle among their citizens. Paul is referring to submission to and enforcement of civil and criminal laws, such as theft or murder.

Paul is not talking here about the Hitlers or the Neros, who encourage their citizens to betray Christians or the Jews so they can be killed. We need to remember Christ’s statement to OBEY the Pharisees in all that they tell the people – but later, Peter did not obey them when they told him not to preach in the name of Christ. Christ would not obey them, either, in following their rules of ceremonial washings or to have no contact with “sinners.” So, Christ and Paul were talking about matters that were not in conflict with God’s Word. (Notice, too, that John the Baptist openly rebuked Herod for committing adultery with his brother’s wife – see Luke 3:19-20. Also, Daniel refused to obey the order of King Darius, not to pray to God, while his three
friends disobeyed the order of King Nebuchadnezzar to worship the golden image).

Q What are the Biblical reasons compelling a Christian to refuse to participate in military service and war?

April 1, 2005

_A There are different Biblical principles involved. We believe that the following will best express our religious convictions against participating in military service and war:

A true Christian is a stranger, alien and exile (1 Peter 2:11; Hebrews 11:13) while here on earth; an ambassador for Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:20); and a representative of God’s kingdom. As such, and in being a light to the world by proper conduct (Matthew 5:14-16), a true Christian does not take part in this world’s governmental or political affairs, because it is not God who presently rules this world, but Satan the devil (Revelation 2:13; Luke 4:5-6). Christians are admonished to come out of the governmental and political systems of this world (Revelation 18:4).

Q What are the Biblical principles enjoining us not to serve on a jury?

April 1, 2005

_A There are different Biblical principles involved. We believe that the following will best express our religious convictions against participating in jury duty:

A true Christian is a stranger, alien and exile (1 Peter 2:11; Hebrews 11:13) while here on earth; an ambassador for Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:20); and a representative of God’s Kingdom. As such, and in being a light to the world by proper conduct (Matthew 5:14-16), a true Christian does not take part in this world’s governmental or political affairs, as presently, it is not God who rules this earth, but Satan the devil (Revelation 2:13; Luke 4:5-6). Christians are challenged to come out of the governmental and political systems of this world. Christ, knowing that God’s Kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36), refused to judge a civil matter when He was asked to do so (Luke 12:14). Paul, likewise, prohibited judging those “who are outside” the church (1 Corinthians 5:12).

Q Why do you teach that a Christian should not vote in governmental elections?

April 1, 2005

_A In the context of this booklet, we need to understand that the issues of jury duty and voting for the government are both connected with the issue of military service and war.

It is inconsistent to take the position that one cannot join the military because one is an ambassador of Jesus Christ and a citizen of another government – the Kingdom of God – while at the same time serving on a jury or voting in governmental elections. For instance, in the United States, the President is also the Commander-in-Chief, having both the right and the obligation under the Constitution, in certain circumstances, to declare war. How can one refuse to participate in war, while voting for a person who has the right and the obligation to declare war? In the past, people were disqualified as conscientious objectors because they did not refuse to serve on a jury or to vote in governmental elections. It was ruled that such an obvious inconsistency in position showed evidence for non-sincerity of the applicant.

Would you please explain 1 Corinthians 5:11?

March 25, 2005

The passage reads: “But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner — not even to eat with such a person.”

It is important to see the context of that passage. Paul had explained, beginning in verse 1, that he had received reports that there was sexual immorality among the local church members — such a terrible perversion, “as is not even named among the Gentiles–that a man has his father’s wife.” Whether this intimate sexual relationship was between mother and son, or stepmother and son, is debatable. Paul continued in verse 2: “And you are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who has done this deed might be taken away from among you.” They were actually “glorying” about this evil conduct (verse 6), feeling that they needed to be so tolerant and liberal with the law of God that this man’s public action was acceptable in God’s Church. But Paul concluded in verse 13: “Therefore ‘put away from yourselves the evil person.'”