Q&A – Page 98 – Church of the Eternal God

Will prophetic events be "cut short"–that is, will some prophecies not come to pass?

December 31, 2004

The Scripture that some use to teach this concept is Matthew 24:22. Various translations use the terms “cut short” in quoting the words of Jesus Christ. For instance, the NIV states: “‘If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.'” Similarly, the NKJV renders this verse: “‘And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened.'”

What days will be “cut short” or “shortened”?

In verse 3 of Matthew 24, some of the disciples asked Jesus: “‘Tell us, when will these things be? And what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?'” Jesus answered them by revealing events far into the future, and He concentrated His response on the events of the generation alive at the time that the Father would send Jesus back to the earth to forcefully intervene in world affairs.

Did Jesus Have Long Hair?

December 24, 2004

The Bible clearly reveals that Jesus Christ, when He was here on earth as a human being, did not wear long hair. Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 11:14: “Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him?” It would therefore be inconceivable to assume that Jesus would have worn long hair.

Some have misunderstood a passage in the book of Matthew, erroneously claiming that Christ was a “Nazirite” (also spelled Nazarite in the Authorized Version) and that He therefore wore long hair. However, Christ was not a Nazirite, but a Nazarene. The passage in Matthew 2:23 reads:

“And he [Joseph] came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, ‘He [Christ] shall be called a Nazarene.'”

Do you teach that God commands His Church in the ancient book of Ezekiel to warn the modern United States of America, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and other English-speaking nations, of impending disaster?

December 17, 2004

This is indeed the understanding and teaching of the Church of the Eternal God and its corporate affiliates in Canada and Great Britain.

First, let us realize that the message, that God gave to the ancient prophet Ezekiel, was in fact a modern prophecy for a modern “Ezekiel”:

It is critical to understand that under Solomon’s son Rehoboam, the nation of Israel became divided. Two separate nations developed, known as the “house of Israel,” with Samaria as its capital, and the “house of Judah,” with Jerusalem as its capital. We read in 1 Kings 12:19-20 (AV): “So Israel [being reigned by King Rehoboam, son of King Solomon] rebelled against the house of David unto this day. And it came to pass, when all Israel heard that Jeroboam [a prominent officer] was come again, that they sent and called him unto the congregation, and made him king over all Israel: there was none that followed the house of David, but the tribe of Judah only.”

Should only ordained ministers of the Church of God baptize, or is it sufficient to get baptized through unordained members?

December 10, 2004

In our booklet, “Baptism–A Requirement for Salvation,” we address and answer this question, as follows, beginning on page 27, under “Who Should Baptize?”

“Once a person is truly ready for baptism, a true minister of Christ should perform the baptism, though it may sometimes require a waiting period by virtue of the fact that a minister of Christ is not immediately available. We need to understand, though, that God is in charge and that when He calls someone and leads them to baptism, He will also work out the necessary details to send one of His ministers to perform the baptism. For instance, God sent Peter to Cornelius, and He sent Philip to the eunuch so that they could be baptized.

“The biblical record indicates that only ordained ministers of God should perform baptisms. The reason is that the baptism is done for the purpose of receiving the Holy Spirit. We need to remember that following baptism by immersing under water, the minister is to pray over the person and to lay his hands on their head so that the person can receive the Holy Spirit. The Bible shows that without the laying on of hands, a person normally does not receive the Holy Spirit.

Can we conclude from Ezekiel, chapter 20, verse 25 (Authorized Version), that God gave Israel laws which were not good?

December 3, 2004

When we review from God’s Word what He tells us about His laws – we can know this statement in verse 25 of Ezekiel 20 cannot be complete as presented.

In Psalm 19:7-10 we read: “The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul; The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple; The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; The commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes; The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever; The judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.” Romans 7:12 tells us “Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good.”

What then, could this verse in Ezekiel be revealing to us? Much can be learned by reading the preceding 24 verses of this 20th chapter of Ezekiel. Israel, of course, had been in captivity under the rule of the Egyptians for some 400 years, and had totally lost any knowledge of God and of His Ways. God had determined to reveal Himself once again to these descendents of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Israel).

Hebrews 5:8 tells us that Christ "learned obedience by the things which He suffered." Didn't Christ live a sinless life? Wasn't He therefore always obedient? If so, how did Jesus Christ LEARN obedience by the things which He suffered?

November 26, 2004

Jesus Christ, when He was here on earth as a human being, lived indeed a sinless life. He never sinned by breaking any of God’s Commandments (compare 1 John 3:4, Authorized Version). Rather, He kept perfectly all of God’s Laws. He said in John 15:10: “I have kept My Father’s commandments.”

The Biblical record is conclusive that Christ never sinned. Hebrews 4:15 tells us that Christ “was in all points tempted as we are, yet without sin.” He was “separate from sinners” (Hebrews 7:26); and even when He suffered, He “committed no sin” (1 Peter 2:21-22). Christ challenged His listeners to convict Him of sin (John 8:46), knowing that they would be unable to do so. He also testified of Himself that “no unrighteousness” was in Him (John 7:18).

Before Christ became a man, He had lived for all eternity as a glorified God being, in the Spirit, together with the Father (John 17:5). But when He became human, having laid aside His divine attributes (Philippians 2:5-7), He experienced for the first time what it was like to live with human nature — in this “sinful flesh” (Romans 8:3). He had to learn IN THE FLESH how to overcome sin and stay obedient to God; how to fight victoriously against the temptations of the flesh; and how to stay obedient in suffering, “to the point of death, even the death of the cross” (Philippians 2:8).

You teach that only ministers are to appoint members to the ministry. However, doesn't Acts 14:23 show that the entire congregation ordained ministers?

November 19, 2004

Actually, Acts 14:23 teaches the exact opposite. Looking at the context, we find that the ones who “appointed elders in every church” (verse 23) were “the apostles Barnabas and Paul” (verse 14; compare, too, Acts 15:2).

As we have pointed out before, for instance, in the Q&A of Update #147 (June 11, 2004), God used ordained ministers to appoint others to the ministry (Titus 1:5). Titus was a minister. He is also referred to as a brother. After all, a true minister is a servant and a spiritual brother. This is why Paul could call Titus a brother, but this does not mean that Titus was not also ordained to the ministry. The Bible shows that ministers or elders are ordained or appointed by other ministers or elders. The laying on of hands through the ministry is very important in this regard (1 Timothy 5:22).

You teach that Daniel 11:40-45 does not require a future "king of the South," although you say that the emergence of one is possible. Being familiar with the teachings of the Worldwide Church of God under Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong, didn't Mr. Armstrong teach that there must be another king of the South?

November 12, 2004

First of all, it is important to realize that we must receive our teachings from the Bible; so even IF Mr. Armstrong HAD taught that there would still have to be a future king of the South, we still would have to be able to back up such a teaching with Scripture. We have published several articles in previous Updates (Q&A in Update 154; Comments from our Readers in Update #156), and we have also placed a StandingWatch program regarding the king of the South on our Web, showing that Scripture does NOT DEMAND a future king of the South. In addition, we are also pleased to state that Mr. Armstrong did NOT teach something contrary to this fact, several false claims of some notwithstanding.

Hours of research have established that Mr. Armstrong has never written that the final fulfillment of the prophecies about the coming king of the South are certainly yet to come. In fact, Mr. Armstrong wrote an Editorial in 1967, which was published in the Plain Truth, pointing out that the prophecy of Daniel 11:40 WAS fulfilled. There is no further mention of a king of the South after Daniel 11:40. It is clear that Mr. Armstrong, since 1967, never taught that there would definitely be a future king of the South, “attacking” or “pushing at” the future king of the North or Europe.

In your new book, "Jesus Christ — A Great Mystery," you state on page 91 that Jesus Christ became sin and a curse for us, when He died on the cross. I understand that Christ paid the penalty for our sins, thereby taking away the curse for breaking the law, but how could He have BECOME sin or a curse?

November 5, 2004

The Bible specifically states that Christ became both sin and a curse for us, when He died on the cross. Notice 2 Corinthians 5:21 and Galatians 3:13, in the New King James Bible:

“For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21).

“Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’)” (Galatians 3:13).

These two passages are correctly translated from the original Greek. The Interlinear Literal Translations renders the two passages as follows:

“For him who knew not sin for us sin he made… Christ us ransomed from the curse of the law, having become for us a curse…”

Christ became sin for us, in that He carried our sins, as Isaiah 53:6 explains: “And the LORD has put on Him the iniquity of us all.” He was the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29). Likewise, He became a curse on our behalf, by paying for us the penalty or curse for our breaking of the law. As the Ryrie Study Bible explains, “Christ… was made a curse for us. The crucifixion brought Him under the curse of the law, as explained in the last half of the verse (quoted from Deut. 21:23).” The New Bible Commentary:Revised adds the following thought: “Sin’s penalty was borne in a substitutionary way. He bore our curse, the curse cited from Dt. 21:23, which is equivalent to the wrath of Rom. 1:18 and 2:8.”

Recently, another Church organization claimed in an article that circumcision, as given by God to Abraham and ancient Israel, is a health law that is still in force and effect today. Is this your understanding, too?

October 29, 2004

This is clearly not our understanding! In fact, such a teaching would totally misrepresent and ignore what God is saying about circumcision.

As we explain in our free booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound…”, God gave man timeless physical and spiritual laws, including health laws, as well as temporary ritual laws, which had a passing and time-related purpose. For instance, God told man that certain animal food is good to eat, while other animals are not fit for consumption (Leviticus 11; Deuteronomy 14). These are health laws, given for the good of man, which are still in effect today. In fact, they will still be in effect at the time of Christ’s return (compare Isaiah 66:16-17).

The law of circumcision was clearly not a timeless health law, but a temporary ritual law. We should, first of all, consider why God commanded circumcision. God commanded the practice of circumcision as a sign of the covenant (Romans 4:11; Genesis 17:11), which God made with Abraham and his descendants, along with any who would want to come under the same covenant of promise. At the same time, circumcision constituted itself a covenant (Acts 7:8). But circumcision was not to be understood as a timeless health law. The reason is that the law of physical circumcision only came into effect long after the creation of man, and that it is no longer required today. If it were a health law, then it should have been in effect from the time of man’s creation, and God would still require it today, as He would not deprive man of something that is good for him.