ALL ABOUT JESUS CHRIST #2

 

All About Jesus #2

His Divinity and Humanity

by Finis Dake If the body of Jesus was the Son of Jesus, and the inner man of Jesus was the Father of Jesus, then how could the Father say to the body, "I am the Son [body] of God?" If the Father inside was talking to the Son outside, then the body could not be the Son. How could the Son (body) be called "Jesus," as in Matt.1:21; 8:29; Mark 1:1; Acts 8:37; 1 Cor.1:9; 1 John 1:3,7; 3:23; 5:20; 2 John 3, and "Christ," as in Matt.16:16; 22:42; 26:63; Luke 4:4; John 20:31, if these two names have been the names of the Father from all eternity, as some argue. The Son (body) had a beginning in Mary 1900 years ago. These names were not the names of God from all eternity, for they were names given to the Son when He was born about 1900 years ago. Not one time are these names used of either person of the Godhead until Jesus was born and anointed by God the Father. The word "Jesus" was the human name given to the Son of Mary eight days after He was born (Matt.1:16,21; Luke 1:31-35; 2:21). It was and is still a common name like John, James, and other names. Josephus mentions thirteen men who are called Jesus. Several are mentioned in the New Testament (Acts 7:45; 13:6; Col. 4:11; Heb.4:8; Matt.1:21). Several in the Old Testament are called "Joshua" and "Joshua" and hundreds of people throughout history have been called Jesus and Joshua. If the New Testament had been written in Hebrew instead of Greek Jesus would have been called Joshua. The word "Jesus" is not an heavenly or divine name. It is an earthly human name given to the second person of the Godhead when he became a man. Therefore, it is His name as a man and not His name as God. The word "Christ" literally means "anointed" and is a name applied to Jesus when He became the anointed of God. It is like the word "Jesus," a name of his humanity, and of His anointing as a man and not His name as God. It is the same as the Hebrew word translated "Messiah" (Dan.9:24-27; John 1:41; 4:25). Jesus became the anointed of God or Christ thirty years after He was called Jesus. It was predicted in prophecy that God would make Him the "Anointed" (Ps.2:1-12; 143 11-18; Isa.11:1-2; 42:1-5; 61:1-2). History records that the time He became the "Anointed" of God was at His baptism (Matt.3:16-17; 12:15-20; Luke 3:21-22; Acts 10:38). Jesus confirmed the time He became God's "Anointed" (Luke 4:16:21). Jesus was anointed with the Holy Ghost and not with oil. He was anointed because He was the Son of the Father and it proves two persons - the one who anointed Him and the one who was anointed. Passages such as Luke 2:26; Gal.3:17; 1 Pet. 1:11 should be understood in the same sense as we would say that President George Washington was a surveyor. He was not this when he was president, but since he became president we could speak of any event of his life before he became president as what President Washington did. So it is with Christ. Since He became God's Christ we can now speak of Christ doing certain things even before He was anointed. 28. The Bible never speaks of the Father dying, but it does say that the Son died (Rom.5:10; Heb.6:6; John 3:16-18). The Son died in the same sense that other men die ... This proves that the Father and Son were two separate persons. 29. Jesus was "the only begotten of the Father" and "his only begotten Son," and He had to be a separate person from the Father in order to be begotten by the Father, and the Father had to be a separate person from Jesus in order to beget Him (John 1:14, 18; 3:16-18; 31-36; 1 John 5:1). No person can beget himself, or be begotten by himself, and no person can be his own father or son. Neither can any person beget part of himself, or be begotten by part of himself. 30. Many statements in the gospel of John prove that Jesus did not claim to be the Father, but He did say that God was His Father and His God (John 5:8-45; 10:18-36; 14:28; 20:17; Rev. 3:12); that God worked only through Him, and that He COULD DO NOTHING OF HIMSELF (John 5:19,30); that He not only COULD NOT, but that He DID NOT DO ANYTHING OF HIMSELF (John 5:30; 6:38; 8:28; 12:49-50); that He did only the Father's will and lived BY THE FATHER, as men are to do His will and live BY HIM (John 6:57); and that the work of God was to believe on the one whom the Father had sent (John 6:29; 3:2; 5:18; 8:54; 14:1). He said that His doctrine was not His, but it was the Father's (John 7:16-17; 8:26,38; 10:18; 12:49-50; 14:10-11; 17:8,14) and that if anyone would do the will of God he should know that He did not come and SPEAK OF HIMSELF, but that He spoke of the Father who had sent Him (John 7:16-18). He claimed that His message was true because He did not SPEAK OF HIMSELF, but that He spoke of the Father (John 7:18; 5:30-38; 14:10-11), that He spoke only what He had HEARD FROM THE FATHER (John 8:26-28,38-40), that He taught BY THE FATHER and that His teaching was not of Himself (John 8:28), that He did not PLEASE HIMSELF, but He lived to please the Father (John 8:29), that He was the "Son" of the house and not the "Father" of it (John 8:35-36; Heb.3:6), and that He had THE SAME RELATION TO THE FATHER that the Jews had to their father the devil (John 8:16, 3 5-44; 9:4). He taught that He, Himself, honored the Father as all men should (John 8:49); that He did not seek HIS OWN GLORY, but that there was "one" (not Himself, but ANOTHER, the Father) that honored Him and sought His glory (John 8:50,54; 12:26-28; 14:12-15; 17:1-5, 10); that He and the Father knew each other, but they were not each other (John 8:55; 10:15); that the Father loved Him for His unselfishness (it takes two people to love and be loved, John 10:17-18); that He had received commandments from the Father, and they were not His own (John 10:18; 12:49-50; 15:10); and that the Father gave Him His disciples (John 10:29; 17:1-25). He further claimed that he was equal to the Father as to deity and some things, but not equal in other things (Mark 13:32; John 5:17-39; 8:13-19,29-42; 19:18,24-29; Acts 1:7; 1 Cor.11:3; Rev.1:1); that He was not a "Spirit" being like His Father (Luke 24:39); John 4:24; Phil. 3:21); that He and the Father were in each other (united as one) in the same sense He and the believers were one (John 10:38; 14:10-11,23; 17:11,21-23; 2 Cor.5:17); and that He was the only way to the Father (John 14:6). Such simple language as that in all the above listed passages cannot be understood except in connection with two separate persons. 31. Jesus said that if He bore witness "of Himself" and if He was the only one that did bare witness, His testimony would not be true and He would not expect men to believe it any more than civil courts would accept only one witness (John 5:21-23,36; 6:38; 7:16-17,28; 8:13-19,37,42,54; 12:44,49-50; 14:10-11; 17:1-25). God repeatedly said in both Testaments that "in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established" (Num.35:30; Deut.17:6-7; 19:15; Matt.18:16; Luke 24:48; Acts 1:8,22; 2:32; 5:32; 7:58; 10:31; 1 Thess.5:19; Heb.10:28-29; 12:1; Rev.11:5). Would God make a fixed law to establish truth by two or three separate witnesses and then break His own law and expect men to have confidence in Him? He would have no grounds to punish man for rejection of God's witness if God were only one person..... Jesus continued by saying that He had greater proof or witness than John the Baptist who had two witnesses, the Father and the Holy Ghost (John 1:31-34; 5:36). John did not have the miracles to confirm his word as did Jesus, who had the same two witnesses that John had plus the miracles (John 2:11,23; 3:2; 4:54; 5:20, 36; 7:2,26; 7:31; 9:16; 10:25-37,41; 11:42-47; 14:10-12; 15:24). When Jesus said, "I am not alone, but I [one person] and the Father [another person] that sent me" and is with me also bear witness, He simply stated that there were more persons in the Godhead than He, thus fulfilling the Word of God concerning more than one witness to establish a fact. He plainly said that the two witnesses in this testimony were the Father and Himself. "I am one that bears witness of myself, and the Father that sent me [another person] beareth witness of me" (John 8:13-18,29; 16:32). Again, in John 8:29 He said, "The Father bath not left me alone" and in John 16:32, "every man to his own and leave me alone: and yet I am not alone, because the Father is with me." What could be more clear in proving two distinct persons, called "the Father" and "the Son," both of them equally God? On the other hand, what foolish statements these are if Jesus is the only person in the Godhead. 32. In the following eighty separate statements of Scripture by Jesus Christ, He constantly affirmed that He was not the Father and not the only person in the Godhead. The grammar of these passages will not permit us to believe in only one person as being referred to. Jesus is the speaker, but He is not the one spoken of, as is made clear by reading these statements concerning Him and His Father. If we are not going to believe what God says in His revelation concerning Himself, His Son, and the Holy Spirit, then He is under no further obligation to give another revelation in order to make the subject of God clear to men. If we will not believe one revelation, we would not believe another. If we will believe at all, then let us believe these scriptural facts of human language concerning more than one person in the Godhead. Then we will not have to teach that God is a mystery ... cannot be understood, and the other foolish doctrines as expressed by men who refuse to take the plain language used by God in the Bible revealing the ... separate persons in the Godhead, as seen in Matt.7:21; 10:32-33; 11:27; 15:13; 16:17; 18:10,19,35; 19:17; 20:23; 24:36; 25:34; 26:29,39,42,53; Luke 2:49; John 5:17,43; 6:32,65; 8:19,28,38,49,54; 10:17-18,25,29,30,32,37; 12:26-28; 14:7,12,20,21,28; 15:1,8,10,4,23; 16:23-26; 18:11; 20:17,21; Rev. 1:1; 2:27; 3:5,12; 5:1-7,13; 7:9,15-16; 10:6; 11:15; 12:10; 21:22-23; 22:1-5. 33. Jesus said that His Father was "greater than all" and "greater than I" (John 10:29; 14:28). He then could not be the Father. Paul also stated that the Father was the "head of Christ" (1 Cor.3:23; 11:3). 34. God the Father said of Jesus, "my beloved Son" (Matt. 3:16-17; 17:5; Ps.2:7). Jesus said of Himself, "I am the Son of God" (John 10:38). An angel declared Him to be "the Son of the Highest" and "the Son of God" (Luke 1:32-35 ). Demons said He was "the Son of God" (Mark 3:11) and "Son of the Most High God" (Mark 5:7). Apostles stated repeatedly that Jesus was only "the Son of God" (Matt.14:33; 16:16-17; Mark 1:1; John 11:27; 20:31; Acts 9:20), "the only begotten OF THE FATHER" (John 1:14,18; 3:16-18), "his own Son" (Rom.8:32), "the Son of the Father" (2 John 3), and "his dear Son" by whom God the Father created all things (Col.1:13-18). John said, "the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world" (1 John 4:14); so there must be two separate persons referred to. John the Baptist also bare record "that this was the Son of God" (John 1:31-34). Others confessed that Jesus was "the Son of God" (Mark 15:39; 1 John 1:49; Acts 9:37), but not once did God, angels, demons, or men say that He was the Father. 35. Both the Father and the Son talked to each other in audible voices at the same time and place, and both voices were heard by a number of witnesses; so there had to be two persons who had their own separate bodies, voices, minds, etc., to be able to speak to each other in the same sense other persons do. (Matt.3:16-17; 17:5; John 12:27-30; 2 Pet.1:17). 36. Jesus taught that when men receive Him they also receive the Father, as when men receive Christ's disciples they also receive Christ (Matt.10:39-41). This does not mean that the Father and the Son were the same person any more than it proves that Christ and the disciples become one person when men receive Christ through them. Separate persons are involved in both statements, as is clear. 37. God the Father is called "he" (John 14:16); God the Son is called "he" (John 8:23-25) ... so if personal pronouns are used of each person in making a distinction between them as is done with other persons, there must be ... separate persons. 38. Christ is symbolized by "the vine," and the Father is spoken of as "the husbandman" in John 15:1-16. It is just as intelligent to call any vine its own keeper and both of them one person as to do so here. This figure clearly proves two persons. 39. Jesus taught that He and the Father had the same relationship to each other as did He and His disciples (John 15:10). Such relationship proves more than one person. One person could not have such relationship by Himself as is required of separate persons in this passage. 40. The word "both" means "two" and is used of the Father and the Son, thus proving two persons (John 15:24; 2 John 9). 41. The word "also" is used of the Father and Son, thus proving two separate persons (John 5:19, 27; 8:19; 13:32; 14:1). 42. Jesus again speaks of Himself and the Father as "two" persons: "They have not known the Father [one person] nor me" (another person). Again, "I go my way to him that sent me (John 16:3,5). Then He speaks of Himself and the Spirit ... Jesus did not say that He would come back as the Holy Ghost, but that He would stay in Heaven and "send him unto you," as fulfilled in Acts 2:33-36. If those who believe in only one person in the Godhead are not capable of understanding the most simple human language, then their case is hopeless. 43. Jesus used personal pronouns in referring to Himself and the Father (John 14:23; 17:1-25; etc.) He used the first, second, and third personal pronouns of Himself, the Father, and the Holy Spirit; and not once do we find Him misusing them (John 14:12-17, 23-26; 15:1-26; 16:7-15; 17:1-25). If they were used rightly, then there must be separate persons in the Godhead. John 17 alone has 162 personal pronouns used by Jesus to and of Himself, of the Father, and of His disciples. He repeatedly calls the true God "Father" and calls Himself "thy Son." He prayed for the disciples to be "one" as He and the Father were "one," and this could not refer to "one person" but "one" in unity. Jesus used "I" and "me," first personal pronouns, in referring to Himself, and "thou," "thee," and ,thine," second personal pronouns, in referring to the Father, whom He was addressing. He used "they" and "them" in referring to the disciples for whom He was praying and "we" and "us" when referring to Himself and His Father, proving that He and His Father were more than one person as much as the disciples were. 44. Jesus said, "All power is given unto me in Heaven and in Earth" (Matt.28:18). Somebody had to give Him this power, and He had to be greater than Jesus, or He would not have it to give. The only one Jesus said was "greater than I" is the Father (John 14:28). The apostles later confirmed this fact of the Father being greater than Jesus, for they said that the Father was "the head of Christ" (1 Cor.11:3), that Jesus had been exalted by the Father above everyone else (1 Cor.14:24-28; Eph.1:20-23; Phil. 2:8-11; Heb.1:1-3; 12:2; 1 Pet.3:22), and that the Father had made Jesus both "Lord and Christ" (Acts 2:33-36), the heir of all things (Heb.1:2; Rom.8:17), the medium of approach to God (Heb. 1:4; John 3:16-18; Acts 4:12; 1 John 3:23; 5:13), and the source of redemption to men (1 Cor.1:30). These facts prove the Father to be a separate person from the Son. 45. Jesus said that He was the same that He claimed to be "from the beginning" (John 8:25). Because He always claimed to be only the Son and not the Father, we can rely upon the fact that He could not be the Father. The statement "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9), does not say that He was the Father. The Greek word for seen is 'horao,' to discern, to experience, perceive, comprehend. Like the English word seen, it means here to truly comprehend and not only to see with the eyes, as it is used in John 1:18; 6:46; 8:38; 1 John 3:6; 2 John 11. No statement in John 14 says that Jesus was the Father in person, but six times this chapter makes it clear that He was not the Father: (1) "Ye believe in God [one person], believe ALSO in me" (John 14:1-2). (2) "In my Father's house [not my house] are many mansions" (John 14:1-2). (3) "No man cometh UNTO THE FATHER, but BY ME" (John 14:6). (4) "If ye had known ME [Jesus], ye should have known MY FATHER [another person] ALSO" (John 14:7). (5) "He that hath seen [comprehended, experienced] ME [one person] hath seen [comprehended, experienced] THE FATHER (another person, John 14:9). In John 1:18 it is stated that no man had "seen" (fully comprehended) the Father save Christ, who came to reveal and declare God to men. If Christ came truly to demonstrate God, then John 14:9 proves He had succeeded in bringing God to men in actual demonstration of Him by His own life. (6) "I [one person] am in the Father [another person] and the Father in me. . . . I speak NOT OF MYSELF; but the Father that dwelleth in me, HE DOETH THE WORKS. I [Jesus] go to the Father," so He could not be the Father (John 14:10-15). "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" is a statement of true representation of another person (1 John 2:6; 3:3,7; 4:17; 1 Cor.11:1; Phil.4:9; 2 Cor.3:1-3,18; Rom.8:29). One who is truly like Christ as He was like the Father can say, "He that hath seen me hath seen Jesus Christ." VI. THE THEORY OF ETERNAL SONSHIP DISCUSSED .............. TO BE CONTINUED It is only in the last 10 years or so that I have heard about the teaching that "God" or the "Godhead" is just ONE person - One person who can be the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, at any time, or can be all three at any given time, but still remain as ONE person. Now, you go figure that one out. Then it is also within about the last 10 years that I have heard the teaching that God is NO PERSON at all, that God or the Godhead, is simply too much to be confined to a literal "personal being" and so God must not be thought of as any kind of a literal being. So I guess to those people who hold such an idea of God, then God is just a MIGHTY NOTHINGNESS. I have answered this "nothingness God" teaching in another study on this Website. As Finis Dake has shown so far, the Scriptures on this subject of God the Father and Jesus Christ, being TWO SEPARATE PERSONAL BEING is as clear and as plain as the sun shining in a cloudless sky. The truth of the matter is taught to us OVER AND OVER again in the pages of the Bible, especially the New Testament - Keith Hunt.

ALL ABOUT JESUS CHRIST #1

 

All About Jesus #1

His Divinity and Humanity

by Finis Dake (1949) FOREWORD: As I agree with Dake about 99% on this topic of the facts about Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, I will not try to re-invent the wheel but give you Finis Dakes study. Now Dake did believe that the Holy Sprit was a THIRD bodily person of the Godhead - which I do NOT believe the Scriptures teach, hence I have edited those portion where he so taught. I have used *** in a few places to give emphasis - Keith Hunt. THE TRUTH ABOUT JESUS CHRIST The facts ... about God apply to the Lord Jesus Christ in His preincarnate state as a Spirit Being, for He is one of the ... distinct Spirit Beings making the Deity or Godhead. Until about nineteen hundred years ago the second person of the Deity had the same kind of Spirit body, personal soul, and spirit that the Father ... still have. At that time one of the ... divine persons ... took human form to redeem the world. This is what has made the difference between the members of the Godhead during the last nineteen hundred years. The following study concerns the person of the Lord Jesus Christ as the manifestation of the invisible God among men: 1. THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS CHRIST The Bible declares that the person we now know as Jesus Christ was one of the ... divine persons of the Deity and that as God He had no beginning. It is this time before He became a man that we refer to as His pre-existence. Technically, there is no such thing as existence before Him as God, but He existed before He became a man. Mic.5:1-2 speaks of Him as existing from all eternity. John speaks of Him as existing in the very beginning with the Father (John 1:1-5). Jesus speaks of Himself as being before Abraham and before the world was created (John 8:5,8; 17: 5,24). Paul speaks of Him as existing before all things and as the Creator and Upholder of all things (Col.1:15-18; Heb.1:1-3, 8; 2:10). God the Father created all things by Him (Eph.3:9) and the Holy Spirit (Gen.1:2). II. THE DEITY OF JESUS CHRIST 1. DIVINE NAMES AND TITLES ARE ASCRIBED TO HIM. The following list of divine names and titles given to Jesus proves that He is by nature divine and a member of the Godhead. He is called God and Immanuel (Matt.1:23; John 1:1; 20:28; Acts 20:28); Lord (Luke 19:34; Acts 2:36); Lord of All (Acts 10:36); Lord of Glory (1 Cor. 2:8); Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace (Isa.9:6-7); Christ the Lord (Luke 2:26); The Son of God (Matt.4:3; 14:33; Luke 22:70; John 1:34; Rom.1:4); His Son (Matt.22:45; John 3:1618); My Son (Matt.3:17); The Only Begotten Son (John 1:18; 3:16-18; 1 John 4:9); The First and the Last, Alpha and Omega, The Beginning and the Ending (Rev.22:12, 13,16); The Lord (Acts 9:17); The Son of the Highest (Luke 1:32; Mark 14:61); The Bread of God (John 6:33); The Holy One of God (Mark 1:24); Thy Holy Child Jesus (Acts 4:30); King of Kings and Lord of Lords (Rev.19:16); Lord and Saviour (2 Pet.3:2); and The Word of God (Rev.19:13). These and many other names and titles in Scripture prove the Deity of Jesus Christ. Some of these are used hundreds of times in Scripture. We must believe in the divinity of Christ if we are going to believe the Bible. 2. DIVINE ATTRIBUTES ARE ASCRIBED TO HIM. This is clear from Phil.2:5-11 where Paul speaks of Christ being in God's form and that He laid aside this form and limited His attributes and powers as God to become a man. Then after His earthly limitation He had these powers given back to Him, as we shall see in Point VIII below. 3. DIVINE OFFICES ARE ASCRIBED TO HIM. HE is called the Creator (John 1:3; Col.1:16; Heb.1:1-3); Mediator (1 Tim.2:4-5; Heb.8:6); Head o f the Church (Eph.1:22; Col.1:16-24); Saviour (2 Pet. 3:2); Judge (2 Tim.4:1); Preserver (Heb.1:1-3); Life Giver (John 10:28; 17:2); Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36); the Resurrection and the Life (John 11:25). These and many other offices and works of Christ prove Him to be divine and one with the Father as part of the Deity. He is called the fellow and equal to God as to divinity (Zech. 13:7; John 5:17-23; 10:30-38; 17:10). 4. DIVINE CHARACTER IS ASCRIBED TO HIM. All ordinary men are sinners by nature (Ps.51:5; Eph.3:1-3; Rom.5:12-21). Christ is holy by birth (Luke 1:35), righteous (Isa.53:11; Heb.1:9), faithful (Isa.11:5; 1 Thess.5:24), true (John 1:14; 14:6), just (John 5:30), guileless (1 Pet.2:22), sinless (2 Cor.5:21), spotless (1 Pet.1:19), innocent (Matt.27:4), harmless (Heb. 7:26), obedient to God (John 15:10; Heb.5:8-10) and to His earthly parents (Luke 2:51), zealous (John 2:17), meek (Matt. 11:29), lowly in heart (Matt.11:29), merciful (Heb.2:17), patient (Isa.53:7), long-suffering (1 Tim.1:16), compassionate (Matt. 15:32), benevolent (Acts 10:38), loving (John 15:13), self-denying (2 Cor.8:9), humble (Phil.2:5-11), resigned (Luke 22:42), and forgiving (Luke 23:34). 5. THE WORKS OF GOD ARE ASCRIBED TO HIM (John 1:3; Col.1:15-18; Heb.1:1-3,10; John 5:19-23; Rev 3:14). 6. DIVINE WORSHIP WAS GIVEN TO HIM (Matt.4:9-10; 14:33; 28:9; Luke 24:52; John 5:23; 14:14; Acts 7:59; Rom.10:9-13; Heb. 1:6; Phil.2:10-11; Rev.5:12-14). Angels and men both worship Him, but they both refuse all such worship for themselves (Acts 10:25-26; Heb.1:6; Rev.22:8-9). 7. HIS NAME IS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT OF THE FATHER AND THE HOLY SPIRIT AS BEING ONE OF ... THE DEITY (Matt.28:19; John 5:19-23; 14:1,23; 17:3; Rom.1:7; 2 Cor.13:14; 1 John 5:7-8; Rev.5:13; 7:10; 20:6). 8. EQUALITY WITH GOD IN DIVINITY IS DEFINITELY STATED (John 5:19-29; Phil.2:5-11). 9. DIVINE CHARACTERISTICS ARE ASCRIBED TO HIM (John 5:19-29; 14:26; Heb.1:9). 10. He is expressly called "God" and "Lord" (John 1:1-3; 20:28; Acts 2:36; 20:28). 111. THE HUMANITY OF JESUS 1. HUMAN NAMES ARE ASCRIBED TO HIM: Rabboni (John 20:16), Messiah or Christ (John 1:41; 4:25; Luke 2:26), Jesus (Matt.1:21), Master (Matt.9:19), Son o f Man (Matt.8:20), Son of Mary (Mark 6:3), and Son of Abraham and David (Matt.1:1), Seed and Offspring of David (Rom.1:3; Rev.5:5; 22:16), The Second Man and The Last Adam (1 Cor.15:45-47), The King of the Jews (Matt.2:2), Lamb of God (John 1:29), and other names which prove His humanity. 2. HE IS CALLED A "BABE," A "CHILD," AND A "MAN" (Luke 2:16; Isa. 9:6; Acts 17:31; 1 Tim.2:4-5; Rom.5:12-21; John 8:40; Acts 2:22; 1 Cor.15:21,45-47). 3. PROPHECY THAT HE WAS TO BE BORN OF A HUMAN MOTHER PROVES HIS HUMANITY (Gen.3:15; Isa.7:14; 9:6-7; 11:1; 53:1-12; Ps.22). 4. HISTORY RECORDING HIS CONCEPTION AND BIRTH OF A WOMAN PROVES HIS HUMANITY (Matt.1:18-25; 2:2; Luke 1:32-35; 2:1-52; Gal.4:4). 5. HE HAD FLESH AND BLOOD LIKE ALL OTHER MEN (John 1:14; Heb. 2:14-15; 1 John 4:1-6; Luke 24:39; John 19:34). 6. HE HAD A HUMAN BODY (FLESH AND BONE - NO BLOOD NEEDED AS HE WAS NOW IMMORTAL - KEITH HUNT) EVEN AFTER THE RESURRECTION (Luke 24:39; John 20:27). 7. HE HAD HUMAN LIMITATIONS AND PASSIONS LIKE MEN: He wept (John 11:35), hungered (Matt.4:1-11), thirsted (John 4:7; 19:28), slept (Matt.8:24), grew weary (John 4:6), sorrowed (Isa. 53:3-4), suffered physical agony (Luke 22:44), craved sympathy (Matt.26:36-40; Luke 22:15-27), was tempted in all points as men (Heb.4:14-16), suffered physical death (John 19:30; 1 Cor.15:3), and endured many human sufferings, as we shall see. 8. HE WAS HUMAN IN ALL THINGS and was subject to physical, mental, and moral conditions of existence as other men (Heb. 2:14-17; 4:14-16). 9. HE LIVED A NORMAL HUMAN LIFE in total dependence upon God in prayer and faith for daily grace for body, soul, and spirit, as all human beings should do (John 5:30-46; 6:57; 7:16; 8:27-29; Heb.5:7-9; Phil.2:5-10). 10. HE WAS LIMITED IN WISDOM, KNOWLEDGE, AND POWER LIKE OTHER MEN AND WAS SUBORDINATE TO THE FATHER, as we shall see in Point VIII below. In fact, His human nature is denied only by antichrists and demons (1 John 2:18-23; 4:1-6). IV. THE UNION OF THE TWO NATURES OF JESUS CHRIST The above-indicated studies on the divinity and humanity of Jesus Christ prove that He was a Divine-human Being. The orthodox theory holds that the two natures of Christ were both complete in themselves yet so organically and indissolubly united that no third nature is formed thereby. It forbids us to divide the person and confound the two natures of Jesus Christ. Being truly divine He is a true representative of God, and being truly human He is a true representative of man. Christ constantly spoke of Himself as a single person and not as two persons in one. There is no interchange of speech between the two natures as between two persons. The attributes and powers of both natures are ascribed to the one person so that they are operated as part of a single individual. There is no double personality, but one single unit of characteristics of both the human and the divine. ***Just as any father and mother impart certain traits to the offspring, making a single person with characteristics of both parents, so the human and the divine were united in the one person of Jesus Christ-with one body, soul, and spirit and with one consciousness and one will.*** The Fatherhood of God and the motherhood of Mary produced a single personality. After all, it must be remembered that God made man with the same bodily parts as He has in His Spirit body, only our bodies are earthly and human and His is spiritual and divine. He made man with the same kind of soul with feelings, emotions, passions, desires, and appetites, capable of the same soul-acts as He Himself was, only our soul is finite and His is infinite. He made man with a spirit with all the attributes and powers that He has, capable of the same acts; only our spirits are finite and His is infinite. In other words, man is endowed with exactly the same traits, characteristics, attributes, powers, feelings, and passions as God, only on a finite scale. With this in mind one can see that the soul and spirit faculties that were born in Jesus Christ by a divine Father and a human mother were exactly the same as in any other being like God; so when Christ acted and used any one attribute or power as a man it was like the exercise of God in the same aspects, only His faculties were perfectly untainted with the fall and its effects. When Christ acted He was like man before the fall and not like sinful man since the fall. Every fallen man when he is re-created in Christ and made a new creature is capable of proper exercise of his faculties in holy and lawful uses.... We may express it this way: man in his unfallen state acted exactly like God in the exercise of his faculties, only his attributes and powers were limited. He was capable of the same powers and acts only on a finite scale. What is finite in man is infinite in God. Holy man when he is energized and acted upon and endued with supernatural powers can exercise his natural attributes and faculties in a supernatural degree or measure, depending upon what extent he is yielded to and energized by the Spirit of God. For example, Christ and the disciples when endued with power from on high were capable of God-action to destroy sin and sickness as much as if God Himself were doing the work without using them as instruments. It must also be remembered that men when born again (begotten again - not yet born - Keith Hunt) become partakers of the divine nature and to the extent to which that nature controls and works in and through their created faculties they live divine lives and do divine works. In such men the created faculties are liberated from evil acts and evil powers and become acts of divine energy through the Holy Spirit. Just as Christ was perfectly helpless in Himself and acted, spoke, worked, lived, and did all things through the anointing of the Holy Spirit, the believer to the extent that he becomes like Christ becomes God-inspired and God-energized and God-operated ... Thus the Christian fully living in the fullness of God lives a divine-human life in the Holy Spirit by the very presence and power of God in the human soul and spirit. If we can understand these things, we certainly can understand how God could become so perfectly human and yet remain so perfectly divine as to be a perfect union - God and man in one personality. Whether the divine attributes and powers of God in Christ were limited and to what extent is a great question in Christian circles. Whether He laid them aside entirely for a time, or whether they were possessed by Him and voluntarily limited will always be a point of controversy. However, this much is settled that He was limited in the days of His flesh, as we shall see in Point VIII below; whether He was limited constitutionally or voluntarily is not the point. It is a fact that if it were done constitutionally it was nevertheless voluntary as stated in John 10:18; Heb.10:5-9. He was not forced to do one thing. Everything was a voluntary action on His part. It matters not whether it was constitutional, or whether He still retained all the divine powers and attributes in His person and chose to limit their use for His time of life on Earth; the fact remains that He was limited as a man, and if His choice was so powerful as to do away with all use of them, what is the difference between laying them aside and still retaining them without power to use them? It was important that He limit Himself as a man to set the right example for man so that he can be inspired to live like God on Earth by the same means Christ used. For all the arguments about His having two personalities, two natures in one personality, human nature without personality, or divine nature without human traits - ***the fact will always remain that He was both human and divine, and if some cannot understand the how of it, the fact of it can be believed and must be if we want harmony of all Scriptures. *** One certainty is that His human nature had no separate existence before its union with the divine and is not in itself a separate personality from the divine person who became incarnated in human flesh.*** It was not only important that He have two natures, human and divine, for the sake of man, but also for the sake of God, to be a true mediator between God and man. His twofold nature gives Him fellowship with both parties and capability of representing both to reconcile both. As God He can uphold the dignity of Deity, and as man He can be truly sympathetic and meet the needs of man. Because He is God His atonement has infinite value and effect. A further discussion of the dual natures will be given under Point VIII below. V. JESUS CHRIST IS NOT THE FATHER OR THE HOLY SPIRIT Many are misled in making Jesus the only person in the Godhead and more than what the Bible says He is and they rob the Father and the Holy Spirit ... and make them less than what the Bible says they are, thus depriving them of their rightful and separate places in the unity of God ... The following Points prove that Jesus Christ is not the Father or the Holy Ghost: 1. The Father was in Heaven all the time that Jesus was on Earth; so the Father could not have been incarnated in Jesus (Matt. 5:16,45,48; 6:1,9; 7:21; 16:17; 18:10; 23:9). 2. Jesus said He would confess men "BEFORE MY FATHER" and " BEFORE THE ANGELS" and this He could not do if He were not a separate person from the Father and the angels (Matt.10:32-33; Luke 12:8-9; Rev.3:2-5). Such language would permit Him to be the angels as much as it would permit Him to be the Father. The word "before" means in the presence of, or face to face with, and requires both the Father and the angels to be distinct persons from Jesus. This word could never be used if only one person were involved, any more than it could be in 1,767 similar expressions in Scripture (Matt.14:6; 17:2; 1 Tim.5:19-20; 6:13; Rev.4:5-6; 5:8; 7:9,11,15; 8:2; etc.). 3. Jesus always prayed to the Father and addressed Him as a separate person from Himself (Matt.11:25; 26:39,42-46; Luke 10:21; 22:42; 23:34; John 11:41; 12:28; 17:1-25). In no place do we read of the Father praying to anyone, but the Son constantly prays to someone else outside of Himself. 4. The Father was OUTSIDE the body of Jesus protecting Him, so could not be incarnated in Jesus, or be all of God INSIDE of Jesus as some teach (Matt.2:12-23; 3:16-17; 17:5; Luke 22:39-46; John 12:27-30). 5. All the Old Testament prophets quoted in the New Testament prove that the Father is a separate person from the Son, for it was the Father who spoke "by the prophets" and "through the Spirit" CONCERNING the Son (Heb.1:1-3; Acts 3:21; Rom.1:1-4; 1 Pet.1:1-16; 2 Pet.1:21). Note THE SPEAKER and the person SPOKEN OF in Matt.2:15,23; 4:6; 12:17-21; 22:41; 27:9-11; Luke 4:16-21; 24:27,44-46; John 18:9; Acts 2:22-34; 3:13-24; 4:25-31; 7:2-50; 8:32-37; 10:34-43; 13:23-41; Heb.2:3-9; 5:5-10). Human language means nothing in the Bible if two ... are not understood in such statements as these passages. 6. Both Jesus and Satan refer to the Father as a separate person from the Son. "HE [one person] shall give HIS angels charge CONCERNING THEE" (Jesus, the Son of the Father, another person, Matt.4:6). 7. Jesus constantly referred to the Father as a separate person from Himself and as being separated bodily from Him as far as the Heaven is above the Earth (Matt.7:21; 10:32-33; 11:27; 15:13; 16:17,27; 18:10-35; 20:23; Mark 12:32; John 5). 8. The New Testament writers called the Father, "The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ," but such could never be if He were the Lord Jesus Christ (Eph.1:3,17; 3:14; 1 Pet.1:3; Matt. 27:46; John 20:17). 9. The phrases "the Son of the Father" (2 John 3), "his Father" (Matt.16:27; Rev.1:6; 14:1), "my Father" (used 57 times, Matt. 7:21; John 15:1; Rev 2:27; 3:5; etc.), "my God" (John 20:17; Rev. 3:12), and other like statements made by Jesus of His Father and by others of God being the Father of Jesus could not be true if Jesus were the Father and the only person called God. If Jesus spoke of God the Father as being His Father and His God, then He either lied or told the truth. Such language demands of us to believe in another person who is the God and Father of Jesus Christ. Not once did Jesus or any Bible writer use such terms as Jesus, the Father, the Father Jesus, spirit-Jesus, Father Jesus, one person in the Godhead, Jesus only, and other unscriptural terms used by some people. 10. Jesus in parables illustrates His relationship to the Father as that of a Son and as a separate person from the Father (Matt. 21:33-46; Luke 20:9-18; John 15:1-10). To believe in only one person as being both the Father and Son in these passages is to make Jesus a plain liar. If He said He was "the vine" and the Father was "the husbandman" (John 15) and if God the Father is compared to "a certain householder" and the Son is compared to "his son" and "heir," then this relationship is the truth and nothing but the truth, thus distinguishing two persons known as "the Father" and "the Son" (Matt.21:33-46; Luke 20:9-18). 11. Jesus taught men to go directly to the Father in all prayer and not pray to Him at all: "YE SHALL ASK ME NOTHING .... Ask the Father IN MY NAME, he will give it you" (John 14:12-15; 15:16; 16:23-28). What could be clearer than that Jesus is not the Father? If men are commanded to "ASK ME NOTHING" but to "ASK THE FATHER" instead, then He is not the Father. ***It is one of the most unreasonable doctrines under the sun to teach that Jesus and His Father are one and the same person and that the body of Jesus is the Son and the inner man of Jesus is the Father.*** It is ridiculous to ask men to pray to one part of a person in the name of another part of the same person, or to call two parts of one person by different names - one part called the Father, or inner part, and another part called the Son, or the body part, one part to be the authority to go to the other part in prayer, or more ridiculous still, as some people do, to ignore the Father part and pray only to the Son, or body part. If the language of Jesus does not refer to two persons, then we have to conclude that He did not know how to use the human language. 12. On certain occasions Jesus thanked the Father, "looking up to Heaven," where the Father dwelled (not looking inside of Himself to a Father that dwelled within (John 11:41; Matt. 26:25-27; Mark 8:6; 14:23). Was Jesus giving thanks to Himself and teaching us by example self-praise and self-worship, or was there a real Father OUTSIDE of Him who dwelled in Heaven as a separate person? 13. Many statements were made concerning the Father that could not have been true of Jesus: the Father was in Heaven while Jesus was on Earth (Matt.5:1, 48); the Father knew things that Jesus did not know (Matt.10:29-31; Mark 13:32; Acts 1:7; Rev.1:1); the Father was "good," but Jesus did not claim any such quality in Himself (Matt.19:17); the Father was on a throne, and Jesus was not (Matt.23:22); Jesus is coming in the glory of the Father and not in His own glory (Matt.16:27); Jesus prayed to the Father and never to Himself (Matt.26:39-42; John 17); Jesus prophesied that He would be exalted at the right hand of the Father (Matt. 26:64), and later the apostles said He was there (Acts 2:33-36; Eph.1:20; Col.3:1; Heb.1:3; 8:1; 12:2; Rom.8:34). Stephen actually saw Jesus with his own eyes on God's right hand (Acts 7:56-59). Jesus committed His spirit to God the Father at death, proving He died, but the Father did not die (Luke 23:46). Others saw Jesus as a separate person from the Father (Dan.7:9-14; Rev. 5:1-7). 14. Jesus claimed that He was SENT BY God, that HE CAME FROM God, and that He WAS GOING BACK TO God (Matt.15:24; John 3:16-18, 34; 5:30,36-37; 6:29-40,44,57; 7:16,28-29; 8:16-18,29,42; 9:4; 10:36; 11:42; 12:45,49; 15:21; 16:5; 17:3,8,21-25; Gal.4:4; 1 John 4:9). These Scriptures would not make sense if only one person were referred to. The sense in which God sent Jesus is the same sense in which Jesus sent His disciples (John 17:18; 20:21) and the same sense in which the Father and the Son sent the Spirit into the world (John 14:16-17,26; 15:26; 16:7-15). Being sent does not make the one sent the same person as the one who sends. If so, then the disciples all became Jesus Christ when they were sent by Him..... 15. Jesus plainly told Peter that His Father in Heaven was not "flesh and blood," and He told the Samaritan woman His Father and His God was "Spirit" (Matt.16:16-17; John 4:24; 19:34). Because Jesus was flesh and blood and did not claim to be "spirit" ... He could not be the Father (Luke 24:39; John 19:34; Rom.8:3). 16. Peter received a revelation from the Father in Heaven of the Sonship of Jesus (Matt.16:17) and also actually heard the Father's voice from Heaven say of the Son on Earth, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him" (Matt. 17:5). Peter later testified that this voice came from Heaven and that it was not a voice inside of Jesus (through practice of ventriloquism). He said later that it came "FROM GOD the Father . . . FROM the excellent glory . . . FROM Heaven" (2 Pet.1:16-18). John the Baptist also heard this voice FROM Heaven while Jesus was on Earth (Matt.3:16-17). They did not say Jesus was the Father in Heaven speaking, and they never believed such. 17. The Jews never understood that Jesus claimed to be the Father, but that He claimed to be the Son, thus making Himself equal with God (Matt.26:64; 27:40-43; John 5:17-35; 6:45; 8:13-38; 10:34-39; 19:7). If He had claimed to be the Father, the only God, all of God, and the only person of the Godhead, they would have had a just case against Him, for not one of the prophets ever foretold this doctrine, but they did say that God would have a Son as a separate person from Himself. 18. Jesus called the Father "my God" even after the resurrection (John 10:17; Rev.3:12; Ps.22:1-10). He could not be His own Father and His own God. If He were the only person in the Godhead, this would be a false statement. 19. The angel Gabriel, "the angel of the Lord" (whom some sects say was God Himself) did not know that Jesus was the only person in the Godhead, for he spoke of a God still in Heaven and called Jesus only "the Son of God" and "the Son of the Highest" (Matt. 1:18-25; Luke 1:19,27-38; 2:21). 20. All the angels in Heaven were as ignorant as Gabriel, for they praised and gave glory to a "God in the highest," who was outside of the baby Jesus in the manger (Luke 2:8-16). It would not be a sin for us to believe that they, being just from Heaven and having come from the Father in the highest and having more intelligence than any man, knew that there was still a "God in the highest," who was one person, and that Jesus in the manger on Earth was another person. 21. Zechariah, Elizabeth, Mary, and Simeon were also ignorant of the theory that the baby Jesus was the Father and all of God, for they talked TO and PRAISED a "God" outside of the baby Jesus (Luke 1:36-56,67,79; 2:25). 22. The shepherds also belonged to the ignorant class and were deceived by the angels, if some human doctrines are right, for they said, "The Lord hath made known to us" about the baby Jesus. Jesus was a new-born child - and was not big enough to make anything known to the shepherds; so if "the Lord" had made known something to them, then there must be a "Lord" outside of Jesus, who did this (Matt.2:12; Luke 2:8-38). 23. Mary and Joseph acted in utmost ignorance that all of God was in the baby Jesus when they brought Him to the temple "to present him to the Lord" (Luke 2:23). Who was this "Lord," or "Jehovah God," they presented Him to? How could they present the only Lord to Himself? 24. In Luke 2:40-52 we have some senseless expressions if there is only one person in the Godhead. Jesus whom some say is the only God and Father Himself, says, "I must be about MY FATHER'S business." Luke said, "The grace of God was upon him. . . . Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man." What Luke really meant, according to some, was that the grace of Himself was upon Himself and that Jesus the only God and His own Father increased in wisdom and in favor with Himself and with man. Common intelligence rebels against such foolishness. Is it any wonder that the subject of God is so hard to understand if we prefer such nonsense to good sense? 25. Even demons knew that Jesus was not the Father, for they called Him "the Son of God," thus demonstrating sense enough to know there must be a separate person from the Son if there was a Father who had a Son. They also called Him Christ, thus proving they had sense enough to know there had to be someone else to anoint Him and make Him the Christ, or the anointed of God (Luke 4:34,41). 26. John the Baptist knew the Father, but he did not know the Son in the wilderness, for "the word of God," or of a person called God, came to him in the wilderness while Jesus was still at Nazareth and told him how he would know the Son (Luke 3:2; John 1:31-34). Shall we believe that the inner man of Jesus was in the wilderness speaking to John while only the body of Jesus was at Nazareth dead? ... Shall we also believe that the Father God and all of God was in the womb of Mary and yet filled John the Baptist at the same time? If John was filled with the Holy Ghost all these years as is clear from Luke 1:15, if he did not know Jesus, and if he was not filled with Jesus, then Jesus could not be the Holy Ghost. If John knew the Father and not the Son, knew God and not Jesus, then Jesus could not be the Father and the God that John knew. There must have been one person called God that John knew and there must have been another person called Jesus, Who was also Deity, that John did not know, thus proving two persons..... 27. God "gave his only begotten Son," but He Himself remained in Heaven; so there must be two separate persons referred to in John 3:16-18, 31-36; Matt.5:45-48; 18:19; etc. If it is true, as some argue, that God the Father is the inner man of Jesus and the Son was the body of Jesus, that God the Father gave Himself and died Himself, and that the Father inside of Jesus could say of Himself, "I created the body you see. I am the Father and this body is my Son," then the phrase "Son of God" should be understood as 'body of God;' "sons of God" should be 'bodies of God;' "my Son" should be 'My body;' "my sons" should be 'My bodies;' "his Son" should be 'His body;' "his sons" should be 'His bodies;' and "thy sons" should be 'Thy bodies.' It should make sense in every Scripture to substitute "body" for "Son" and "Son" for "body." Try "body" for "Son" in Matt.11:27; John 1:18; 3:16-18,35-36; 5:21,25-26; 10:36; Acts 3:13; 8:3; 9:20; Gal. 2:20; Rom.1:9; 5:10; 8:29; Heb.1:2; 11:17, and see how ridiculous such an idea is. ............... TO BE CONTINUED

DOES GOD HAVE A BODY?

 

DOES GOD HAVE A BODY?

Is God a personal being with shape and form? Does He have a head, chest, stomach, arms, legs and feet? Does God have eyes, ears, nose and mouth? Is God in one place at one time or everywhere? Does God have a body or is He a disembodied Spirit? There are some who teach God is not a personal being with a body. What is the truth of the matter? In this article you will find the answer. by Keith Hunt The leader of one of the large Sabbath keeping Churches of God has written: "Now, none of us would want to make God into an image of mortal man, but IF WE CLING TO A BELIEF THAT GOD HAD A BODY then we have inadvertently reduced God to an image made to look like mortal man. God is not created. HE DOES NOT HAVE A BODY" (Worldwide News, August 3, 1993, emphasis mine). Do you see the psychological mind play here? The writer is trying to intimidate his readers by saying that NOBODY wants to bring God down to the level of man, and if we say God has a body, that's just what we are doing - lowering the stature of God, and no one wants to be accused of that now, do they. What he also says is the reversal of what God said in the beginning. Turn to Genesis, chapter one. God had been busy for a number of days during that re-creation week, making various CREATURES of the land, sea, and air. Nothing is said about them having the form of God Himself. After all those creatures were created notice what God says in verses 26,27, "....Let us MAKE MAN in OUR IMAGE, after OUR LIKENESS.. ..So God created MAN in His OWN IMAGE, in the IMAGE OF GOD created he him; male and female...." Right at the very beginning of the Bible, the Eternal God tells us that He created mankind in, not the likeness or image of the angels or any other spirit being, but He formed and gave mankind the IMAGE or LIKENESS of HIMSELF. God took the dirt of the ground and moulded the shape and form of man from it to resemble the image or shape of very GOD. Friends, you need to clearly understand this plain truth. The Bible is written so a young child can understand its basic most important truths and teachings. God has hidden some of His mysteries in parables and symbolism for the mature adult Christian, for those who have fed on the milk of the word and are ready for stronger meat, but the all important basic doctrines and truths that God wants all of His children to KNOW, and know that they know, is made easy to understand, if we will be as young children in simple belief, as Jesus once said, "I thank you Lord that you have hid these things from the wise and prudent, and have revealed them unto babes." I submit that in Genesis 1:26,27 we are being told by the creator that He does have a body and that His body is in the form and shape of the physical humans He created from the dust of the earth. I submit that is the truth of the matter and that is how a young child would understand those verses. It was certainly the way I understood those verses as a young child growing up in the church I attended from the age of six years old. The writer in the Worldwide News has turned the truth of God upside down. He says if we believe God has a body we make God to look like mortal man - yet God says I will make mortal man to look like ME! Do you see how the word of God has been twisted around to say the opposite of what was really said? Do you remember who started that way of thinking, reasoning and deceptive talk? It was none other than the great deceiver himself - Satan the devil. God had told Adam and Eve that they could eat of every tree of the garden except ONE. They were not to eat the fruit from that tree - if they did they would surely DIE! Satan comes along(chapter 3 of Genesis) and completely changes the plain teaching and words of God, turns what God said UPSIDE DOWN. Satan told the woman that God did not mean what He said, nor did God say what He meant. The Devil told Eve that God was saying something else in what He said to her, and that something else was "Ye shall not surely die" but live forever as God, knowing the difference between good and evil(verses 1-5). Satan is still promulgating today his topsy-turvy deceptions on mankind. Jesus told the young man who came to Him asking what he must do to inherit eternal life, that he should "keep the commandments" but the ministers of Satan say "no, no, you do not have to obey those commandments to be saved." Paul was inspired to tell the church at Rome that "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life" but the deceiver has got most ministers teaching that eternal life is the wage of sin, albeit in ever burning hell fire. Jesus told Nicodemus that when born of the spirit you would be like the wind, not being able to see it, but Satan has people thinking they are born of the spirit at conversion while still quite visible to other humans. Jesus said "no man has ascended to heaven" but most professing Christians believe millions are in heaven and thousands went to heaven before Jesus spoke these words. Jesus says "think not" and man thinks. Jesus said "believe" and man does not believe. Jesus says "this do" and man does not. Jesus said, "I will come again" and large segments of Christianity say no He will not. And on and on it goes. God said I will make man in my image, and a large Church of God is now saying, no way - "God is not created, He does not have a body." MOSES SEES GOD'S BODY God first revealed Himself in a mighty way to Moses from the burning bush. From that time on the Eternal and Moses were friends with a "buddy-buddy" relationship. This relationship between the Lord and Moses was so personal that it is recorded, "And the Lord spoke unto Moses FACE to FACE, as a man speaks unto a friend...."(Ex.33:11). Now our "no body" for God teachers will say either this is just a metaphor or God appeared as a human, but when in the "spirit" He has no body or face. Of course that is the answer they will give to any section of scripture where God appeared to men. But there was a time when God appeared to Moses IN THE SPIRIT FORM - the Lord opening up his eyes to see Himself in the spirit dimension, that the human eye can not usually see, I refer you to the example of the servant of Elisha in 2 Kings 6. So close a relationship did Moses have with God that on one occasion Moses was so bold as to ask the Lord to show Himself to him, not as a human but as He really IS. Moses' request is found in Exodus 33 and verse eighteen. Notice the reply from the Eternal: "....You can not SEE MY FACE; for no man can see me and live."(verse 20). God did not say to Moses that He did not have a body and so did not have a face and so could not show Himself in the spirit form as having a shape. To the CONTRARY, the answer to Moses SHOWS CLEARLY GOD DOES HAVE A FACE AND BODY! He told Moses that no man could look upon the face of God in spirit form and live. Now I ask you, how simpler can the word of God be in this matter? No theological degree needed to understand this verse, just believe it for what it says. Well friends, notice what God would do for Moses, "And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, and you shall stand upon a rock: And it shall come to pass, while my GLORY passes by, that I will put you in a cliff of the rock, and will cover you with my hand while I pass by: And I will take away my hand, and you SHALL SEE MY BACK PARTS: but my FACE shall not be seen."(verses 21-23). There it is, how simple, how wonderful, is the word of the Lord. You can believe it - means what it says and says what it means. You do not need seductive men to "interpret" God for you. Truly I tell you with the words of the apostle John, "These things have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. But the anointing which you have received of Him abides in you, and you need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teaches you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, even as it has taught you, you shall abide in it" (1 John 2:26,27). As a young child's mind together with the anointing of the Holy Spirit, you can understand the truth about God, you can know the things that God wants you to know about Him, the things that He has revealed about Himself, and one of those truths revealed to us is that God DOES HAVE A SHAPE, A BODY, A FACE! Moses was given the great privilege - only a few to be so given - of seeing God in His SPIRIT - GLORY - FORM. Moses could not look upon the face of God and live, but he was able to look upon the BODY of God from the back. Oh the truths of the word are so wonderful. Be not afraid of those who "set themselves" up as your teachers, who huddle behind closed doors with their theology degrees from theology schools of this world, and come forth to proclaim deeper understanding of God, which is really only old pagan myths from Babylon and Egypt. How the Lord must LAUGH at their imaginations, then again maybe He WEEPS at their hard heartedness for not being as little children in reading and believing His word. EZEKIEL SEES GOD The prophet Ezekiel was born in Jerusalem to a priestly family. At the age of 25 he was taken captive by the armies of Babylon about the year of 597 B.C. He was among the captives of Judah by the river of Chebar in the environs of Babylon. In the book that bears his name he tells us that the word of the Lord came to him(chapter 1, verses 1-3). Not only did the word of the Lord come to him but he also SAW things that very few, if any, other human has ever seen. From the midst of a cloud and fire he saw FOUR LIVING CREATURES - their likeness he explains in verses 5-14. In verses 15-21 he tells us about the FOUR WHEELS together with the living creatures. Now notice carefully verses 22-28. Above the heads of the four living creatures was a firmament of crystal. Ezekiel tells us there was a VOICE from the crystal floor above the heads of the creatures(verse 25). On the firmament was a THRONE - sapphire stone(verse 26). THEN NOTICE THIS! Upon the throne was the LIKENESS OF A MAN! He then goes on to tell us the appearance in COLOR of this likeness of man. From the LOINS up was as amber with fire round about. From the LOINS down was as fire with brightness(verse 27). So, what possibly could this man shaped likeness be? Was it just another creature of some kind, or some created angel? Ezekiel did not leave us to guess, or I should say, God did not leave us guessing, as this was all inspired from the Lord - what Ezekiel saw and wrote was what the Lord allowed him to see and told him to write. Ezekiel was allowed to see things in the SPIRIT DIMENSION - things the human eye cannot see unless God works a miracle of sight. What or WHO was this man above the crystal firmament upon the throne? Verse 28, "THIS WAS the appearance of the LIKENESS of the GLORY OF THE LORD." There it is, no guesswork needed, we are told in easy to understand language that what Ezekiel saw was the GLORY OF THE LORD - the appearance of the LIKENESS of the Lord. The Lord had said from the beginning as we have seen, that He made man in HIS LIKENESS, so it should not be at all surprising to find that when He allowed Ezekiel to see Him in His GLORY FORM, it was in the form, likeness and appearance of a MAN. This was not God appearing to man as flesh and bone as He did many times to Abraham, Jacob, Moses and others, but this was God showing Himself to Ezekiel in His SPIRIT GLORY form, and Ezekiel KNEW the Lord had a body in the form and shape of a man. This was definitely God on this throne - a throne that travelled the universe(which also tells us that God as a person can only be in one place at one time) - as this person goes on to speak to Ezekiel in the first person tense as THE LORD - see chapters 2 through 6. Nothing hard to understand here my friends, just believe what you read, that's all there is to it. Here in the book of Ezekiel we have revealed to us more of that spirit world that God lives in - the other dimension that is unseen to human eyes unless that other world is allowed to show itself to us by the Lord who made it. And at times - to a few selected humans - the Lord has chosen to even show His form and shape to men. It is always as the form of human kind, for the human kind was shaped in the form of the God kind. ISAIAH SEES THE LORD Another human that was blessed with seeing the Eternal in His Glory was Isaiah. It was about the year 760 B.C. and the prophet of God tells us: "the year that king Uzziah died I SAW also the LORD SITTING UPON HIS THRONE, high and lifted up, and his train filled the temple." (Isa.6:1). This was not the temple in Jerusalem but the very temple in heaven itself, continuing in verse two, "Above it stood the seraphim And one cried unto another, and said, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord of hosts...." This was no small thing for Isaiah, he knew exactly what he had seen, this was awesome - he proclaimed: "...Woe is me!....I am a man of unclean lips....for mine eyes have seen the KING, THE LORD OF HOSTS...."(verse 5). The Hebrew words used for Lord in verses 1,3,5 are ADONAI and YHVH - no mistaking - Isaiah did see the ETERNAL sitting on His throne in heaven. Now if God does not have a body then pray tell me how Isaiah could have seen God sitting on His throne with seraphim around about? If God did not have a shape and body Isaiah would have seen just an empty throne. Then again maybe(to our bodiless God teachers) the throne and seraphims were not really there either, all this was just the wild imagination of Isaiah, or just a dream, or maybe a metaphor, perhaps it was a figure of speech on Isaiah's part and not really something he literally saw. For those who want to "spiritualize" away the plain words of the Bible, nothing will convince them that what Isaiah wrote was what he literally did see. There are those Christians who believe Satan is not a literal spirit BEING but just a metaphor standing for evil. There are those who believe Jesus will not literally come back to earth as He said He would, but that He has returned via the Holy Spirit coming on the day of Pentecost. There are those who believe that the New Heavens and New Earth of Revelation 21,22, is just a figure of speech and metaphor for the time when there will be no more evil, when man through the help of the Holy Spirit will bring about universal righteousness. It is impossible to argue with or try to convince such people that they are in total error. But for those babes that the Eternal God has revealed His truths to, then Isaiah chapter 6 is another proof that the Lord does has a shape and body, albeit composed of eternal spirit. STEPHEN SEES THE FATHER AND SON IN THEIR GLORY The early apostolic Church were in need of dedicated men to serve the Lord and brethren. The congregation of believers together with the apostles chose 7 men and ordained them to the office of the DIAKONEO (Acts 6:1-7). The man Stephen was one of those seven ordained. He was full of faith and power and did great wonders and miracles among the people(verse 8). He was so effective in his work for the Lord that the religious rulers brought him before the council for questioning. They set up false witnesses against him who said Stephen blasphemed their temple and law(verses 9-15). Stephen began his defense and preaching of Jesus in chapter 7. By the time Stephen had finished his sermonette, they were spitting mad - ready to literally kill him. At this point we are told: "But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and SAW the GLORY of God, and Jesus standing on the RIGHT HAND of God, and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the RIGHT HAND of God"(verses 55,56). Now ask yourself this question: If God does not have a body how could Stephen know that Jesus was at the RIGHT HAND of God? If God is Bodiless, then Jesus could have been standing at God's left hand, or standing on his shoulders, or maybe on his chest or legs. How could Stephen say Jesus was at the right hand of the GLORY of God if that glory did not have a shape and form as like a man? The truth is, Stephen could say no such thing unless what he saw was TWO ETERNAL BEINGS. Now the New Testament plainly says Jesus is God. Both He and the Father are God - one God but two individuals (John 1:1-18; Heb.1:1-8). If Jesus is God, as He is, and if God does not have a body, them Jesus is also bodiless. Yet Stephen SAW Jesus at the right hand of the glory of God in heaven. If Jesus had a shape and form, and if Jesus is God, then the Father who is also God, has a form and shape - has a body. The logic of the one side must give evidence of the logic of the other side, unless you are going to argue that the Bible is a book of il-logic, then of course anything in the Bible is up for private interpretation and nothing is sure. But to the childlike mind the plain truth is easy to understand. The word of the Lord means what it says and says what it means. JOHN SEES THE BODY OF GOD Towards the end of the apostle John's life he was in the isle called Patmos(Rev.1:9). In writing the book of Revelation, John did THREE things - 1) bare record of the word of God. 2) bare record of the testimony of Jesus Christ. 3) bare record of all the things he SAW (Rev.1:2). John SAW MANY THINGS! One of the greatest things he saw was: "In the midst of the seven candlesticks one LIKE UNTO THE SON OF MAN, clothed with a garment down to the FOOT, and girt about the PAPS(chest) with a golden girdle. His HEAD and His HAIRS were white like wool, as white as snow, and His EYES were as a flame of fire. And His FEET like unto fine brass. He had in His RIGHT HAND seven stars and His COUNTENANCE(face) was as the sun shines in full strength" (Rev.1:13-16). As most Bible scholars know and admit, this is a picture of Jesus in His GLORIFIED form in heaven above. Then in chapter 4 and 5 we are given a view of the heavenly throne room. Much of this ties in with what we have already seen in Isaiah 6 and Ezekiel 1. There is a BEING sitting on a throne in heaven holding a book in His RIGHT HAND that only the true Lamb of God can open and reveal. These things in heaven above are real my friends, they do exist - the twenty four elders, the living creatures, the seraphim, the angels, the throne, the temple, the heavenly Jerusalem, and God the Father and Jesus Christ - all made of eternal spirit, all the living above having form, shape and bodies PHILIP ASKED TO SEE THE FATHER I guess after being with Jesus and seeing all the miracles, knowing He was from God, believing He was the literal "son of God" and sent from Father, it would only be natural that one of the disciples would at some point want Jesus to "show us the Father, and it will satisfy us"(John 14:8). The disciple to ask that request from Jesus was Philip. Notice the reply Jesus gave: "Have I been so long with you, and yet have you not known me, Philip? He that HAS SEEN ME HAS SEEN THE FATHER; so why say you then, show us the Father" (verse 9). Jesus was the "carbon copy" as they say, of the Father. In every part of life. Hem manifested the Father - in attitude, in emotions, in thoughts of mind, in love, mercy, kindness, justice, anger, and in BODY. Jesus was telling Philip and all of the disciples that the Father was just like Himself in EVERY WAY, except as He had told the woman at the well, the Father was SPIRIT, not flesh and blood, but composed of eternal spirit. Now if Jesus knew that God did not have form or shape, that He did not have a body as He did, then how could He possibly have told Philip that they had seen the Father by seeing and knowing Himself. The logical mind of man upon hearing the answer to Philip would have understood Jesus to be saying that the Father did have FORM and SHAPE, that He did HAVE THE APPEARANCE OF THE HUMAN KIND and was in mind and emotions just like Jesus. Now that is the simple and easy way to understand what Jesus said about the Father, and that is what all the rest of the Bible proves to be the truth of the matter. How wonderfully plain are the basic truths of the Lord, if we will only be as babes in belief. TO SEE OR NOT TO SEE - THE FACE OF GOD? Those who believe and teach that God does not have a body(and so no face, arms, hands, legs, feet), to those who believe God is some kind of "spirit" without form or shape, they by their very teaching will never see the face of God, I am not sure WHAT they expect to see if they would make it into the Kingdom of God, as far as looking for "the Father" of all things. But this I do know for those who will trust and believe the word of God as little children..... I can tell you with full confidence friends.......I can tell you with full assurance, this I can tell you is the "thus says the Lord" of the matter. The UNBELIEVING will be cast into the lake which burns with fire and brimstone - the second death. And those that overcome shall inherit ALL THINGS and, "he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it....the tree of life......And there shall be no more curse; but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and His servants shall serve Him: And THEY SHALL SEE HIS FACE and His name shall be in their foreheads....and they shall reign for ever and ever" (Rev.21:7,8; 22:1-5). The day will come my friends when the true believers will indeed see the very FACE of God the Father. What a great and precious promise. I hope you will be there to see the glory of our Father's BODY and share in His everlasting Kingdom. This has only been a short study about the truth of what God IS. .................. Written 1993

THROUGH THE BIBLE—- CHRISTIANS AND WINE #3

 Christians and Wine? #5

What God teaches and allows

THE GREEK WORD "OINOS"

by

Keith Hunt

Despite the fancy foot work used by Mr. Saunders in saying, 

"...the Greek word 'oinos' translated 'wine' was a composite

word, sometimes meaning fermented wine and sometimes

unfermented.." the use of this word in the NT would show that

it clearly means fermented wine and never unfermented grape

juice, at least as used by the writers of the NT. Paul said, "be

not drunk with OINOS" (Eph.5:18). "not given to (or addicted to)

OINOS" (1 Tim.3:3). "not given to much OINOS" (1 Tim.3:8).   

Jesus turned water into OINOS (John 2:1-11), etc.

But Mr. Saunders says NO! And he tries to prove that 'oinos' can

mean unfermented grape juice by referring you to Luke 5:37.He

writes, "This is an example of 'oinos' meaning 'new wine' ... Now

we have already proven 'new wine' to mean fresh juice before

fermentation sets in. Further proof: How would fermented wine

burst the wine skins? Fermentation has already taken place. But

if grape juice were put into 'old wine skins' it would cause

fermentation, thereby bursting the wine skins!" (page 21 "Should

Christians Drink Fermented Wine" ).

FIRST. Does 'new wine' mean fresh juice before fermentation sets

in? Turn to Acts the second chapter - read verses one to thirteen

- especially notice verse 13. It should be obvious, many people

on that day of Pentecost when seeing what was happening to the

disciples and what they were doing, thought the disciples were

DRUNK on 'new wine.' Actually the Greek for 'new wine' in Acts

2:13 is GLEUKOS whereas the Greek for 'new wine' in Luke 5:37 is

'new OINOS.'

SECOND. When we understand the process of how wine was made in

Palestine, we can understand this analogy Jesus was using and

that the oinos being related to was indeed fermented, but still

fermenting. It would seem Mr.Saunders either did not know this

information or was not willing to give it, as it would destroy

his argument. You can find it in past studies on this topic under

"Fermentation." But I will take the space here to quote it again:

"In the climate of Palestine fermentation begins almost

immediately, frequently on the same day for juice pressed out in

the morning, but never later than the next day. At first a slight

foam appears on the surface of the liquid ... The action rapidly

becomes more violent, and while it is in progress the liquid must

be kept in JARS or in a VAT, for it would burst even the newest

and strongest of wine skins (Job 32:19 ). Within about a week

this VIOLENT FERMENTATION subsides, and the wine is TRANSFERRED

to other jars or STRONG WINE - SKINS (Mk 2:22), in which it

undergoes the SECONDARY FERMENTATION..."(emphasis mine).

So do you see how the new OINOS was wine that had gone through

the first violent stage of fermentation and was now being put

into strong new wine skins to undergo the secondary stage of

fermentation.It was at the end of 40 days that it was regarded as

properly "wine" and could be offered as a drink offering. See 

"Fermentation" in past studies.

THE BEST WINE?

In the account of Jesus attending a marriage feast as recorded by

John (ch.2:1-11), we see Him turning water into wine and the

governor of the feast calling this "the good wine" or the "best

wine" (v.10). Mr.Saunders would have us believe that this "best

wine" was unfermented GRAPE juice. He quotes from the ROMAN

writer Pliny as proof that Jesus turned water into grape juice

and not fermented wine. Pliny wrote, "Fresh grape juice, to make

it keep without fermenting, was boiled until it became thick,

like molasses, and in that form was stored away in large jars for

future use, to be eaten spread upon bread, or mixed and stirredup

in water to make a drink. When grape juice was boiled down to

one-third of its bulk to secure the finest flavor, it was called

'SAPA' (the BEST WINE)."

Mr. Saunders says, "This was unfermented wine, the 'best wine'

you could get. That's the kind Jesus made." (Should Christians

Drink Fermented Wine? page 19).

Let us look very carefully at this account of Jesus turning water

into wine. I want you to study attentively these comments by ADAM

CLARKE - the emphasis is his:

"...'But did not our Lord by this miracle minister to vice, by

producing an excess of inebriating liquor?' No; for the following

reasons: 1. The company was a select and holy company, where no

excess could be permitted. And, 2. Our Lord does not appear to

have furnished any EXTRA quantity, but only WHAT was necessary. 

But it is intimated in the text that the guests were NEARLY

INTOXICATED before this miraculous addition to their wine took

place; for the evangelist says, 'OTAN METHUSTHOOSI,' WHEN THEY

HAVE BECOME INTOXICATED. I answer: 1. It is not intimated, even

in the most indirect manner, that THESE guests were at all

intoxicated. 2. The words are not spoken of the persons at THAT

wedding at all: the governor of the feast only states that such

was the COMMON CUSTOM at feasts of this nature; without

intimating that any such custom prevailed there. 3. The original

word... signify not only to INEBRIATE, but to TAKE WINE, to DRINK

WINE, to DRINK ENOUGH: and in this sense the verb is evidently

used in the Septuagint, Gen.43:34; Cant.5:1; 1 Macc.16:16; Hag.

1:6; Ecclus.1:16..."(Clarke's Comm. Vol.3, p.527).

The basic word used in John 2:10 for "have well drunk"is METHUOO

it is a verb.

The verb is used of being intoxicated in Mat.24:49; Acts 2:15; 

1 Cor.11:21; 1 Thes.5:7b. (See Vine's Expository Dictionary of NT

Words,pages 331 and 333).

Using THE ANALYTICAL GREEK LEXICON in trasing the Greek word for

"have well drunk" we find that, Methusthoosi is from METHUSKOO

which is a verb meaning to inebriate, make drunk; to be

intoxicated, to drink freely. This word in turn is from METHUOO -

to be intoxicated, strong drink, be drunk. (See the above Lex.

page 261).

Do you see what we have found? I believe the KJV has a good

rendering with "have well drunk" for the word Methusthoosi, but

the very word itself in Greek refers to drinking well of an

intoxicating wine,a wine that will if drinking of it too well -

make you drunk! Now read again the above comment by Adam Clarke.

We will now turn our attention to the phrase "good wine" or 

"best wine ." The marriage feast Jesus was attending was a JEWISH

marriage not a Roman one. What the Roman Pliny had to say about

the phrase "best wine" as used by the Romans, MAY or MAY NOT be

the same as what the JEWS meant by this same phrase. Surely we

would be on safer ground to prove our point by knowing what the

Jews understood this to mean. I submit that "good wine" herein

used is the same as saying "old wine." Compare this section in

John with Luke 5:37-39. Now notice this comment by Adam Clarke on

Lk.5:39.

"...The OLD WINE, among the Rabbis, was THE WINE OF THREE LEAVES;

that is, wine three years old; because, from the time that the

vine had produced that wine, it had put forth its leaves three

times."

The Greek language has shown us that this "good wine" was

fermented - it was "old wine," about three years old, and was 

(as given in John) usually served FIRST at a Jewish marriage

feast. Then when the guests had well drunk of this fermented

OINOS (wine) the poorer, younger wine was served. But, as Adam

Clarke observed, "That which our Lord now made being perfectly

pure, and highly nutritive."

NOT OFFENDING PEOPLE?

To defend the teaching that a Christian should never drink an

alcoholic beverage, this argument is often put forth:

"But you may defend your drinking by saying, 'I have total

control of my drinking, I know when it's enough, and I can stop

at any time.' Well, that may, or may not be so. But, dear

commited Christian, according to Paul's exhortation, that is not

the criterion. Paul says you could cause a 'weak brother' to sin

(See 1 Cor.8:9-13; Rom.14:21) if he should follow your example

and become a drunkard. Here is another passage from Paul, the

apostle: 'All things are lawful for me, but all things are not

expedient, all things are lawful for me, but all things edify

not' (1 Cor.10:23).

I suggest this passage 'hits the nail on the head.' You see, we,

as free moral agents in a democratic society, have the privilege

of our own choices and doing as we wish, (except if we break a

law of our society. This would include drinking alcoholic

beverages under certain regulations), but, what Paul is saying is

that we are NOT FREE to do anything we wish. Paul continues,

'Let not one then seek his own good and advantage and profit, but

(rather let him seek the welfare of his neighbour) each one of

the other' (v.24, Amp. Ver.)"

The above was taken from "Should Christians Drink Fermented

Wine?" pages 16, 17.

The scriptures used in this argument are a part of the inspired

word of God. They are true and should be followed within the

scope of how Paul was meaning them. Was Paul meaning that a

Christian should NEVER at any time or place have a fermented

drink because some other Christian whom he did not know, had

never seen, and was not present, might be offended? Was Paul

saying that a Christian should NEVER at any time or place eat

meat, or food offered to an idol, because some other Christian

whom he had never seen, did not know, and was not present, might

be offended?

Let's take the logic of the above argument about not drinking

alcohol and apply it to some other things in life that some

people and some groups take as very important in being a

Christian.

Some large Christian organizations believe that MAKE-UP 

(lipstick, eye coloring etc.) is SIN - that a Christian woman

should not use such evil things. Now should another Christian

woman who is not a part of this belief and sees no evil in

makeup, not use makeup at all - never, because she may pass on

the street a Christian woman whom she knows not, but is from the

group that thinks makeup is evil? Many religious (and otherwise

people) are VEGETARIANS - some feel they have Biblical evidence

to uphold their 'no meat' diet. Now should another Christian who

does not hold such views, never at any time eat meat? Should he

never eat meat at home, at a friend's home, or at the restaurant,

incase another 'no meat' Christian that he does not know, has

never seen before, should come along and seeing him eat meat, be

offended? Some Christian organizations teach it is UN-Christian

to wear GOLD, PEARLS and costly apparel. Should the Christian who

does not hold such convictions, never at any time wear jewelry or

expensive clothes, because they may pass on the street or ride

next to on the bus, a 'no gold no pearls' Christian that they do

not know is a Christian holding such beliefs? There are some who

dress all in BLACK as they practice their Christianity, now am I

to do the same because I may walk by somewhere, one of these

individuals and I do not want to offend him? Can I never at any

time, cut my lawn on Sunday, because my Catholic neighbour who

lives three blocks away and I do not know, may believe I'm

breaking his sabbath day? Examples like this are endless!

Of course Paul is not teaching that we can be ALL THINGS to ALL

PEOPLE at ALL TIMES. If we do not take ourselves out of society,

it would be MENTALLY and PHYSICALLY an impossibility to act,

dress, eat, drink etc. etc. so not to offend ANYONE. Someone

somewhere is sure to not approve of something you are saying or

doing.

Read again these verses in Rom.14:21; 1 Cor.8:9-13; 10:23, but

now read them in CONTEXT within the chapter.

Now do you see? Paul was talking about SPECIFIC CIRCUMSTANCES and

SPECIFIC persons whom you DID KNOW or would come to you and say

they were offended by what you were doing. Many would be "weak in

the faith" (not understanding all that God taught on a specific

subject in His word) or new members in the Church of God, and

may, because of their former upbringing, background or training,

be OFFENDED at what you knew was your liberty in the Lord. Then

under THOSE SITUATIONS Paul says DO NOT USE YOUR LIBERTY - as

long as the situation lasts, as long as you are with, or when you

are with, that person or persons that would be offended at you

eating 'meat,' or 'drinking wine,' or 'eating food offered to

idols' or anything where by their conscience is defiled or made

weak - DO NOT BE SELFISH, do not use your LIBERTY, do not DESTROY

your BROTHER (church brother, physical brother, personal friend)

with that which is your liberty to do and which does not defile

your conscience. Paul is teaching us to be considerate of the

feelings and beliefs of others WHEN WE KNOW THEM and when KEEPING

COMPANY WITH THEM or when THEY TELL US THEY ARE OFFENDED.

I have a number of Seventh Day Adventists as friends. I know

their feelings - they do not drink any alcohol ever. When they

visit with me I never serve any type of wine or alcoholic

beverage as I know this would offend them. Some do not eat meat

at any time or on any occasion. When they come over for a meal

with I never serve meat - I will make some very delicious

vegetarian dishes so they are not offended. If I had a neighbour

who would be offended at my cutting the lawn on Sunday, I would

cut it on some other day. 

I think you should now get the picture.

DRINKING AND DRIVING?

The high speed automobile was not around in Abraham's, Moses', or

Jesus' day.

In those days they did not have to think about whether 'drinking

and driving' mixed, but we today DO!! The Lord says "come let us

reason together" - the Spirit of the Lord is a Spirit of "a sound

mind." God's word is not a text book on science, surgery,

automobile repairs or hundreds of other technical arts. God's

word is a text book of the basic laws of life that will produce

health and happiness in our physical life and is an instruction

book of how to obtain everlasting life. Some of these laws are

ETERNAL - never changing under any generation or age. Some of

God's instructions are within what you would call "the liberty of

the Lord" - the Lord allows us to DO or NOT DO certain things and

still be within His law and grace, such as eating meat or not

eating eat. Some of these allowences and principles must also be

used with LOVE and WISDOM within the context of the circumstances

of any particular time, as we have seen in the above section of

not offending people in specific situations.

The drinking and driving circumstance is within the context of a

particular time - the age when the automobile is a reality - when

the human mind that God gave us together with FACTS tell us that

the automobile can be a deadly weapon when driven by someone who

has, in some cases, only had a few drinks of alcohol. Through

much study and research many countries have instituted laws as to

what they consider is the safe amount of alcohol that a person

can have in their blood and still be a SAFE and RESPONSIBLE

DRIVER. This is using the mind and scientific ability that the

Lord endowed us with to a RIGHT and GOOD purpose, applied to a

circumstance that is relatively new to mankind, that of drinking

alcohol and driving an automobile. WE SHOULD HEED THIS KNOWLEDGE

AND THIS LAW OF OUR LAND!! The world cries out "Do not drink and

drive." ANY responsible person, SHOULD TAKE HEED AND OBEY THAT

INSTRUCTION - IT IS WISDOM! It is sound mindedness based on true

research, knowledge and facts.

The Lord gave us wine and strong drink FOR OUR ENJOYMENT, to make

glad our hearts, to make His Festivals times of physical as well

as spiritual delight, to make the marriage feast brim full of

happiness, to lift the mind and heart of the down cast, to use

as a health tonic. Wine and strong drink are for times of

RELAXATION and NOT when you are going to take a DEADLY WEAPON

into your hands. And an automobile IS A DEADLY WEAPON! Thousands

of people are killed every year on our highways by automobiles,

WHEN THEY ARE QUITE SOBER!! IT IS A VERY SERIOUS RESPONSIBILITY

TO DRIVE AN AUTOMOBILE - ANY TIME .

The Lord has allowed us to invent the horseless carriage (even

they could be dangerous). The automobile like the horse drawn

carriage is NOT SIN OF AND BY ITSELF. Likewise, alcohol is not

sin of and by itself (though some will teach it is) as God's word

has shown us, but it must be used CAREFULLY and with

SELF-CONTROL. So it must also be with the automobile, it should

be used with care and with self-control. And as the world has

proven beyond any reasonable doubt - the two do not mix.

DO NOT DRINK AND DRIVE!!

ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, AND DRUGS?

Mr.Saunders in his booklet writes, "... Mr. Rowe... though he

acknowledges the evils of drunkeness, he argues that a 'moderate

amount of alcohol won't hurt you, nor is it wrong for Christians

to drink alcoholic beverages moderately.' If this be true, can it

not be argued that using tobacco 'moderately' is not wrong? And

how about a 'moderate dose of drugs? ..." (page 27).

Well if we want to speak about "drug" in general, then, I will

point out to you that there are a number of books on the market

written by doctors that admit and state that ALL DRUGS 

(manmade pharmacist chemical drugs) ARE TOXIC, that is POISONOUS

to some extent. Some are more poisonous than others. ALL have

SIDE EFFECTS to one degree or the other. The MEDICINE profession

has come a long long way from its founding father HIPPOCRATES who

said, "Food must be our medicine, and our medicine must be our

food." 

As for TOBACCO, it is not specifically mentioned in the word of

God, but then a lot of other substances that people want to take

into their bodies are not mentioned either, such as TEA or COFFEE

or PEPSI-COLA. We again must use our minds in a logical way

together with what scientific information may come our way, to

determine whether we should deliberately take into our bodies

certain substances. It has never to me seemed very logical to

inhale smoke. This deduction of mine was probably due to my many

camp-fire cookings I experienced as a Boy-Scout when growing up.

Now we have mountains of factual and research data that show

smoking tobacco is very detramental to your health and our bodies

well being.

The word of God plainly says that our bodies are the temple of

the Holy Spirit and if we defile that temple - if we practice a

way of life that leads to destroying our mind or body, God will

destroy us. He does expect us to physically take care of His

temple. A Christian should not take poisons into God's temple. A

Christian should not smoke tobacco even in moderation just as

they should not take strong toxic drugs even in moderation, for

the evidence of the bad effects of these outweigh by far any so

called 'good' that some claim they have on the body, the nerves

or the mind. 

But such is not the case for the moderate use of wine, beer or

the Biblical strong drink. God's word endorses that last sentence

and modern scientific research is ever proving the Eternals word

as accurate.

Wine is now proven to be healthy for you, of course used in

moderation. For it is also proven that many "good things" over-

done, can become harmful to you.

IN CONCLUSION

David Wilkerson (author of the best-seller "The Cross and the

Switchblade") has had intimate contact with countless people,

mostly teen-agers, whose lives have been ruined by drugs and

alcohol. He has written a small book called, "Sipping Saints" in

which he competently exposes the dreadful and tragic results of

alcoholism. While I can also deplore the abuse of alcohol by the

young or the old, and shout just as loud as Mr.Wilkerson against

drunkeness and alcohol addiction, I find that David Wilkerson has

followed the oath that so many others have trod when talking or

writing about this subject. Lots of GLANDULAR EMOTION and very

little scholarly research into ascertaining what the word of God

truly says.

I find Mr.Wilkerson's emotional outbursts against those

Christians who do not hold his "no Christian should drink

alcohol" attitude, very unbecoming to say the least and possibly

very offensive to many self-controlled Christian drinkers. Some

of his statements are:

"Who drinks beverage alcohol. Those whose hearts are in revolt

against emptiness ... Those whose spiritual minds are out of

joint ... Those who have not yet fastened onto a higher love ...

The need for alcohol originates with unfulfilled spiritual  

desires. Artificial stimulation becomes a crutch for weak

Christians who have not learned to tap the inner river of life

that flows from God's Holy Spirit ... Why is drinking an    

irresponsible act for any true Christian? Because the machinery

of a spiritual heart can run on nothing less than holy oil! ...

The only responsible drinking I know is drinking from the

fountain of life in Jesus Christ! ... Only impaired spirits need

stimulants of any kind ... "

As I have always been a methodical thinker, one who has always

tried to "prove all things" by getting as much information and

facts on any doctrine as possible before arriving at a

conclusion, I find the name calling, down grading and disparging

comments of Mr.Wilkinson very distainful. I do not know how he

hopes to win others to his way of thinking with such remarks,

unless they are ones who are just as glandularly emotional as he

is himself with regards to this topic. I ask those who are

hungering for truth and righteousness not to let human feelings

and emotions on this topic of alcohol rule their mind. But to do

as the wise Bareans did when Paul preached to them, "....They

received the word with all readiness of mind, and SEARCHED THE

SCRIPTURES DAILY, whether those things were so. Therefore many of

them BELIEVED..."(Acts 17:11,12).

REMEMBER IT IS NOT MAN'S WORD, BUT GOD'S WORD THAT IS TRUTH 

(John 17:17).

                             .................

Written in 1985