Q&A – Page 86 – Church of the Eternal God

Would you please explain Christ's saying in Matthew 26:26-28? Didn't Jesus clearly say that the wine and bread "are" His blood and body; therefore, aren't those correct who believe in the dogma of "transubstantiation"–that is, that every time when we eat the sacrificial bread and drink the sacrificial wine, that bread and wine change into the body and blood of Christ?

April 18, 2008

First of all, we need to understand that the Bible commands God’s disciples to eat a piece of unleavened bread and drink a small portion of red wine ONCE a year–at the annual festival of Passover. When Jesus instituted the new symbols of bread and wine, replacing thereby the Old Testament Passover lamb, He did so during the evening of Passover (Matthew 26:18-20; compare Luke 22:11-20). Christ did not teach that we should partake of the symbols of bread and wine, in memory of His Sacrifice, any time we please. It is to be observed annually–once a year (compare Leviticus 23:4-5).

When Christ said that the bread and the wine “were” His flesh and blood, He used symbolic language. He had stated earlier that His disciples were to “eat His flesh” and “drink His blood” in order to have life and lasting fellowship with Him (compare John 6:53-55). Jesus used this kind of language to TEST His disciples. He knew fully well that at that time, none of His disciples would understand the meaning of His saying. But He wanted to find out how many would leave Him, and who would stay with Him, even though nobody understood what He was teaching them. Sadly, “many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, ‘This is a hard saying; who can understand it’… From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more” (John 6:60, 66).

Would you please explain Matthew 19:12. Does Jesus teach the concept of compulsory celibacy; that is, that ministers or priests must not marry?

April 11, 2008

When the disciples heard that marriage was for life, and that it can only be dissolved under very limited circumstances, they responded, “If such is the case of the man with his wife, it is better not to marry” (Matthew 19:10). Jesus answered that “all cannot accept this saying, but only those to whom it has been given” (verse 11). He continued, in verse 12:

“For there are eunuchs who were born thus from their mother’s womb, and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He who is able to accept it, let him accept it.”

Most commentaries are in agreement that Christ was not teaching “compulsory celibacy” for anyone. The Nelson Study Bible explains the meaning of the passage as follows:

Why does the Bible say that Christ's body was broken, when we read that not one of His bones was broken?

April 4, 2008

The apostle Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 11:23-24: “For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; and when He had given thanks, He BROKE it and said, ‘Take, eat; this is [meaning “represents”] My body which is BROKEN for you; do this in remembrance of Me.'”

John 19:31-37 reports that at the time of Christ’s crucifixion, a soldier pierced His side with a spear and killed Him. When other soldiers came to break the legs of Christ and the two robbers, they noticed that Christ had already died. Therefore, they did not break His legs. Verse 36 informs us that “these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, ‘Not one of His bones shall be broken.'”

Is it correct to refer to the New Testament Passover as the Lord's Supper?

March 28, 2008

The use of the term “Lord’s Supper” for our observance of the New Testament Passover is not biblical–and it only adds to the confusion surrounding the CORRECT observance of the New Testament Passover.

We pointed out the following in a previous Q&A (Update #88; compare also Update #189, under “Feasts”):

“The Passover was kept once a year — ‘as a memorial.’ On the night when Christ was betrayed, He kept the Passover. The Passover was at that time celebrated as a supper — that is why it is called in Scripture ‘the Lord’s Supper.’ We are today to continue keeping the Passover, but not as a meal — not as ‘the Lord’s Supper.’ We are to only partake of the symbols of bread and wine on the Passover night — we do not eat a full meal during the Passover service. In fact, we are told that we must ‘discern the Lord’s body’ — we must distinguish the symbols of bread and wine from an ordinary meal (1 Corinthians 11:29). 1 Corinthians 11:20, 34 tells us, ‘Therefore when you come together in one place, it is NOT to eat the Lord’s Supper… But if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home.’ (As an aside, nowhere does the Bible speak about ‘communion,’ during which we are to partake of bread and/or wine).”

Should we eat a Passover meal in Church on Passover evening, before we partake of the New Testament Passover symbols of bread and wine?

March 21, 2008

We find that, in New Testament times, certain local congregations apparently had a Passover meal in Church before partaking of the Passover symbols of bread and wine, as can be seen in the passage in 1 Corinthians 11:17-22 (Authorized Version):

“Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord’s supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not…”

Were the Holy Days given at the time of Moses actually observed before—including even in the times before the flood?

March 14, 2008

The most complete summary of the Holy Days given by God and to be observed by His people is found in Leviticus 23. Carefully note how the first two verses introduce these special days:

“And the LORD spoke to Moses, saying. ‘Speak to the children of Israel, and say to them: “THE FEASTS OF THE LORD, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, these are MY FEASTS”’” (Leviticus 23:1-2).

In this record, we see that God revealed to Moses the specific feasts, and Moses was to, in turn, teach the nation of Israel about these observances. Earlier, as He began to intervene and deliver Israel from Egyptian captivity, God very specifically established a calendar system to be used by His nation (Compare Exodus 12:1-2). At the same time He also established the observance of the Passover and Days of Unleavened Bread as recorded in chapters 12 and 13 of the book of Exodus.

Please explain Jesus' sayings in Mark 9:43-48.

March 7, 2008

This particular passage has caused great confusion for many readers, and has prompted some Christians to adopt wrong and unbiblical teachings.

This is what Jesus said in Mark 9:43-48:

“If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched–where ‘Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.’ And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched–where ‘Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.’ And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire–where ‘Their worm does not die, And the fire is not quenched.'”

Would you please explain the concept of the "New Jerusalem," as described in Revelation 21 and 22?

February 29, 2008

We are told in Revelation 21 that John sees in a vision that God will create a new heaven and a new earth (Revelation 21: 1; compare 2 Peter 3:13; Isaiah 65:17-18; 66:22; Psalm 102:25-26)—apparently after this earth and the heavens have been burned up (compare 2 Peter 3:7, 10). There will be no more sea on the new earth (Revelation 21:1)

In addition, John sees the “holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God” (Revelation 21:2). This is a literal city–albeit not physical, but spiritual (For more information on the spiritual nature of the new Jerusalem, please read our free booklet, “Angels, Demons and the Spirit World.”). That this city is literal and not just a symbolic reference to the church, for example, can be seen from the very detailed and specific description in Revelation 21:10-22; 22:1-5. We are told in Revelation 21:2, in conjunction with other Scriptures, that God is presently “preparing” this city in heaven (compare Revelation 3:12; Hebrews 11:9-10; 12:10, 22; 13:14; Galatians 4:26). We also read that Jesus Christ is presently “preparing” for us a place in the “Father’s house”–the new Jerusalem (John 14:1-3).

Please explain the identity of the 144,000 in Revelation 7 and 14, the great multitude in Revelation 7, and the woman and the dragon in Revelation 12.

February 22, 2008July 13, 2016

The question as to the exact identity of the 144,000 and the great multitude, as well as the woman and the dragon, has puzzled many over the decades and centuries.

1) The 144,000 and the Great Multitude in Revelation 7:

Revelation 7 describes an important event in the plan of God. Before God will pour out His wrath on unrepentant mankind during the coming Day of the Lord–a still future time beginning shortly before Christ’s return, when God commences to actively intervene in the affairs of humans–certain servants of God will be sealed to be protected (Revelation 7:1-3; compare Ezekiel 9:4; see also Revelation 9:4). First 144,000 will be sealed—12,000 out of each tribe of Israel (Revelation 7:4-8), excluding Dan (for a possible explanation as to why Dan might be excluded, compare Judges 18:30; Deuteronomy 29:17-20; and Genesis 49:16-18).

Who were the Nicolaitans, mentioned in Revelation 2?

February 15, 2008

We find two references in the Bible about the Nicolaitans, and they are both contained in the second chapter of the book of Revelation. In His message to the church of Ephesus, Jesus Christ says in Revelation 2:6: “But this you have, that you hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.” Again, in His message to the church of Pergamos, He says in Revelation 2:15: “Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.”

Much has been speculated about the origin and exact nature of the Nicolaitans and their teaching.

The Catholic New Advent Encyclopedia states that the Nicolaitans were “a sect… about the character and existence of which there is little certainty. Irenaeus… discusses them but adds nothing… except that ‘they [led] lives of unrestrained indulgence.’ Tertullian refers to them… Hippolytus based his narrative on Irenaeus, though he states that the deacon Nicholas was the author of the heresy and the sect… Clement of Alexandria… exonerates Nicholas, and attributes the doctrine of promiscuity, which the sect claimed to have derived from him, to a malicious distortion of words harmless in themselves… Eusebius [states]… that the sect was short-lived… Another opinion, favoured by a number of authors, is that, because of the allegorical character of the Apocalypse, the reference to the Nicolaitans is merely a symbolic manner of reference…”