Bible

Does the Holy Spirit proceed from the Father, from the Son, or from both?

This question has been the cause of controversy for many centuries and generations. While one major Christian denomination teaches that the Holy Spirit only proceeds from the Father, but is given us through the Son, another major Christian denomination holds that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son.

To answer this question from the Bible, we must first of all realize that the Holy Spirit is not a Person or a Personage, but the POWER and the MIND of God. It is through the POWER of the Holy Spirit that God creates and acts, and mightily sustains what He has created. For more information on this vital subject, please read our free booklet, “Is God a Trinity?“

On the other hand, God the Father and Jesus Christ, the Son of God, are powerful Personages or God beings. Both the Father and the Son ARE God. And it should therefore come as no surprise that both the Holy Spirit of God the Father AND the Holy Spirit of God the Son are dwelling in converted Christians. The Bible clearly teaches, then, that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father AND the Son, and that BOTH are bestowing THEIR Holy Spirit on us.

Notice the following excerpts from our free booklet, “Is God a Trinity?”:

“Acts 2:33 states: ‘Therefore, being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He [Christ] poured out this which you now see and hear.’

“Notice, it says here that Christ received the Holy Spirit from the Father, and that Christ then poured out the Spirit from the Father. This is confirmed, too, in John 15:26, where we read Christ’s words: ‘But when the Helper comes, whom [better: which] I shall send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth who [better: which] proceeds from the Father, He [it] will testify of me.’ Again, we are told here that Christ sends us the Holy Spirit from the Father (cp. also John 16:7).

“Notice also Christ’s words in John 14:16-17: ‘And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He [better: it] may abide with you forever—the Spirit of truth…for He [it] dwells with you and will be in you.’ Here we see that it is the Father who will give us the Holy Spirit. He does so through Christ, as we read earlier…

“Titus 3:5-6 confirms that the Father gives us the Holy Spirit through Jesus Christ: “[God] saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom [better: ‘which,’ cp. Authorized Version] He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior.”

“We also see, however, in John 14:26, that the Father Himself sends us His Holy Spirit, in the name of Jesus Christ. Christ said: ‘But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom [better: which] the Father will send in My name, He [it] will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.’

“Notice that it is not only the Holy Spirit of the Father that dwells in us. We also see that it is the Spirit of Christ that dwells in us. Gal. 4:6 tells us: ‘And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, “Abba, Father.”‘ We see here that God the Father sent the Spirit of His Son, Jesus Christ, in our hearts, and because it is the Spirit of His Son, we can call God our Father. Notice it, too, in Phil. 1:19: ‘For I know that this will turn out for my deliverance through your prayer and the supply of the Spirit of Jesus Christ.’ Again, it is the Spirit of Christ that dwells in us…

“That the Spirit of the Father and of Christ dwells in us becomes very clear when reading Rom. 8:9: ‘But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.’ Here we read that the Spirit of God dwells in us, and when we do not have the Spirit of Christ dwelling in us, we are not even Christians.

“So putting all those passages together, we can see that the Spirit of God the Father and of Christ dwells in us, and that both God the Father and Jesus Christ send us, or pour into us, the Holy Spirit. But how can that be? Isn’t there only ONE Spirit?…

“There is clearly only one Spirit, just as there is only one baptism, one faith, one hope and one body (cp. Eph. 4:4-5). But consider this: Although there is only one baptism, there are many individuals being baptized. And even though there is only one body, there are many members in that body (cp. 1 Cor. 12:14). And we know that the ONE God consists of the Father and the Son, that is, God is not just one person.

“The same is true for the Holy Spirit. There is ONE Spirit, but both God the Father and Jesus Christ are Spirit beings, and the Holy Spirit emanates from both of them. That is why we read about the Spirit of the Father and the Spirit of Christ. When we read that there is one Spirit, then the reference is to the oneness or harmony between God the Father and Jesus Christ. It is exactly the same when Christ said, ‘I and the Father are one.’ (John 10:30). Christ did not mean, the Father and He were ‘one’ being—but that they were ‘one’ in purpose and goal and mindset and character. When Christ spoke these words, He was clearly a separate person from God the Father. Christ said in John 17:11, that we all should be one, as the Father and Christ are one in spirit—not in the sense that we all would become one being, but rather, that we all be of the same spirit. God the Father and Christ are one in spirit, and so are we to become one in spirit.

“Notice Christ’s words in John 14:23: ‘If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him.’ Both the Father and Jesus Christ live in us. John 14:16-18 confirms too that not only the Father, but also Jesus Christ live in us, through the Holy Spirit, when Christ told His disciples, ‘I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper…, the Spirit of truth…[that] will be in you. I will not leave you orphans. I will come to you.’ God the Father and Jesus Christ have both come to us, and they both have made their home with us. They do this through the Holy Spirit that flows from both of them into us.”

The Bible teaches that both the Father and the Son live in converted Christians. In 2 Corinthians 13:5, Paul encourages us to examine ourselves to make sure that Christ is in us. We read in John 15:4 that Jesus “abides” or “lives” in true Christians. As Christ abides or lives in us through the Holy Spirit, so God the Father abides or lives in us through the Holy Spirit. This is confirmed in 1 John 3:23-24: “And this is His commandment that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ… Now he who keeps His [God the Father’s] commandments abides in Him, and He in him. And by this we know that He [God the Father] abides in us, by the Spirit [which] He has given us.”

In addition to the passages quoted above, please note that we are specifically told that God the Father gives the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him (Luke 11:13). Acts 15:8 reiterates that God the Father gives the Holy Spirit.

More clearly, 1 John 4:12-13 explains: “No one has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God abides in us, and His love has been perfected in us. By this we know that we abide in Him, and HE IN US, because He has given us OF His Spirit.”

We are called the sons of God when we are led by the Spirit of God (Romans 8:14)–as Jesus Himself was led by the Spirit of God the Father (Luke 4:1).

When we are called upon to defend ourselves in courts for what we believe, then the “Holy Spirit” (compare Mark 13:11; Luke 12:11-12) will speak through us. The Holy Spirit is specifically defined, in this context, as the Spirit of the Father, as Matthew 10:19-20 says: “… For it will be given to you in that hour what you should speak; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit OF YOUR FATHER [which] speaks IN you.” But we also read t
hat it is CHRIST who will speak through us in that hour. Luke 21:14-15 states: “Therefore settle it in your hearts not to meditate beforehand on what you will answer. I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries will not be able to contradict or resist.”

That the Holy Spirit, dwelling in us, is both the Spirit of the Father AND of the Son, and that–through the indwelling Holy Spirit–we have become children of God and members of the Family of God, is also revealed in Ephesians 3:14-19:

“For this reason I bow my knees to the FATHER of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that HE would grant you… to be strengthened with might through HIS Spirit in the inner man, that CHRIST may DWELL IN YOUR HEARTS… that you may be filled with all the FULLNESS OF GOD…”

To summarize, the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and from the Son. The Father gives us OF His Holy Spirit, through or in the name of Jesus Christ–Christ being the only Mediator between God the Father and man. In addition, Christ Himself also gives us OF His Spirit, and so both the Father and the Son abide, dwell or live in us.

The Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of God, and God consists of two Beings–God the Father and God the Son. From this it follows that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God the Father AND of God the Son, and when the Holy Spirit of God dwells in us, then God the Father and God the Son–Jesus Christ–dwell or live in us THROUGH the Holy Spirit OF GOD.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

What is your position on the death penalty?

We find in the ninth chapter of the book of Genesis that, following the great flood by which God wiped out all existing mankind, save Noah and his family, God made a covenant with Noah. In that covenant, God emphasized the sanctity of human life.

Genesis 9:5-6 reads: “Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning… from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man. Whoever sheds man’s blood By man his blood shall be shed; For in the image of God He made man.”

Later, after God had brought the Israelites out of Egyptian slavery, He instructed the leaders of the nation of Israel that capital punishment was to be carried out for a variety of crimes, including murder, kidnapping, adultery and rape (Exodus 21:12, 16, and Deuteronomy 22:13-27). Moses was also commanded to put to death anyone who cursed their father or mother (Leviticus 20:9).

God’s people in New Testament times acknowledged the authority of civil governments to carry out the death penalty. In Acts 25:11, Paul at his trial before Festus gave recognition to the death penalty when he said: “For if I am an offender, or have committed anything deserving of death, I do not object to dying….”

Paul tells us in Romans 13:1-5: “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience sake.”

1 Peter 2:13 also emphasizes: “Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.”

Christ Himself acknowledged that Pilate’s authority to crucify and to release Him was “given” him “from above” (John 19:11)–but He also stressed that Pilate’s actions towards Him were a miscarriage of divine and even human justice. Once again this shows that God has given permission to human rulers to carry out capital punishment, but since God is not ruling this world, there is no guarantee that the execution of those convicted of crimes is fair and just and in accordance with God’s and even man’s laws.

Man is not born with spiritual discernment, and therefore, errors in judgment can, and have been made, and guilt wrongly established. In theory, modern justice is carried out under the premise that the accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and in many jurisdictions, the prosecution must show beyond a reasonable doubt that he or she committed the offense. If there is reasonable doubt, the person must be acquitted. In practice, due to news coverage ahead of a trial and because of other factors, the accused is oftentimes presumed guilty and is called upon to prove his innocence.

Capital punishment in the United Kingdom was abandoned in 1998, the last hanging taking place in 1964, prior to capital punishment being abolished for murder in 1969. There were several unsuccessful attempts to reinstate capital punishment for killing police officers. Capital punishment in America is still somewhat active in a number of States, although some have repealed the death penalty. In other countries the execution of criminals by their governments is still much in effect including beheadings, firing squads, stoning and hanging.

Even though God permits civil rulers to execute convicted criminals, this does not mean that the true Church of God should get involved in the political debate of the pros and cons of capital punishment. Regarding the woman caught in the act of adultery–a capital sin under God’s law, and for which Moses had been commanded by God that both the adulterer and the adulteress should be stoned (John 8:5; Leviticus 20:10)–Christ refused to condemn the woman. Although not condoning the sin, He recognized the hypocrisy of those who demanded the death penalty (for instance, they only presented the woman caught in the very act of adultery, but not the man), but He advised the woman “to sin no more,” and the woman’s life was spared (John 8:10-11).

Even in Old Testament times, judicial safeguards were built into God’s law to provide for the rights of the accused in order to prevent injustices, i.e. guilt had to be firmly established; circumstantial evidence was not sufficient, and at least two witnesses were required to establish guilt. False witnesses were themselves subject to death. Difficult cases could be sent, on appeal, for judicial review. Once rightly convicted, however–and since the nation of Israel was at that time a theocracy, God would see to it that no innocent person would be wrongly convicted—the death penalty was mandatory, and it was swift and sure. By contrast, today’s punishment in a number of cases is slow and unsure and often subject to long-winded and sometimes even mandatory appeals. In these cases the administration of justice is seen to be lax, ineffective and devoid of what victims perceive as adequate justice and appropriate sentences.

Eventually, following Christ’s Return, the administration of justice, including capital punishment, will be rendered by God’s saints as Kings, Priests and Judges. It will be meted out fairly and equitably.

In the meantime, God’s Church is to have no part in administering man’s “justice” and the death penalty, and Church members are not to serve as judges or jurors. The following quote is from a position paper by the Global Church of God in a special edition, dated February 1999: “…if the State is not fulfilling its obligations, it is not up to the individual to take to himself the State’s authority which was conferred by God Himself. It is not for the individual to ‘execute wrath on him who practices evil.’ For Christians this is even more so as we are not to be the ruling executives, legislators or judges of the civil government. Paul explained this in 2 Corinthians 3. Though the administration of ‘the letter’ which kills (v6) is from God—and a civil authority that administers it is even ‘God’s minister’ of this particular function (Romans 13:4)—true Christians are to administer only ‘life’ through the administration of the Spirit.”

Lead Writers: Bill Koeneke and Norbert Link

Does the Bible have anything to say about the existence of "sea monsters," such as the "Loch Ness creature"?

Surprising as it may seem, the Bible has indeed much to say about the existence of certain elusive creatures. It is entirely possible that some of these creatures, such as the “Loch Ness monster” in Scotland or similar “lake monsters” in other parts of the world, might exist today.

First of all, let us examine some interesting Scriptures which clearly describe animals, which are generally believed today to be myths or legends, or which are thought to have become extinct. Some have attempted to apply living known animals, or Satan, or world powers, to the biblical descriptions, but those attempts must be considered as totally inadequate.

For instance, the Bible has much to say about a creature called, “Leviathan.” This animal clearly existed at the time of Job, and is described, in detail, in the 41st chapter of the book of Job. Some have said that a crocodile is described there–but this is utter nonsense. The description of Leviathan in the book of Job and in other places refers to a living animal–but it does not remotely apply to a crocodile. Some have said that the description of Leviathan in the book of Job is merely a description of Satan. However, clearly an animal is described in Job 41–not a spirit being (even though some of the characteristics of Leviathan might very well, in a symbolic sense, apply to Satan).

We might also consider additional passages outside the book of Job, referring to Leviathan. Psalm 74:14 says that God “broke the HEADS of Leviathan in pieces, And gave him as food to the people inhabiting the wilderness.” Some might want to dismiss this passage as simply mythological, claiming that no known animal existed or exists with more than one head. This claim is not necessarily accurate. Even today, sometimes animals, due to mutation or birth defects, are born with more than one head, so there is no reason to believe that the passage in Psalm 74 must be understood in a mythological, rather than a literal way.

Psalm 104:25-26 clearly identifies Leviathan as a real, living water animal, co-existing with man: “… The great and wide sea, In which are innumerable teeming things, Living things both small and great. There are ships sail about; There is that Leviathan Which You have made to play there.”

There are additional biblical passages which might refer to Leviathan and/or other unidentified “sea monsters.”

In Isaiah 51:9, we read: “‘Awake, awake, put on strength, O arm of the LORD! Awake as in the ancient days, In the generations of old. Are you not the arm that cut Rahab apart, And wounded the serpent?”

Amos 9:3 states: “And though they hide themselves on top of Carmel, From there I will search and take them; Though they hide from My sight at the bottom of the sea, From there I will command the serpent, and it shall bite them.”

An interesting statement can also be found in Isaiah 27:1: “In that day the LORD with His severe sword, great and strong, will punish Leviathan the fleeing serpent, Leviathan that twisted serpent; And He will slay the reptile that is in the sea.”

Some contend that God is referring here to world powers, comparing them with Leviathan and other strong animals. Maybe so. We find similar comparisons in other passages. For instance, King Nebuchadnezzar is described as “a monster” in Jeremiah 51:34, and in Ezekiel 32:2, God compares the Pharaoh of Egypt with a young lion AND with a “monster in the seas, Bursting forth in your rivers, Troubling the waters with your feet, And fouling the rivers.”

In any event, the fact that God compares world powers or individuals with Leviathan and other sea creatures suggests that those creatures exist. God compares Pharaoh with a lion AND with a monster in the sea. Since lions are real animals, it is reasonable to conclude that that particular sea monster exists as well. Also, God speaks in the same context of Leviathan as the fleeing serpent and the twisted serpent, AND of the reptile in the sea. We all know that reptiles exist. Why would God mention Leviathan in the same context, if THAT creature was only mythological or allegorical?

We should understand that the alleged sightings of the “Loch Ness monster” are only one category among literal hundreds of other sightings of additional “lake monsters” all around the world. Another famous “lake monster” is the “Ogopogo,” a creature reportedly living in the Okanagan Waters in Canada. The description of that creature is very similar to the description of the “Loch Ness monster.”

We are not saying that the Leviathan of the Bible is necessarily identical with the “Loch Ness monster” or with the “Ogopogo”–nor, of course, that these modern creatures have more than one head–but we are saying that the Bible allows for the existence of “sea monsters.” And if the “Loch Ness” monster or “Ogopogo” exist today, they would not have been the end product of an “evolutionary development,” nor would they be “living fossils,” but God would have created them, and, as water animals, they would have survived Noah’s Flood.

There are many reports of sightings and even some photographs of the “Loch Ness monster” or the “Ogopogo” or other lake creatures from all over the world–just too many to be summarily dismissed. We cannot say that all these reports and pictures are fake (even though undoubtedly many are); or that none of these sightings are legitimate; or that they all were the result of highly imaginative minds; or that they were hallucinations, caused by Satan the devil (again, undoubtedly, some, if not many, of these “sightings” would belong to those categories).

Books have been written trying to identify the “Loch Ness monster” or the “Ogopogo” as a pre-Adamic long-necked plesiosaur, a marine dinosaur thought to have been extinct “for about seventy million years,” and they have tried to explain how and why that creature was able to survive in sweet water lakes. Others have tried to explain the numerous sightings by pointing at a variety of known existing animals or other natural phenomena.

However, these explanations fail to consider that even today, we sometimes discover previously unknown species, or animals which were thought to have been long extinct. For instance, although legends existed for centuries of a “hairy man living in the trees,” it was only fairly recently that the Orangutan ape was discovered by scientists. The same can be said for the huge giant squid which lives in the oceans. Although there had been some speculation for centuries that it might exist, scientists were only recently able to discover certain body parts of the giant squid, such as the portion of a long arm, with tentacles, in the belly of a sperm whale, enabling them to calculate the enormous size of that squid. Even in more recent days, new, previously unknown species were discovered. Cadavers from animals were found–and pictures taken–which look like the cadavers of previously unknown animals or of those considered by misled scientists to have become extinct “millions of years ago.”

Many eyewitness reports of the “Loch Ness monster” or of the “Ogopogo” have been published, but members of the Church of God view those reports correctly with caution, not knowing how reliable they really are. However, in light of the biblical evidence, it is possible that some of those reports are accurate and that these and other unknown creatures do exist. As a consideration of this question, we are setting forth below an eye witness report about an encounter with the “Ogopogo.” The report was written by Delia Messier, wife of Rene Messier, an ordained minister of the Church of God (CGCF) in Canada. The report, relating events which took place in about 2007, is reliable and also makes reference to eye witness reports from two other Church of God ministers and their families:

“The beautiful Okanagan Lake has a famous legend of an elusive water creature called the Ogopogo. This lake is almost 100 miles long with under-water caverns. For many years stories of sightings of the Ogopogo living in the Okanagan Lake have been heard and told. A family of three of our friends told my husband and me that they saw [about 25 years ago] Ogopogo’s head appear in front of them, as they were standing on the pier one fall day. They told us: ‘It lifted its head out of the water, then quickly disappeared when it saw us.’ Another family had also told mutual friends that they had seen it, but never having seen it myself, and being an elusive creature not common to public acceptance, one tended to dismiss the stories.

“One day, driving along the lake heading towards Kelowna, I saw something on the water that was strange. Looking hard at what it was that I saw there in the water, I have to say that it was at first unrecognizable. Nothing I had ever seen before in all these years living near the lake fit what I was observing. It was puzzling as it was not any type of water craft I would normally see, not a motor boat, not a canoe, not a Sea-Doo, not a paddle wheel, not a water skier, not a sail boat. Trying to identify what it was, I had to eliminate what it wasn’t, but there it was–a big head sticking out of the water, erect and moving smoothly straight forward, with a long wake trailing behind. It had a very big head, shaped like a horse’s head, with the long face and nostrils which a horse has, and with rounded short ears.

“The lake was quiet that day, as it was in late fall and the usual summer tourists had gone for the season, so this big water animal, gray or dark green in color like a wet rock, kept swimming leisurely. There was nowhere for me to pull over on the highway, but as long as I could see the lake from the road, the animal stayed above water and kept moving forward. Now I do believe the legend is true, that there is the Ogopogo living in the Okanagan Lake, and that our friends truly saw it, just as I did.”

From this it follows that an elusive creature seems to exist in the Okanagan Lake, and that similar creatures might also exist in Loch Ness and in many other lakes around the world. What is especially interesting is that the words of the Bible, speaking of unknown “sea monsters” co-existing with man, have to be viewed as literal truth, rather than myth, legend or fiction.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Would you please explain Mark 13:27?

Some have used this passage to teach a secret rapture just before or at the beginning of the Great Tribulation. However, that is not what Christ was referring to in this Scripture.

Mark 13:24-27 discusses the VISIBLE return of Jesus Christ (verse 26), AFTER the Great Tribulation and the heavenly signs (verse 24). Verse 27 reads: “And then He will send His angels, and gather together His elect from the four winds, from the farthest part of the earth to the farthest part of heaven.”

In the past, we discussed at length the false teaching of a secret rapture. For more information, please re-read our Q&A on 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18.

In that Q&A, we also wrote regarding Mark 13:27:

“The Bible does not teach a secret rapture. Rather, God’s Word reveals that Christ will return ONCE, NOT TWICE (Hebrews 9:28). He will come openly, not in secret (Matthew 24:21-31; Revelation 1:7; Acts 1:10-11), and He will END the Great Tribulation at the time of His Coming by establishing the Kingdom of God here on earth (Revelation 11:15-18). Mark 13:24-27 specifically states: ‘But in those days, AFTER that tribulation, the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars of heaven will fall, and the powers in the heavens will be shaken. THEN they will SEE the Son of Man COMING in the clouds with great power and glory. And THEN [not before then] He will send His angels, and GATHER TOGETHER HIS ELECT…’

“Christ will come at the time of the LAST TRUMPET when His elect will be resurrected from the dead or changed to immortality (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17; 1 Corinthians 15:50-52). There can only be ONE last trumpet, which means, there can only be ONE return of Christ… He says in Matthew 24:26-27: ‘Therefore if they say to you, “Look, He is in the desert!” do not go out… For as the lightning comes from the east and flashes to the west, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.’ His return will be clear and obvious and visible for all alive. Revelation 1:7 says: ‘Behold, He is coming with clouds, AND EVERY EYE WILL SEE HIM…’

“We read in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 that we will meet the returning Christ, at His coming, in the air. This is not referring to the third heaven, but to the atmosphere of our earth, which has air and clouds. We read that we will be with Christ from that time on. We read that Christ will descend on that same day to the Mount of Olives (Zechariah 14:4), and we will be with Him (Zechariah 14:5)… Christ’s disciples will meet Christ in the air and will accompany Him back to earth. The angels had told the apostles that Christ would come back in the same manner as He had left them. They were on the Mount of Olives, and He left them visibly on a cloud (Acts 1:9-11)… Christ GATHERS His elect when He returns VISIBLY (compare again Mark 13:24-27).”

But what is meant, then, by Christ’s statement in Mark 13:27 that the angels will gather the elect “from the four winds, from the farthest part of earth to the farthest part of heaven”? Literally, it says: “… from the end of earth to the end of heaven.” Notice the wording of Christ’s statement in the parallel passage, in Matthew 24:31: “And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.”

The reference to the “four winds” (as in Mark 13:27) can be found throughout the Bible. In Daniel 7:2 we read that Daniel saw in a vision that “the four winds of heaven were stirring up the Great Sea.” In Daniel 8:8, he describes a vision of four notable horns or generals, coming up “toward the four winds of heaven.” In Zechariah 2:6, we read that the inhabitants of Jerusalem who were scattered into the “land of the north” had been “spread abroad like the four winds of heaven,” and in Jeremiah 49:36 we read that God will punish Elam or modern Persia (Iran) by bringing “the four winds From the four quarters of heaven, And scatter them toward all those winds; There shall be no nations where the outcasts of Elam will not go.” Finally, we read in Revelation 7:1 that John sees in a vision “four angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding the four winds of the earth, that the wind should not blow on the earth, on the sea, or on any tree.”

The reference to the four winds, then, is meant to convey global effects and dimensions. The same is true regarding the additional emphasis that the elect would be gathered from “the farthest part of earth to the farthest part of heaven.”

A similar wording is used in Deuteronomy 4:32, where we read: “For ask now concerning the days that are past, which were before you, since the day that God created man on the earth, and ask from one end of heaven to the other, whether any great thing like this has happened, or anything like it has been heard.”

Notice how modern translators render the phraseology in Matthew 24:31:

Richard Francis Weymouth, The New Testament in Modern Speech, writes: “…from north, south, east and west, from one extremity of the earth to the other.” Charles B. Williams, The New Testament: A Translation in the Language of the People, states: “…from the four points of the compass, from one end of the sky to the other…” E.V. Rieu, The Four Gospels, renders it this way: “…from one horizon to the other…”

Commentaries seem to agree that Christ’s reference to “the four winds” and “from the farthest part of earth to the farthest part of heaven” describes a worldwide, all-encompassing gathering of the elect.

The New Bible Commentary:Revised states that the elect will be gathered “from all over.” The commentary quotes Deuteronomy 30:4, stating: “If any of you are driven out to the farthest parts under heaven, from there the LORD your God will gather you, and from there He will bring you.”

The Broadman Bible Commentary adds in volume 8, page 220, that Christ’s coming is “in judgment… [and] to gather his elect from all parts of the world.” It adds on page 377 that “‘the four winds’ here means simply the four directions or points of the compass. Similarly, ‘from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven’ must mean ‘from everywhere,’ though the first phrase may refer particularly to all the land mass east of Palestine, and the second to the horizons of the west, where lay the blue waters of the Mediterranean.”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible gives the following additional explanation to Matthew 24:31:

“‘From the four winds’ – That is, from the four quarters of the globe – east, west, north, and south. The Jews expressed those quarters by the winds blowing from them… ‘From one end of heaven, etc.’ – Mark says [in Mark 13:27], from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven. The expression denotes that they shall be gathered from all parts of the earth… The word ‘heaven’ is used here to denote the ‘visible’ heavens or the sky, meaning that through ‘the whole world’ he would gather them.”

How and why will the angels gather Christ’s elect from “everywhere”?

Consider that some converted Christians will be at the place of safety when Christ returns (compare Revelation 12:14; 3:10). But this is not true for everybody. Others will have survived the Great Tribulation in their respective localities, but some, if not many, will have been, as captives, brought to all kinds of places all over the world (compare Deuteronomy 28:64-68). Others, over the millennia, died in Christ, and they were buried in diverse places. When Christ returns, they will hear His voice and be resurrected to immortality, coming out of their graves (John 5:28-29), or they will be changed to immortality (if they are still alive and Christ’s Spirit dwells in them, 1 Corinthians 15:50-52). Then, the angels of God will gather all of them (Psalm 50:5) and bring them to Christ to meet Him in the air (1 Thessalonians 4:16-17). Christ and His saints will then descend together to the Mount of Olives to begin to rule in the KINGDOM OF GOD here on earth (Zechariah 14:4-5; 1 Thessalonians 3:13; Jude 14-15; Daniel 7:14, 22, 27; Revelation 5:10; 20:4).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

What are the biblical principles regarding hair length and dress for men and women?

In last week’s Q&A, we addressed some general principles regarding the kinds of clothing and style that should be worn. We emphasized the importance of right balance and modesty.

Paul also instructed the Church of God regarding the length of hair that both men and women should wear:

“Judge among yourselves. Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him? But if a woman has long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is given to her for a covering. But if anyone seems to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor do the churches of God” (1 Corinthians 11:13-16).

We can derive from these guidelines that men and women should appear differently in hairstyles. God permits differences in length of hair, and we note that varieties occur in hair color and texture among people. Some men will wear very short hair while others will have fuller styles; the same might be true, to an extent, for women. The key to falling within the guidelines instituted by God in His Word is for men to avoid having female-type hairstyles and for women to maintain a proper length to serve as a covering and as an unmistakable woman-like appearance.

We discussed the issue of hairstyle in a previous Q&A. We are quoting the following pertinent portions:

“In 1 Corinthians 11, Paul sets forth the timeless principles of proper hairstyle and hair length for men and women. After explaining in 1 Corinthians 11:3 that the Head of Christ is God the Father, the Head of a man is Christ, and the head of the woman (wife) is the man (husband), Paul continues: ‘(verse 4) Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonors his head. (verse 5) But every woman who prays or prophecies with her head uncovered dishonors her head, for that is one and the same as if her head were shaved. (verse 6) For if a woman is not covered, let her also be shorn. But if it is shameful for a woman to be shorn or shaved, let her be covered…’

“The context of the Scripture discusses the length of hair – not the wearing of a veil or of a hat (There is, however, nothing wrong in God’s eyes for a woman to wear a veil or a hat, if she so desires, following the culture of her upbringing). We read that a woman should wear long hair, which is given to her ‘as a covering’ [1 Corinthians 11:15] or, as some translations render this, ‘as a veil’…

“We read that a woman should have ‘long hair’ as a covering, as distinguished from an ‘uncovered’ head, a ‘shaved’ head, or a ‘shorn’ head. A ‘shorn’ head pictures very short hair. One might think of the analogy of a ‘shorn’ sheep… A ‘shaved’ head describes a bald head. In contrast, a woman should wear ‘long hair’…

“At the same time, we are told that a man is not to wear ‘long hair,’ and that even nature teaches us that wearing long hair is a ‘dishonor’ to a man.”

On this subject, we note and utterly reject the false image that has been promoted as the likeness of Jesus Christ. Not only does this contradict the teaching by Paul against men having long, feminine appearing hair, but it also violates the clear command against making any image representative of God as found in the Ten Commandments!

Some teach that Jesus was a Nazirite and that He was therefore permitted to wear long hair. This teaching is false. We have addressed this issue in great detail in a previous Q&A. The following excerpts should be helpful in this context:

“Jesus was called a Nazarene, because He lived and grew up in the city of Nazareth. He was not a ‘Nazirite.’ The sixth chapter of the book of Numbers describes the law of the ‘Nazirites.’ Those who took the vow of a Nazirite did not cut their hair, but they were also prohibited from drinking any wine or touching a dead body (Numbers 6:4-6). Christ, however, did drink wine (Luke 22:14-18; Matthew 11:19), and He did touch dead bodies (Luke 8:51-55).

“If Christ had been a Nazirite, He would have broken His vow and thereby violated one of God’s laws. But He said that He had kept His Father’s commandments (John 15:10), including all ritual laws still in force and effect at His time, and we read that He never sinned. The Bible defines sin, however, as the transgression of the law (1 John 3:4, Authorized Version). Therefore, Christ could NOT have been a Nazirite.

“Christ was a Jew, and He looked like an ordinary Jewish man, without special beauty in appearance (compare Isaiah 53:2). Judas had to identify Him to others with a kiss. He was able to escape on occasion, by mingling with the crowd and going ‘through the midst of them’ (Luke 4:30; John 8:59). Apart from the Bible, archeology and history also confirm as well that the Jews at the time of Christ did not wear long hair. Christ, therefore, did not either–otherwise, He would have stood out in a crowd, and a special identification through Judas would not have been necessary.”

In reviewing hair length and hair style of men and women, we conclude, based on biblical principles, that one should be able to determine the gender of a person at first sight. To put it bluntly: A man should look like a man, and a woman should look like a woman. The difference should be recognizable based on outward appearance. When the length or style of hair, all by itself, does not allow to make that determination, then the particular hairstyle or hair length would need to be modified.

In addition, we must consider more of what God specifically instructs concerning how we ought to wear our hair, and how we ought to dress.

Our hairstyle should be “normal.” It should be viewed by the overwhelming majority of society as “acceptable,” rather than as outlandish. Somebody who colors his or her hair in such a way that he or she looks like a circus clown places him- or herself within the fringes of society. During the Hippie-culture of the 1960s, young men would wear long hair, but this was never accepted by the majority of our Western society. Parents might have grudgingly “given in” to their “rebellious” sons, but they never liked it. Today, a man with long hair is normally looked upon as “different.” The types of hairstyle propagated today by the MTV generation, with hair sticking out like that of a porcupine, or uncombed, giving a sloppy appearance, or hair which is just too long for a man, are simply not in line with how a Christian man should appear in public. This would also include wearing an uncultivated beard or not shaving for several days (unless it is for the purpose of wearing a well-trimmed acceptable beard).

Regarding dress, in Deuteronomy 22:5, we have this admonition: “’A woman shall not wear anything that pertains to a man, nor shall a man put on a woman’s garment, for all who do so are an abomination to the Lord your God.’”

In recent years, the design of clothing worn by women has come to include the wearing of pants and pantsuits. While some believe that this type of apparel crosses the line and violates God’s instructions, the designs of these types of garments are, for the most part, gender-specific. That is, women’s pantsuits are designed for the female anatomy. However, even in this circumstance, care must be taken to purchase appropriate garments that clearly complement a feminine appearance.

Further questions have arisen concerning whether these kinds of pantsuits should be worn in services conducted by the Church of God. In the spirit of what God states in Deuteronomy 22, verse 5, we find no reason to recommend that pantsuits not be worn—specifically, because they are designed for women and not men. However, it would not be advisable to wear pantsuits in Church services all the time, to the exclusion of wearing appropriate dresses. We might note that in ancient times, the apparel of men and women had similar looks, but they had unique characteristics that identified with the gender of the wearer.

Regarding men, in our Western world, this would include wearing a suit and a tie for Church services (or a nice combination of jacket, tie and pants). In other parts of the world, different attire might be appropriate, but it is always important that it is in line with the desire to honor God and our fellow brethren by how we dress. Attending Church services in jeans and an open shirt is disrespectful to God and simply not acceptable in His eyes.

We are addressing those who are members of the Church of God, and we are specifically offering guidelines to help us all set a right example. However, as in all matters of Christian growth, we must be patient with each other–particularly with those who are new to the faith (compare James 2:1-9).

Finally, we have this instruction from the Word of God:

“Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering; bearing with one another, and forgiving one another, if anyone has a complaint against another; even as Christ forgave you, so you also must do. But above all these things put on love, which is the bond of perfection. And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body; and be thankful. Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. And whatever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through Him” (Colossians 3:12-17).

Lead Writers: Norbert Link and Dave Harris

Does the Bible have anything to say about the way men and women should dress?

In fact, the Bible presents some very specific guidelines for the kinds of clothing and style that should be worn. In this Q&A, we are addressing the topic in a more general way. Subsequent Q&A’s will address this topic, and related topics, in more detail.

While some may consider the Bible as being archaic, with little relevance for our day, quite the opposite is true! At the very outset, God gave man responsibility to care for the earthly realm (Compare Genesis 1:26-28). In particular, Adam was told to “tend and keep” the specially prepared Garden of Eden (Genesis 2:15).

Mankind was given stewardship to govern the earth under God’s sovereignty. The record of Genesis shows that through the deception of Satan, Eve disobeyed God and Adam then followed her lead (Compare Genesis 3; also, 2 Corinthians 11:3 and 1 Timothy 2:14). In their rebellion, Adam and Eve decided that their nakedness in the privacy of their home was evil, and they hid themselves from God as a consequence (Compare Genesis 3:7-11).

While Adam and Eve fabricated coverings for themselves out of fig leaves (verse 7), God clothed them with much higher quality “tunics of skin” (verse 21).

In a letter to Timothy, the apostle Paul gave instructions about proper dress, and what he wrote was to be further taught to the Church of God throughout its existence. Giving specific guidelines for women, Paul states: “… in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation [margin: “discretion”], not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, but which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works” (1 Timothy 2:9-10).

As we shall see from other principles in the Bible, the emphasis taught by Paul was that women show a reflection of “godliness” in their manner of dressing. However, this is not a prohibition against well-presented hairstyles, the wearing of jewelry or having quality clothing. Rather, it is a matter of emphasis and of attitude on the part of Christian women.

Peter adds this perspective in his instruction to wives, showing that this type of presentation was acceptable, but should not be the most important aspect: “Do not let your adornment be merely outward—arranging the hair, wearing gold, or putting on fine apparel—rather let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the incorruptible beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is very precious in the sight of God” (1 Peter 3:3-4).

An emphasis on very showy clothing of both men and women was evidently a problem in the first generation of the Church of God. James specifically warned that the brethren should not show favoritism to those who were “better dressed”:

“My brethren, do not hold the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with partiality. For if there should come into your assembly a man with gold rings, in fine apparel, and there should also come in a poor man in filthy clothes, and you pay attention to the one wearing the fine clothes and say to him, ‘You sit here in a good place,’ and say to the poor man, ‘You stand there,’ or, ‘Sit here at my footstool,’ have you not shown partiality among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?” (James 2:1-4).

Jesus challenged those of His day about their attitude concerning the appearance of John the Baptist: “‘But what did you go out to see? A man clothed in soft garments? Indeed those who are gorgeously appareled and live in luxury are in kings’ courts’” (Luke 7:25).

We see that wearing certain kinds of clothing can create perceptions in others. True followers of Jesus Christ must look beyond these superficial aspects. This teaching does not preclude dressing the very best we can with what we can legitimately afford. In a poetic, song-like outpouring of how much God loved His chosen city of Jerusalem, an analogy of a bride and wife is presented. Note how God represents the adorning of His love:

“‘Then I washed you in water; yes, I thoroughly washed off your blood, and I anointed you with oil. I clothed you in embroidered cloth and gave you sandals of badger skin; I clothed you with fine linen and covered you with silk. I adorned you with ornaments, put bracelets on your wrists, and a chain on your neck. And I put a jewel in your nose, earrings in your ears, and a beautiful crown on your head. Thus you were adorned with gold and silver, and your clothing was of fine linen, silk, and embroidered cloth. You ate pastry of fine flour, honey, and oil. You were exceedingly beautiful, and succeeded to royalty. Your fame went out among the nations because of your beauty, for it was perfect through My splendor which I had bestowed on you,’ says the Lord God” (Ezekiel 16:9-14).

When God gave instructions for the creation of “holy garments” for the priests of Israel, He specifically wanted them made “‘for GLORY and for BEAUTY’” (Exodus 28:2).

Jesus Christ gives us this perspective in Matthew 6:25-33:

“‘Therefore I say to you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; nor about your body, what you will put on. Is not life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they? Which of you by worrying can add one cubit to his stature? So why do you worry about clothing? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they neither toil nor spin; and yet I say to you that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. Now if God so clothes the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is thrown into the oven, will He not much more clothe you, O you of little faith? Therefore do not worry, saying, “What shall we eat?” or “What shall we drink?” or “What shall we wear?” For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things shall be added to you.’”

All of what we have been examining from examples found in God’s Word point to the ingredient of BALANCE in the matter of how men and women dress in terms of quality.

Regarding how both men and women dress when attending Church services, we find a meaningful example in the time when the children of Israel were commanded to wash their clothes in advance of appearing before God (Compare Exodus 19:10,14). Likewise, the priests were to wash themselves when appearing before God (Compare Exodus 30:19-20); and, they were to wear special clothing (Compare Exodus 28).

It has been the practice of the Church of God to recognize that we are appearing before God when we assemble for Sabbath services along with other special commanded assemblies as given by God. As such, we do recommend that each person present himself or herself in the best apparel they have available. The foremost idea is to specially prepare to appear before God to honor HIM! In the parable of the wedding feast, the guest who did not have on a wedding garment was removed from the feast (Matthew 22:1-14).

While it is evident that members of God’s Church have typically tried to find the middle ground of the customs of the society they live in, we also find that God takes great exception to the self-absorbed and self-willed practices of people who lose all restraint. This applies to inappropriate sloppy appearance, as well as to the over-emphasis on wealth and riches. A case in point for the latter is this stern prophecy that is finding its fulfillment in our day:

“Moreover the Lord says: ‘Because the daughters of Zion are haughty, And walk with outstretched necks And wanton eyes, Walking and mincing as they go, Making a jingling with their feet, Therefore the Lord will strike with a scab The crown of the head of the daughters of Zion, And the Lord will uncover their secret parts.’ In that day the Lord will take away the finery: The jingling anklets, the scarves, and the crescents; The pendants, the bracelets, and the veils; The headdresses, the leg ornaments, and the headbands; The perfume boxes, the charms, and the rings; The nose jewels, the festal apparel, and the mantles; The outer garments, the purses, and the mirrors; The fine linen, the turbans, and the robes. And so it shall be: Instead of a sweet smell there will be a stench; Instead of a sash, a rope; Instead of well-set hair, baldness; Instead of a rich robe, a girding of sackcloth; And branding instead of beauty’” (Isaiah 3:16-24).

We must take these warnings to heart! Our responsibility is to dress modestly and yet to dress with quality garments that reflect our honoring of God. In the letter to Titus, Paul encourages the teaching of “sound doctrine” (Titus 2:1). Among his recommendations is that the older members set an example for and teach the younger members. Using this key to developing a balanced approach to the way men and women dress can also find application in the Church of God in our time.

Finally, when it does come to questions about our personal dress, remember—we are called the body of Christ (Compare Romans 12:5; 1 Corinthians 12:27).

Let us who have been chosen to become a part of the bride of Christ EDIFY the Church of God by how we present ourselves before God and by the example we uphold for one another in even our manner of dress (Compare Revelation 19:7-9).

Lead Writers: Dave Harris and Norbert Link

Why do some Christians eat fish on "Good Friday"?

It is a Catholic custom to abstain from eating meat on “Good Friday” and to eat fish instead. Where did this custom originate?

First, let us examine the precise nature of this custom.

We are quoting from an Internet Website:

“Prior to reforms in the [Catholic] Church in the 1960s, Catholics were expected to refrain from consuming meat on all Fridays throughout the year and in advance of certain holy days. However, in 1966, Pope Paul VI limited the number of days that required fasting and abstinence and allowed local bishops to modify certain details. In the U.S. it is still expected that all Fridays are [days] observed with abstinence, but one may be permitted to replace abstaining from meat with another form of penitence or by performing some spiritual act. During Lent [which lasts for forty days, beginning with “Ash Wednesday” and ending with “Holy Saturday,” preceding “Easter Sunday”], which is the most penitential season of the year, the obligation to abstain from meat may not be substituted.

“It is common practice for Catholics to substitute fish for meat in their Friday meals. In Islam and Judaism, as well as Christianity, fish is not regarded as meat, thus the popular custom of fish fries throughout Lent… As a result of this identification of ‘meat’ based upon its behavioral characteristics, all manner of animals, including shellfish, beavers, and alligators, are classified as ‘fish’ for the purposes of dietary laws… Pope Pius XII granted American Catholics a dispensation from abstinence on the Friday after Thanksgiving to allow them to consume the leftovers from the day before.”

Another Website quotes the Catholic Code of Canon Law 1250, 1251, as follows:

“‘The penitential days and times in the universal Church are every Friday of the whole year and the season of Lent. Abstinence from meat, or from some other food as determined by the Episcopal Conference, is to be observed on all Fridays, unless a solemnity should fall on a Friday. Abstinence and fasting are to be observed on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday’… The application of this precept varies from country to country. For example, American bishops allow individual Catholics to substitute another penance if they could not abstain from meat.”

The Catholic publication, “The New Question Box,” 1988, states on page 367:

“In most places in the United States today, Catholics over 14 years of age must abstain from meat (and soup or gravy made from meat) on Ash Wednesday and all Fridays of Lent. On two days–Ash Wednesday and Good Friday–those over 18 and under 59 should fast. This means only one full meal, and only liquids like milk and fruit juices between meals.”

The idea of fasting during Lent stems from the concept that Christians would have committed sinful practices during Carnival (ending with “Ash Wednesday”) and needed therefore to repent or give penance during the subsequent time until Easter.

The reason for “fasting” on Good Friday is explained by “The New Question Box” in the sense that “Friday commemorated the day of Jesus’ death.”

However, as we explain in our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–a Great Mystery,” Christ was NOT crucified on Friday. Further, spiritual fasting, according to the Bible, is observed quite differently than how it is taught by the Catholic Church. For more information on that important issue, please read our free booklet, “The Meaning of God’s Fall Holy Days,” Chapter 2–The Day of Atonement, beginning with page 17.

The real origins of Catholic “fasting” during Lent, including on Good Friday, and the custom to eat fish instead, especially on Good Friday, are to be found in antiquity.

Alexander Hislop writes in “The Two Babylons,” on pages 104-106:

“The forty days’ abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess (Astarte or Ishtar)… Such a Lent of forty days was observed in Egypt… Among the Pagans this Lent seems to have been an indispensable preliminary to the great annual festival in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz, which was celebrated by alternate weeping and rejoicing [compare Ezekiel 8:13-14]… [T]o conciliate the Pagans to nominal Christianity, Rome, pursuing its usual policy, took measures to get the Christian and Pagan festivals amalgamated… Originally, even in Rome, Lent, with the preceding revelries of the Carnival, was entirely unknown.”

Ralph Woodrow writes in “Babylon, Mystery Religion,” copyright 1981, on pages 142 and 143:

“… each Friday, many Catholics abstain from meat–substituting fish in its place–supposedly in remembrance of the Friday crucifixion. Roman Catholics in the United States are no longer required by their church to abstain from meat on Fridays (as formerly)–except during Lent–nevertheless many still follow the custom of fish on Friday.

“Certainly, the Scriptures never associate fish with Friday. On the other hand, the word ‘Friday’ comes from the name of ‘Freya,’ who was regarded as the goddess of peace, joy, and FERTILITY, the symbol of her fertility being the FISH. From very early times the fish was a symbol of fertility among the Chinese, Assyrians, Phoenicians, the Babylonians, and others. The word ‘fish’ comes from ‘dag’ which implies increase or fertility…

“The goddess of sexual fertility among the Romans was called Venus… Friday was regarded as her sacred day because it was believed that the planet Venus ruled the first hour of Friday and this was called dies Veneris. And… the fish was also regarded as being sacred to her…

“The fish was regarded as sacred to Ashtoreth… In ancient Egypt, Isis was sometimes represented with a fish on her head… Considering that Friday was named after the goddess of sexual fertility, Friday being her sacred day, and the fish her symbol, it seems like more than a mere coincidence that Catholics have been taught that Friday is a day of abstinence from meat, a day to eat fish!”

But there is even more historical evidence for the custom of eating fish on Friday–especially on “Good Friday,” when Christ ALLEGEDLY was killed–according to Roman Catholic tradition, that is.

Woodrow explains, on pages 84 and 85, the following about the fishgod DAGON:

“Dagon was actually but a mystery form of the false Babylonian ‘savior.’ The name Dagon comes from ‘dag’ (a word commonly translated ‘fish’ in the Bible) and means fishgod. Though it originated in the paganism of Babylon, Dagon worship became especially popular among the heathenistic Philistines…

“Layard, in Babylon and Nineveh, explains that ‘the head of the fish [depicted as being worn by the fishgod Dagon on Mesopotamian sculptures] formed a mitre…’ A famous painting by Moretto shows St. Ambrose (in the sixteenth century) wearing a mitre shaped like the head of a fish.”

Woodrow also shows in his book pictures of Pope Paul VI, wearing the fish-shaped mitre.

To summarize, the Catholic custom to eat fish on Good Friday is not Scriptural. It is clearly derived from pagan customs and concepts and is also connected with the wrong teaching that Christ was crucified on a Friday–which He was not.

Of course, it would not be wrong to eat fish on any day of the week–including on a Friday–as long as it is not done with the false idea that eating fish on “Good Friday” honors God or Christ in any way. As Paul explained, we could even eat meat sacrificed to idols–as idols are nothing–as long as we don’t do it “with consciousness of the idol” (1 Corinthians 8:7), thereby giving a wrong impression that we agree with the correctness of those pagan customs, or by defiling the conscience of others (compare verses 10, 12; 1 Corinthians 10:28-29).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

In John 18:19 the "high priest" Annas questioned Jesus and yet in verse 24 Jesus was sent by Annas to Caiaphas the "high priest." Is this not a contradiction?

No. In John 10:35 it states that “the Scripture cannot be broken,” and so we must look for another explanation.

In John 18:13 Jesus was described as being brought to Annas, who was the father-in-law of the high priest at that time–Caiaphas. According to Josephus, Annas had been deposed of the high priesthood in 15 CE by Valerius Gratus, and Caiaphas was the high priest from 18 to 36 CE. However, other sources, as quoted below, state that Annas was dismissed as high priest in AD 23.

There are those who have suggested re-arranging the order of events, as described in the book of John, but this is not supported by the majority of manuscripts. Rather, it is indeed correct that both Annas and Caiaphas are quite legitimately referred to as “high priest” in the Bible, and for important reasons.

The New Bible Commentary states:

“Jesus is bound and taken before Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas (Annas had been deposed from the High Priesthood by Valerius Gratus, Pilate’s predecessor as procurator, but continued to exercise control from the background). The account of this examination before Annas is not given in the synoptist narrative, and it was probably an informal inquiry at Annas’ house.”

In Matthew Henry’s Commentary, these comments are made:

“This Annas was father-in-law to Caiaphas the high priest; this kindred by marriage between them comes in as a reason either why Caiaphas ordered that this piece of respect should be done to Annas, to favour him with the first sight of the prisoner, or why Annas was willing to countenance Caiaphas in a matter his heart was so much upon. Note, acquaintance and alliance with wicked people are a great confirmation to many in their wicked ways… The power of Caiaphas intimated (v. 13). He was high priest that same year. The high priest’s commission was during life; but there were now such frequent changes, by the Simoniacal artifices of aspiring men with the government, that it was become almost an annual office, a presage of its final period approaching; while they were undermining one another.”

These comments show that the high priest’s commission was during life but were subject to “Simoniacal artifices”–which are defined as “the skill in the crime of buying or selling ecclesiastical preferment; the corrupt presentation of any one to an ecclesiastical benefice for money or reward.” When a minister in the Church of God today is ordained, that ordination is not to be taken lightly nor discarded at a later date. It is a lifetime appointment in the service of God and “no one having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the Kingdom of God.” As this applies to our calling, it can also be correctly applied to the ministry. Of course, a person can disqualify himself–or can be dismissed–from a ministerial office for biblical and scriptural reasons.

And so, Annas, a former high priest, could also still have that title applied to him. Annas, his five sons, and his son-in-law Caiaphas, all held the Jewish High-Priesthood during the first century AD.

In Luke 3:2 it states that “Annas and Caiaphas being high priests…” And Acts 4:6 reads, “as well as Annas, the high priest, Caiaphas, John and Alexander, and as many as were of the family of the high priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem.” Luke, who authored both of these verses, referred to both Annas and Caiaphas as “high priests,” for the reasons explained above.

As a similar example today, in the United States’ governmental elections in 2008, Mr. Obama was elected President while Mr. George W Bush was still in office. One man was still President while the other was President-elect. Mr. Bush is one of a number of ex-Presidents still alive at this time, and he is still being referred to as “President Bush” today, even though he is no longer fulfilling the functions of a President. The same is true for President Carter or President Clinton or President Ford or President Bush Sen.–and we even refer to those men who have died by now as Presidents, such as President Washington or President Lincoln or President Reagan.

The Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge comments:

“Annas was dismissed from being high priest, A.D. 23 after filling that office for fifteen years; but, being a person of distinguished character, and having had no fewer than five sons who had successively enjoyed the dignity of the high-priesthood, and the present high priest Caiaphas being his son-in-law, he must have possessed much authority in the nation. It was at the palace of Caiaphas where the chief priests, elders, and scribes were assembled the whole of the night to see the issue of their stratagem.”

Caiaphas was actually in office as High Priest, but it appears that his father-in-law, Annas, being a former High Priest, either held the title for life, or was still viewed by the Jews as “high priest,” even though not in a functioning capacity. It therefore appears that the answer to this conundrum that has provoked so much controversy and discussion over many years is that Annas was still seen as a high priest even though his son-in-law Caiaphas now occupied that position.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale

Are Christians subject to the command to not wear mixed fabrics as specified in Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:11?

As a first step in answering this puzzling question, we must understand that all of God’s commandments were given for the good of mankind! King David extolled God and continually praised Him for His Way: “…For all Your commandments are righteousness” (Psalm 119:172).

Very specifically, God chose the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, for a unique relationship with Him. Note what He offered to Israel:

“‘Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. And you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation…’” (Exodus 19:5-6).

As a part of the covenants (binding agreements) God made with His nation Israel, He included the laws written in the Ten Commandments along with other statutes and judgments by which to administer His government. Some of these had a very specific application for the time and especially for the conduct of the “holy nation” of Israel, even though their overall application was not limited to ancient times.

Let’s consider the sin of adultery as a case in point. One of the overarching commandments of God as found in the Ten Commandments is, “‘You shall not commit adultery’” (Exodus 20:14). The penalty for such a transgression was for the offenders to be put to death (Compare Leviticus 20:10). In establishing the way to administer this law in Israel, God showed that this kind of immoral act was to be dealt with very severely, and He explained the reason: “‘…So you shall put away the evil from among you’” (Compare Deuteronomy 22:21, 22, 24).

Laws concerning agriculture, health practices, public policies and much more were to be administered by the leaders of Israel under God’s direct guidance. Among these is the law concerning mixed fabrics. Here is what is stated:

“‘You shall keep My statutes. You shall not let your livestock breed with another kind. You shall not sow your field with mixed seed. Nor shall a garment of mixed linen and wool come upon you’” (Leviticus 19:19).

“You shall not wear a garment of different sorts, such as wool and linen mixed together’” (Deuteronomy 22:11).

In the context of these statutes, we see from Leviticus 19:19 that God very specifically drew lines of separation—i.e., for livestock, for planting and for garments—clothing made, in this case, from an animal by-product and that made from plant derivatives. Also, in the context of Deuteronomy 22, verses 9 and 10 further elaborate the command by God to keep like things together.

In His recreation of life on the earth, God established plants and animals of tremendous variety, and of these, the Word of God states that each was to reproduce “‘according to its kind’” (Compare Genesis 1:11-12, 21, 24-25).

To quote from our booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound…”:

“Let us briefly review a few examples of Old Testament laws, which are clearly still binding today, as neither the letter, nor spiritual principles of the New Testament, nor any ritual character of such laws would indicate otherwise.

“For instance, Deuteronomy 22:5 prohibits cross-dressing. A man is not to wear women’s clothes and vice versa. This law deals with transvestism.

“Deuteronomy 22:9 forbids sowing a vineyard with different kinds of seed. The principle is to plant seeds together that will each continue to reproduce after its own kind, in order to avoid substandard products or hybrids. There is nothing wrong, then, with planting peas or beans among corn, or planting two pasture grasses together. On the other hand, cucumbers should not be planted with watermelons because they will cross and produce a perversion. Likewise, various members of the muskmelon and cantaloupe family should not be planted near pumpkins or certain types of squash, as they will mix.

“Finally, Deuteronomy 22:11 prohibits, correctly translated, the wearing of a garment ‘of different sorts, wool and linen mixed together.’ [The words, ‘such as’ have been added and do not appear in the original Hebrew.] Leviticus 19:19 contains the same prohibition. Wool is an animal product, while linen is a plant product. Such products should not be combined, as an improper blend, as they produce clothes of lesser quality.”

From the standpoint of practicality, mixing wool and linen together for the purpose of clothing degrades the quality. [From a spiritual or symbolic standpoint, wool is very warm on our bodies, but linen is cold. A combination of the two would result in wearing something which gives a “luke-warm” effect, compare Revelation 3:15-16].

Wool and linen both have unique characteristics in clothing and can each be crafted into garments of extremely high quality. As we consider this statute from God, let us also remember that He created the sheep and the flax plant with the knowledge that they would serve as a source of clothing. What He stipulates in both Leviticus and Deuteronomy is the proper use.

At the time of Israel’s emergence as God’s nation, cloth was made from raw materials that were spun into threads and woven on looms. Historical references cite silk, hemp, camel hair and goat hair, while cotton seemed less of a commodity in that part of the world. Animal skins were also commonly processed for clothing. With all of these choices available, God specifically limited the co-mingling of the threads of wool and linen to create garments worn by the people of Israel.

However, we also see that God commanded that special holy garments be made for Aaron and his sons “‘…for glory and for beauty’” (Compare Exodus 28:1-4). This priestly clothing was made according to God’s instructions:

“‘They shall take the gold, blue, purple, and scarlet thread, and the fine linen, and they shall make the ephod of gold, blue, purple, and scarlet thread, and fine woven linen, artistically worked’” (Exodus 28:5-6). NOTE: The italicized word thread is also rendered as material by the NASB and yarns by the TANAKH.

The variety of materials used in preparation for the Tabernacle and for the clothing to be worn by Aaron and his sons is also described in Exodus 35, verses 20 to 29. Additionally, in Exodus 39, further description of the materials is given. Please note that gold was also woven into these priestly garments as stated in verse 3.

While the exact appearance is not known, copies have been constructed in modern times—especially by organizations in Israel who seek to re-establish Temple worship. From these we see that both animal and plant materials were used for these garments that were only to be made for or worn by the priests of God. It is evident that the construction involved layers of clothing and unique appliqués.

Today, we might consider the wearing of a wool suit coat over a cotton shirt adorned by a silk tie as an example of wearing diverse clothing that each are made of pure materials BUT NOT MIXED TOGETHER IN THEIR FABRICATION. As we saw from the accounts in Exodus, though, the interweaving of some materials—such as gold—was allowed.

In recent times different materials have been developed for making clothing.

Nylon, Polyester, Spandex, and Acrylic are examples of petroleum-based synthetic materials that now make up some of our apparel; also, Rayon (or Viscose) is a cellulose-based semi-synthetic fiber made from wood pulp. Oftentimes these may be used with natural fibers—either as blends or as supporting parts.

As we are not to mix together animal and plant products, it would appear that linen (a plant product) should not be mixed together with an animal product. However, this prohibition does not apply to artificial products, so that combinations such as linen or wool with synthetic and semi-synthetic materials would not be problematic.

How then do we actually apply the restrictions in our apparel as commanded by God? Let’s consider the context of these rules. Understand that these statutes were given to the NATION of Israel that had the totally unique relationship of God’s direct rule through His appointed servants. However, God rejected both Israel and Judah because of their rebellion and their refusal to live by His laws.

When Jesus came as representative of God’s Kingdom and its future establishment on the earth, His disciples wanted to know if He would “‘…at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?’” (Acts 1:6).

That did not nor has it yet happened!

Consider the example of the woman caught in adultery. When the scribes and Pharisees brought her before Jesus, they said, “‘Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?’” (John 8:5).When the accusers left without condemning her, Jesus said, “‘Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more’” (John 8:11).

At that time, Jesus did not enforce the PENALTY of God’s laws as given to the nation of Israel; However, He did UPHOLD THE LAW by admonishing the woman not to sin—which is the breaking of God’s law (Compare 1 John 3:4).

In the future, when God’s Kingdom is established on the earth, God’s laws will be used to govern the earth. Penalties will be exacted (Compare Zechariah 13:3).

In addition, we find that priestly clothing is again specified for the future in the restored Temple of God:

“‘And it shall be, whenever they enter the gates of the inner court, that they shall put on linen garments; no wool shall come upon them while they minister within the gates of the inner court or within the house. They shall have linen turbans on their heads and linen trousers on their bodies; they shall not clothe themselves with anything that causes sweat. When they go out to the outer court, to the outer court to the people, they shall take off their garments in which they have ministered, leave them in the holy chambers, and put on other garments; and in their holy garments they shall not sanctify the people’” (Ezekiel 44:17-19).

We see then, that God’s statutes, as well as its penalties, will be used to govern His future Kingdom, but how are we Christians to look upon the administration of God’s government NOW?

Christians are to abide by the laws of the Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, unless the New Testament shows clearly, by letter or in the spirit, that certain Old Testament laws are no longer binding. For example, the New Testament shows that physical circumcision is no longer necessary.

We find an example in the issue of circumcision that arose as uncircumcised Gentiles were being converted to Christianity. Circumcision was strictly enforced among the Israelites; however, note how James and the other elders responded to the Gentile converts:

“‘They wrote this letter by them: The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings. Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law”–to whom we gave no such commandment–it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell’” (Acts 15:23-29).

Paul further shows the application of God’s laws in the deeper, spiritual sense. Using the principle of Deuteronomy 22:10 as a basis, he taught the Church of God, “Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 6:14).

Christians today are not to carry out the physical penalties of the Old Testament (such as stoning) against others.

On the other hand, no New Testament passage indicates that those Old Testament laws, as set forth in Leviticus 19:19 or Deuteronomy 22:11, are no longer binding.

We should all make diligent effort to apply the spirit of the administrative statutes and judgments given to the nation of Israel. We need to take steps to avoid the inferior quality of blended fabrics used for clothing—including that of wool mixed with linen.

Lead Writers: Dave Harris and Norbert Link

Is the "Epistle of Barnabas" inspired? Shouldn't it be part of the Holy Scriptures?

The “Epistle of Barnabas” is not inspired. It was clearly not written by the Apostle Barnabas. Mosheim states in his “Ecclesiastical History” that the author “must have been a very different person from the true Barnabas, who was St. Paul’s companion.”

The epistle contains numerous Scriptural errors and should therefore not be considered as inspired. It was never referred to by Jesus or any of the New Testament writers as Scripture, and it was not included in the New Testament by the apostles. As we explained in a prior Q&A, the apostles Paul, Peter and John canonized the New Testament Scriptures, but the Epistle of Barnabas was not one of those books.

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains that a reference in the Epistle of Barnabas (in chapter 4, verse 4) pertains to a command given by Adrian in A.D. 130 for the reconstruction, in honor of Jupiter, of the Temple at Jerusalem, which had been destroyed by Titus. Adrian had also forbidden the Jews to practice circumcision. The epistle must, consequently, have been written in A.D. 130-131–long after the canonization process of the New Testament writings was completed.

It is further explained that “the extremely allegorical character of the exegesis leads to the supposition that the author of the letter was an Alexandrian. His way of constantly placing himself and his readers in opposition to the Jews makes it impossible to believe that either he or the larger part of his readers were of Jewish origin. Besides, he is not always familiar with the Mosaic rites… The history of the epistle confirms its Alexandrine origin. Up to the fourth century only the Alexandrians were acquainted with it…”

Some Interesting Concepts

Even though the Epistle of Barnabas is clearly not inspired, it does contain some interesting concepts. For instance, the author speaks out against abortion. It says in chapter 19, verse 5 (We should note that some divide the epistle in different chapters than the ones given in this Q&A): “thou shalt not kill a child by abortion, neither shalt thou destroy it after it is born…”

Abortion is indeed wrong. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Are You Already Born Again?,” pages 13-15.

In addition, the author seems to refer to the belief of a 7,000 year plan–the concept that God assigned six “days” of 1,000 years each to man to rule himself, followed by the Millennium or the seventh “day” of one-thousand years, which is referred to in the book of Hebrews as a “Sabbath” rest (compare Hebrews 4:1-10):

We read in chapter 15 in the Epistle of Barnabas:

“(15:3) He speaketh, too, of the sabbath in the beginning of the creation: And God made in six days the works of his hands, and finished them on the seventh day, and rested in it and sanctified it. (15:4) Consider, my children, what signify the words, He finished them in six days. They mean this: that in six thousand years the Lord will make an end of all things, for a day is with him as a thousand years. And he himself beareth witness unto me, saying: Behold this day a day shall be as a thousand years. Therefore, my children, in six days, that is in six thousand years, shall all things be brought to an end. (15:5) And the words, He rested on the seventh day, signify this: After that his Son hath come, and hath caused to cease the time of the wicked one, and hath judged the ungodly, and changed the sun and the moon and the stars, then shall he rest well on the seventh day.”

For further information on the existence of a seven-thousand-year plan, see our Q&A.

Doctrinal Errors

However, the doctrinal errors contained in the Epistle of Barnabas are quite striking, showing that this book could not possibly be “inspired” by God. We are setting forth below some of its major errors:

Error #1:

The Epistle of Barnabas alleges that the Seventh-Day Sabbath has been replaced by the “eight day” Sunday, on which “Jesus rose from the dead.”

Quoting from the 1885 translation of the “Apostolic Fathers, Charles H. Hoole,” we read in chapter 15, verses 8 and 9:

“(15:8) And, further, he saith unto them, Your new moons and your sabbaths I cannot endure. See, now, what he meaneth. The sabbaths, that now are, are not acceptable unto me, but that which I have made is, even that in which, after that I have brought all things to an end, I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, which thing is the beginning of another world. (15:9) Wherefore we keep the eighth day as a day of gladness, on which also Jesus rose from the dead, and after he had appeared ascended unto heaven.”

Nowhere does the Bible teach that the Sabbath was replaced by Sunday; nor, that Sunday is the “eighth day”; nor, that Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. For more information, please read our free booklets, “Jesus Christ–a Great Mystery,” and “God’s Commanded Holy Days.”

Error #2:

The Epistle of Barnabas alleges that the dietary laws (as contained, for instance, in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14) were never meant to be understood literally and that they were never binding, in their literal application, on anyone, including Jews or Christians.

We read in chapter 10, verses 1-9:

“(10:1) But in that Moses said, Thou shalt not eat the swine, nor the eagle, nor the hawk, nor the crow, nor any fish that hath not scales in itself… The commandment of God is not, therefore, that they should not eat; but Moses spake in a spiritual sense. (10:3) He spake of the swine with this meaning: Thou shalt not cleave, he meaneth, unto men of this sort, who are like unto swine, for when they become wanton they forget their Lord, but when they are in want they think upon the Lord; even as the swine when it eateth knoweth not its lord, but when it is hungry it crieth, and when it hath received it is again silent. (10:4) Nor shalt thou eat of the eagle, nor of the hawk, nor of the kite, nor of the crow. Thou shalt not, he meaneth, cleave to, nor be like to men of this sort, who know not how to provide sustenance for themselves by labour and sweat, but in their iniquity seize the property of others, and, as though they walked in innocence, watch and observe whom they shall plunder, through their covetousness; even as these birds alone provide not sustenance for themselves by means of toil, but, sitting idle, seek out how they may eat the flesh of others, being destructive by reason of their wickedness.

“(10:5) And thou shalt not eat, he saith, of the lamprey, or the polypus, or the cuttle-fish. Thou shalt not, he meaneth, cleave to or become like unto men of this sort, who are impious unto the end, and have been already condemned to death, even as these accursed fish alone swim in the depth, not floating as the others do, but dwelling in the earth below the depth of the sea. (10:6) Thus, he saith, Thou shalt not eat the hare, meaning thou shalt not indulge in unnatural lusts; (10:7) nor shalt thou eat the hyaena, meaning thou shalt not be an adulterer; (10:8) nor shalt thou eat the weazel, meaning thou shalt not do uncleanness with thy mouth concerning food; (10:9) therefore Moses spake in the spirit these three doctrines. But they, according to the lusts of their flesh, received them as being about meat.”

This is utter nonsense and totally contradicted by Scripture. For more information, please read our free booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound.”

Error #3:

The Epistle of Barnabas alleges that the “Azazel” goat to be sent alive into the wilderness at the time of the annual Day of Atonement was a symbol of Christ, not of Satan. We read in chapter 7, beginning in verse 6:

“(7:6) How, then, did he give his commands? Attend ye. Take ye two goats, fair and like each other, and offer them up. And let the priest take one of them as a whole burnt offering for sin. (7:7) But what shall they do with the other? Let the other, he saith, be accursed. Now attend ye, how the type of Jesus is made manifest. (7:8) And do ye all spit upon it and pierce it, and put scarlet wool around its head, and so let it be cast out into the wilderness… One is brought to the altar, the other is accursed, and the accursed one is crowned, because they shall see him in that day, who had the scarlet robe about his flesh, and they shall say, Is not this he whom once we set at naught and crucified, and spat upon and pierced? Truly this was he who at that time said that he was the Son of God.”

The Azazel goat was NOT a symbol for Christ, but for SATAN. For more information, please read our free booklet, “The Sacrificial System and the Tabernacle in the Wilderness.”

Error #4

The Epistle of Barnabas alleges that the Twelve Apostles were the most unrighteous of all people prior to their conversion. It says in chapter 5, verse 9:

“But when he chose out his own Apostles, who were about to preach his gospel, they were men unrighteous beyond all sin, that he might show that he came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”

Nowhere do we read anything like this in Scripture. To state that the apostles Peter, John and James, for example, were more unrighteous men than others–in fact, “beyond sin”–is utterly ridiculous.

For all the foregoing reasons, we must in no way view the Epistle of Barnabas as inspired. It is a book which contains some truth and many errors, and should not be viewed as a manual for Christian living or doctrine.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

©2025 Church of the Eternal God
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.