Bible

Do you think that the Book of Enoch is inspired? Didn't Jude quote from it and gave it therefore canonical status?

The book of Enoch belongs to the so-called Pseudepigrapha books and was apparently written during the first century B.C.–even though some claim that it was written before then.

The term Pseudepigrapha was given to Jewish writings, which were attributed to authors who did not actually write them, but who misappropriated the names of famous people by pretending that they were the authors of those writings. Known “Pseudepigrapha books” include “the Apocalypse of Abraham,” which was probably written in the second century A.D.; “the Apocalypse of Adam,” which was perhaps written in the first or second century A.D.; the “Fourth Book of Ezra (2 Esdras),” which was probably written between 95 and 100 A.D.; and “the Testament of Moses” (or, “Assumption of Moses”), which was written in the first century A.D.

The Pseudepigrapha books also include the Book of Enoch, which is a compendium of four or five Jewish apocalypses, all of which were composed before the destruction of the Second Temple. The book of Enoch is now usually designated as I Enoch, to distinguish it from the later II Enoch, or the “Secrets of Enoch.” The book of Enoch was written by many different writers in different time periods. The whole book is found only in an Ethiopic language, but parts of it have been discovered in Greek and in Aramaic.

In addition, the Pseudepigrapha books include the book of the Secrets of Enoch (2 Enoch or Slavonic Enoch), which is a Jewish apocalypse from the time before the destruction of the Temple. Closely connected to it is the Books of Giants, a writing allegedly associated with Enoch, relating the deeds of the giants who were born by the daughters of men (descendants of Cain) to the sons of God (descendants of Seth, compare our Q&A on Genesis 6:1-4). It is known from fragments found at Qumran and was written before 100 B.C.

In a previous Q&A, we discussed the reasons why the Apocrypha are not to be considered as inspired. Similar reasons exist for the Pseudepigrapha books, including the book of Enoch. In addition, unlike the Apocrypha which are, to an extent, considered as inspired by the Catholic Church, none of the Pseudepigrapha books are considered inspired by either Protestants or Catholics.

From the evidence provided by the Dead Sea Scrolls, we see that this religious Jewish community located at Qumran had writings that included much of the Old Testament. However, other nonbiblical books were also discovered, and this included 1 Enoch along with Tobit, Ecclesiasticus and Baruch 6.

The book of Enoch was quoted in the apocryphal book of Baruch, and in several early writings, including the “epistle of Barnabas,” as well as by Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria. Some have speculated that Jude 14-15 is a quote from the book of Enoch and concluded that Jude regarded Enoch as inspired Scripture. The following two quotes compare Jude 14-15 to the suspected passage in the book of Enoch:

Jude 14-15 reads: “… Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of His saints, to execute judgment on all, to convict all who are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have committed in an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things which ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.”

Enoch 1:9 reads: “. . . Behold he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove all of flesh for every thing which the sinful and ungodly have done, and committed against him.”

Even though both passages are close, they are not identical. Jude says that God will “convict” all of the ungodly, but Enoch says that they will be “destroyed.” The rest of the two passages disagree in wording in minor ways.

Therefore, it is not compelling to conclude that Jude quoted from the book of Enoch. Even if he did, he would not have been particularly careful in quoting it verbatim. But apart from the inconsistencies between the letter of Jude and the book of Enoch, and assuming that Jude had quoted from the book of Enoch, this still does not mean that he felt that the entire book had to be inspired.

For an example, Paul quoted a Cretan prophet (whom scholars have identified as Epimenides) in Titus 1:12, but that does not mean that Paul considered the writings of that prophet as godly inspired, or that we should give any additional authority to his writings. Other New Testament quotations from, or allusions to, non-Biblical works include Paul’s quotations of some Greek poets in Acts 17:28 (one of those poets has been identified as Aratus).

In fact, both the Old and the New Testament mention quite a number of books which were not preserved, but which were known to the particular biblical author at the time of his writing. It is obvious that God did not see fit to preserve those books, and they never became part of the canonized Holy Scriptures.

For instance, Numbers 21:14-15 mentions “the Book of the Wars of the Lord.” Joshua 10:13 and 2 Samuel 1:18 refer to and quote from the “Book of Jasher.” 1 Kings 11:41 refers to the “book of the acts of Solomon.” 1 Chronicles 29:29 refers to the “book of Samuel the seer,” “the book of Nathan the prophet,” and “the book of Gad the seer.” 2 Chronicles 12:15 refers to “the book of Shemaiah the prophet” and of “Iddo the seer.” The “book of Jehu the son of Hanani” is mentioned in 2 Chronicles 20:34.

We can deduce from 1 Corinthians 5:9 that Paul wrote another letter to the Corinthians which was not preserved. There is also a reference by Paul to a letter which the Corinthians wrote to him, which is likewise not preserved (compare 1 Corinthians 7:1). Paul makes reference in Colossians 4:16 to an unpreserved “epistle from Laodicea,” which he even instructed the Church at Colossae to read. Luke makes reference to “many” who wrote down events pertaining to the life of Jesus (Luke 1:1-4).

The fact that reference is made in Scripture to some other book or a statement within another book does not mean that those writings were inspired. The same is true for Jude 14. Assuming that Jude quoted from Enoch 1:9, then this still does not indicate that he thought the entire book was inspired or true. All it means is that the particular quoted verse was true.

It is more likely, however, that Jude did not even quote from the book of Enoch. No scholar believes that the book of Enoch was written by the Enoch in the Bible. But it is obvious that the words of Enoch, as quoted by Jude, were something that the true Enoch prophesied. Jude related the prophecy of Enoch, as it had been preserved orally. Notice that Jude introduces Enoch’s words as follows, in verse 14: “Now Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about these men also, SAYING…'” This introduction is then followed by the exact wording of Enoch’s oral prophecy, as quoted in verses 14 and 15.

Note, too, that Jude is not even referring to the book of Enoch in the context. He is just making the point that Enoch had made an oral prophecy, under godly inspiration. That one of the authors of the book of Enoch wrote down the substance of Enoch’s prophecy (even though with slight changes) does not render the book of Enoch inspired.

Consider the additional fact that Moses is quoted in Deuteronomy 33:2, using a similar statement as that of Jude: “‘…The LORD came from Sinai, And dawned on them from Seir; He shone forth from Mount Paran, And He came with ten thousands of saints; From His right hand Came a fiery law for them.'”

While this quote does not reference Enoch, it does verify the same truth of what Jude wrote about.

We can safely say, then, that the Pseudepigrapha books, including the book of Enoch, are NOT inspired writings.

As is the case with the Apocrypha, the Jews never considered any of the Pseudepigrapha books inspired. And as we have pointed out in previous Q&A’s, God entrusted the Jews with preserving the “oracles of God,” including the INSPIRED Old Testament writings. In addition, many parts of the Pseudepigrapha contain heresies condemned in the Old Testament. Especially the book of Enoch preaches falsehood and doctrinal error; for instance, that allegedly angels married humans, and that the giants became evil spirits dwelling on earth (Book of Enoch, chapter 15, verses 8-10). Compare for more information Norbert Link’s sermon, titled, “When the Sons of God Saw the Daughters of Men…”

The Pseudepigrapha books also abound in even more historical errors than the Apocrypha.

Finally, the book of Enoch was never referred to by Jesus or any of the New Testament writers as Scripture, and the book 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 book of Enoch was not one of those books.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Why don't many editions of the Bible contain the Apocrypha?

The Apocrypha are a collection of books, which were written in Greek by various individuals from about 400 to 200 B.C. The Catholic Church considers some of these books as inspired Scripture.

At the Council of Trent (1546 A.D.), the Catholic Church declared that some apocryphal books, together with unwritten Catholic tradition, are of God. It was stated that those who disagreed with this decision were to be considered “anathema.”

The Roman Catholic Church (as well as the Greek Orthodox Church) consider the following Apocrypha (which are also referred to as Deuterocanonical books) as inspired:

Tobit or Tobias
Judith
Wisdom of Solomon
Jesus Sirach (Ecclesiasticus)
Baruch (including the letter of Jeremiah, Baruch 6)
First and Second Maccabees
Additions to Esther and Daniel [i.e., added chapters at the end of the book of Esther; and added chapters to the book of Daniel, including Prayer of Azariah (Daniel 3:24-50); the Song of the Three Young Men (Daniel 3:51-90); Susanna (Daniel 13); and Bel and the Dragon (Daniel 14)].

The Catholic Church rejected as inspired the Apocryphal Books of Third and Fourth Maccabees, Psalm 151, First and Second Esdras, and the Prayer of Manasseh, as well as the so-called Pseudepigrapha, which were written between 200 B.C. and 100 A.D. and which contain, among other writings, the books of Enoch, Michael the Archangel, and Jannes and Jambres. There are additional Pseudepigrapha books, which were possibly written after Christ’s death and which were likewise rejected as inspired, such as the Assumption of Moses, the Apocalypse of Elijah, and the Ascension of Isaiah.

When the Catholic Church decided in 1546 to treat some of the Apocrypha as inspired, their decision had been preceded by a hot debate among early “Church Fathers.” Hilary (bishop of Poictiers, 350 A.D.) rejected as inspired the Apocrypha (Prologue to the Psalms, Sec. 15), and so did Epiphanius (360 A.D.). Referring to the Wisdom of Solomon and the book of Jesus Sirach, he said: “These indeed are useful books and profitable, but they are not placed in the number of the canonical.” In addition, Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius and Jerome spoke out against the inspiration of the Apocrypha.

In his preface to the Wisdom of Solomon, Jerome (340-420 A.D.) rejected the Apocrypha as godly inspired, stating: “As the Church reads the books of Judith and Tobit and Maccabees but does not receive them among the canonical Scriptures, so also it reads Wisdom and Ecclesiasticus for the edification of the people, not for the authoritative confirmation of doctrine.”

According to Edward Hills in “The King James Version Defended,” page 98, other famous Catholics with this viewpoint included Augustine (354-430 A.D., who at first defended the Apocrypha as canonical), Pope Gregory the Great (540-604 A.D.), Cardinal Ximenes, and Cardinal Cajetan.

The Protestant Churches have rejected as inspired all of the Apocrypha. It has been said that the translators of the early King James Bible (Authorized Version) felt that some of the Apocrypha were inspired, but this is incorrect. It is true that in early editions of the King James Bible, the Apocrypha were placed between the Old and New Testaments. But this was done as an appendix of reference material. The Apocrypha began to be omitted from the Authorized Version in 1629 A.D.

Luther stated: “Apocrypha–that is, books which are not regarded as equal to the holy Scriptures, and yet are profitable and good to read” (compare, “The King James Version Defended,” page 98). Calvin wrote: “I am not one of those, however, who would entirely disapprove the reading of those books.” His objection was to “placing the Apocrypha in the same rank” with inspired Scripture (“Antidote” to the Council of Trent, pp. 67,68).

WE MUST STATE THAT THE APOCRYPHA ARE NOT INSPIRED WRITINGS.

Although there are many reasons why this is the case and why the Apocrypha must not be viewed as inspired, we are setting forth several striking examples for this conclusion:

1) The Jewish Canon never included the Apocrypha. This is important, as Romans 3:1-2 tells us that the Jews were given the godly responsibility to preserve the “oracles,” including the Hebrew Scriptures.

As a consequence, the Jewish scholars of Jamnia (90 A.D.) rejected the Apocrypha as divinely inspired. Philo, a Jewish teacher from Alexandria (20 B.C.- 40 A.D.), quoted extensively from virtually every canonical Hebrew book but never once quoted from the Apocrypha.

Josephus (30-100 A.D.) said that the prophets wrote from the time of Moses to that of Artaxerxes, and that no writing since that time had the same authority. In fact, the Jewish people reportedly destroyed the Apocrypha after the overthrow of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.

The Jewish Talmud teaches that the Holy Spirit departed from Israel after the time of the prophet Malachi who lived about four centuries before Christ. While the proof of this assertion is not directly stated in the Word of God, the evidence is that no further inspired writings were given by God until Jesus Christ established the New Testament Church of God.

2) Jesus Himself confirmed the inspired canon of the Hebrew Bible and its correct order (which is divided into the Law, the Prophets and the Psalms). When speaking about the violent death of righteous people, He said in Luke 11:51: “… from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who perished between the altar and the temple…” The death of Abel is recorded in Genesis, the first book in the Hebrew canon. The death of Zechariah is included in 2 Chronicles, the last book of the Hebrew canon.

3) It is also worthy to note that the New Testament never quotes from ANY of the Apocrypha, while it quotes extensively from EVERY section of the Old Testament Scriptures, which Jesus referred to as “ALL the Scripture” (Luke 24:27). In fact, there are allegedly 263 quotations and 370 allusions to the Old Testament in the New Testament and not one of them refers to the Apocrypha.

4) While the inspired Scriptures make the claim for themselves that they ARE inspired and infallible, the Apocrypha do NOT make this claim for their own writings.

For instance, the author of 2 Maccabees writes:

“… At this point I shall bring my work to an end. If it is found to be well written and aptly composed, that is what I myself aimed at; if superficial and mediocre, it was the best I could do” (2 Maccabees 15:37-38, Revised English Bible).

5) The Apocrypha contain blatant contradictions, but God’s inspired Word does not contradict itself (compare John 10:35). For example, in the two books of the Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes dies three different deaths in three different places.

6) The Apocrypha include teachings which contradict the doctrines of the Holy Scriptures, showing that the Apocrypha could not possibly be inspired. For instance, 2 Maccabees 12:42-45 states in the New Revised Standard Version, that 2.000 drachmas of silver were sent to Jerusalem for a sin-offering and to “pray for the dead,” so that “atonement” or reconciliation for the dead could be made, so that “they might be delivered from sin.” The Revised English Bible translates that they were praying and giving the silver drachmas “to free the dead from their sin.” This concept of praying and paying for the dead is contrary to the teaching of the Hebrew Scriptures (and to the teaching of the New Testament).

A terrible example of wrong teaching is included in Tobit 6:5, 8, where the “angel Azariah” gave the following “healing” advice: “Cut open the fish and take out the gall, heart, and liver… For its gall, heart, and liver are useful medicines… As for the fish’s heart and liver, you must burn them to make a smoke in the presence of a man or woman afflicted by a demon or evil spirit, and every affliction will flee away and never remain with that person any longer.”

We must therefore conclude that the Apocrypha are NOT inspired writings, and that they do not belong in the Bible. This is not to say that they must never be read. Especially historical records, for instance the first two books of the Maccabees, can give us valuable information. But as is the case with every book other than the inspired writings contained in the Holy Bible (the writings of Josephus, for example, are of historical value, but they are not “inspired”), we need to be aware that we will be reading, to a larger or smaller degree, truth mixed with error.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Would you please explain the meaning of the coronation of the High Priest Joshua, as reported in Zechariah 6:9-15.

We mentioned in a prior Update, when discussing the vision of the High Priest Joshua in Zechariah 3:1-10, that Joshua is a type of Jesus Christ. This fact becomes even more obvious in the passage, which describes the coronation of Joshua.

Zechariah 6:9-15 reads:

“(9) Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying: (10) ‘Receive the gift from the captives–from Heldai, Tobijah, and Jedaiah, who have come from Babylon–and go the same day and enter the house of Josiah the son of Zephaniah. (11) Take the silver and gold, make elaborate crowns [according to the literal text, see margin of the New King James Bible], and set [them] on the head of Joshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest. (12) Then speak to him, saying, “Thus says the LORD of hosts, saying: ‘Behold, the Man whose name is the BRANCH! From His place He shall branch out, and He shall build the temple of the LORD; (13) Yes, He shall build the temple of the LORD. He shall bear the glory, And shall sit and rule on His throne; So He shall be a priest on His throne, And the counsel of peace shall be between them both.'” (14) Now the elaborate crowns [not “crown,” see comment above] shall be for a memorial in the temple of the LORD for Helem, Tobijah, Jedaiah, and Hen the son of Zephaniah. (15) Even those from afar shall come and build IN [as it should say, compare the Authorized Version] the temple of the LORD. Then you shall know that the LORD of hosts has sent Me to you. And this shall come to pass if you diligently obey the voice of the LORD your God.”‘”

1) Symbolic Names

The passage, although describing a real event at the time of Joshua, nevertheless foreshadows a much more important event which will take place at the time of Christ’s return. The passage is filled with symbolic references to the end time.

For instance, even the names listed in verse 10 are of deep symbolic significance. As the Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary explains, Heldai means “robust” (or, according to Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible, “The Lord’s World”–which would refer to the Millennium, as today, this is NOT God’s world); Tobijah means, “the goodness of God”; and Jedaiah means, “God knows” (or, “God cares for,” according to Albert Barnes).

In addition, several commentaries point out that Heldai was also called Helem (in verse 14), and that Joshua (which means, “God founds” or “God supports”) was also called Hen (meaning “favor”), as the same person often had two names. Also, the meaning of “Zephaniah” (in verse 14) is, “The LORD hides.”

2) The BRANCH

It is obvious that the reference to the “BRANCH” in verse 12 describes Jesus Christ, the Messiah, the God of the Old Testament. This shows that the entire passage is millennial.

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible states to verse 12: “‘Not for himself, but for Christ, whose name Joshua bare, and whose Priesthood and Princedom he represented,’ was the crown given him. The prophet had already foretold the Messiah, under the name of the Branch.”

The correct understanding of the identity of “the BRANCH” as the Messiah (compare Jeremiah 33:15)–and not as Zerubbabel, as the Broadman Bible Commentary erroneously concludes–has consequences for the correct understanding of the remainder of the entire passage.

3) The Building of the Temple

We are told in verse 12 that it is the BRANCH–Jesus Christ–who will build the temple. Verse 15 says that some from afar will come to build IN the temple.

Albert Barnes explains verse 15 in this way: “And build in – or upon, the temple of the Lord… Not ‘build it’ for it was to be built by ‘the Branch,’ but ‘build on,’ labor on, it. It was a building, which should continually be enlarged…”

We find a similar explanation in the Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary: “Christ ‘builds the temple’… His people ‘build in the temple.'”

a) The New Testament Church

Some commentaries understand the temple to refer to the New Testament Church, which Jesus Christ promised to build.

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible writes:

“The material temple was soon to be finished, and that by Zerubbabel, to whom this had been promised [Zechariah 4:10], not by Joshua. It was then a new temple, to be built from the foundation, of which He Himself was to be ‘the foundation’… as He said, ‘On this rock I will build My Church’… and in Him ‘all the building, fitly framed together, groweth unto an holy temple to the Lord’ [Ephesians 2:21].”

John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible concurs: “… and [He] shall build the temple of the Lord; not a material temple, but the spiritual temple, the Church…”

b) The Millennial Physical Temple

Others conclude that the reference to the temple to be built by the BRANCH refers also–or primarily–to a physical temple in the Millennium.

The Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary states:

“The promise of the future true building of the spiritual temple by Messiah… is an earnest to assure the Jews, that the material temple will be built by Joshua and Zerubbabel, in spite of all seeming obstacles. It also raises their thoughts beyond the material to the spiritual temple, and also to the future glorious temple, to be reared in Israel under Messiah’s superintendence… The repetition of the same clause [compare Zechariah 6:12 and 13] gives emphasis to the statement as to Messiah’s work.”

The Ryrie Study Bible adds: “The crowning of Joshua foreshadowed the crowning of Messiah, who at His second coming will build the (millennial) temple.”

The Nelson Study Bible agrees, stating:

“The Messiah Himself will build the temple of the Lord. Since the restoration temple (the second temple) was already being built and would be completed by Zerubbabel (see 4:9), the temple referred to here may be the future temple of the messianic kingdom… The temple of Zerubbabel was a prophetic symbol of the temple that is still to come…”

c) A Physical Temple Just Prior to Christ’s Return

It is also possible that the reference to a future temple, which will be built by the BRANCH, could relate to a physical temple still to be built in Jerusalem–just prior to the return of Christ. We know from Scripture that the Jews will bring sacrifices in Jerusalem. If there is a physical temple, then these sacrifices would be brought in that temple, until they are –temporarily–abolished by a European power.

As we discussed in our free booklet, “Is That in the Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation!”, strong biblical evidence exists for the rebuilding of a temple in the modern Jewish nation of Israel.

It would also be possible that it is THAT temple which will survive the partial end-time destruction of the city of Jerusalem, which is described as the millennial temple in the book of Ezekiel.

4) Crowns on Joshua’s Head

We also read in verses 11 and 14 that crowns were placed on Joshua’s head. Even though the New King James Bible speaks of only one crown, the literal text says, “crowns,” but uses a SINGULAR, not a plural VERB, in relationship to the crowns, signifying unity and harmony.

John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible states:

“… both the crown of the priesthood and the crown of the kingdom should meet in [Joshua’s] antitype Christ, who is said to have on [His] head many crowns [Revelation 19:12]… The double crown is placed on Joshua’s head, symbolizing that the true priesthood and the kingdom shall be conferred on the one Messiah… It was a thing before unknown in the Levitical priesthood that the same person should wear at once the crown of a king and that of a high priest…”

The Nelson Study Bible adds: “… In the Messiah the two offices of king and priest will be united…”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible emphasizes this important additional aspect in his comment to verse 13: “He shall be at once king and priest, as it is said, ‘Thou art a priest forever after the order of Melchizedec.’ When the Christ should reign, He should not cease to be our Priest…”

5) Crowns for a Memorial

We should also take note of the fact that certain named individuals from Babylon brought gifts of silver and gold (verses 10 and 11) to be used for the construction of elaborate crowns for Joshua. These crowns were URGENTLY made “the same day” “for a memorial” (compare verse 14).

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible states in this context:

“They brought a passing gift, but it should be for a lasting memorial in their behalf… When Midian had been smitten before Israel, and not one of Israel had been slain, they brought all the gold which had accrued to them, and ‘Moses and Eleazar took the gold, and brought it into the tabernacle, a memorial for the children of Israel before the Lord’ [Numbers 31:50, 54]. So the angel said to Cornelius, ‘thy prayers and thy alms are come up for a memorial before God’ [Acts 10:4, 31].”

The Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary adds: “… a memorial — deposited in the temple, to the honor of the donors; a memorial, too, of the coronation of Joshua, to remind all of Messiah, the promised antitypical king-priest, soon to come.”

Our work for God is never in vain (Revelation 14:13)–even though it might sometimes seem to us that way (compare Isaiah 49:4). God does remember our hard labor and diligent service (Malachi 3:16-18). They are in God’s memory–a memorial! He will not forget that we are “doers of the work” (James 1:25), and that through our work, we accelerate and HASTEN the coming of the LORD (2 Peter 3:12).

6) “Counsel of Peace Between Them Both”

We also read in verse 13 that Christ shall be a priest on His throne and that “the counsel of peace shall be between them both.”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible points out:

“There is a counsel of peace between [Christ] and the Father whose temple He builds. The Will of the Father and the Son is one. Both had one Will of love toward us, the salvation of the world, bringing forth peace through our redemption.

“God the Father ‘so loved the world, that He gave His Only-Begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life’ [John 3:16]; and God the Son ‘is our peace, who hath made both one, that He might reconcile both unto God in one body by the Cross, and came and preached peace to them which were afar off and to them that were nigh’ [Ephesians 2:14, 16-17].”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible offers an additional explanation:

“… the counsel of peace shall be between… the Father and the Son… Or, rather,… Between… [the] priestly and kingly office of Jesus Christ…”

A similar explanation is given by the Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary:

“Peace between the kingly and priestly attributes of Messiah implies the harmonizing of the [seemingly] conflicting claims of God’s justice as a King, and His love as a Father and Priest. Hence is produced peace to man… It is only by being pardoned through His atonement and ruled by His laws, that we can find ‘peace.'”

7) “Those From Afar Shall Build in the Temple”

We are also told that “Even those from afar shall come and build [in] the temple of the LORD” (compare verse 15).

The Ryrie Study Bible explains that this is a reference to the Millennium, when Gentiles will join in building the millennial temple.

However, Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible applies this reference to the spiritual temple, the New Testament church, stating:

“They who came from Babylon with offerings to God, became types of the Gentiles, of whom the Apostle says, ‘Now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off have become nigh through the blood of Christ’ [Ephesians 2:13];… and ‘the promise is to you and to your children, and to all that are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call’ [Acts 2:39].”

A similar explanation is given by John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible:

“And they that are afar off shall come… Into the temple; not the material temple… but into the spiritual temple, the church; and [it] is a prophecy of the calling of the Gentiles, who are said to be ‘afar off’…”

However, since the possibility of the building of a physical temple remains on the immediate horizon of prophetic events, occurrences may well happen that will lead to a more literal application of this prophecy. Indeed, the construction of the new Temple may be accomplished through the support of powerful groups outside of modern Israel. As it was in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, there might be great opposition to the Jews when they were to undertake the rebuilding of such a symbolic representation of the Jewish claims to the city of Jerusalem and the land of Israel.

8) “And This Shall Come to Pass…”

As mentioned in previous Q&A’s on the Book of Zechariah, the phrase in verse 15, “Then you shall know that the LORD of hosts has sent Me to you…” refers to the Messiah, Jesus Christ. Ultimately, people will know that God the Father sent His Son to die for the world, and that it is He who will return as the all-powerful and glorious King of kings and Lord of lords. The remainder of verse 15 is also quite interesting. It says:

“And this shall come to pass if you diligently obey the voice of the LORD your God.”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible explains this phrase in this way:

“Not as though the coming of Christ depended upon their faithfulness, but their share in it. ‘Ye shall know (he had said) that the Lord of hosts hath sent me unto you;’ but whether this knowledge should reach to individuals, depends upon their obedience and their willingness to know…

“‘For none of the wicked,’ Daniel says, ‘shall understand’ [Daniel 12:10]… So our Lord said, ‘If any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God or whether I speak of Myself’ [John 7:17]…”

9) Conclusion

The coronation of the High Priest Joshua is a remarkable prophecy for the return of the Messiah and the beginning of His millennial rule here on earth. Then, true justice and mercy, as well as peace, will become known to and experienced by all men, and the time of man’s misrule, under the inspiration of Satan, will have ended.

Christ is still building His spiritual temple today, allowing fallible human beings to build IN His temple, under His guidance and leadership. He will soon return to this earth and especially to His spiritual temple “for salvation” (Hebrews 9:28).

He will be ruling as THE King and THE Priest–but He will be assisted by His spiritual temple, the–by then–immortal glorified members of the Church of God. At that time, true physical sacrifices will be brought “in righteousness” at a physical millennial temple in Jerusalem–a temple, which might have already been built just prior to Christ’s return.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Did the Roman Catholic Church Canonize the New Testament?

When we read certain historical books, we may find something like the following narrative, as adopted from sources published on the Internet:

The process of canonization was complex and lengthy. In the first three centuries of the Christian Church, there was no New Testament canon that was universally recognized. Nevertheless, by the 2nd century there was a common collection of letters and gospels that a majority of church leaders considered authoritative. These contained the four gospels and many of the letters of Paul. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and Tertullian (all 2nd century), held these to be on par with the Hebrew Scriptures as being divinely inspired. Other books were held in high esteem, but were gradually relegated to the status of New Testament apocrypha.

In about 170 AD, Irenaeus cited 23 of the 27 New Testament books, omitting only Philemon, James, 2 Peter and 3 John. The Muratorian fragment, written about the same time, attests to the widespread use of all the New Testament books except Hebrews, James, 1 Peter and 2 Peter.

However, other church fathers had already cited those omitted books in various writings defending against Gnostic doctrines. The Codex Barococcio from 206 AD includes 64 of the 66 books of today’s Bible. Esther and Revelation were omitted, but they had already been declared as inspired scripture by Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement, Tertullian and the Muratorian Canon. In 230 AD, Origen declared that all Christians acknowledged as scripture the four Gospels, Acts, the epistles of Paul, 1 Peter, 1 John and Revelation.

By the early 300’s, all of the New Testament books were being used in the mainstream church body. The New Testament canon as it is now, including all 27 books, was first listed by St. Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, in 367, in a letter written to his churches in Egypt. The Synod of Hippo (393 AD) and the third Synod of Carthage (397 AD) also recognized these 27 books as canonical. In addition, during this time, the highly influential church fathers, Jerome (340-420 AD) and Augustine (354-430 AD) published their lists of 27 books completing the New Testament.

Certain books continued to be questioned, especially James and Revelation. As late as the 16th century, theologian and reformer Martin Luther questioned (but in the end did not reject) the Epistle of James, the Epistle of Jude, the Epistle to the Hebrews and the Book of Revelation. Today, German-language Luther Bibles are printed with these four books at the end of the canon.

Even many of those who claim that the canonization of the New Testament books took place, as described above, admit that the recognition of the sanctity of Scripture was not the result of any pronouncement by Roman Catholic Church officials in the late fourth century. Rather, they clarify that the canon was determined by the authoritative use of these books by the first and second century church. It is claimed that the New Testament canon was merely a process of formal recognition of already recognized Scripture.

We do not believe that God gave the Roman Catholic Church the task to decide which books of the New Testament were inspired and should be included. Even though it RECOGNIZED their inspiration at a later date, the “canonization” took place much earlier–that is, in the lifetime of the apostles Peter, Paul and John (compare our Q&A in Update 374, discussing the completeness of the Bible).

In 2 Timothy 4:13, Paul asked Timothy to “bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas when you come—and the books, especially the parchments.” This appears to be a reference to letters which Paul had written, and which he wanted to be preserved. The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown states:

“He was anxious respecting these that he might transmit [the books] to the faithful, so that they might have the teaching of his writings when he should be gone… ‘especially the parchments’ — containing perhaps some of his inspired Epistles themselves.”

In 2 Peter 3:16, Peter considered the letters of Paul, which can be found in the New Testament, as part of the Scriptures. He also stated in 2 Peter 1:15 that he was anxious to ensure that the brethren would “always have a reminder of these things after my decease,” referring to his death. He went on to explain in 2 Peter 1:18, in regard to the transfiguration on the mount, that “we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.” Only three apostles were on the holy mountain when Christ was transfigured and when, in that vision, Elijah and Moses appeared. These disciples were Peter, John and James. By the time of Peter’s writing, James had died, and only John and Peter were still alive.

Peter continued, in verse 19, that “we have the sure word of prophecy” (Authorized Version). The use of the word “we” would have to be a reference to Peter and John. It would be Peter and John who preserved and would leave behind the inspired “word of prophecy” or “inspired writings”–the word “prophecy” can also refer to inspired preaching. Peter said that John and he had, or possessed, the inspired writings–the New Testament. This referred to the writings of the New Testament which were already in existence at that time, but it also allowed for those writings, which would still be added by the apostle John, before his death.

At the time of Peter’s writing, Paul had died, and Peter spoke of Paul’s letters as “Scripture,” showing that they were recognized as such. Who recognized them? Obviously, Paul must have recognized them before his death, and subsequently, they were recognized by the last remaining two original apostles, Peter and John, and they did so under godly inspiration.

After Peter’s death, John survived as the last of the early apostles. Before he died, he wrote the gospel of John, the three letters of John, and the book of Revelation, which concluded the sacred writings of the New Testament.

That the book of Revelation was meant to be the last and final book of the New Testament can be seen by its very claims. We read in Revelation 22:18: “For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book.”

In other words, those would have to face God’s punishment who would claim that additional future writings should become part of the inspired Scriptures of the New Testament. We also read in verse 19 that punishment would befall those who would try to take away from the words of the book of Revelation–who would claim that portions of the book of Revelation, or the entire book, was not inspired.

We have every reason to believe that the books of the New Testament, as we have them today, were recognized as inspired by the apostles Paul, Peter and John, as they were guided by the Holy Spirit. And as we explained in the Q&A in Update 377 on the Preservation of the New Testament, God saw to it that the New Testament books would be preserved, as He also preserved the sacred writings of the Old Testament.

Jesus Christ Himself promised that God would ensure that His Word would be preserved for all eternity. He said in Matthew 5:18: “… one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled.”

Peter explained that “the word of the LORD endures forever” (1 Peter 1:25). Paul instructed Titus to only ordain an elder if he would hold “fast the faithful word as he has been taught” (Titus 1:9), expecting, of course, that “the word” would be preserved. Jude challenged the brethren to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Again, true brethren were asked to stand up for the faith which had been taught and preserved in the sacred writings.

We read that God’s end-time disciples would keep His Word (Revelation 3:8)–which requires that God’s Word had been preserved and would be available in the end time. In fact, some, living in the end time, would even be killed for keeping the Word of God (Revelation 20:4).

Jesus is the personified Word of God (Revelation 19:13; John 1:1, 14; 1 John 1:1). As He is still alive today, so He made sure that His written Word–the entire Bible–would stay ALIVE as well. After all, the Word of God is “LIVING and powerful” (Hebrews 4:12).

Who canonized the New Testament? It was God, but He inspired His apostles Paul, Peter and John to pronounce the decision which books and letters should be considered as sacred and infallible. And so, God ultimately used the apostle John to canonize the writings of the New Testament.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Who preserved the New Testament?

As a first step in answering this question, we need to consider what the New Testament is. Why is there even such a collection of books and letters that report on events from the first century A.D.? Are these merely the random writings of an influential religious movement that have found their way into the literature of the present time?

Or, as the New Testament claims for itself, is this part of the inspired Word of God? Understanding who preserved the New Testament adds even more proof about the unquestionable authority of this part of the Bible that we now possess!

What is the New Testament? Consider the following summary statement given in the “Illustrated Dictionary of the Bible,” Herbert Lockyer, Sr., Editor, 1986:

“…the second major division of the Bible. It tells of the life and ministry of Jesus and the growth of the early church. The word testament is best translated as ‘covenant.’ The New Testament embodies the new covenant of which Jesus was Mediator (Jer. 31:31-34; Heb. 9:15)…

“The 27 books of the New Testament were formally adopted as the New Testament canon by the Synod of Carthage in A.D. 397, thus confirming three centuries of usage by the church.”

This traditional overview of the New Testament places formal acceptance of the “books” as occurring some three hundred years after the lives of the apostles and of their contemporaries. However, this selection, done by what had become the Catholic Church, is merely an example of a religious organization choosing to accept what already existed—much as did later movements within “Christianity,” such as Protestantism.

Earlier, history of the Church established by Jesus Christ, through His chosen ministry, also shows the source of the writings we now have in the canon of the New Testament. An important test of what truly constitutes the inspired Word of God is true for both the Old and New Testaments:

“…the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness…” (2 Timothy 3:15-16).

To this end, individuals inspired by God wrote the record of the life of Jesus Christ, the founding of the Church and the subsequent growth of the faith of Christianity, along with instructions concerning the doctrines of God. We must note that the New Testament also contains the record of false teachers with deceiving doctrines beginning to infiltrate the body of true worshippers of God and Jesus Christ:

“I marvel that you are turning away so soon from Him who called you in the grace of Christ, to a different gospel, which is not another; but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed” (Galatians 1:6-9).

Along with this stern rebuke from Paul, others whose letters became a part of the New Testament, recorded warnings and admonitions concerning a growing departure from the original faith (compare 2 Peter 2; 1 John 4:1-6; 3 John 1:9-12, and the letter of Jude).

Additionally, carefully note what Peter said, showing that in his lifetime it was necessary to warn the brethren—and this message was written down in order that it would endure beyond his own lifetime:

“For this reason I will not be negligent to remind you always of these things, though you know and are established in the present truth. Yes, I think it is right, as long as I am in this tent, to stir you up by reminding you, knowing that shortly I must put off my tent, just as our Lord Jesus Christ showed me. Moreover I will be careful to ensure that you always have a reminder of these things after my decease” (2 Peter 1:12-15).

While most people who study the history of the Bible agree that the canon—that is, the entire New Testament as commonly accepted—is complete, the fact is that the preservation of these writings was first accomplished by the Church of God that began on the Day of Pentecost and the giving of the Holy Spirit of God in 31 A.D. And while the Church grew with powerful impact in the decades that followed, nonetheless, heresy arose to such an extent that the next century records a much different kind of Christianity. Note what Jesse Lyman Hurlbut states in his book, “The Story of the Christian Church,” 1967, page 33:

“For 50 years after… Paul’s life a curtain hangs over the church, through which we strive vainly to look; and when at last it rises about 120 A.D. with the writings of the earliest church fathers, we find a church in many aspects very different from that in the days of… Peter and… Paul.”

In fact, the true and faithful Christians all but disappeared from the annals of history in those times. These followers of the true faith depended on the copies of the letters that were to become a part of the New Testament, which they continued to preserve through hand-written documents. As already mentioned, the Roman Church was able to avail itself of long existing copies of the New Testament books several centuries later.

A very poignant example of multiple copies of a part of the New Testament being distributed among various congregations is found in the Book of Revelation. The resurrected Jesus Christ is quoted by John as saying: “‘…I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last,’ and, ‘What you see, write in a book and send it to the seven churches which are in Asia: To Ephesus, to Smyrna, to Pergamos, to Thyatira, to Sardis, to Philadelphia, and to Laodicea’” (Revelation 1:11).

If we are to believe that John carried out what he was instructed to do, then we know that this information went to these churches—and, since they received this inspired “book” of Revelation, they then were instrumental in preserving it. The very intent of this book is primarily focused on the future and was to be preserved for our time—prophesying of events leading to the return of Jesus Christ (For further explanation, please read our free booklet: “Is That in the Bible? The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation!”).

Other letters were commonly circulated among the churches (compare 2 Peter 3:15-16; Colossians 4:16; 1 Thessalonians 5:27). However, not all of these “letters” were genuine (compare 2 Thessalonians 2:1-2). In fact, this very process of writing letters continued well past the lifetime of the first generation of the apostles. Spurious writings made claims to inspiration on par with that of the New Testament books; however, when closely examined for authorship and for agreement with foundational biblical teachings, these documents were eventually rejected.

Beyond the rather blurry record that marks the transition of the early Christian faith into history’s background and the subsequent emergence of the Roman Catholic Church, another factor supersedes in accounting for Who preserved the New Testament. The real Author of the inspired writings of the New Testament also has sustained His written Word throughout the ages. The proof of this statement is found in the words of Jesus Christ, when He said, “‘Sanctify them [set them apart] by Your truth, Your word is truth’” (John 17:17); and, “‘Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away’” (Matthew 24:35; also, compare parallel statements)—1 Peter 1:23, 25).

These Scriptures, along with many others, point to the fact that the New Testament record would be preserved. For instance, another quote from Jesus shows that His teachings would come before all men in all generations: “‘He who rejects Me, and does not receive My words, has that which judges him–the word that I have spoken will judge him in the last day’” (John 12:48).

Consider one final answer as to who preserved the New Testament. The teachings of Christianity became a Way of life for those who embraced what they learned! Note this statement by Paul: “For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you welcomed it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe” (1 Thessalonians 2:13; also, compare a parallel statement in 1 John 2:5).

By taking to heart their calling to salvation, the faithful of countless generations have helped sustain and preserve a true understanding of the written Word of God. That same responsibility now falls upon us—we, too, must endeavor to uphold the teachings we have been given, just as those who helped to preserve the New Testament: “I know your works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can shut it; for you have a little strength, HAVE KEPT MY WORD, and have not denied My name” (Revelation 3:8).

Lead Writer: Dave Harris

Was Rahab really a harlot?

The famous woman Rahab who helped the spies at the time of Joshua, is clearly identified in the Bible as a harlot or a prostitute. This is the obvious conclusion, when we just accept the relevant Scriptures on their face value.

However, many commentaries feel uncomfortable with that assessment and have been trying to re-interpret and re-write Scripture to bring it more in line with their humanly-devised perceptions. The following serves as a very good example to caution everyone NEVER to accept the opinions of commentaries as inspired doctrine, UNLESS they are clearly supported by the biblical evidence. Commentaries reflect, as a whole, the opinions of man which may or may not be inspired by God. We must also remember that God has revealed His truth to “babes,” while HIDING it from most of the learned and sophisticated intellectuals of this world (compare Matthew 11:25).

Regarding Rahab, notice the following clear biblical evidence:

Joshua 2:1 and Joshua 6:17, 22, 25 identify Rahab as a “harlot.” This is confirmed, in the New Testament, in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25. The Hebrew and Greek words are “zanah” and “porne” and designate a harlot, as we will see.

Rahab later married Salmon and brought forth Boaz. Boaz married Ruth and brought forth Obed. Obed, in turn, brought forth Jesse, the father of David (compare Matthew 1:5-6). David became the forefather of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and of Mary herself. Based on these facts, many commentaries have concluded that Rahab could not have been a harlot, but that she was just an upstanding innocent and respected “innkeeper.”

Notice the following examples for this adventurous reasoning:

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible states to Hebrews 11:31 that it is “exceedingly probable that the [Hebrew and Greek words]which we translate harlot, should be rendered innkeeper or tavernkeeper, as there is no proper evidence that the person in question was such a woman as our translation represents her. As to her having been a harlot before and converted afterwards, it is a figment of an idle fancy. She was afterwards married to Salmon, a Jewish prince… And it is extremely incredible that, had she been what we represent her, he would have sought for such an alliance.”

Please also consider these comments in John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible:

“The Targum… calls her… ‘a woman, that kept a victualling house’: this paraphrase is taken notice of by Jarchi and Kimchi on the place, who interpret it, ‘a seller of food’: and even the Hebrew word… is so explained by a considerable Jewish writer… and this may rather seem to be the sense of the word, and to be her proper business, from the spies going to her house, as being an house of entertainment; and from Salmon’s marrying her, which might be thought strange that a prince of Israel would, had she been a person of ill fame.

“… but yet, the constant use of the word, in this form, the testimonies of two apostles, and her making no mention of her husband and children, when she agreed with the spies, confirm the generally received character of her, that she was an harlot. Some Jewish writers say… that she was ten years of age when the Israelites came out of Egypt; and that all the forty years they were in the wilderness… ‘she played the harlot’; and was one and fifty years of age when she was proselyted. She is called an harlot…”

In addition, Vincent’s Word Studies explains correctly:

“Rahab’s occupation is stated without mincing, and the lodging of the spies at her house was probably not a matter of accident. Very amusing are the efforts of some earlier expositors to evade the fact of a harlot’s faith, by rendering [the word for “harlot” as] landlady.”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible also explains correctly:

“Among the noble army of believing worthies, bravely marshalled by the apostle, Rahab comes in the rear, to show that God is no respecter of persons… She was a Canaanite, a stranger to the commonwealth of Israel… She was a harlot, and lived in a way of sin; she was not only a keeper of a public house, but a common woman of the town…”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible contains the following interesting annotations to Hebrews 11:31:

“Much perplexity has been felt in reference to this case, and many attempts have been made to remove the difficulty. The main difficulty has been that a woman of this character should be enumerated among those who were eminent for piety, and many expositors have endeavored to show that the word rendered ‘harlot’ does not necessarily denote a woman of abandoned character, but may be used to denote a hostess… But there are no clear instances in which the Greek word, and the corresponding Hebrew word… is used in this sense. The usual and the fair meaning of the word is what is given in our translation, and there is no good reason why that signification should not be retained here…

“… the obvious meaning of this word here and of the corresponding place in Joshua 2:6 is, that she had been a woman of abandoned character, and that she was known as such. That she might have been also a hostess, or one who kept a house of entertainment for strangers, is at the same time by no means improbable, since it not unfrequently happened in ancient as well as modern times, that females of this character kept such houses…

“Other females of a similar character have been converted, and have subsequently led lives of piety… ‘Publicans and harlots,’ said the Saviour, ‘go into the kingdom of God;’ Matthew 21:31. Rahab seems to have been one of them; and her case shows that such instances of depravity are not hopeless. This record, therefore, is one of encouragement for the most abandoned sinners.

“… there is no need of supposing that the apostle in commending this woman [in Hebrews 11:31] approved of all that she did. That she was not perfect is true. That she did some things which cannot be vindicated is true also – and who does not? But admitting all that may be said about any imperfection in her character… it was still true that she had strong faith – and that is all that the apostle commends. We are under no more necessity of vindicating all that she did, than we are all that David or Peter did – or all that is now done by those who have the highest claims to virtue.”

In addition, please note, as a matter of clarification, that at the time of the destruction of Jericho, Rahab and her relatives were at first not allowed to stay INSIDE the camp of Israel (compare Joshua 6:23)–obviously due to Rahab’s reputation. She first had to prove herself–she had to show or bring forth fruits worthy of repentance (compare Matthew 3:8). That she clearly did so is manifested by the fact that she would later live IN Israel (compare Joshua 6:25).

In any event, we really don’t need to guess as to who and what Rahab was. The concept that she was just an outstanding noble landlady is plainly and totally ridiculous.

The Hebrew word “zanah” (translated as “harlot” in regard to Rahab, in Joshua 2:1, etc.) can also mean, “to commit fornication, go a whoring.” It is used in Genesis 34:15, 24, 31. Jacob’s brothers condemned the Hivite prince Shechem of having treated their sister Dinah like a harlot–not like an innkeeper.

Jephtah is called the son of a harlot in Judges 11:1; and there are many more passages which translate this word accurately as “harlot.” (Compare, Judges 16:1; 1 Kings 3:16; Proverbs 29:3; Isaiah 1:21; Jeremiah 3:1, 6, 8; 5:7; Ezekiel 16:31, 35; Hosea 3:3; Joel 3:3; Micah 1:7, etc., etc.)

The Greek word “porne” (translated as “harlot” in regard to Rahab, in Hebrews 11:31 and James 2:25), can also mean, literally, “one sold” or “fornicator.” It is used in Matthew 21:31-32 where Christ talked about publicans and harlots, not publicans and innkeepers. Notice also Luke 15:30 where the “lost son” did not devour his living with innkeepers, but with harlots. Also, notice 1 Corinthians 6:15-16 where Paul was not talking about fornication with an innkeeper, but with a harlot or prostitute. AND, notice Revelation 17:5 where Babylon is described as the mother of harlots, not of innkeepers.

The Bible is very candid about the strengths and weaknesses of its heroes. The Bible does not tell fairy-tales, but it gives us the complex characteristics of real life people. The GOOD NEWS is that EVERYONE who is called by God to repentance CAN change–NO MATTER what he or she was or what he or she might have done. Rahab was a harlot–no doubt–but she responded to God’s call with faith, and she acted upon her faith by hiding the spies and saved them from death. After all, faith without works is dead (James 2:17, 24-25). Rahab changed her life, and she became an ancestor of Jesus Christ.

We might also recall that Jesus Christ defended a repentant woman who is identified as “a sinner” in the account given in Luke 7:36-50. The contextual meaning is that she was an immoral woman. However, note what Jesus said of her actions: “Then He said to the woman, ‘Your FAITH has saved you. Go in peace'” (Luke 7:50). This record further supports the reason Rahab is mentioned among the faithful in Hebrews 11:31–in spite of the fact that she had at one time lived as a harlot.

The only women specifically mentioned by name in the genealogy of Jesus, as recorded in Matthew 1, besides Rahab, are Mary, the wife of Joseph (verse 16), who was a righteous woman; Tamar, the daughter in law of Judah (verse 3), who played the HARLOT with him since he had broken his promise to give her one of his sons in marriage (compare Genesis 38:1-30); and Ruth, a non-Israelite from the tribe of Moab (verse 5). One more woman is mentioned, without naming her directly, in verse 6, where we read: “David the king begot Solomon by her [who had been the wife] of Uriah.” This refers to Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, whom David had killed, after Bathsheba became pregnant as a result of David’s adulterous affair with her.

All of these women are listed in the genealogy of Jesus, the stepson and foster child of Joseph. They are listed because they deserved to be listed–not because of their weaknesses and sins, but because of their subsequent repentance and faith. Rahab is no exception. She clearly was a harlot and she was known as such, but she acted upon faith, repented and changed her lifestyle, and she is today memorialized in God’s Word as one of the ancestors of Jesus’ stepfather Joseph. In addition, she was an ancestor of Mary, the mother of Jesus–which means that Jesus Christ was a direct descendant of Rahab! (Compare Luke 3:32 with Matthew 1:5, showing that Boaz, an ancestor of King David, was the son of Salmon and Rahab). Most importantly, however, is the fact that she will be in the first resurrection (Hebrews 11:31, 39-40).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Are there really any Old Testament Scriptures in the book of Zechariah which foretell or relate to the First Coming of Jesus Christ?

There are indeed numerous Scriptures in the Old Testament, including in the book of Zechariah, which give precise details on the appearance of the Messiah about 2,000 years ago. As those passages can be found throughout the pages of the Old Testament, this fact alone proves the divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures.

For instance, we find literally dozens of biblical references to Christ’s First Coming in the book of Isaiah. We are just quoting a few selected examples:

Isaiah 7:14 states that “the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel (which means, literally, God with us.)” This prophecy was fulfilled in Jesus, as Matthew 1:18-23 tells us. Isaiah 6:9-10 foretells the fact that the people would not listen to the Messiah’s preaching and warnings (compare Matthew 13:14-15). Isaiah 9:1-2 states that the Messiah would stay temporarily in the land of Zebulon and Naphtali (compare Matthew 4:13-16). Isaiah 11:1 foretold that the Messiah would be a descendant of Jesse and David (compare Matthew 1:5-6, 25; Luke 3:23, 31-32). Isaiah 29:13 foretold that the people had rejected the commandments of God and replaced them with the traditions of men (compare Matthew 15:7-9). Isaiah 42:1-4 foretold the exact manner of the Messiah’s preaching (compare Matthew 12:16-21). Isaiah 49:8-9 [and also Isaiah 61:1-2] foretold that the Messiah would preach the gospel and proclaim spiritual liberty (compare Luke 4:16-19).

Isaiah 50:6 prophesied that Christ would be beaten and spit on (compare Matthew 27:26, 30). Isaiah 53:1 prophesied that the people would not believe the report or warning message brought by the Messiah (compare John 12:37-38). Isaiah 53:3-5 prophesied that the Messiah would heal people, due to His own physical suffering and the stripes, which He would receive from the Romans (compare Matthew 8:16-17). Isaiah 53:8 stated that He would be “taken from prison and from judgment,” foretelling that His “trial” and “conviction” would be illegal even according to human law (For more information on these startling prophecies, see Part 4 of our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–A Great Mystery,” pages 41-65).

Isaiah 53:12 foretold that He would pray for the transgressors at the time of His death (Luke 23:34). Isaiah 53:12 also stated that “He was numbered with the transgressors.” This was fulfilled in more than one way, by the two robbers crucified with Him, and by His own disciples, compare Matthew 27:38 and Luke 22:35-38. Isaiah 53:12 also foretold that He would bear “the sin of many,” which found its obvious fulfillment in Christ’s death (compare Hebrews 1:1-3; 1 Peter 2:24).

The books of Psalms are also filled with prophetic references to Christ’s First Coming.

Psalm 8:2 foretold that children would greet and welcome the Messiah at His First Coming (compare Matthew 21:16). Psalm 16:10 foretold that the Messiah would not stay in the grave, but that He would be resurrected soon after His death so His body would not see corruption (Acts 2:25-35). Psalm 22:7 revealed in advance that He would be ridiculed, while dying on the cross (Matthew 27:39-44). Psalm 22:14, 17 prophesied that the Messiah would be crucified (Matthew 27:26; John 12:32-33). Psalm 22:18 stated that soldiers would cast lots and divide His garment among themselves (Matthew 27:35). Psalm 34:20 foretold that none of Christ’s bones would be broken (compare John 19:33, 36).

Psalm 41:9 foretold that the Messiah would be betrayed by one of His friends who would eat bread with Him (Luke 22:21; John 13:18). Psalm 69:21 prophesied that He would be given vinegar to drink for His thirst (John 19:28-30). Psalm 78:2 foretold that the Messiah would speak in parables (compare Matthew 13:34-35). Psalm 118:22-23 prophesied that the Messiah would be rejected by the builders, but that He would become the chief cornerstone for His Church (compare Matthew 21:42; Ephesians 2:19-22; 1 Peter 2:6-10). Psalm 118:26 foretold in advance the exact words with which the people in Jerusalem would greet the Messiah (compare Matthew 21:9).

We find in the book of Numbers (24:17) that, in relationship to the birth of the Messiah, a star would come out of Jacob (compare Matthew 2:2). In addition, a striking prophecy can be found in the book of Micah (5:2), referring to Christ’s birth: “But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Though you are little among the thousands of Judah, Yet out of you shall come forth to Me The One to be Ruler in Israel, Whose goings forth are from of old, From everlasting.” Compare the record of the fulfillment of this prophecy in Matthew 2:1-12.

Hosea 11:1 foretold that the Messiah, as a child, would stay temporarily in Egypt (compare Matthew 2:14-15). And Jeremiah 31:15 told us in advance about the horrible murder of the Jewish children at the time of Herod (compare Matthew 2:16-18).

Malachi 3:1 prophesied the appearance of a messenger just prior to the manifestation of the Messiah’s First Coming to prepare a people for Him. This prophecy found its fulfillment in John the Baptist, preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins (compare Matthew 11:7-10; Mark 1:2-4).

Even though the book of Zechariah deals foremost with the time of Christ’s Return–the Second Coming of the Messiah–it also contains several references to events which took place during His First Coming.

Zechariah 9:9 reports that Christ, the just King offering salvation, would appear lowly, “riding on a donkey, A colt, the foal of a donkey.” The fulfillment of that prophecy is recorded in John 12:14-15. Zechariah 9:9 also shows that His entrance in Jerusalem would be triumphant, as we read: “Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion! Shout, O daughter of Jerusalem!” This prophecy was fulfilled just prior to Christ’s betrayal and arrest, compare Mark 11:8-10.

In Zechariah 11:12-13, we are told that Jesus would be betrayed for thirty pieces of silver (compare Matthew 26:14-16), and that the money would be thrown into the house of the LORD–the temple–for the potter. This was fulfilled, exactly as stated; compare Matthew 27:3-10. Please note that Matthew 27:9 says that Jeremiah, too, gave this prophecy in advance. But it says that Jeremiah the prophet SPOKE those words, apparently, without writing them down in the book of Jeremiah. The prophecy was RECORDED, however, in Zechariah 11:13, as we have seen.

Zechariah 12:10 refers to the fact that the Messiah would be pierced. We are told in the New Testament that a soldier pierced Christ’s side with a spear, causing His death on the cross (John 19:34-37). For the exact manner of Christ’s death, please read our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–a Great Mystery,” pages 78-79. The passage in Zechariah 12:10 is quoted in Revelation 1:7, referring to Jesus Christ.

Another possible reference to the piercing of Christ’s hands at the time of His crucifixion (compare John 20:25) can be found in Zechariah 13:6, where we read, in the Authorized Version: “And one shall say unto him, What are these wounds in thine hands? Then he shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.”

Finally, Zechariah 13:7 foretells that all of Christ’s disciples would leave Him at the time of His arrest, prior to His crucifixion and resurrection: “… Strike the Shepherd, And the sheep will be scattered…” Compare, for the exact fulfillment of that prophecy, Matthew 26:31-32 and Mark 14:27-28.

It is truly remarkable how these and many other Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus Christ at the time of His First Coming. Jesus Himself insisted that ALL prophecies written about His earthly life were, and had to be fulfilled (Luke 24:25-27, 44-46; compare Matthew 26:51-56).

Based on this testimony of Scripture regarding things which are past, we can have complete and total confidence in the infallibility of prophecies dealing with the future. As Christ came as a humble servant to die for us, so He WILL come again as the KING of kings to rule for and with us (Revelation 5:8-10; 20:4, 6; Daniel 7:13-14, 26-27). He said time and again that He WILL return–and soon (John 14:3; James 5:8-9; Revelation 22:12, 20).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Did Jesus violate His own words, when He first said to His disciples before His crucifixion that He would drink no more wine, and when He later drank wine before His death?

Actually, this question has puzzled quite a few people. It is important to read all the relevant passages in context.

We read in Matthew 26:27-29 that Jesus gave wine to the disciples, symbolizing His shed blood for the forgiveness of sins. The entire passage reads (Authorized Version throughout, unless otherwise mentioned):

“And He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament [covenant], which is shed for many for the remission of sins. But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.”

In the parallel passage in Mark 14:25, He is quoted as saying: “Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” Compare, too, the wording in Luke 22:18.

These passages do not only refer to wine per se, but also to any product or “fruit” of the vine–including grape juice or vinegar.

Later, during the crucifixion, we read indeed that Jesus first refused to drink of the fruit of the vine which was offered to Him.

Matthew 27:34 tells us:

“They gave Him vinegar to drink mingled with gall; and when he tasted thereof, he would not drink.” The parallel passage in Mark 15:23 clarifies that the “vinegar” was actually cheap or “sour wine.” We read: “And they gave him to drink wine [New King James Bible: “sour wine”] mingled with myrrh: but he received it not.” The passage in Luke 23:36 explains further that the soldiers offered Him vinegar or sour wine, at least in part, to mock Him.

W.E.Vine explains in his “Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words,” that the Greek word for “vinegar,” i.e., “oxos,” “denotes sour wine, the ordinary drink of labourers and common soldiers.”

But then, just before His death, we read that Jesus partook of some fruit of the vine. This occurred, in part, in fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy in Psalm 69:21 (“… in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink”). During biblical times, vinegar was usually produced from grapes (compare the reference of “vinegar made from wine,” in Numbers 6:3). So, the Old Testament prophesied that Jesus would drink vinegar or sour wine just before His death.

We read in Matthew 27:48:

“And straightway one of them ran, and took a spunge, and filled it with vinegar [New King James Bible: “sour wine”], and put it on a reed, and gave him to drink.” Compare the parallel account in Mark 15:36.

John informs us in his account that at that time, Jesus DID drink from the vinegar or sour wine. We read in John 19:28-30:

“After this, Jesus knowing that all things were now accomplished, that the scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst. Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar [New King James Bible: “sour wine”]: and they filled a spunge with vinegar [“sour wine”], and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had RECEIVED the vinegar [“sour wine”], he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

Many commentaries explain why Jesus did not drink from the “sour wine” earlier, but why He drank from it now. For instance, the Nelson Study Bible writes:

“‘Sour wine’ was not the same as the drugged wine that had been offered to Jesus earlier (‘wine mingled with myrrh’; see Mark 15:23). Jesus did not take that wine because He wanted to die fully conscious. He did take a sip of this wine; one of the agonies of crucifixion was incredible thirst, added to the terrible pain.”

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible states to John 19:29:

“This was probably that tart small wine which we are assured was the common drink of the Roman soldiers. Our word vinegar comes from the French vin aigre, sour or tart wine… This vinegar must not be confounded with the vinegar and gall mentioned [in Matthew 27:34], and [in Mark 15:23]. That, being a stupefying potion, intended to alleviate his pain, he refused to drink; but of this he took a little, and then expired…”

The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown agrees, stating:

“The vinegar mingled with gall [Matthew 27:34], or the wine mingled with myrrh [Mark 15:23] was offered to Jesus before his crucifixion as a stupefying draught… The vinegar in this case was offered in order to revive Christ. John does not mention the stupefying draught.”

The Broadman Bible Commentary adds: “… because this drink [in John 19:29] was not drugged (as in Mark 15:23; Matt. 27:34) but acutely produced a refreshing effect, Jesus willingly received it.”

To summarize, most commentaries agree that the “vinegar,” or “sour wine,” which Christ refused, was a mixture of vinegar and a narcotic herb which had pain-killing effects, while the second, which He accepted, was the common drink of workers and soldiers known as posca, which was a mixture of vinegar, water and eggs.

What most commentaries fail to explain, however, as far as we can see, is HOW and WHY Jesus COULD drink from the sour or tart wine–the “vinegar”–even though He had said earlier that He would not drink from the fruit of the vine until He would do so WITH HIS DISCIPLES in His Father’s Kingdom. When He drank vinegar or sour wine–which was “fruit of the vine”–, He was not yet in His Father’s Kingdom–nor did the disciples drink with Him, either.

To repeat, it is important to realize that the “vinegar” that Jesus drank just before His death, was “wine vinegar” or “sour wine.”
According to Easton’s Bible Dictionary, the “vinegar” mentioned in John 19:29-30, “… was the common sour wine… daily made use of by the Roman soldiers.” Both Nave’s and Strong’s Greek Dictionary agree that this was sour wine.

The question still remains: How could He drink wine vinegar–a product or fruit of the vine–even though He had said that He would NOT drink of the fruit of the vine until His return to earth at the time of His Second Coming?

It is important to read Jesus’ statements in context. Returning to Luke 22:14-16, we see that Jesus, when saying that He would not eat or drink THEREOF, referred to the symbols of the New Testament PASSOVER. The entire account reads as follows:

“And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat THIS PASSOVER with you before I suffer: For I say unto you, I will not any more eat THEREOF, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.”

He went on to say, in verse 18, that He would not drink of the fruit of the vine “until the kingdom of God shall come,” and He distributed the bread–symbolizing His broken body–to be eaten by His disciples (verse 19).

Christ did NOT say that He would not drink any more of any fruit of the vine–vinegar, sour wine, grape juice, etc.–and He did not say that He would not eat anymore any bread, until His return to establish and set up the Kingdom of God. He ONLY made reference to the symbols of bread and wine as part of the New Testament Passover of which He would NOT partake UNTIL He had established the Kingdom of God here on earth.

On the other hand, we read that Christ apparently DID eat bread with two of His disciples after His resurrection, but before His ascension, and, of course, before His return to establish the Kingdom on earth, which has not happened yet. Luke 24:30-31 reports that “… it came to pass, as he sat AT MEAT with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave it to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.”

In addition, John 21:9, 12, 15 reports that the resurrected Jesus had breakfast with His disciples–eating bread and fish (as they had done on previous occasions, compare Matthew 14:13-21; 15:32-37).

In any event, Jesus did not say that He would not eat bread or drink wine until His return. He only spoke of the symbols of bread and wine in the context of the annual New Testament Passover celebration. The Bible does not contradict itself in any way–but it sometimes requires diligent research of the Scriptures to see why and how “the things are so.”

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

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

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:

“Jesus indicates [in verse 11] that remaining unmarried is only for a few people… Some people do not marry because they were born with no sex drive. Others do not marry because they are castrated. Still others forgo marriage for the sake of serving God. Some have been given the spiritual gift of celibacy in order to do this (see 1 Cor. 7:7).”

The Life Application Bible points out:

“Couples should decide against divorce from the start and build their marriage on mutual commitment. There are also… reasons for not marrying, one being to have more time to work for God’s kingdom… Some have physical limitations that prevent their marrying, while others choose not to marry because, in their particular situation, they can serve God better as single people. Jesus was not teaching us to avoid marriage because it is inconvenient or takes away our freedom. That would be selfishness.”

The Broadman Bible Commentary adds the following observations:

“The alternative to marriage is celibacy. Jesus made room for both as honorable and proper to discipleship. He warned, however, that the demands upon celibacy are high, just as they are upon marriage. Some are incapacitated for marriage because of physical impotence or impairment. They are those who are ‘eunuchs who have been so from birth,’ or those ‘who have been made eunuchs by men.’ In royal courts, especially, there were slaves who were made eunuchs through surgery so that they would not be a threat to their masters’ household. Those who ‘made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven’ are those who forego marriage with a view of life given more fully to the service of Christ.”

To interject, some have taken this statement literally [“there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake”]; apparently, Origin castrated himself in obeying this “supposed obligation.” This is, however, NOT what Christ meant. He had already mentioned the category of literal eunuchs who had become such “by men.” The third category of “eunuchs” for the sake of the kingdom of God deals with those who VOLUNTARILY forgo marriage. Christ did not imply that they ought to literally castrate themselves.

The Broadman Bible Commentary continues:

“As Jesus spoke of marriage and celibacy he did not say that one was morally higher than the other… Each is an honorable choice to be made on an individual basis… ”

Jesus did not teach supremacy of celibacy over marriage. At least some of the apostles were married, including Cephas or Peter, as well as the believing brothers of Jesus (compare 1 Corinthians 9:5). Paul adds in Hebrews 13:4 that “marriage is honorable among all.”

It is correct that Paul seems to be giving celibacy a preferred state over marriage in 1 Corinthians 7:1, 6-8, 32-33, 40. But we must realize the context–it is because of “the present distress” (verse 26), prompting Paul to say that even those who have wives should be as though they had none (verse 29). He said this because of the ensuing persecution, which would cause married couples “to have trouble in the flesh” (verse 28). Christ said, in Matthew 24:19: “But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days”–immediately preceding the Great Tribulation. He also stated in Luke 23:29: “For indeed the days are coming in which they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren, wombs that never bore, and breasts which never nursed!'”

On the other hand, Paul did not teach that it was ever sinful to marry, even in times of great physical distress, and he added that for some, it was necessary to marry even then. He stated in 1 Corinthians 7:9, 28: “… if they cannot exercise self-control, let them marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion… if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned.”

To clarify, the Church of the Eternal God in the USA and its corporate affiliates in Canada and Great Britain do NOT advise to forgo marriage because of the soon-coming return of Jesus Christ. We simply don’t know the exact time of Christ’s return. At one time, many felt that Christ might return in the early 1970’s. Now, after more than 30 years, He still has not returned. If people had forgone marriage in the 1970’s because of their anticipation of Christ’s return, which will be preceded by the Great Tribulation, just imagine what they would have missed–including seeing their children and grandchildren growing up.

Proverbs 18:22 tells us that “He who finds a wife finds a GOOD thing, And obtains FAVOR from the LORD,” and God said at the beginning, after He had created man, that it was NOT GOOD for the man to be alone. He then made the woman to be the man’s companion and helpmate (Genesis 2:18). It is true that those who will, in the future, enter the Kingdom of God as immortal spirit beings, will not marry nor are given in marriage at that time (Matthew 22:30), but this is not to be applied today to mortal human beings on a physical level.

As can easily be seen from the very wording of Christ’s sayings in Matthew 19:12, He was not teaching that anyone MUST forgo marriage to enter the kingdom of heaven. He was clearly talking about a VOLUNTARY individual decision, without coercion from anyone. Biblical examples of those who decided for themselves, not to get married for the sake of the Kingdom of God, were Jesus Christ Himself, as well as John the Baptist. As a former Pharisee, Paul would have been married, but his wife apparently died, and he decided not to re-marry, but to remain a widower.

Since the Bible does not teach coerced celibacy, why is it, then, that the Catholic Church teaches compulsory celibacy for their priests–prohibiting them to get married?

An interesting explanation is given by James Hastings, in his “Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics,” Vol. 3, pages 272-273:

“Two influences contributed especially to the rise of sacerdotal celibacy… To the Gnostic…, ‘marriage and generation are from Satan… marriage [was pronounced] to be corruption and fornication.’… To these we must add the influence of the religion of Isis and the worship of Mithra… both of which were wide-spread throughout the Roman Empire and had a powerful following in the 1st and 2nd century. The former had its… tonsured men and women–emblematic of a higher purity. The latter had its grades of initiation and its companies of ascetics and virgins… Catholic Christians were not to be outdone by heretics and heathens in self-renunciation… the outcome was inevitable. The highest type of Christian was the celibate… Christian teachers praised virginity, and marriage came to be in their eyes only a secondary good for those who were unable to preserve continence… [Ultimately,] superiority of virginity or celibacy to the marital state [had become Catholic Church doctrine]. Anathemas [being accursed from Christ] were pronounced on all who held to the contrary. This remains the law of the Roman Catholic Church…”

As we can see, the Catholic Church came to teach mandatory celibacy for their priests in direct or indirect consequence of Gnostic teachings and the worship of Isis and Mithra. This teaching was not derived from Scripture. On the other hand, Protestants have mostly rejected the concept of compulsory celibacy. Hastings continues to explain, on page 275:

“The Protestants vigorously denounced clerical celibacy… Luther, as early as 1520, advocated allowing pastors their freedom in the matter, and denounced compulsory celibacy as the work of the devil… he said that the celibacy of the clergy was ‘a popish innovation against the eternal word of God’… Calvin… denounced the ‘vile celibacy’ of the priests and the interdiction of marriage to priests as contrary to the word of God and to all justice… Ulrich Zwingli… condemn[ed] vows of chastity… [The] Anglican Church… asserts that ‘Bishops, Priests, and Deacons are not commanded by God’s Law either to vow the state of single life or to abstain from marriage: therefore it is lawful for them, as for all other Christian men, to marry at their own discretion, as they shall judge…’

“The attitude of Protestants and Catholics has remained practically unchanged to the present time, and the subject is unlikely to be touched UNLESS A PROPOSAL FOR UNION BE MADE” (emphasis added).

As the fruits have shown over the centuries, coerced celibacy is a very bad concept. Some who wanted to become Catholic priests and were forced, as a consequence, to take the vow of celibacy, have either been having their “affairs” with unmarried women, including nuns or their “housekeepers,” or they have been having homosexual relationships, sometimes even with minors and altar boys. Human regulations and man-made restrictions, which go beyond or contradict the Word of God, bring forth unnecessary and avoidable pain and suffering. Compulsory mandatory celibacy is one of those wrong concepts, which is clearly not taught in the Bible.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

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

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.

In addition to establishing this unique yearly calendar, God also reminded Israel of the proper way to mark the weekly period by setting apart the seventh day—the Sabbath—as a time in which the nation of Israel was to rest, because the Sabbath was holy to the LORD (Compare Exodus 16, especially verses 23-36). This observance was also subsequently included and re-emphasized in the proclamation of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:8-11).

WHY did God do this with Israel—why were they given knowledge of the Holy Days?

Part of the answer is found in Exodus 19:5-6: “‘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.’…”

This people of Israel were the descendants of Abraham, and God had chosen Abraham to serve Him for a great purpose. Note this promise given by God to Abraham: “‘In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice’” (Genesis 22:18). The “seed” refers to Jesus Christ–the Savior of mankind (compare Galatians 3:16). This far reaching commitment by God to Abraham provided the key for the rest of mankind to eventually be reconciled to God.

The assurance and knowledge of this plan of God is revealed in the Holy Days given to the nation of Israel. We have written extensively about this and much more detailed information is available on our websites—especially note the following booklets: “God’s Commanded Holy Days“; “The Meaning of God’s Spring Holy Days“; “The Meaning of God’s Fall Holy Days“; and, “The Sacrificial System and the Tabernacle in the Wilderness.”

The Bible reveals that it was to Israel that God revealed His Feasts and commanded the entire nation to observe them from that time forward. However, let us also note what is the FIRST of the “feasts of the LORD” mentioned in the summary found in Leviticus 23:

“‘Six days shall work be done, but the seventh day is a Sabbath of solemn rest, a holy convocation. You shall do no work on it; it is the Sabbath of the LORD in all your dwellings’” (Leviticus 23:3).

The very first—and only—pre-Moses biblical record of an observance of this particular Feast (or any of the Holy Days) is mentioned in Genesis 2:2-3: “And on the seventh day God ended His work which He had done, and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made.”

What is revealed is that it was God who rested, and it was God who established and set apart the weekly Sabbath for special observance. We may infer that Adam and Eve were taught about the Sabbath, as it is clearly revealed that God’s Ten Commandments were in force and the Sabbath is a part of those commandments. However, it is also evident that following the disobedience of Adam and Eve, their descendants—with only the fewest exceptions—rebelled against God and did not walk in ANY of God’s ways. That disobedience brought on the terrible global destruction of the flood as punishment.

There is no biblical evidence of any other of God’s commanded Holy Days being observed, or, for that matter, even being revealed or established, prior to Moses. After all, God’s annual Holy Days were given to the nation of ancient Israel–the “church in the wilderness”–which came into existence at the time of Moses, when God made covenants with the nation.

Let us also point out that God established the Sabbath as a “Holy Day” in conjunction with the events surrounding His creative work that culminated in the creation of man. Later, He told Israel to “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy… For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth… THEREFORE the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it” (Exodus 20:8, 11). We see that the weekly Sabbath was to be kept as a MEMORIAL of God’s creation. (Later, God added another reason why Israel was to remember to observe the Sabbath, compare Deuteronomy 5:12-15).

When God first established the Passover and Days of Unleavened Bread, their purpose was revealed in association with God’s separation of the people of Israel and their deliverance from the bondage of Egyptian servitude (Compare Exodus 12; Exodus 13:9). The Passover season was to be observed by Israel in memory of what God did in Egypt. Exodus 12:26-27, in referring to the Passover service, points out: “And it shall be, when your children say to you, ‘What do you mean by this service?’ that you shall say, ‘It is the Passover service of the LORD, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt, when He struck the Egyptians and delivered our households….'” Likewise, Exodus 12:14, 17, in referring to the Days of Unleavened Bread, states: “So this day shall be to you a MEMORIAL; and you shall keep it as a feast to the LORD throughout your generations… So you shall observe the Feast of Unleavened Bread, FOR ON THIS SAME DAY I will have brought your armies out of the land of Egypt. THEREFORE you shall observe this day…”

As the weekly Sabbath was to be kept in memory of God’s creation, so Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread were to be kept in memory of what God did in Egypt. The difference is this: While the weekly Sabbath began when God made man (remember that God made the Sabbath for man, Mark 2:27)–and was clearly revealed to be kept from the very beginning–the events surrounding the first Passover did not occur prior to Moses and Israel in Egypt. Therefore, there is no biblical evidence that individuals kept the annual Holy Days prior to Moses.

Likewise, the other Holy Days mentioned in Leviticus 23 have a specific association with events of the time when Israel came out of Egypt to possess the Promised Land God was giving them.

It is for these reasons that the Church of God has taught for many years that the ESTABLISHMENT of the annual Holy Days and their observance by God’s people began at the time of Moses–and not prior to that time. Herbert W. Armstrong, the late human leader of the Worldwide Church of God, wrote in his booklet, “Pagan Holidays or God’s Holy Days-Which?” (emphasis added):

“The Sabbath is a WEEKLY MEMORIAL OF CREATION…. Now in like manner, when God GAVE HIS CHURCH seven annual Sabbaths, God, in His wisdom, had a great purpose… The [first] day [of unleavened bread] ESTABLISHED as a Sabbath, or holy convocation forever, is the feast day, the selfsame DAY on which they WENT OUT OF EGYPT… This day is a MEMORIAL… A MEMORIAL OF DELIVERANCE FROM EGYPT, which pictures to us deliverance from sin! Observe that the days of unleavened bread are a period, having two high-day Sabbaths. And this period is ESTABLISHED forever WHILE the Israelites were still IN EGYPT.. Why did God ordain these feast days? What was His great purpose? Turn now to Exodus 13, verse 3: ‘And Moses said unto the people, Remember this day, in which ye came out from Egypt. . . .’… Verses 6, 8-10: ‘Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, and the seventh day shall be a feast unto the Lord . . . This is done because of that which the Eternal did’ (a MEMORIAL) ‘and it shall be for a sign’… God’s purpose in GIVING HIS CHURCH His annual holy days was to keep His children constantly in true understanding of God’s great plan.”

That great Holy Day PLAN of God is far more encompassing in its intended meaning.

(1) For instance, Jesus Christ came into the world to become the Passover Lamb of God (John 1:29), and His sacrifice paid the penalty of sin for all who would believe and accept His offering by turning to God in humble repentance and obedience. In addressing the keeping of the first of the three seasonal feast periods—Passover and Unleavened Bread—Paul states: “Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us” (1 Corinthians 5:7).

(2) In the Book of Hebrews, the significant meaning of the Sabbath is revealed in an even greater scope: “So there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God” (NASB Study Bible; Hebrews 4:9). This points to a future fulfillment in a time when Jesus Christ will establish the Kingdom of God on this earth and reign for 1,000 years with the firstfruits–the saints of God and Jesus Christ–who will be the first to be resurrected to immortality (Compare Revelation 20:4-6).

(3) These firstfruits are also pictured by the keeping of the Feast of Weeks or Pentecost, as revealed in Leviticus 23:15-22. Again, we see that more than what was then revealed about this Feast occurred following the resurrection of Jesus Christ. In this context, it is important to note that Jesus Christ pointedly told His disciples to stay in Jerusalem for a dramatic and very specific purpose: “‘Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high’” (Luke 24:49).

What followed is recorded in the Book of Acts, and it involved the disciples doing exactly what they were commanded to do by Jesus—that was to stay in Jerusalem, and in doing this, they also observed the Day of Pentecost (Feast of Weeks): “When the Day of Pentecost had fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled the whole house where they were sitting. Then there appeared to them divided tongues, as of fire, and one sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:1-4).

In addition to the summary of the Holy Days of God described in Leviticus 23, God also describes His Feasts as three seasons within the year (Compare Exodus 23:14; 34:23). We have already seen that for the first two “times” that the Feast Days were observed, there has been additional fulfillments revealing even more about God’s plan of Salvation as contained in the outlined observance of these holy times.

(4) Other elements of God’s plan are revealed through His Fall Holy Days. Symbolically observed in accordance with God’s instructions, these Feasts point to and foreshadow awesome future occurrences that will lead to the completion of God’s great plan—that is, to increase His Family, the God “kind,” by giving eternal life to obedient men and women as sons and daughters of God and members of the spirit-composed and eternal Family of God!

Addressing the question at hand, we again need to focus on what role these Holy Days actually played in the period before Moses.

Perhaps the closest narrative that might hint at some kind of a seasonal observance is found in the account of the offerings that were brought to God by Cain and Abel, as recorded in Genesis 4. However, it would be supposition and unfounded speculation to go beyond what is written and to then try and ascribe this offering as occurring on, and in celebration of, a particular Holy Day.

This is not to say that God did not cause certain events to take place–prior to Moses–which foreshadowed the later observance of the annual Holy Days. It is even possible that some of these events occurred on days which would later be observed as annual Holy Days. It has been speculated, for example–and there exists some Jewish “tradition” to that effect–that events surrounding Lot and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, as well as Abraham’s “sacrifice” of Isaac, might have taken place during the days which would later be known and observed as Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread–but even though this might be interesting conjecture, it cannot, of course, be proven from Scripture.

The Bible simply does not clearly reveal or support the idea of people observing God’s Holy Days in times earlier than Moses—with the notable exception of the weekly Sabbath Day which was kept by Noah, Abraham and other servants of God, as part of the Ten Commandments which were in force and effect prior to Moses (Compare our free booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound“).

Nonetheless, there is evidence that the Holy Days have been a part of God’s intentions and PLANNED FOR even before the creation of the physical realm in which we now exist!

There are Scriptures that clearly reveal that God’s plan—a plan pictured by His Holy Days—was in place even before God created the earth! Even the sacrifice of Jesus Christ was planned for far in advance (Our booklet, “Are You Predestined to be Saved?”, provides insightful explanations about this misunderstood subject). Please note the following Scriptures:

Matthew 25:34: “Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world…”

Ephesians 1:4: “… just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love…”

1 Peter 1:20: “He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you…”

Revelation 13:8: “All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.”

While it is obvious from the Word of God that an awesome plan of staggering proportions is being carried out by God the Father and Jesus Christ, the fact remains that only certain elements have been revealed! Also, God has revealed information as He deemed it appropriate and necessary for His purposes.

The annual Holy Days were clearly revealed in conjunction with Moses and the establishment of the nation of Israel as God’s people. We don’t read in Scripture that they were revealed or established prior to that time. But it is clear that true Christians–spiritual Israelites–are to keep all of God’s Feasts today–the weekly Sabbath AS WELL AS the annual Holy Days. As has been the case throughout man’s history, knowledge of the annual Feast Days has been lost or simply ignored. Our challenge remains to neither take away from this priceless knowledge nor to add to it, but rather to faithfully observe these very special days set aside by God.

Lead Writers: Dave Harris and 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.