Would you please explain the meaning of Colossians 2:16-17?

We have explained this passage, in detail, in our booklets, “Is That in the Bible?–Man’s Holidays or God’s Holy Days,” and “God’s Commanded Holy Days.” In these booklets, we show from Scripture that Colossians 2:16-17 does not teach–as many have erroneously concluded–that the weekly Sabbath and the seven annual Holy Days are no longer binding; in fact, correctly understood, that particular passage teaches the exact opposite.

First, we want to quote from our booklet, “Is That in the Bible?–Man’s Holidays or God’s Holy Days,” which contains a more general discussion of the passage. This will be followed by a very specific discussion of, among other concepts, the grammatical structure of the passage in the original Greek, as quoted from our booklet, “God’s Commanded Holy Days,” revealing in much detail the intended meaning of that Scripture.

To begin with, please note the following excerpts from our booklet, “Is That in the Bible?–Man’s Holidays or God’s Holy Days“:

“In the New King James Bible, Colossians 2:16–17 reads as follows: ‘So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival [margin: ‘feast day’] or a new moon or Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ’…

“Let’s first look at the phrase, ‘the substance is of Christ.’ The word ‘is’ is not in the Greek. It was added by the translator in an attempt to make the meaning clearer; however, this addition has, to the contrary, confused and perverted the meaning. Without the word ‘is’ in that particular phrase, it simply states, ‘…but the substance of Christ.’ What is the substance of Christ?…

“The literal meaning for the word ‘substance’ is ‘body.’ The Greek word here is ‘soma’ and is otherwise translated as ‘body’ throughout the New Testament, and especially in the letter to the Colossians… With that understanding, let us turn again to Colossians 2:16–17, where Paul says: ‘Let no one judge you… regarding a festival or Sabbaths… but the body of Christ.’ In other words, let no one, except the body of Christ—the Church—judge in those matters. The Church—the body of Christ—the preserver of the truth—CAN, and should, judge in that regard.

“The Colossians were criticized by their opponents, not by Paul, when they kept the Sabbath and the Holy Days (Note that Paul refers to ‘Sabbaths’; that is, to both the weekly and the annual Sabbath or Holy Days.) Paul is essentially saying to them: I am speaking on behalf of the Church when I tell you that you should continue keeping the Sabbath and the Holy Days, as this is what the Church has judged and resolved to do, based on the Scriptures.

“Colossae was a predominately Gentile city, although some Jews undoubtedly lived there as well. The Christian converts in Colossae had begun to keep the weekly Sabbath and the annual Holy Days, and Paul essentially told them: ‘Don’t listen to your former friends and your relatives who try to convince you not to keep those “Jewish traditions”—but rather, listen to what the Church is telling you’…

“What did Paul mean when he described these things as being a shadow of things to come? The weekly Sabbath and the annual Holy Days have tremendous meaning for us today. They foreshadow events to occur in the future at a time when the whole world will be ruled by Christ and taught by Him to keep God’s Law—including the weekly and annual Sabbaths—as God’s people already do today.

“Rather than doing away with the keeping of the Sabbath and Holy Days, Colossians 2:16–17 teaches the exact opposite. It teaches us not to worry about people who say that we should not do so, but rather to concern ourselves with the truth of the matter, which is being taught by Christ’s Body—the Church…

“Some tried to convince the Gentile Christians in Colossae to cease from keeping the weekly and annual Sabbaths. Others went to the opposite extreme—they tried to convince the Gentile Christians in Colossae that they had to fast on the weekly and annual Sabbaths.

“Since both the weekly Sabbath and the annual Holy Days are Feast days, the Christians in Colossae kept them, of course, as FEAST days. They would eat and drink on those days (except, of course, during the ‘Fast’—on the Day of Atonement). Some, though, apparently criticized them for that, teaching that no eating and drinking should take place on any of those days.

“Colossians 2:16, correctly translated from the Greek, states: ‘Let no one judge you regarding eating and drinking.’ Paul is addressing here the ACT of eating and drinking, not the KIND of food and drink being partaken of. Some critics felt, however, that Christians should fast on those days, rather than eating or drinking anything. Notice Paul’s reference to this kind of self-imposed ascetic, or austere, religion in Colossians 2:20–23 (‘…why… do you subject yourselves to regulations—”Do not touch, do not taste, do not handle,” which all concern things which perish with the using—according to the commandments and doctrines of men?’).

“Paul told the Colossians to continue keeping the Sabbath and the Holy Days in the same way as they were doing it, rather than listening to those who were trying to tell them not to do it at all, or not to keep them as feast days…”

As mentioned, our booklet, “God’s Commanded Holy Days,” discusses the passage of Colossians 2:16-17 in greater detail. For the spiritual benefit of our readers, we would like to quote from this more detailed, albeit perhaps somewhat technical discussion, to destroy any doubt as to what Colossians 2:16-17 is REALLY teaching:

“Colossians 2:16–17 reads, in the New King James Bible, as follows: ‘So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival [margin: ‘feast day’] or a new moon or Sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ’…

“If you have a New King James Bible, you might want to check the margin. It says there that the literal meaning for the word ‘substance’ is ‘body.’ That is correct. The Greek word here is ‘soma,’ and it is otherwise translated as ‘body’ throughout the New Testament.

“Limiting this discussion just to the letter to the Colossians, the New King James Bible has translated the word ‘soma’ consistently as ‘body.’ Only here, in Colossians 2:17, it is translated as ‘substance.’ Why? Simply because the translators did not, and do not, understand the meaning of the passage.

“Notice it for yourself. Notice, too, what is being referred to when the phrase ‘body of Christ’ is used elsewhere in the following passages:

“Colossians 1:18: ‘And He is the head of the body [‘soma’ in Greek], the church.’ Christ is identified here as the Head of the body, which is the Church.

“Colossians 1:24: ‘I now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up in my flesh what is lacking in the afflictions of Christ, for the sake of His body [‘soma’ in the Greek], which is the church.’ Again, we see that the body of Christ is identified here as His Church.

“Colossians 2:19: ‘… and not holding fast to the Head, from whom all the body [‘soma’], nourished and knit together by joints and ligaments, grows with the increase that is from God.’ Again, the reference is to the spiritual body of Christ, the Church.

“Finally, let’s notice Colossians 3:15: ‘And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body [‘soma’].’ We all belong to that one body—the Church, of which Christ is the Head.

“These Scriptures clearly show that the references in that letter to the body of Christ is to the Church of Christ. With that understanding, let us turn again to Colossians 2:16–17, where Paul says: ‘Let no one judge you… regarding a festival or Sabbaths… but the body of Christ.’ In other words, let no one, except the body of Christ—the Church—judge in those matters. The Church, the body of Christ, the preserver of the truth, can and should judge in that regard…

“It is interesting that Greek scholars recognize—in simply looking at the Greek structure of the sentence—that the first part of the statement, ‘Let no one judge you…’ requires a second statement to explain who should do the judging.

“Professor Troy Martin wrote an article entitled, ‘But Let Everyone Discern the Body of Christ (Col. 2:17),’ which was published in the Journal of Biblical Literature in the Summer of 1995. In that article, he confirms—based on the Greek structure of the sentence—that the second part of the statement in Colossians 2:16–17 explains who is doing the judging.

“He first points to a parallel passage in 1 Corinthians 10:24 that states: ‘Let no one seek his own, but each one the other’s well being.’ In order to understand this passage correctly, one has to repeat in the second phrase the opposite of the beginning of the first phrase. In other words, the clear and intended meaning of this passage is: ‘Let no one seek his own, but let each one seek the other’s well being.’

“This Scripture is grammatically structured in the same way as Colossians 2:16–17. Therefore, according to Professor Troy in regard to both 1 Corinthians 10:24 and Colossians 2:16–17, ‘The verb judge determines the action that is forbidden [by the first phrase = let no one judge you…] and then enjoined [or commanded, by the second phrase].’

“With this understanding, the sentence in Colossians 2:16–17 has to read this way: ‘So let no one judge you… regarding a festival or Sabbaths…, but let the body of Christ judge you.’

“Professor Troy gives a second example to prove this conclusion, namely Romans 14:13, which reads: ‘Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.’ In the Greek, the word for ‘judge’ and ‘resolve’ is exactly the same, namely ‘krino.’ This word is used in Colossians 2:16–17 and translated there as ‘judge.’

“Romans 14:13 tells us that we must not judge one another, but that we must judge how not to become a stumbling block for others. This statement in Romans 14:13 is identical in structure with the structure used in Colossians 2:16–17. No one is to judge the Colossians regarding the Sabbath and the Holy Days, except for the body of Christ, the Church. This means, then, that Colossians 2:16–17 says exactly the opposite from what critics of the Sabbath and the Holy Days want us to believe. The Colossians were not criticized for NOT keeping the Sabbath and the Holy Days, but rather, they were criticized for KEEPING them.

“Comparing Romans 14:13 with Colossians 2:16–17, Dr. Troy concludes that Paul is telling the Colossians in Chapter 2 that they should not let a man judge them for keeping the Holy Days and the Sabbath, but that the Church—the Body of Christ—should judge this matter. The Colossians were criticized by their opponents, not by Paul, when they kept the Sabbath and the Holy Days. Paul is essentially saying to them: I am speaking on behalf of the Church, when I tell you that you should continue keeping the Sabbath and the Holy Days, as this is what the Church has judged and resolved to do, based on the Biblical Scriptures.

“The Church [of God] has understood the correct meaning of this passage in years past. In 1976, Herbert Armstrong, late Pastor General of the Church of God, wrote a booklet entitled, ‘Pagan Holidays or God’s Holy Days—Which?’ On page 35 he writes: ‘So these little-understood verses ought to be translated clearly: “Let no man therefore judge you… but [rather let] the body of Christ [determine it].” Let Christ’s body judge these church matters. Greek scholars recognize that the last clause “but [rather] the body of Christ” demands that a verb be added, but have often not seen that the missing verb should be supplied from the most logical and grammatical parallel clause so as to read properly, “Let the body of Christ judge [these matters].”‘

“Unfortunately, a few years after Mr. Armstrong’s death in 1986, the wording of this section in the same booklet was changed. A new and unauthorized explanation was given regarding Colossians 2:16, paving the way, of course, for subsequent drastic [erroneous] changes. The revised wording was: ‘Therefore the Christians at Colossae were not to let themselves be taken to task by heretical teachers concerning matters such as eating, drinking, holy days, new moons and Sabbaths… After all, how could such matters possibly transcend Christ? He is the body, the substance, the very center of God’s plan of salvation. All else is a mere shadow that holds no value as a replacement for him’…

“What did Paul mean when he described these things as being a shadow of things to come? Let’s review once again the insightful comments of Prof. Troy in the above-mentioned article. He states: ‘These Christian practices may comprise the shadow, and they are not presented negatively except by the opponents…The tense is present [Note carefully that the text reads, ‘these ARE,’ not ‘WERE’ ‘a shadow of things to come’], and affirms that these things are now shadows. [Some] commentators translate the past tense and conclude that these stipulations have ended now that the true substance has arrived since they were only shadows… In spite of this…, the text affirms a present… validity to the shadow.’

“The weekly Sabbath and the annual Holy Days have tremendous meaning for us today, foreshadowing events to occur in the future, when the whole world will be ruled by Christ and taught by Him to keep God’s Law—including the weekly and annual Sabbaths—as God’s people already do today.

“Rather than doing away with Sabbath and Holy Day keeping, Colossians 2:16–17 teaches the exact opposite. It teaches us not to worry about people who say that we should not do so [or who try to convince us of their personal ideas as to HOW and HOW NOT to keep these days], but to concern ourselves with the truth, as taught by Christ’s Body—the Church…”

In conclusion, Colossians 2:16-17 teaches without a shadow of a doubt that true Christians are obligated and commanded to continue keeping the weekly Seventh-Day Sabbath and the seven annual Holy Days.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Fellowship

On September 5, 2009, Dave Harris will give the sermon, titled, “Fellowship.”

The services can be heard at  www.cognetservices.org (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new StandingWatch program was posted on StandingWatch and YouTube. It is titled, “FDIC’s Fund Almost Empty.” Norbert Link discusses the fact that more and more banks are failing, but the worst is far from over. 74 federally insured banks have failed so far in 2009, but the number of additional banks on the FDIC’s list of problem institutions leaped to 305. At the same time, the FDIC’s insurance fund is running out of money. It stands at its lowest level since 1993. What will depositors do when their banks fail and the government is unable to help them out?

Norbert Link’s new video-recorded sermon, “To the Galatians, Part 2,” has been posted on the Web.

Norbert Link’s new German sermon, titled, “Liegt Alles Nur an Zeit und Glück?” (“Is It Just a Matter of Time and Chance?”) was posted on the Web.

Raising the Bar

by Cali Harris

A “baseline” is defined as a base for measurements, or a point of reference. The word is a common term, used in sports, marketing, real estate, law, design, and medicine.

I see baselines at work in most parts of my life: in work requirements and performance, earning grades at school, progressing to more advanced levels of dance, and even in expectations of friendships. There is a starting point or basis for measurement in nearly everything I do, and these baselines affect my thoughts, words and actions.

Lately, I’ve been thinking about the baselines that exist in my spiritual life. As I consider the Bible to be my fundamental point of reference, my knowledge can expand based on my spiritual growth. Whenever I’m blessed with increased understanding, I have a “new” baseline; my point of reference gets bumped up to a higher level.

I recently typed in “decision” to the church website to search for sermons that dealt with decision-making, because I have been faced with making important choices about school and work. I listened to several sermons, and was reminded that I should place my hard decisions in God’s hands, while using the opportunity to grow… and increase my baseline.

I’ve thought about my spiritual baseline in regard to the responsibility to help others—as a light in this world today and in an eternal role in the future. I am excited that every bit of growth makes me a better example; it raises the bar. I’m trying to regularly ask myself, “What is my baseline today?” The point of reference to measure myself—my baseline—should grow continuously.

In John 2:13-16 Jesus drove the money changers out of the Temple. Isn’t this an example when violent civil disobedience is acceptable?

First of all, let us read these verses in the book of John:

“Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And He found in the temple those who sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers doing business. When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables. And He said to those who sold doves, ‘Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!’”

Christ spoke with authority! It is obvious from other passages that Jesus, who was recognized as a Rabbi, had authority. In John 3:1-2 we read: “There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to Him, ‘Rabbi, we know that You are a teacher come from God; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.'” Here Nicodemus addressed Jesus as Rabbi which is translated “Teacher” (compare Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible) or “Master” (which is an official title of honor – compare Strong’s Hebrew & Greek Dictionaries).

Therefore, even within the Jewish establishment, Jesus was not just some ordinary Jew of that time, taking things into His own hands, but someone who had the right to exercise authority in the Temple which was their place of worship. We note in Luke 4:16-19 that Jesus “went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day and stood up to read” which shows that He did have authority to take such action.

When Jesus drove out the money changers, He was driving out all of the commercialism and business that had permeated a place of worship – and He had the authority to take such action. Not only human authority, of course–as the Son of God He represented God the Father who was the Owner of the Temple.

Did the authorities try and put a stop to this action that Jesus took? The Jewish authorities were afraid to stop Jesus because they knew that He had this authority and they knew that the law of God was on His side.

The New Bible Commentary observes that “He (Jesus) visits the Temple and finds that within the sacred enclosure in the court of the Gentiles a market has been established for the sale of animals required for the sacrifices. The money changers sit there changing Roman currency into Jewish. Jesus is stirred in His soul and is moved with flaming indignation at such profanation of the temple of God. The wrath of the Lamb is a reality.”

We read the following in the KJV Commentary: “Christ found in the court of the Gentiles a terrible scene. The Sanhedrin was permitting the selling of sacrificial animals at exorbitant prices and permitting the changing of foreign currency into Jewish money, which was required for the temple tax. Christ makes a whip and drives out both the animals and the wicked merchants. [We might want to interject here that Christ only beats the animals, not the people.] He overturns the tables and scatters the coins across the floor. He commands the dove owners, Take these things hence. Christ then justifies this striking action, make not my Father’s house an house of merchandise (Malachi 3:1–3). Again, the failure of Judaism is emphasized. The disciples recall that this is the fulfillment of prophecy (Psalm 69:9). In verse 18, the Jews, who have been shocked by the action of Christ, demand a sign to substantiate His authority and conduct. However, this was a ridiculous request since the cleansing in itself was a sign (Malachi 3:1–3).”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible has this to say about Christ’s actions: “… he did it without the resistance of any of his enemies, either the market-people themselves, or the chief priests that gave them their licences, and had the posse templi—temple force, at their command. But the corruption was too plain to be justified; sinners’ own consciences are reformers’ best friends; yet that was not all, there was a divine power put forth herein, a power over the spirits of men; and in this non-resistance of theirs that scripture was fulfilled (Mal. 3:2, 3)…”

And so we can see that Christ had the authority for His actions and He spoke with authority. But what about us – does that give us the right to fight against the authorities today if we consider it necessary and feel that such action is justified?

In Romans 13, we see that we are to be subject to the powers that be, to man’s laws which is our commitment to an orderly society, so long as there is no conflict with the law of God. Verses 1 and 2 state that “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.”

As Jesus Himself taught, we are to render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s and to God the things that are God’s (compare Matthew 22:15-22; Mark 12:13-17; Luke 20:20-26), thus showing that He was subject to man’s law so long as there was no conflict with God’s law. And that applies to us today.

In Titus 3:1 Titus is instructed by Paul to “Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work.”

In 1 Peter 2:13-17, the same principle is repeated: “Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme, or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good. For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men – as free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bondservants of God. Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.”

In Acts 4:18, Peter and John were “commanded… not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.” But in verses 19-21 we read: “But Peter and John answered and said to them, ‘Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.’ So when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding no way of punishing them, because of the people, since they all glorified God for what had been done.”

In this instance, they defied the secular authorities so that they could do the Will of God and no punishment was forthcoming. Shortly thereafter, in order to follow God’s command which had been communicated to them by an angel, they again had to disobey the secular authorities and were severely punished as a consequence (Acts 5:17-32, 40). But in spite of their punishment and the ongoing threats of the government, the apostles defied the order of the civil counsel, “rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer shame for His name” (verse 41). And they continued to disobey the orders of the government while obeying God’s explicit instructions (verse 42).

In short, our submission to governing authorities does not mean uncritical obedience, as our highest authority is God. Laws that are contrary to the law of God must not be obeyed, but in such situations we must be willing to accept the consequences of our actions and submit to the penalties inflicted upon us, without resorting to violent civil disobedience.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new StandingWatch program was posted on StandingWatch and YouTube. It is titled, “Is the Recession Really Over?” Norbert Link points out that even though some overly optimistic economic “experts” have pronounced the end of the recession in the USA, reality portrays quite a different picture. “Retail sales disappointed in July, and the number of newly laid-off workers filing claims for unemployment benefits rose UNEXPECTEDLY last week” (A.P., August 13, 2009). At the same time, our federal deficit is climbing into historic heights, and Mr. Obama’s approval rates for his job performance has dropped to historic lows. WHY is God NOT blessing this country?

Norbert Link’s new sermon–the first installment on the book of Galatians–was posted on the Web.

A new StandingWatch program in the German language was posted on the Web and on our Web site (www.aufpostenstehen.de), titled, “Wirtschaftskrise–‘Das Schlimmste Kommt Erst Noch.'” (“Recession–‘the Worst Is Still to Come.'”).

Norbert Link’s new German sermon, titled “Die Verwandten Jesu Christi, Teil 2” (“Jesus Christ’s Relatives, Part 2”) was posted on the Web.

Would you please explain your understanding on healing, and what specific procedures do you apply in your Church for anointing and public prayer requests?

We have discussed the issue of physical healing in several of our Q&As, http://eternalgod.org/qa/4963, http://eternalgod.org/qa/3221, http://eternalgod.org/qa/3749, http://eternalgod.org/qa/2842 , and also at length in our free booklet, “Sickness and Healing–What the Bible Tells Us.”

The following issues will be discussed in this Q&A:

–OUR BELIEF ON PHYSICAL HEALING
–WHAT TO DO WHEN WE ARE SICK
–WHY ANOINT WITH OIL?
–THE USE OF AN ANOINTED CLOTH
–DOES GOD HEAL ONLY BAPTIZED MEMBERS OF HIS CHURCH?
–WHEN DOES GOD BEGIN TO HEAL A PERSON WHO IS ASKING FOR AN ANOINTED CLOTH?
–WHEN SHOULD WE ASK FOR ANOINTING?
–CAN OR SHOULD WE ASK FOR ANOINTING MORE THAN ONCE FOR THE SAME SICKNESS?
–WHEN SHOULD WE ASK THE MINISTRY TO ANNOUNCE A SICKNESS TO THE CHURCH AND ASK FOR PRAYERS?
–SHOULD WE SEEK OUT A PARTICULAR MINISTER FOR ANOINTING BECAUSE HE MAY HAVE THE “GIFT OF HEALING”?

In this Q&A, we are setting forth briefly our belief and practice, as well as administrative procedures. For a more comprehensive discussion, please consult and review our additional literature, as quoted above.

OUR BELIEF ON PHYSICAL HEALING

God tells us in Exodus 15:26 that He is our LORD who heals us. We are healed by the stripes of Jesus Christ who gave His life for us, and who was tortured and beaten so that we can obtain forgiveness of our sins and healing from our sicknesses and diseases (Psalm 103:1-3; Matthew 8:16-17; 1 Peter 2:21-25; Isaiah 53:5).

WHAT TO DO WHEN WE ARE SICK

We ought to pray to God in private for healing. IN ADDITION, based on the severity of the sickness, we are to call for the elders of the Church of God to pray for us, to anoint us with oil, and to lay hands on us, so that we can be healed (James 5:14-15; Mark 16:18).

WHY ANOINT WITH OIL?

We read in Mark 6:13 that Christ had His disciples anoint sick people with oil, and they were healed. We know that Christ healed the sick with the power of the Holy Spirit (Luke 8:43-46 — the Authorized Version has here, “virtue,” but the literal meaning is, “power,” compare New King James Bible. Compare, too, Mark 5:30; Luke 6:19).

Christ said that His ministers would heal the sick by the power of the Holy Spirit (Mark 16:18), which presence is symbolized by the anointing of the sick person with oil (James 5:14). Oil can symbolize a consecration, or a special setting apart for a holy purpose–the divine purpose of physical healing, for example. Oil can refer to the Holy Spirit abiding in a person, or it can also refer to God’s presence, through His Spirit, to motivate, guide or lead, as well as heal a person, although the Holy Spirit might not reside in that person.

THE USE OF AN ANOINTED CLOTH

Many times, a ministerial visit may not be possible, as the sick person might live in a remote area. If this is the case, then elders are permitted to pray over a cloth, anointing it with a drop of oil as the symbol of the Holy Spirit, and asking God to heal the sick person who will receive this cloth.

It is up to the ELDER to decide whether to personally visit the sick person for anointing, or whether to send him or her an anointed cloth. Even if the sick person asks for a cloth, the ELDER may decide to visit the person; conversely, if the person asks for a visit, the elder may decide to send the person a cloth.

The use of a cloth is based on numerous passages in the Bible, showing us that people were healed when they touched the garments of Christ (Mark 6:56) or the aprons or handkerchiefs from Paul’s body (Acts 19:12).

There is no magical importance attached to an anointed cloth. It cannot and will not heal anyone. As mentioned, it is through the stripes of Christ that we are healed.

When a person who is sick receives the anointed cloth, he is to place it on his head and pray to God (as the minister did when anointing the cloth) that God would heal the sick person from the sickness. Since our faith must be in God, and not in any man or in the anointed cloth, the cloth should be destroyed immediately after it has been used.

DOES GOD HEAL ONLY BAPTIZED MEMBERS OF HIS CHURCH?

The sick person does not have to be a baptized member of the Church of the Eternal God or one of its corporate affiliates, the Global Church of God in UK or the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada, or even the spiritual body of Christ (of which the Church of the Eternal God and its corporate affiliates are a part). It is necessary, however, that the sick person has faith in the sacrifice of Christ, believing that he or she will be healed by God because of what Christ did for us. Unique examples of healing do occur based on the actions of faithful ministers of Jesus Christ (compare Acts 3:1-10); however, a sick person’s faith in Jesus Christ and His sacrifice remains the basis for healing–and this is vitally important for those who have been called to a knowledge of the truth of God.

When Christ was here on earth in the flesh, He healed many people, and none of those were converted, as the Holy Spirit was only given at Pentecost in 31 A.D. Even after the New Testament Church was established, God continued to use the apostles and elders to heal people who were not members of the body of Christ. Today, children of parents in the Church, as well as unconverted mates, may experience healing, sometimes in unusual ways, so that their faith in God the Father and Jesus Christ may be strengthened.

If a sick person asks one of our ministers for anointing or an anointed cloth, believing that God will heal them, the minister, based on his judgment and discretion, will anoint such a person. God gave command to His servants to preach the gospel of the Kingdom of God and to “heal the sick” (Matthew 10:8; Luke 9:2; 10:9).

WHEN DOES GOD BEGIN TO HEAL A PERSON WHO IS ASKING FOR AN ANOINTED CLOTH?

God may begin to heal a sick person when he or she places the cloth on his or her head and prays to God for healing. On the other hand, we have seen over the years that God may heal a sick person, or begin to heal him or her, prior to the receipt of the cloth, or, for that matter, prior to the arrival of the elder to anoint the sick person with oil and pray over him or her.

Our faith in God must not be restricted to actually receiving an anointed cloth; rather, we should have faith that God can and will heal us whenever it pleases Him. But, we are still to follow through with His command to ask for anointing. Having shown God that we are willing to obey Him in everything, we can and should have the faith that God will heal us, whenever He chooses. To repeat, there is nothing magical about the anointed cloth. IT does not heal anyone. We must be careful that we don’t place our faith and trust in the cloth–or in the anointing minister–rather than in God.

Even though a sick person who has asked for anointing already feels better, or has been completely healed, by the time of the arrival of the elder or the cloth, the procedure of anointing and praying over the sick person, or of applying the cloth, should still be carried out and followed through, thereby showing God our diligence and our gratitude for His ongoing intervention. (Peter still baptized Cornelius, even though he had already received God’s Holy Spirit in this unique and extraordinary circumstance).

WHEN SHOULD WE ASK FOR ANOINTING?

Basically, if we are too sick to go to school or to work or to attend Church services, we are “sick enough” to ask for anointing. Of course, if we are suffering from a continuing serious sickness which is not contagious and which would not prevent us from attending Church services, we should still be anointed (sometimes more than once, see below) in order to be healed. Remember, God COMMANDS us to ask for anointing when we are sick. Far too many prefer to consult with medical doctors and expect healing from them, rather than taking advantage of the means by which God promises us physical healing.

CAN OR SHOULD WE ASK FOR ANOINTING MORE THAN ONCE FOR THE SAME SICKNESS?

This is most certainly permitted in a more serious sickness. On the other hand, as stated, we must never place our faith in elders who anoint us, or in an anointed cloth. Our faith must always be in God, our Healer. Therefore, if a repeated request for an anointed cloth for the same sickness would become tantamount to a misplaced faith in the cloth, then such a request would be inappropriate.

WHEN SHOULD WE ASK THE MINISTRY TO ANNOUNCE A SICKNESS TO THE CHURCH AND ASK FOR PRAYERS?

Should we ask the Church to make an official prayer announcement via email or during services (being broadcast on the Internet), before asking a minister to anoint us or send us a cloth?

The answer is, generally not. The first step for a sick person is to fulfill HIS or HER responsibility–that is, to ask God in private prayer for healing and then to ask the ministry for anointing. In more serious cases, it is appropriate to ALSO ask for a prayer announcement to the brethren–either subsequently or even simultaneously (depending on the severity of the sickness or injury).

Please note carefully the order in James 5:14-16: “(Verse 14:) Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. (Verse 15) And the prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise him up… (Verse 16:) … pray for one another, that you may be healed.”

Verse 14 says that first should come the prayer and anointing of the ministry, together with the prayer of the anointed and others who might be present during the anointing; and then, according to verse 16, a more encompassing prayer by the brethren for others could follow.

Normally, barring extraordinarily circumstances, and based on the judgment of the ministry, we are sending out or announcing prayer requests for our members or prospective members/attendees, on their own behalf or on behalf of close family members. (When Church members ask for prayers for their unconverted sick close relatives, no requirement of prior anointing would normally be made, as the sick persons might not even know about the possibility of anointing.) These prayer requests are normally only sent to our members and selective others who have specifically asked to receive our prayer announcements.

The reason for this somewhat limited procedure is the weight and obligation that our prayer requests carry for our members. Once a prayer request is sent out, the recipients are expected and obligated, before God, to actually pray for the injured or sick person and his or her immediate family. It is therefore important that the sick person [or a converted family member] does not make such a request lightly; that the ministry weighs the request carefully; and that the members receiving the request come before God in prayer to ask for healing of the sick person.

SHOULD WE SEEK OUT A PARTICULAR MINISTER FOR ANOINTING BECAUSE HE MAY HAVE THE “GIFT OF HEALING”?

The short answer is: Absolutely not. Some may erroneously believe that they must seek out a particular minister to be anointed, thinking perhaps that God will only heal through that minister–or that they may have a “better chance” of being healed, as that minister is perceived as having the “gift of healing.” However, God commands us to ask the “elders” of His Church to anoint us with oil, when we are sick, and the PRAYER of FAITH shall lift us up. It is GOD who heals us. In looking at a particular man for such anointing is tantamount to placing our trust in man, rather than in God.

We need to remember that God warns us that some will arise to perform miracles and signs–while perhaps even claiming to be true ministers within the body of Christ–but they will DECEIVE many (Matthew 24:11, 24). If a “minister” claims–or allows such a claim to be made about him, without rejecting it–that he has a special gift of healing and that members must come to HIM to be anointed and be healed, then such claim would dishonor God and be deceitful.

We read in 1 Corinthians 12 about all kinds of spiritual gifts, such as gifts of healing, working of miracles, prophecy, discerning of spirits, and different kinds of tongues or languages (verses 1, 9-10). Paul says that not everyone in the Church has the same identical gifts (verse 4), but all gifts are given “to each one for the profit of all”–the entire Church (verse 7). It is not for the purpose of placing our trust in a man or looking at a man (the Samaritans looked at Simon Magus as the great power of God who bewitched them with his sorcery and magic tricks), but to give all glory to God. And God is most certainly not limited to perform miracles by having to use fragile, weak and feeble men who might be viewed as having “the gift of healing.”

Rather, we read that GOD will heal us and raise us up when we ask for the “elders” of His Church to pray over us and anoint us. Christ’s great commission to the Church in Mark 16:15-18 includes the promise that His ministers “will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover” (verse 18), without any requirement that a particular minister must have a “special gift of healing” so that God could heal the sick, while other true ministers without such a gift would not be used by God to heal.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new StandingWatch program was posted on Standingwatch and YouTube. It is titled, “Coming–The Third Jerusalem Temple?” In the program, Norbert Link points out that a poll was released on the saddest day on the Hebrew calendar–the fasting day of Tisha B’Av–revealing that nearly two-thirds of Israelis say the time is right to rebuild the Jerusalem Temple — “an idea politically unthinkable in Israel just 10 years ago.” What does the Bible say about future daily sacrifices and the building of a Third Temple just prior to the return of the Messiah? What is the abomination of desolation, referred to by Daniel and Jesus?

A new German sermon was posted this week on the Web. It is titled “Die Verwandten Jesu Christi, Teil 1” (“Jesus Christ’s Relatives, Part 1”).

Why was there slavery in the Old Testament? Why didn't the early apostles condemn slavery? Will there be slavery in the Millennium?

We can safely say that it was never God’s intent for man to engage in the kind of slavery which has brought so much misery and pain on others. We can also say that it was never God’s original intent that there should be any form of slavery. And we conclude that it will be very unlikely that there will be any slavery in the Millennium.

To give an overview of the ORIGIN of slavery in the Bible, let us quote from The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, by James Hastings:

“The causes of slavery are at first sight manifold. It may be the result of capture in war; it may be the punishment for crime or debt; or a man who is starving may sell himself or his children to buy food. But, the more we examine the subject, the more we find that the primary cause is capture in war, particularly when the war is between different races…”

As to the primary reason for slavery–capture in war–this concept won’t exist anymore in the Millennium as there will be no more wars in the Millennium (Isaiah 2:1-4). Also, since all will live in prosperity and there will be no more poverty, that reason for slavery won’t exist anymore, either (Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 3:10). Finally, “slavery” for punishment of crime or debt in the Millennium might likewise be non-existent, as people might not be allowed to actually carry out crimes or go into debt, necessitating that kind of punishment or treatment (compare Isaiah 30:20-21).

We should also mention that it was never God’s original intent that men should be poor in the first place (Deuteronomy 15:1-6). Nor was it God’s original intent that men should go to war, as we explain in detail in our free booklet, “Should You Fight in War?” It was only when man decided that he wanted to fight, that God gave laws which regulated warfare and its consequences–mostly to prevent the kind of terrible abuses which were so prevalent in other ancient societies and which are still so prevalent today.

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, by James Hastings, continues:

“Slavery existed among the Hebrews, as among all the peoples of antiquity, but it appears in milder forms and was inspired by a more humane spirit than in either Greece or Rome…”

The Nelson Study Bible adds:

“… the Jews practiced slavery… A Jewish slave belonged to the family of the owner and had certain religious and social rights. If the slave was a Hebrew, the term of slavery was limited to six years… But even if the slave was a Gentile, the owner’s power was limited… If a master punished and injured a slave in his possession, the slave was to be set free. If the punishment resulted in the slave’s death, then the master was to be punished. The slave was viewed as a person and was to be treated fairly, which differed from the Roman system of slavery…”

It is indeed correct that the kind of “slavery,” as described in Old Testament passages, cannot be remotely compared with the terrible curse of slavery which had been adopted by other cultures in ancient antiquity or which was later practiced and carried out by other cultures, including those of the “Christian” Western societies.

We are setting forth below several examples showing the “humane spirit” of the ancient biblical concept of slavery, while remembering that God had never intended that slavery should exist at all. Still, God saw to it that slaves would have rights and privileges:

As mentioned above, the Bible prohibited the abuse of slaves and required the punishment of the master or the freedom of the slaves in case of physical abuse (Exodus 21:20, 26-27).

Deuteronomy 21:10-14 described the rights of a female slave who had been captured in war.

Deuteronomy 23:16 expressly prohibited that an escaped slave would be returned to his cruel master.

In 1 Chronicles 2:34-35, we find that an Egyptian slave became the son-in-law of his master.

Slaves could even become heirs to the property of their masters (compare Genesis 15:2-3).

Slaves were included in God’s command of rest on the Sabbath, and they were exempted from forced labor on that day (Exodus 20:10).

Slaves were allowed to participate in the Passover, after they were circumcised (Exodus 12:44).

Slaves of priests were allowed to eat the food dedicated to the priests (Leviticus 22:11).

And in Job 31:13-15, we find Job’s exclamation that a godly master would respect the rights and causes of his male or female slave, pointing out that God had made them as well as Job.

In this light, we need to examine why we don’t find explicit condemnation of the concept of slavery in the New Testament.

The Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, by James Hastings, writes:

“There is no explicit condemnation of slavery in the teaching of our Lord. It would even be difficult to say how much He refers to it, as the Greek can mean ‘slave,’ ‘bond servant,’ or ‘servant.’… it is in the Epistle to Philemon that St. Paul’s teaching is most clear. Onesimus was a runaway slave whom the apostle was sending back to his master Philemon… there is no condemnation of slavery…”

The Nelson Study Bible writes:

“At that time [when Paul wrote the letter to Philemon], the slave-master relationship was as common as the employee-employer relationship is today… In his letters the apostle Paul did not approve of slavery, but he also did not condemn it. He exhorted slaves to demonstrate Christian obedience and humility even to their masters… In turn, Christian masters were to treat their slaves fairly… Yet at the same time, Paul declared the equality of both slaves and free persons before Christ [compare Galatians 3:28; Colossians 3:11; 1 Corinthians 12:13], a principle that would eventually undermine the institution of slavery… The letter [to Philemon] is basically an earnest plea for a Christian love that would confront the cruelty and hatred embodied in the cultural institutions of that day…”

It might appear that Paul’s approach seemed to have been in opposition to the explicit command in Deuteronomy 23:16, not to return a slave to his master. But this is only the case at first glance. If we review these passages more carefully, we find that Deuteronomy 23:16 prohibits the return of an abused slave against the slave’s will. In the case of Paul, the escaped slave Onesimus [the Bible does not tell us WHY Onesimus ran away] perfectly agreed to return to his master Philemon, as Paul encouraged Philemon to receive his slave back with Christian love and to treat him as a brother in the faith.

In trying to explain Paul’s approach, we find the following comments in The New Bible Commentary:Revised:

“Although slaves are mentioned in several Pauline Epistles, in none does slavery appear so vividly as in [the letter to Philemon], since the whole Epistle revolves around a runaway slave. The question arises why Paul did not take the opportunity of pointing out in a more direct manner the evils of the whole system. Certain factors must be borne in mind before an answer is suggested. Slavery was so integral a part in the social system that a direct confrontation with the State to abolish it, even if it had been possible for the Christian church to embark on such a crusade, would have resulted in nothing short of revolution. Paul was certainly no revolutionary…

“Although the Christian could not have hoped to make abolition of slavery a political platform, they could set an example to the world at large concerning the way in which Christianity… could mitigate its evils. This brief letter is a notable example of such an approach in that Paul argues that a new relationship must develop between Philemon and Onesimus, since both master and slave were now Christians…”

We must remember that Paul included several striking passages about “slaves” in New Testament times. Even though he demanded that Christian “slaves” work obediently and sincerely for their Christian or non-Christian masters (Ephesians 6:5-8), while exhorting those masters to treat their “slaves” fairly (Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1), he did encourage slaves to sever the master-slave relationship, if that could be done (compare 1 Corinthians 7:21).

Paul also prohibited Christians from becoming voluntarily slaves of men (verse 22). These prohibitions also apply to us today in our “free” Western societies, even though the concept of “slavery” might not be that obvious at first sight–for instance, a true Christian should not volunteer to join the military and thereby become a slave of man.

Apart from these Christian principles regulating a master-slave relationship, we must understand that it has never been the role, function and responsibility of the Church of God to change the world now, or to undermine the systems and governments of this world. True Christians don’t participate in the wars of this world, nor do they vote in governmental elections nor participate in any attempts to overthrow the government. As explained in our free booklet, “Should You Fight in War?,” Christians are ambassadors of Christ and representatives of a better world–the heavenly kingdom–to be set up on this earth within a few years from now.

Focusing on these facts, we might understand better WHY the New Testament or the apostle Paul did not condemn or even address the concept of slavery per se: This is NOT God’s world, but Satan’s (compare Matthew 4:8-9); Christians are not here for the purpose of “improving” Satan’s rotten evil world (Galatians 1:4)–of trying to make this evil world a better world. They know that this world will be REPLACED by a better world (Daniel 2:44; Revelation 11:15-18)–attempts to IMPROVE or change THIS Satan-ruled world for the better are doomed to fail. However, Christians are to live in this world and its numerous systems as lights, showing as Christ’s ambassadors how they CAN live as Christians in this world, without becoming a part of it, regardless of what circumstance they might find themselves in. Even when they were imprisoned, Joseph or Paul continued to live as true Christians.

Paul was not trying to change the system. He taught that we are to obey our governmental leaders (Romans 13:1-7), except when their laws or directives contradict God’s commands (Acts 5:29; 4:19). His letter to Philemon shows how one can live in the world and within its systems, and still be a Christian.

Based on the foregoing, we feel that it is highly unlikely that there will exist any slavery in the Millennium. But how are we to understand a Scripture like Isaiah 14:1-2, which deals with the Millennium and might suggest the existence of some form of slavery? The passage reads:

“For the LORD will have mercy on Jacob, and will still choose Israel, and settle them in their own land. The strangers will be joined with them, and they will cling to the house of Jacob. Then people will take them and bring them to their place, and the house of Israel will possess them for servants and maids in the land of the LORD; they will take them captive whose captives they were, and rule over their oppressors.”

Upon closer examination, this passage does not seem to teach that men will enslave others in the Millennium. Note how some commentaries explain this Scripture.

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible writes:

“‘And they shall take them captive…’ — That is, they shall induce them to become proselytes; to be willing to accompany them to their own homes, and to become their servants there. It does not mean that they would subdue them by force; but they would be able, by their influence there, to disarm their opposition; and to induce them to become the friends of their religion… This is one instance where the people of God would show that they could disarm their oppressors by a mild and winning demeanour, and in which they would be able to induce others to join with them. Such would be the force of their example and conduct, of their conversation and of their deportment…”

The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown adds: “‘captives’ — not by physical, but by moral might; the force of love, and regard to Israel’s God [compare Isaiah 60:14].”

Finally, John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible states:

“… this will have… accomplishment in the latter day, when the Gentiles shall bring their sons and daughters in their arms, and on their shoulders, and on horses, and in chariots, to Jerusalem [Isaiah 49:21-23]… [They will choose] rather to be servants and handmaids to them, than to return to their own land, and who were a kind of inheritance or possession to the [Israelites]… It may be understood of Gentile converts…, who would willingly and cheerfully engage in the service of the church of God, and by love serve his people, and one another [Isaiah 61:5]…”

In conclusion, it was never God’s intent that there should be any kind of slavery in the first place–had mankind chosen to OBEY God. It is highly unlikely that God will use men to enslave others in the Millennium. This is not to say, however, that God won’t deal with uncompromising power and authority regarding individuals and nations who refuse to obey God, until they yield to God’s rule (compare Revelation 2:27; Zechariah 14:11–20; Ezekiel 38:18-23; 39:1-16).

In the meantime, Christians have to strive to live within the laws of man–whatever they might be–unless they contradict the laws of God. No matter what circumstance we might find ourselves in, we still can and should continue to live the way of God.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Spiritual Immune System

by

God created us with the ability to develop an immune system. Beginning at birth, a child is not fully equipped to fight off the onslaught of germs, though the mother is able to immediately aid in this by nursing. As we grow older, we grow stronger and more resistant to the common infectious agents that attack us.

When God calls us into a new way of life, He implements an additional system, as it were. As babes in the church, He infuses us with a small amount of His Holy Spirit. Initially and to a large extent, we are nurtured (1 Peter 2:2) by the mother of us all, which is the church (Galatians 4:26). This enables us to fight the spiritual diseases that bombard our system and seek to destroy us (1 Peter 5:8). As we grow along the Way (2 Peter 3:18), our spiritual immunity becomes robust and resilient. The ills that used to plague us, no longer do, because we have matured and overcome them.

To ensure that we continue to stay in good spiritual health, we should make every effort to maintain the best spiritual immune system possible. We can facilitate this by eating right (John 6:48), exercising (1 Timothy 4:7) and getting plenty of rest (Hebrews 4:9; Matthew 11:28-29).

©2024 Church of the Eternal God