Christian Churches of God

FAQ Bible Study Old Testament (No. 57)

(Edition 1.1 20000630-20011124)

Frequently Asked Questions on Old Testament texts are listed herein. All answers are predicated on the premise that God exists and that the Bible is the inspired word of God as revealed to His servants the Prophets.

 


Christian Churches of God

PO Box 369, WODEN ACT 2606, AUSTRALIA

E-mail: secretary@ccg.org

 

 

(Copyright ã 2000, 2001 Wade Cox)

This paper may be freely copied and distributed provided it is copied in total with no alterations or deletions. The publisher’s name and address and the copyright notice must be included. No charge may be levied on recipients of distributed copies. Brief quotations may be embodied in critical articles and reviews without breaching copyright.

This paper is available from the World Wide Web page:
http://www.logon.org and http://www.ccg.org


 

 

Contents

One True God:

God exist-Why is God eternal-Many names for God-Which name, which entity-Elohim/Eloah-Elohim plural-How many elohim-Jehovah/Jehovah of Hosts-SHD 3068/3069-Two different beings-God look on sin-God and His Law

Spiritual Creation:

Angel of YHVH: Is Christ YHVH-Worship the son-Great Angel OT-Who spoke to Abraham-Who did Moses see-Who talked to Moses and Aaron

Sons of God: How many sons of God-Difference in heavenly beings-24 Thrones/Elders-4 living creatures-4 rivers/4 Cherubim-Lion headed systems-Who are the host-Cause of rebellion-Cherub rebel-Rebellion-Fallen host repent-Angels male or female Lucifer: Meaning of Lucifer-Satan still has access to God-Satan not always evil- Abaddon/Apollyon Angels: Function of angels-Can we recognise angels-Pray to angels

Physical Creation:

Nephilim: Humans before Adam-Pre/post Adam DNA-Nephilim not resurrected Adam and Eve: Why create man-Mankind’s destiny-Adam rebuke Eve-Life before Adam-Children’s stories-Apple forbidden fruit-Different races-Vegetables or meat first-Physical condition early people Noah: Origin or faces from Noah-Flood worldwide-Noah’s faith Abraham: Blessings for Hagar/Ishmael

The Law:

Two tablets of stone-6 and 4 or 5 and 5-First Commandment-Sabbath-Reading the law Society: Uncleanness until sundown-Not coming near wives-Childbirth-Garments etc-Swearing-Violence on innocent-Death penalty-Tattoos-Owe no man-Gambling Food Laws: Mushrooms-Supplements-Pork and fish-Eating meat-Food and ten commandments Tithes and Offerings: 3 or 7 offerings-Atonement tax-Stealing from God

Israel:

12 Judges-Kings-Numbering of tribes-Order of tribes-Moses: Broken tablets-Wife and children-Hosts of Pharaoh-Red sea-Seven-day march-Fall of Jericho- Red cords-Blood on doorposts-Idols and Images: Golden idol-Why a calf-Worship of images-Golden calf/golden cross-Divisions of Israel

JoshuaJoshua’s life-12 rocks/12 apostles-2 spies

JudgesJudges 9:7-21;-Judges 19-Gideon 70 sons-Samson’s hair-Riddle to 30

RuthRuth’s kinsman

1Samuel1Samuel 1:6-17:40-David

1Kings1Kings chapter 6

2Kings2Kings chapter 2

EstherEsther 9:13 Nuremburg Trials

Job7 sons 3 daughters-Job of Genesis 46:13

PsalmsPsalm 82-Psalm 187

ProverbsProverbs 8 and 9-Proverbs 31

EcclesiastesEcclesiastes 7:1-Birthdays

Prophets:

IsaiahIsaiah 19:23-Isaiah 65:1-6-Isaiah 1:29

JeremiahJeremiah 4:15ff

EzekielEzekiel 46:20;-26:21;-Exekiel’s Temple-Ezekiel 20:37-38

DanielDaniel 12:1-2;-2:43;-7:9-10;-Daniel and 3 in oven-Lion’s den

HoseaHosea 2:15

JoelJoel 2:23

MicahMicah 6:4;-5:5

ZechariahZecariah 14:16-19

God’s Calendar:

Full moon-Time lost-Number 7-Jubilees: What is a Jubilee-How to count-Blown on Atonement-5 months in 50th or 1st year-End of Jubilee Feasts: Where does he place his name-Assemblies of God-Fat of the Feast-Pentecost: Shavuot-Trumpets: Trumpets blown-Feast of Shofar-New Year-Atonement: Meaning-Tribute tax-Half Shekel

***********************************

FAQ Old Testament

One True God

Why do you believe that God exists?

A: It is written only a fool says in his heart that there is no God. The entire structure of the creation demands that God exist: From the Laws of Thermodynamics to the phase space volume selection of the universe and Quantum Mechanical theory. The philosophical basis of Causation is singularist and not supervenient. Why would you think that there is no God?

Why do you think God is eternal? The fact that God created us should not mean that God never dies. Maybe your God just had special power to create the whole world and maybe His life has just been very long, of years old.

A: God stands outside of time and space. The Bible is very clear that there is only One True God, whom no man has ever seen or ever can see (John 1:18), and who dwells in unapproachable light and who alone is immortal (1Tim. 6:16).

We know this to be true as the phase, "space volume selection of the universe" is held to be a factor of ten to the tenth, to the 123rd power. It cannot be written in normal denary notation, even if the entire substructure of matter in the universe were to be used. In other words, there is a point of origin, and only one for the entire universe.

We now know from the general theory of relativity and subsequent quantum mechanical theory and its adaptations that a substructure, which we call "quarks", underpins the basis of matter.

We know from the decay of "K Mesons" that there is directionality to time. We know that the structure of matter in the universe is a directional structure in which Space, Time Mass, Energy and Gravity are equivalent expressions of a single fundamental essence, and that essence we call spirit. The Bible is understood to teach us that God creates it "ex nihilo" or "out of nothing". This was also the doctrine of the Shepherd of Hermas, the earliest of the writings not now included in the New Testament.

God created the entire spiritual realm, and then he created the physical. This is examined in the papers How God Became a Family (No. 187) and The Purpose of the Creation and the Sacrifice of Christ (No. 160). The structure of the creation and the logical necessity of Singularist Causation and the impossibility of Absolute Creation in the work is shown in Creation: From Anthropomorphic Theology to Theomorphic Anthropology (No. B5).

I see in my concordance that there are multiple words in Hebrew that are translated as "God." Do they all mean the same thing? Why do the Hebrews have so many words for God?

A: No, they don’t all mean the same thing. The various names for God are a function of His activity in the creation. Also, beings carry the name "God" and "Yahovah" when they act for the one true God. The name of God in the singular is "Eloah." "Elohim" is a plural name, which can be used of singular beings.

In the same way "Yahovah" is used of multiple beings of the angelic host including Christ, but "Yahovih" is not so used. "Yahovih" is "Yahovah of Hosts" who is the "Most High" or the "Elyon." The term "I am that I am" is a corruption of this idea. The text is " ‘eyeh ‘asher ‘eyeh" or "I will be what I will become." The term, "Yahovah" is "He causes to be" as a third person form (see fn. to Exodus 3:14 in the Oxford Annotated RSV). The names of God in the various forms are covered in the texts The Names of God (No. 116); and The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243).

I am confused as to the different names given in the Bible for God. I have read your papers and all makes sense, but it does not tell which name is for which entity. For example, how do you know in Genesis 1:1 that this Elohim is the One True God in the Spirit? In verse 26 it states, "Let us make man in our own image..." That sounds like the plural Elohim and not the One True God. Then I look at 2:4 and on and it states, "YHVH Elohim." Who is the Elohim in 1:1 and who is YHVH Elohim in 2:4 and how do you know how to distinguish between them? It does say in 2:4 that YHVH Elohim created the Heavens and the Earth. Were they created by YHVH Elohim through His Elohim(s)?

A: Yes, this is a very important question. We have this basic rule. No man has ever seen God, neither heard His voice, nor seen His form (Jn 1:18). We have this from the mouth of Christ and reinforced by John and Paul. Thus, the beings that are referred to in the Bible as Elohim who were seen or touched, were sons of God and not the One True God. This One True God dwells in unapproachable light and no man has seen Him or ever can see Him. All that was experienced by man was delivered by the Great Angel of the Old Testament, who gave the Law to Moses and who became Jesus Christ, or those other sons of God who worked with him and who also bore the name of God. Look at the papers The Names of God (No. 116) and The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243). The One True God, Eloah has created all things by His will and all beings act under His will.

Am I to conclude that we do not know which elohim it is referring to in Genesis 1:1 and it really does not matter because all the Elohim are acting under the direction of Eloah? Do you think it is the sons of Eloah it is referring to because of the plural used in verse 26? So everything was created through the Elohim for Eloah?

A: The word God in Genesis 1:1 refers to Eloah and the first act of creation already completed, which was the extension of Himself as Elohim. Thus, the extended being is Elohim and He creates as Elohim because it involves multiple beings.

Job 38:4-7 shows the concept. He created and the sons of God were gathered together and the Morning Stars sang for joy at the creation of the earth. Thus, all were elohim under the One True God (cf. Jn. 17:3). It is irrelevant who was allocated tasks from the primary creation, which was the generation of the elohim from Eloah. Look at the papers How God Became a Family (No. 187) and The Government of God (No. 174).

Could you explain and define the Hebrew word for God, "Elohim"? Isn’t this a plural word? Are we to understand that it encompasses the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?

A: The Hebrew word "Elohim" is a plural word meaning both "God;" and "Gods" plural, depending on its use. The singular word for God is "Eloah." This is "Elahh" in Chaldean. The plural word for God in Chaldean is "Elahhin’" which is the same meaning as Elohim. "The God" is referred to as "Ha Elohim." The Arabic came from the eastern Aramaic or Chaldean and that is why the Arabic word for God in the singular is "Allah'." Elohim extends to cover all the sons of God as a council of elohim and a body of spirit beings. The Bible refers to the elohim as a plurality and elohim is rendered as "aggelos" in Greek and "angels" in English. For example, Psalm 8:5 says of Messiah that "Thou hast made him a little lower than the elohim." This is translated in the English of the KJV as "angels" from the rendering in the Septuagint (LXX) as "aggelos". The same is true in the Vulgate, and the Syriac. Thus, it was generally understood for three hundred years before and after Christ that the "elohim" were the "sons of God" who were termed "messengers" or "angels." This text is also rendered "angels" in Hebrews 2:7. The Angel of the Old Testament is also an elohim. Psalm 97:7 also refers to the elohim as a wider council of elohim. It is a very important and interesting point, which is obscured by the Trinitarian system (see the paper Psalm 8 (No. 14). The Trinity is a pagan system of the Triune God, which was introduced from Rome in the Fourth Century. Look also at the papers The Elect as Elohim (No. 1); The Angel of YHVH (No. 24); The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243); Creation: From Anthropomorphic Theology to Theomorphic Anthropology (No. B5) and The Soctratic Doctrine of the Soul (No. B6).

In Genesis 1:26 it says man was created in the image of Elohim. In 2:7 it says that YHVH Elohim formed man of the dust. In Revelation 21:17 it refers to the measure of a man, that is, of an angel. It seems to me that it is talking about two different men and maybe two different Gods. Are the words in the ancient text for man in all the places that I referenced the same word? Are we talking about the same beings?

A: The Bible does speak of various elohim. The elohim are a council, as we know from the Psalms and elsewhere. The text in Revelation speaks of the measure of a man as the measure of an angel, and that tells you that we are all brethren and made in the image of God. This aspect also has ramifications about the angelic host. We are all to become brothers and part of the City of God where God is all in all. Look at the paper The City of God (No. 180).

Are Jehovah and Jehovah of Hosts one and the same, or are we talking about different beings?

A: We are talking about different beings. Yahovah or Jehovah in English (there is no J in Hebrew) was allotted Israel as his possession by the Most High (Deut. 32:8 esp. RSV). The Most High or "Elyon" is Yahovah of Hosts. All beings who act for Yahovah of Hosts have the title, "Yahovah." Christ was the key figure in the Old Testament as the Great Angel of Yahovah who had this title, but there were others. In Genesis, chapters 18 and 19, we see three Yahovahs who came to see Abraham. The senior remained with Abraham and the other two went on to Lot at Sodom.

They destroyed Sodom by calling down fire from Yahovah in Heaven. Thus there were four there and the One in Heaven who sent the fire down on Sodom. That One is Yahovah of Hosts. He sent Messiah to the world as the giver of the Law and as the protector of Israel. Look also at the papers The Names of God (No. 116); The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243); The Angel of YHVH (No. 24); and Early Theology of the Godhead (No. 127). The creation had a purpose and Christ had a role in the creation given to him by "Yahovah of Hosts" who is "Yahovih" (cf. The Purpose of the Creation and the Sacrifice of Christ (No. 160)).

In your writings you make a distinction between Yahovah (SHD 3068) and Yahovih (SHD 3069). You state that Yahovih (3069) is superior to Yahovah (3068). It is my understanding that the original script is just the Tetragrammaton that is translated YHVH with no vowels. If I am correct, how did the translators come up with 2 different versions of the word and make one superior to the other when they both were YHVH?

A: The Hebrew Text has preserved these distinctions. The alteration by the Sopherim of "Yahovah" to "Adonai" is a basis for the vowel point argument from Adonai. Look at the comments in Strong’s Hebrew Dictionary for 3068 and 3069. You will see there the distinctions. 3068 is read as "Adonai" and 3069 is read as "elohim."

I was reading the paper Law and the Second Commandment (No. 254) and in Deuteronomy 11:17 ‘Lord’ is referenced both ways in the same verse. Is this a misprint or are we talking about 2 different beings? If so please explain the difference. Also explain 2Corinthians 6:17-18.

A: The word translated "Lord" in the text is "Yahovah" (SHD 3068) (cf. Greens Interlinear Bible). The Septuagint makes no distinction in the use of "Kurios," and it is also translated the same way.

In 2Corinthians 6:17-18, it is speaking of the "Lord Almighty" and there is no distinction. There is a distinction between the entities, as in Zechariah 2:8-11. The "Yahovah" sent to save Israel and Jerusalem is sent by "Yahovah of Hosts." This is the distinction in Psalm 45:6-7 and seen in Hebrews 1:8-9 as "Messiah."

Can God look on sin? I heard a sermon where the minister said "God can’t look on sin, that’s why Christ said ‘my God, my God, why have you forsaken me’ as he bore the sins of the world." Is this true?

A: Yes, God can look on sin but we ask Him not to (Ps 51:9 ff; Isa 59:2).

That statement is a myth spread by people who have never read the Psalms properly. The text spoken by Christ was an Aramaic form of the Hebrew in Psalm 22:1. In Psalm 22:24 we read that God did not hide his face from him.

The events in Psalm 22 all refer to Christ and his actual crucifixion. Verse 24 says:

"For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; Neither has He hid His face from him; But when he cried unto Him, He heard."

This fiction is designed to deal with the concept of the reparation for sin without real understanding or acknowledging the Wave Sheaf offering and the true concepts of the Passover. Because they do not obey God’s laws and kept pagan systems, they do not understand Scripture and the Laws of God. The matter of the crucifixion and the aspects of Psalm 22 are examined in the papers on the web at http://www.ccg.org and http://www.logon.org

 

Ezra 9:15 refers to God being righteous, and Psalm 119:172 refers to God’s Law being righteous. Is there a connection between God and His Law?

A: God is holy (Ps 145:17), perfect (Mat 5:48), righteous (Ps 145:17), good (Ps 25:8) and true (Deut 32:4) and His Law is holy (Rom 7:12), perfect (Ps 19:7), righteous (Ps 119:172), good (Rom 7:12), and true (Ps 119:142). This is because the Law proceeds from the nature of God and not from His whim. This is analysed in the papers Distinction in the Law (No. 96) and Love and the Structure of the Law (No. 200).

Spiritual Creation

Angel of YHVH

It was my understanding that "YHVH of Hosts" is the Father and the King is Christ (Zech 9:9), but in Zechariah 14:16 we are told "all shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the LORD of Hosts." Does Christ also have this title "YHVH of Hosts" or is this speaking of "worshipping" both the King and YHVH of Hosts?

A: Christ is given the names he is by the Father and acts for the Father under His delegation. God is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, and yet we see Christ coming as King of Kings and Lord of Lords strapped, as a title, to his thigh (Rev 19:15-16). Only Yahovah of Hosts is worshipped and as such He is King. The title is given to Christ as it is also given to the elect.

Christ is also given a new name in this process, which will also be written on the elect (Rev 3:12). We have all been redeemed to be a nation of kings and priests (cf. Rev. chs 4 and 5 for the council and their statements about the saints and the Messiah).

Because some of these titles given to Christ overlap with titles ascribed to Almighty God, many have misconstrued the intent and believed that Christ is somehow God as God is God, being part of a Trinitarian, Binitarian or Ditheistic Godhead.

This is not the case. These titles given to Christ all convey the concept of delegated authority, even as the Mal’ak of YHVH was termed YHVH, and Elohim because he represented YHVH of Hosts (Eloah). See the papers Isaiah 9:6 (No. 224) and The Names of God (No. 116))

In Daniel 2:45 we read about the Stone that was cut out of the Mountain and then in Daniel 7:13-14 we read about the coronation of the Son before the Ancient of Days. It appears the Son came from the Father differently than all the other creation. It almost seems like a type of cloning the Father did on Himself. Could you comment on this? If this is different from the creation of angels and the physical creation, then it would be quite acceptable to "worship" the Son in addition to the Father. He really would be in the Father and the Father in Him.

A: Christ was generated by God in the same way all the sons of God were generated by God. Christ was sent to earth in a different way and was the "only born god," the "monogenes Theos" of John 1:18. The vision of Daniel 2 is covered in the papers on the nature of God series of the Bible Study Program (No. B1). Look especially at the paper How God Became a Family (No. 187).

No, it would not be acceptable to worship the Son as the Father. The Bible is clear that he who sanctifies and they who are sanctified are of one origin (Heb. 2:11). The doctrine that Father and Son were one God, and the son was worshipped and came to be sacrificed is the doctrine of Attis, and entered Christianity in the Council of the fourth century. "Have we not all one Father? Hath not one God created us?"(Mal. 2:10)

Who was the great Angel who was with Israel in the Old Testament?

A: The belief of the Church in the first and second centuries was that this was Christ. He gave the Law of God to Moses. Justin Martyr, in writing to the Roman Emperor (ca 150) in his "First Apology," states categorically that it was the belief of the Christian Church that the Great Angel of the Old Testament who gave the Law to Moses was Christ. That is the teaching of the Original Catholic Church. See also www.originalcatholicchurch.org. Look at the papers The Angel of YHVH (No. 24); The Early Theology of the Godhead (No. 127); and The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243).

Who was it who spoke to Abraham? Was it Jesus? Who destroyed the cities?

A: It was the angel of Yahovah who became Jesus Christ. He was termed Yahovah, as were the other two angels who came with him to meet Abraham, and then the other two Yahovahs went on to Lot at Sodom and Gomorrah. They (Yahovah) then called fire down on the cities from Yahovah out of Heaven (Genesis 19:24). This Yahovah in Heaven was Yahovah of Hosts or Yahovih. These matters are explained in the papers: The Elect as Elohim (No. 1); The Angel of YHVH (No. 24); The Names of God (No. 116); and The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243).

If no man has seen God as John states, then who was it that Moses saw? Didn't he see God?

A: No Moses did not see the One True God. Christ said no man has seen his form or heard his voice at any time so also repeated by John and Paul (Jn. 1:18; 1Jn. 5:20; 1Tim. 6:16). The belief of the early Church was that the Angel of the Old Testament that gave the Law to Moses was Christ. See the papers The Angel of YHVH (No. 24); The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243); and Early Theology of the Godhead (No. 127).

In Exodus (referring to the 10 plagues) who was giving Aaron and Moses instructions for the pharaoh?

A: The being that was with Israel in the wilderness was the rock that was Christ. He was the Angel of the Old Testament who gave the Law to Moses at Sinai. This was the teaching of the original Church and it is the teaching of the Church today (cf. Justin Martyr, First Apology). Look at the papers: The Angel of YHVH (No. 24); Early Theology of the Godhead (No. 127); and The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243).

Sons of God

How many sons of God does the Bible say there are?

A: The sons of God are mentioned in the texts in the Old Testament, but no number is given. Deuteronomy 32:8 shows the nations were allocated to the sons of God according to their number (This was altered later in the Masoretic Text but the RSV has the text correct). So we have 70 by tradition for this, but we know it was much more than that from the vision in Elijah. Job 1:6; 2:1; and 38:4-7 just mentions the sons of God and the Morning Stars.

Job 33:23 indicates there are a thousand in the structure capable of ransoming men. We get the term "myriads" used of them and the term "armies" is also applied to them (Rev. 19:14). The book of Revelation gives a number of 200 million horsemen which are marshalled by the four angels bound at the Euphrates for the time appointed to slay a third of mankind (Rev. 9:16). These may well be men and not of the heavenly host.

We have no way of knowing if this reference is an exhaustive number or not. Thus, the number of the sons of God, sometimes termed Messengers, in the texts is perhaps 200 Million, but certainly numbered as armies. Perhaps they are as many as people have been since Adam. We will know when we get to The City of God (No. 180) and are joined with them as a living Temple and residence for God and the Lamb.

Could you explain the differences between all the heavenly beings – sons of God, Angels, Cherubim, Nephilim? Are all sons of God Angels, and all Angels sons of God?

A: All the heavenly host are sons of God. The ones sent to mankind are messengers, termed angels. These are in ranks and positions: Cherubim, Seraphim, and Morning Stars. All are sons of God. Christ is one of them.

The Nephilim are the product of the fallen host. See the paper The Nephilim (No. 154). They have no resurrection. The demons are the sons of God who fell from grace. We will all be Sons of God. Look at the papers How God Became a Family (No. 187) and The Government of God (No. 174) and The Elect as Elohim (No. 1).

Can you explain in a nutshell about the 24 thrones and 24 elders?

A: The inner council of the elohim has thirty beings. These thirty are comprised of the twenty-four elders under the High Priest, who is Messiah. The Four Living Creatures are the cherubim around the throne of God. They have the elders allocated to them on the basis of two to a system, with three systems making six to a division. God is in the centre at the throne. This makes thirty.

There are others who then make up the council of the seventy. This structure was reflected in the system in Israel, and at the Tabernacle and the Temple. The twenty-four division high priests and the High priest reflected the council of the elders. The seventy plus two reflected the outer council. Israel was divided into four divisions of twelve tribes, three tribes to a division, and with the priesthood of Levi at the tabernacle or throne (see Numbers 10). The divisions of the priesthood were allotted to the division of the tribes. The structure is also covered in the paper The Government of God (No. 174). Look also at How God Became a Family (No. 187).

What are the 4 living creatures and of what importance are they?

A: The Four Living Creatures are the anointed covering Cherubs that stand before the throne of God. The Ark carries two on the Lapporah or cover and another two stand over them. Look at the papers The Ark of the Covenant (No. 196) and also The Meaning of Ezekiel’s Vision (No. 108). The paper The Government of God (No. 174) explains their function.

The four living creatures and the Council discharge function within the Host related to administration and judgment. They are in effect quadrant commanders of the universe and cover the throne of God.

The living creatures represent the four stages of the history of the priesthood and Israel. The first stage was the tabernacle of the wilderness and the Judges. The second stage or cherub was as the first Temple from Solomon to the captivity. The third stage was from the reestablishment after the return to the destruction in 70 CE and the fourth stage was as the era of the seven churches until the return of the Messiah.

Each stage is as a covering cherub which protects the throne of God and by human hands (under the wings) accomplishes His purpose on earth. The living creatures have been described elsewhere in the Bible but the symbolism of the form has a much deeper meaning than that of a created oddity with four different faces. In Revelation 4:6-8 we see the same faces but separate as four living creatures each with one of the faces but with six wings.

Do the four rivers flowing from Eden have anything symbolically to do with the four Cherubim around the throne of God?

A: Yes, symbolically the rivers represent the four divisions of the creation. The creation and the role of the cherubim have been examined in a number of works. These are The Government of God (No. 174); The Purpose of the Creation and the Sacrifice of Christ (No. 160); The Doctrine of Original Sin Part I The Garden of Eden (No. 246) and How God Became a Family (No. 187).

You referred to the man and lion-headed systems; what are the roles or duties of these positions?

A: They are the quadrant commanders of God’s system. They are anointed covering cherubs, and they also appear as such in the Temple in Ezekiel. Revelation shows that they are at the throne of God. They occupy the position senior to the 24 elders, and they are seen in Ezekiel chapter 1 et seq where they are identified as the Cherubim. They have set areas of responsibility as we see from the fact that they do not change their orientation no matter where the throne is headed. Look at the papers: The Meaning of Ezekiel’s Vision (No. 108); How God Became a Family (No. 187); The Government of God (No. 174) and The City of God (No. 180).

Could you please give me as much information about the Hosts as you can. Who exactly are they, how many, their function and roll? Was Jesus part of the Host?

A: The Host are the sons of God. They are called messengers only from the fact of their mission to man. Angel is a derivation of the Greek word for messenger. "Malak" in the Hebrew has become "Malaikat" in the Arabic, and on into the Indonesian etc.

The Host are centred on the throne of God and serve Him. Christ was one of those sons of God in the beginning. The process is explained in the papers How God Became a Family (No. 187); The Government of God (No. 174) and also The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243).

We are to become sons of God and elohim and that is covered in the paper The Elect as Elohim (No. 1). The Meaning of Ezekiel's Vision (No. 108) also has information of interest regarding the Cherubim. How we all fit together is covered in the paper The City of God (No. 180).

What was the cause of the rebellion of the host?

A: It was always understood as being their objection to our creation. The Koran gives this as the specific reason. That is why Satan is the accuser of the brethren. They accuse us night and day to God. Look at the papers How God Became a Family (No. 187) and The Government of God (No. 174). Lost Sheep and the Prodigal Son (No. 199) is also of interest in this matter as is The Judgment of the Demons (No. 80).

Could a cherub rebel and lose his position? If so what does the future hold for him?

A: Yes one, Satan, and perhaps two did rebel. They can repent like all of God’s sons. Look at the paper The Judgment of the Demons (No. 80) and also Lost Sheep and the Prodigal Son (No. 199). God’s mercy endures forever.

If one third of the host rebelled and there are 30 in the inner council one could speculate 10 rebelled. Is that why there are 10 components; 7 church eras, 2 witnesses, and Messiah needed to repair the problem/breach created by the hosts rebellion?

A: One might speculate that way and it would seem logical, however the figures used by the Satanist cells are of the order of twelve/twelve. It seems they actually might have got more from the inner council than a third. However, over all they got a third as it says. Perhaps it was two cherubs and the ten. We will know when we get to Jerusalem and Christ gives us new information.

The ten components of the Temple are not related to individuals, save in the Messiah and the two witnesses. The seven are churches unless we identify the seven angels of the seven churches as potential replacements in the host, and the human elements as the new section.

If the fallen angelic host (the demons) can repent and still become sons of God, then maybe you believe that the unrepentant demons will be killed forever? What is the difference then, between us and them? Are people just another more creative way of doing the same thing that is done with angels?

A: Yes, that is the answer. The human creation with the family system was another way of giving the angels similar responsibilities of the human family, but with greater oversight. When Satan objected to our creation and the third of the host objected and rebelled with him, they were then given responsibility for us. They became our accusers instead of our spiritual parents. They became an obstruction to the plan and our salvation. After the final rebellion at the end of the Millennium, the demons will be reduced to physical form and die. This is the sense of being brought down to the side of the Pit and to die like any man, as we see in Ezekiel 28 and also the same sense in Isaiah 14. This aspect has been examined in the paper The Fall of Egypt The Prophecy of Pharaoh’s Broken Arms (No 36); and Lucifer: Light Bearer and Morning Star (No. 223). They will then be placed within the physical resurrection at the Second or General Resurrection of the Dead. One can imagine the difficulties they will face when dealt with, in examining their roles over the last 6000 years and the havoc they caused even by simply failing to prevent false action, let alone actually inducing it in the human host.

It was probably to escape this accounting that they developed the theory and doctrine among the mystery cults, especially the Orphic, of the daemon among the humans which was a fallen theos or god, and which had to be purged in order to return to heaven. The inducement of humans in the endeavour was probably a reaction and a desire to be returned to their former estate without enduring the process of the second and physical resurrection under the human elect of the First Resurrection.

The soul doctrine is an invention of Socrates of the "psuche" in reaction to the Orphic doctrines, and from which we get the immortal soul and which later went to the heaven of the Gnostics. The eternal soul is another lie, on the same vein as demons cannot die and they cannot repent. Christ was reduced from one of the elohim to the form of a man and he died on the cross, was resurrected and ascended into heaven. If he could do that, then so can any one of the demons. God has no limitations in the creation. Look at the papers The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243); The Judgment of the Demons (No. 80); The Resurrection of the Dead (No. 143); The Soul (No. 92); Lost Sheep and the Prodigal Son (No. 199); The Socratic Doctrine of the Soul (No. B6).

I have read up on the paper entitled The Nephilim (No. 154). The angels involved in this sin to create Nephilim were clearly male in origin. So, does that mean that all the spiritual creation is closer to a male type as we understand male and female, or are there also spirit beings that would be closer to the female species?

A: The sons of God have the capacity to materialise in whatever form. If they can appear as a man, they can also appear as a woman and do appear as women often, hence Fatima etc. They appeared as Balaam’s donkey in one instance. Satan is termed the serpent and may well have literally appeared to Eve in that guise. We make the mistake of thinking that the Spirit world is just another copy of this one. We see through a glass darkly.

The Spirit world has the capacity to move through time and space without the limitations we understand or think within. Mass, space, time, gravity and energy are equivalent expressions of the single fundamental essence we understand as spirit. Some of our scientists have made the error of assuming an immanent God from this basis.

The sons of God were all gathered together here when the world was created. Their leaders, the Morning Stars, sang for joy. Satan was among them as a Morning Star and the anointed Covering Cherub. The function of woman was the capacity by which God would produce more sons of God.

Demons appeared as men to interfere with the creation. They may well have become women but then they would have been tied to the creation and the upbringing of the cuckoos they laid. They were probably emotionally immature for that responsibility without the Holy Spirit of God. Also, the woman was the one they influenced. They lost the Holy Spirit when they finally rebelled and were cast from heaven. They then had to produce the pseudo logon. Thus, they are no longer consubstantial. Look at the paper Consubstantial with the Father (No. 81).

We will all be asexual in the resurrection. The second physical resurrection also seems to demand that asexuality. Look at the paper The Resurrection of the Dead (No. 143) and Outline Timetable of the Age (No. 272).

Are you aware of any scriptures besides Psalm 8:5 that refer to spirit beings (other than the Father and the One that became Christ) as elohim?

A: Yes, there are a few texts. Moses is referred to as an elohim in Exodus 7:1. Abraham is referred to as an elohim in the original Hebrew text in Genesis 23:6, which is termed Mighty Prince in the English.

Satan is referred to as an elohim or theoi in various texts. Paul says there are many theoi (theoi polloi) or elohim in the New Testament. Zechariah 12:8 said that the household of David will become elohim with the Angel of Yahovah (Jehovah) at our head. It is written: "I said ye are gods and Scripture cannot be broken" (Jn. 10:34-35). Look at the paper The Elect as Elohim (No. 1).

Psalm 45:6-7 says that Christ, our elohim, was anointed with the oil of gladness above his partners. Thus, there is a council. Psalm 82 deals with this aspect. The other references are covered in that paper. Also look at the The Angel of YHVH (No. 24).

Are the 1000 sacrifices offered by Solomon in the Tabernacle referring to the council of the 1000 sons of God? Just as Job 33:23-24 talks of one of 1000 and redemption through Messiah; or Genesis 20:16 mentions the 1000 pieces of silver to Abraham for the vindication of Sarah but the entire council needed the appeasement for the offence; or Song of Songs with 1000 shields (Eph. 6:16 shield of faith to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.) Bottom line, do all these scriptures tie to God’s administrative council of a 1000?

A: Yes, the reference in Genesis 20:16 is in fact an appeasement along the lines we see in Job, where the redemption was from one of the 1000. And the irony of Abimelech, in using the term brother, is because of the sin and damage he suffered.

The notion of being protected by the host is evident as well, as being redeemed by one of the 1000. This is fairly esoteric ground now. Nothing turns on it, other than the view that sin was an offence against God. That was why thirty pieces of silver was paid for Christ. Because it was an offence against the council and it was also deemed the price of a slave

Lucifer

What does the name Lucifer mean?

A: Lucifer means Light bearer. The name comes from his function as the Morning Star of this planet. It is an educative and controlling role which is taken up by Christ and the elect at the end of the age, in the not too distant future, for the millennial reign. The terms are covered in the paper Lucifer: Light Bearer and Morning Star (No. 223).

In remembering that Satan came before God with the angels as told in Job, I am wondering if he still has this access to God and does he still have influence on the angels?

A: Yes, he is the accuser of our brethren and he still has one third of the host under him. Some are held to have repented from the activities of the early Church. He is cast down and knows his time is short. Christ said He saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Thus, he must be cast down. Revelation speaks of the short time and his fury against the Church because of that short time. We are in that time. In fact, we are past the 1260 years of the woman in the wilderness. The Fifth Seal is still continuing and the woman that rides the beast, who is drunk on the blood of the saints, is about to be destroyed. Look at the paper Outline Timetable of the Age (No. 272) and also The Role of the Fourth Commandment in the Historical Sabbath-keeping Churches of God (No. 170).

I believe that Lucifer and Satan are one and the same being. This presents a bit of a problem though for this would mean that Satan was not always evil wouldn’t it? This is looking more like it may be true as Ezekiel 28:15 shows him being perfect from the day he was created. So how better can one be than perfection?

A: Lucifer was the anointed covering Cherub of the Throne of God and he was perfect among the sons of God. Lucifer means, "light bearer" and thus he was the educator of the host and Morning Star of the planet. See the paper Lucifer: Light Bearer and Morning Star (No. 223).

He and the fallen host became iniquitous. They sinned and tried to grasp equality with God. They failed in the test of faith. They became accusers of the brethren at the creation of Adam. Christ was not, and did not seek co-equality with God and did not try to grasp what was not His. He preferred to be given and earn the gift of power by obedience, and so He became a man and He humbled himself unto death, even death on the stake (Phil 2:5-7). See the paper The Purpose of the Creation and the Sacrifice of Christ (No. 160).

He became a son of God in power by His resurrection from the dead (Rom. 1:4). See the paper The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243). All of God’s creation is perfect, but we have the choice to mess it up, and we have done so. The Plan is perfect and includes a safety net, so we will all attain to perfection in God’s time. Look at the paper Outline Timetable of the Age (No. 272).

Some of my friends believe the earth is the place of restraint for the angels that sinned. In Luke 8:31 I read where the demons begged not to be cast into the deep or the Abyss. Also Revelation 9:11, 11:7,17:8, IPeter 3:19, IIPeter 2:4 and Jude 6 leads me to believe there is more to this than just the earth in general. Is Abaddon/Apollyon a king restrained also for a future release or is he the same as Satan? Where might this place be? The ocean possibly?

A: The New Testament term is also "Tartaros" which is reserved specifically for the fallen host. Abbadon or Appollyon is the destroyer and, as such, it is another term for Satan and the system he commands. The fallen host or demons have power over the earth and over mankind for 6000 years. At the return of the Messiah, Satan and the demons are restrained for the thousand years of the Millennium.

The pit is death and the texts indicate that the demons are made to die like any man. They are then dealt with in the Second Resurrection like anyone else. This matter has been examined in the papers The Judgment of the Demons (No. 80) and also in Lost Sheep and the Prodigal Son (No. 199). The timing of the activities is seen from the paper Outline Timetable of the Age (No. 272).

Angels

When asked what is the function of angels or what are they, the most common answer heard is that they are simply messengers indicating that they are basically footmen or errand boys. This does not exactly add up. For instance, the 38th chapter of Job is an explanation to Job as to how everything was created. At verse 7, it says that the sons of God, shouted for joy at the creation. I believe sons of God here refers to the angels, so if they were already around at the creation of the earth, and before the creation of man, then what were they doing up to this point?

A: Yes, that is the point. Angel is from the Greek "aggellos" meaning "messenger" which was applied to the heavenly beings. In the Septuagint the word "aggellos" was used to translate various concepts. It was used to translate "Sons of God" in Deuteronomy 32:8. During the post-Temple period, Jewish scribes changed that to read "Sons of Israel" to get away from the concept of there being sons of God in charge of Israel, as Christ was associated with the Angel of Yahovah as a son of God.

The LXX of Isaiah 9:6 says, "Angel of Great Counsel" for the Messiah who was son of God. Job 1:6 and 2:1 use the term "Aggeloi", "Angels of God" for the "sons of God." The same is also in Job 38:4-7 where "angels" were used for "sons of God". The understanding of the meaning of the Hebrew texts is starting to slip by this time. And the concept of the Hebrew Morning Stars is not well understood by the translators in the LXX translation. Nehemiah says they had to explain the Hebrew to the populace during his time because they no longer understood it, speaking only Aramaic.

Basically, an Angel was a messenger. Before the creation there was no one to carry messages to, and so they were simply all sons of God. When men were created they were sent to men as messengers, and so all of them who were in that capacity were angels. Look at the papers The Angel of YHVH (No. 24); The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243) and How God Became a Family (No. 187). For the long-term plan look at the paper The City of God (No. 180).

Were some people able to recognise angels as soon as they saw them and yet others did not? If they appear as humans are we supposed to know they are angels?

A: The Patriarchs recognised them, as we see by what they did and said in the Bible. It’s the "duck test." If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it’s a duck. Sometimes they are with us and we are not informed. We entertain angels unawares (Heb. 13:2). God makes His wishes known through His servants the prophets (Amos 3:7).

These people speak for God. So too, the sons of God in the heavenly Host speak for God, and are sent to men as "angels" or messengers. Look at the papers on the sons of God for example The Angel of YHVH (No. 24) and also How God Became a Family (No. 187).

I have been presented with Genesis 48:16 as a supporting scripture to pray to angels. What is the correct understanding of this text?

A: This text, and the comment by Stephen, is the only text in the Bible where Christ is addressed in prayer. Moses spoke to him face to face, and stood between him and Israel, as did David. David addresses him is Psalm 45:6-7. When he says: "Therefore God thy God has anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy partners." In each of the cases concerned, it is a direct request to Christ in his role as protector of Israel. Look at the paper The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243).

In each case they are used as teaching comments. How would we know that the Angel of Redemption was the elohim of Israel (Zech. 12:8; Heb. 1:8-9), appointed by his God, unless we had the direct testimony of the Patriarchs in the Scriptures to demonstrate this fact. They reflect the direct relationship of the prophets with Christ. We pray to and worship only the One True God.

Physical Creation

Nephilim

Were there human beings alive on this planet before Adam, and when was Adam created?

A: According to Bishop Ussher’s chronology, Adam was created in 4004 BCE. We know from archaeology that there were beings created on this planet before Homo Sapiens existed.

Thus, there was another creation prior to Adam. The discussion on what the Bible has to say about this is carried on in the works The Nephilim (No. 154) and Doctrine of Original Sin Part 2 The Generations of Adam (No. 248).

The interpretation of Genesis to confine the creation to the sons of Seth and the sons of Cain was an invention by Augustine of Hippo in the early fifth century. It denied the understanding of the ancients and left Christianity entirely unprepared to cope with the modern scientific finds of the last two hundred years. This one single false doctrine of Augustine has made the destruction of Creation theory with the false doctrine of evolution possible.

Are you aware of any information in the comparison of pre-Adam humanoid DNA and post-Adam DNA? Do you see any conflict with Bible scripture and archaeology finds?

A: Yes, recent tests made on the Neanderthals have isolated their DNA structure and it is a 27-strand system whereas a human is an 8-strand. We are trying to isolate the Cro-Magnon to see the exact divergence between it and modern humans. There seems to be a reluctance to discuss this issue of release of any results, if tests have in fact been done. What we have so far is indicative that modern primates are of a totally unrelated creation to the Neanderthals. The humanoids we have so far from Australia, such as the Arunka and Kowe Swamp people, have marked divergences from modern humans. Their mitochondrial DNA differs from modern humans. The Lake Nitchie Male was a giant. These aspects have been covered in the paper The Nephilim (No. 154).

I understand that the pre-Adamic creation was inferior and as stated in Isaiah has no resurrection. The Nephilim are not resurrected because they are not fit physical receptacles able to be acted upon by the Holy Spirit. Is this correct? After 6000 years of misrule of this planet multiple vectors such as viruses, transposons, etc that are able to insert foreign genetic material into our DNA could cause man to become nearly as corrupt as the Nephilim. If the fallen host were given a much longer time period than 6000 years, they could achieve what they tried to achieve with the Nephilim. Do you agree with this?

A: The solution is that the Creation was made in the image of God so that the Holy Spirit could be implanted or superimposed over it. The degradation of the species is certainly happening. It is probable that the limitation of the creation to 6000 years was to limit the degradation of the species by its genetic isolation and other problems. The lessening of the life spans indicates a problem. Also, it appears that there has been a deliberate attempt to interfere with the DNA makeup of humans by the Host through the pre-flood structure of the Nephilim.

There is no doubt that the Neanderthals were of a completely different system but the later structure was not. Neanderthals reportedly have a 27-strand system and the current primates have an 8-strand system. We have more in common with chimpanzee DNA than with the Neanderthals. Our capacity to survive may well be limited if it went any longer than 6000 years unchecked.

I’ve read several responses on resurrection and you state that the Nephilim have no resurrection, but Satan and his demons will have a chance to repent. Can you explain why?

A: The fallen host were all part of God’s Creation and were made in his image and through His will. They can repent and can be used. The Nephilim were not part of God’s Creation. They were made by the fallen host specifically to frustrate the Plan of God, and they are not in the image of God. Thus, they cannot function with the Holy Spirit as the demons are able to do.

God is obliged logically and morally to extend repentance to His Creation, but not to things created by the demons contrary to His Will. Thus, He will extend that capacity to the demons and they will be judged by us according to Scripture (1Cor. 6:3). In like manner, He has said that capacity will not be extended to the Nephilim. They have no resurrection (Isa. 26:14). Look at the papers The Judgment of the Demons (No. 80); The Resurrection of the Dead (No. 143) and Lost Sheep and the Prodigal Son (No. 199).

Noah was chosen to be saved in the Ark because his lineage was perfect. I understand that to mean that his lineage was not corrupted by the Nephilim. All these humans that were corrupted by the Nephilim and died in the flood would be resurrected wouldn’t they? If all of the Nephilim did not perish in the flood, are their descendants subject to resurrection or not?

A: No, the Nephilim/Rephaim have no resurrection as we know from Isaiah 26:13. The whole matter of who they were and what happened before and after the flood is covered in the paper The Nephilim (No. 154).

Adam and Eve

Why would God desire a physical human creation when He had already created spirit angelic beings to be sons of God? Why not just create more angels? What is the difference in the roles of entering His family?

A: This question is perhaps the most fundamental question to the plan of salvation. God could have made spiritual sons as many as He needed or wanted. Why then did he create a weaker physical creation that was then placed under the spiritual creation?

The same question then applies to the physical creation. Why did God create humans in a sequence of breeding animals that would suffer and perhaps die in the process? Why did they eventually die anyway? Why did He not create them all at once and simply educate them?

The answer is both simple and complex. In this way He would have to be obeyed and the entire creation would have to walk by faith. The angelic host would have to see the physical creation destined for some event as sons of God and would have to walk by faith and nurture them as ministering spirits as parents nurture children. The human creation could see even less and that is why faith exhibited in them is greater.

Satan used the creation to bring one third of the host to rebellion. These rebellious sons were then placed in charge of the creation to test both and to judge both.

The church is a group called out to test and judge the demons as they are measured against the standard we set. In the Millennium we will do the job they were set to do now under God's laws. The demons decided to create another system with another structure of worship that does not work. So we see that the structure was made to ensure that the elect walked by faith and only those who exercise faith and obedience are made sons of God in power from the resurrection of the dead.

The sons of God had to be tested by faith and tested by their duties. Thus the spiritual creation was tested by the physical creation and both come to salvation together. Look at the papers How God Became a Family (No. 187); The Judgment of the Demons (No. 80); The Purpose of the Creation and the Sacrifice of Christ (No. 160); and The City of God (No. 180).

What is mankind’s ultimate destiny?

A: The purpose of the creation of man is to rule as God (Zech 12:8). The name Israel means literally "he shall rule as God." We were created to raise us, and the sons of God of the Angelic host in a sense of mutual interaction and shared responsibility. We are to get ourselves, and the Host, through the Resurrections to the City of God. Look at the papers The Purpose of the Creation and the Sacrifice of Christ (No. 160) and The City of God (No. 180). We will rule the heavens and we can only guess, at present, at what God has in store for us and the rest of the Host (1Cor 2:9; Deut 4:19).

In the Garden of Eden, why didn’t Adam rebuke Eve for eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, instead of following along with her?

A. It was his responsibility to rebuke her. He did not and the way we are dealt with was changed. However, God knew that he would do it and that it would also become necessary to send Christ to become leader as the slain lamb. We were written in the Book of the Lamb, The Book of Life and of the Resurrection from the foundation of the world.

Thus, God understood the events and they were provided for in the system of Salvation. Look at the papers The Doctrine of Original Sin Part I The Garden of Eden (No. 246); and Doctrine of Original Sin Part 2 The Generations of Adam (No. 248).

The Old Testament says that Adam was created about 5000 years before Jesus Christ, but actually there has been several civilisations like the Pharaohs in year 4200 BCE and the Chinese before that. Scientifically, they found some human bones dated millions of years back. How can we justify this contradiction?

A: According to Ussher's chronology, which follows the Bible, Adam was created in 4005/4 BCE. The explanation of the pre-Adamic creation is contained in the paper The Nephilim (No. 154). Look also at the papers The Doctrine of Original Sin Part 1 The Garden of Eden (No. 246) and Doctrine of Original Sin Part 2 The Generations of Adam (No. 248).

Do you have any idea why so many of the children’s stories only represent Adam and Eve sinning and making themselves loin coverings of fig leaves (Gen. 3:7)? Most accounts stop the story there and do not explain the time frame, how Adam and Eve were being taught by God, or how even after their sin God made them garments of skin and clothed Adam and his wife (Gen.3:21).

A: The stopping of the text here is based on a number of false premises. Firstly, the efforts by them were man-made efforts and in contrast to the God-made clothing of animal skins. The emphasis is thus on the human effort and not on God’s effort (cf. Romans 8:3).

The popular presentations are for a number of reasons. The Gnostics and their doctrines were ascetic vegetarians and wished to conceal the fact of the killing of animals and the consumption of meat. Look at the paper Vegetarianism and the Bible (No. 183).

The leaves also have symbolism among the mystery cults. Thus, they were portrayed more readily. The oak leaves are clearly condemned in the Bible. The priests of Attis in Rome also tattooed themselves with ivy leaves, which were sacred to their god. Thus, the leaf is often used in their symbols, as was the phallus or Asherah, and the kid.

Was the forbidden fruit really an apple? I don't see that in my Bible, could you tell me where it says that Eve ate an apple?

A: The notion that Eve gave Adam an apple is not biblical. It comes from the myths and mysteries and is associated with the golden fruit of discord. The full story is contained in the paper The Doctrine of Original Sin Part 1 The Garden of Eden (No. 246).

I believe in God but one thing I have difficulty understanding is if "Adam and Eve" were supposedly the first humans on earth, then where did all the distinct races of man come from?

A: There is only one race, the human race. We are all brothers. The tongues were confused at Babel. It is a bit like the breeding of animals. The darker skinned people were basically developed, in terms of skin pigmentation, over many years. The fairer ones were in countries where they wore more clothing. However, they are still the same people with the same basic structure. The blood types or categories vary from east to west but they still have the same basic varieties.

In animal terms, we can say that the German Shepherd and the Sheepdog both come from the wolf, and not so long ago. Even though they look different they are both dogs. The creation is dealt with at The Doctrine of Original Sin Part 1 The Garden of Eden (No. 246) and the Doctrine of Original Sin Part 2 The Generations of Adam (No. 248). The pre-Adamic creation destroyed with the flood is covered in the paper The Nephilim (No. 154).

All variations of the human species are explicable in the variations we see occurring from pigmentation and family/tribal likenesses. The finds in the Choukoutien Cave in China indicate the coexistence of families with what we consider vast racial differences within what appears to be the one family group.

These findings by anthropologists are examined in the light of a series of humanoids that existed before modern man but which have no link to them. This matter is examined in the paper The Nephilim (No. 154). The matters have also been examined in the paper The Fall of Egypt (No. 36). This complex matter is too large to be explained here in detail.

God’s word teaches that it is incest to marry a brother or sister, yet how else could the family of Adam and Eve grow? Is it possible He made wives for the sons as He made one for Adam?

A: This matter is explained in the papers Rachel and the Law (No. 281) and also Doctrine of Original Sin Part 2 The Generations of Adam (No. 248). It is also forbidden in other aspects, but Lot produced Ammon and Moab through his daughters contrary to Law. They perceived it as necessity knowing that the world would end by fire and they believed they were in that position then.

‘And Cain knew his wife’. Was she his sister? Why could she live alone before marriage, without being afraid of wild animals?

A: She may have been his sister or she may have been one of the Nephilim. It is likely that she was his sister as that was the only explanation for the sons of Adam keeping their generations pure. Look at the paper The Doctrine of Original Sin Part 1 The Garden of Eden (No. 246); Doctrine of Original Sin Part 2 The Generations of Adam (248); and The Nephilim (No. 154).

Did man eat vegetables or meat first? I say vegetables since they were easier to get than hunting meat.

A: It is believed man had a balanced diet from the beginning (Gen 1:28-30). The Adamic species has a delineated process from the Bible record. This is covered in the papers The Doctrine of Original Sin Part I The Garden of Eden (No. 246) and Doctrine of Original Sin Part 2 The Generations of Adam (No. 248) and also Vegetarianism and the Bible (No. 183). The paper, The Nephilim (No. 154) might give you some other views of interest regarding the last 140,000 years.

There are divisions to this question. In the case of pre-Adamic man, the answer is both. Man was omnivorous and ate both fruits and also grubs and insects on them and in the trees. The body structure of vegetarians make for significant guts, and this is evidenced by Australopithecines skeletal reconstructions such as Lucy.

What was the physical condition of the early biblical people? Did they exercise? What do you know of their diet? What did they do when struck with an illness? Why were so many struck with leprosy and blindness? Didn’t they have a lot of knowledge of medicinal plants, oils and such?

A: Well, if the ages of the patriarchs are any indication, they were of a vastly superior diet and genetic structure than we are. It appears we have seen a degeneration in the age of man as we have gone from a longevity of 120 years to 70 years, and we are varying downwards on that due to other problems. The diet of the ancients can be seen from the paper The Food Laws (No. 15).

Also they had superior forms of grain then which had the necessary vitamins and minerals. We have developed superior yields, which have in many cases decreased benefit. They did get a lot of exercise because they walked everywhere, or rode horses and camels and donkeys. Their knowledge of drugs was reasonably high. We now have direct evidence that they imported tobacco and cocaine into the Middle East from America at the time of King David (ca 1000 BCE). They had extensive use of herbs and medicines.

Our evidence also shows advanced surgery such as trepanning in early times. The failure to keep the quarantine laws resulted in the transmission of leprosy. Blindness often resulted from infections carried from birth through immorality, as it does to this day. They had a great capacity for navigation, and there was a sea and trading empire from Israel and Phoenicia from 1000 BCE onwards. There was degeneration in world conditions from the fourth century. In the sixth century there was a series of cataclysms, along with the attitude of the Church, which contributed to the Dark Ages. From this time, the world lost vast levels of knowledge and we are only now putting together what was actually lost.

Noah

In the past some ministers have said one of Noah’s sons was married to a black woman, one married an oriental woman and one married a white woman. This, they explain (or speculate), was to keep the 3 races alive. After the flood they separated by migrating. I have a hard time believing this and wonder if the true reason we have people of different colours is due to the environment and that we are all really the same "race", the human race, with the same parents Adam and Eve. After all we see a type of evolution within the various "kinds" of animals depending on what part of the world they are from, etc. What do you think about the origin of the various "races"?

A: This view postpones the issue back to Adam (meaning the one who was ruddy or red). Another variation was that Noah had the capacity to throw hybrids, being pure in his generations. This is the real basis of the explanations. Every variety of dog on the planet came from two forms based on the wolf. The capacity to be in various forms was inherent in the early peoples.

Our finds in the Choukoutien Upper Cave in China (discovered 1930 excavated by Pei (1939, 1940) in 1933 show a peculiar group. This one group comprised of two adult males, two adult females, one adolescent, one child, and one baby showed a surprising spread of racial characteristics. The female skulls were a Melanesoid and an Eskimoid. Of the two adult males, one was elderly (estimated at 60), and was relative to the Obercassel skull but was defined as being primitive Mongoloid. Weidenreich (1939) defined these as being of three different racial types, primitive Mongoloid, Melanesoid and Eskimoid type (R. M. and C. H. Berndt Aboriginal Man in Australia, 1965, p. 30).

Professor Berndt was of the view that current Australians are related to the ancient Egyptians and the Indian Dravidians. Egyptian relics have allegedly been found in some parts of Australia (cf. notes to I. L Idriess’ Drums of Mer first edition re the ancient artefacts in the caves of the Zogo Le). There are also numerous boomerangs from the tomb of Tutankhamen now in the Egyptian museum.

The Choukoutien finds were in the one cave in the same strata, all living together so it seems. This indicates that the family groups, who resettled China, all had the diverse genetic capacity to encompass at least three racial groups in the one family system. This matter has not been fully examined from this point of view for obvious reasons.

The Epic of Gilgamesh states that Noah also took the artisans on board with their families as well. If looked at in this light, then the eight people were the heads of families and the women were not counted among the eight. This raises other matters as well. The eruption of the Nephilim is placed in the Midrash at the foot of Og, who allegedly stowed away on the top of the ark and Noah allowed him to remain. Look at the paper The Nephilim (No. 154).

The question of the diversity of current racial types is simply explained as one of pigmentation and localised breeding patterns. For example, one can tell someone from Manx as they have a peculiar line to their ears in relation to the jaw, which is not seen elsewhere in Britain. Pigmentation is simply resistance to the sun’s rays. Modern mapping of the genome and DNA shows we are all from the same ancestors, and not all that far back. The discussion is now merely where and how far.

Was Noah’s flood a worldwide catastrophe or was it limited to the Mediterranean area? If it was worldwide, how was it possible for Noah to gather all the species of plants and animals into the ark?

A: The Bible indicates it was worldwide. A localised flood scenario has been mooted to resolve the problems seen by geologists and archaeologists working to the current accepted theories of planet age. The Ark was basically a box that God told Noah to build, which Noah did, over a period of one hundred years.

The animals of the earth were the responsibility of God to collect, and he did so collect them. The genetic diversity of the animals was contained in the mother species, and they had the capacity over the following millennia to diversify. Plants did not need to be gathered as they were seed driven and simply germinated when conditions were ready, as they do now. The same is true with spores and others.

Many seeds were taken into the ark as well in the form of food supplies. With, for example, the desert plants and eucalyptus, fire is needed to germinate the seeds. Wood is preserved underwater for a long time, so all the forests were either swept to certain areas, as appears to be the case in the North Pole area with the trees and mammoths etc., or left in areas to generate, first through grass to start the next series off.

We are finding out more and more about the species of the planet. In fact, the procedures for mapping the human genome have shown that the entire creation is based on a similar model. All humans are 99.99 percent exactly the same, and so it is with other species. There is no race other than the human race, and most animals are of the one common species. Mammals are all based on a similar blue print.

We know that this is not so with the DNA of the Neanderthals for example as they are an entirely different structure to our DNA and even chimpanzees, with which we have more in common than the Neanderthals. Look at the paper The Nephilim (No. 154).

During a sermon, our pastor was preaching on faith. He made the statement, "Look at the faith of Noah. God told Noah to build the ark before he even had a family (a wife, three sons, and daughters-in-law)." He said if you will read this chronologically you will see that this is true. Can you explain this to me?

A: The Bible says at Genesis 6:10: "And Noah begat three sons Shem, Ham and Japeth." He then proceeds to tell Noah (V. 14) that the earth is corrupt and orders him to build the ark. The sons helped to build the ark. Other versions of this flood account all agree in this aspect (cf. The Epic of Gilgamesh).

The genealogies, up to the flood, are covered in the paper, Doctrine of Original Sin Part 2 The Generations of Adam (No. 248). The genealogy of Shem, the youngest son of Noah, is covered in the paper Melchisedek (No. 128).

Tower of Babel

What in your opinion was God's purpose at the Tower of Babel? What do you think He was trying to accomplish?

A: The dispersion at Babel was to ensure that mankind did not become as elohim, of their own accord and destroy the planet under Satan before time.

Satan had been given 6000 years as Morning Star of the planet. As it is Christ is going to have to return so that we are saved. If he did not there would be no flesh left alive. The plan of Salvation can be seen from the papers. Look at the papers Outline Timetable of the Age (No. 272); Lucifer: Light Bearer and Morning Star (No. 223); The Millennium and the Rapture (No. 95). There are also many other papers dealing with prophecy.

What exactly was happening at the tower of Babel, and why was God so worried about it? Seems to me there must have been a bit more going on there than just building a church with a tall steeple that would reach the heavens.

A: Yes, there was a lot more to it. The false system at Babel was destroyed and the languages confused so that man would not progress at a rate that was so fast as to endanger the existence of the planet too early within the time frame given to Satan.

They would become as elohim but without the Holy Spirit and thus destroy this planet and hence, the Plan of God. The system you see unfolding now might have happened two or more thousand years ago. The planet would not exist now.

Abraham

Did Hagar or Ishmael receive any blessings for their relationship to Abram?

A: Indeed, they did receive a blessing. Christ himself said, at the direction of God, He would bless Ishmael and make a mighty nation from him (Gen. 21:17-18).

Look at the various papers that deal with Abraham: Why was Abraham called "the Friend of God" (No. 35); The Angel and Abraham’s Sacrifice (No. 71); Abraham and Sodom (No. 91) and also look at Genesis 22, Judaism, Islam and the Sacrifice of Isaac (No. 244).

The Law

Is there a reason why the commandments were given on two tables of stone?

A: Yes, there is a reason. The two tablets were small and they were carried by Moses. They appear to have been written on both sides. The tablets appear to be duplicates as a double witness. The tablets of the law were placed within the Ark of the Covenant (See the papers The Ark of the Covenant (No. 196); and Distinction in the Law (No. 96).

The Law is explained in the series The Law of God (No. L1). The concept of being written on stone was one of God, who is the rock (Ps 17:31) from which we, and Christ, are all cut (Isa 51:1) and who engraves his Law in our hearts through his power. He becomes all in all.

In Deuteronomy 10 it talks about the covenant (Ex. 34:28) being the Ten Commandments that were written on the 2 tablets. In verse 5 it says he put the tablets IN THE ARK. Is this the LAW that is the New Covenant that is written in the minds and hearts of the elect? Is there more significance to this that you could expound on?

A: Yes, that is the significance both of the Ark and of the tablets being placed inside it. The Law of God was to be placed in the hearts and minds of the elect. This aspect is examined in the papers: Distinction in the Law (No. 96); The Ark of the Covenant (No. 196); The Oracles of God (No. 184); and The Law of God (No. L1).

Are the commandments in two lots of 4 and 6 or 5 and 5?

A: Assuming you refer to the divisions based on the two great Commandments of the Law; the First Great Commandment is "You shall love the Lord your God with all your mind and with all your heart and with all your strength." The second is like unto it. "You shall love your neighbour as yourself." The Commandments fall into two natural divisions of the first four dealing with the love of God and the last six dealing with the love of man. Thus, the Fourth Commandment dealing with the Sabbath day, covers the aspects of the Law and the testimony concerning God’s Calendar and His worship and is the technical end of the First Great Commandment proper.

The Fifth Commandment, concerning the love of father and mother, is the first with a promise. It relates to life on this earth and the formation of the family, which is the building block on which God has chosen to build society. This extends into the heavenly family of the Church and the sons of God. Thus, this Commandment forms a link between the first four and the last six so that, in a sense, both answers are correct.

The Law is divided into two great commandments the first four and the last six linked by the fifth, which joins both the First and the Second Great Commandments. Look at the papers in the series on The Law of God (No. L1), and the associated reference papers as well.

Could you please define and interpret the first commandment?

A: It is written (Ex. 20:2-3):

"I am the Lord thy God Which has brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the House of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me."

Roman Catholics join the second commandment to this commandment and split the tenth commandment into two, which is impossible, based on the text in Deuteronomy 5.

The words for "Lord thy God" here is not simply "Yahovah." It is "Yahovah Elohim" meaning God in His extended and creative sense. If it were Yahovah, as Bullinger says, it might be argued that the Law was limited to Israel, which it is not.

The first two Commandments are in the first person. The remainder are in the third person. Deuteronomy has the same structure for the first two Commandments. The section in Deuteronomy is argued to be a repeat and definite explanation by Moses of the original ten, which were in Exodus (cf. Soncino Commentary, Chumash p. 458).

"Thou shalt have no other elohim before me" means that no other elohim is to be placed before, or worshipped as, or in place of the One True God, who in the singular is "Eloah" the God of the Temple who placed His name at Jerusalem. See the text in Ezra 4:24-7:26 for the use of Eloah in relation to the Temple and the Law. It is the Law of Eloah.

Eloah has a son from Proverbs 30:4-5. Thus, the Son is not the One True God, Eloah. The First Commandment and the application of the Law and the Prophets have been outlined in the text Law and the First Commandment (No. 253) which was prepared for the Reading of the Law in the Sabbath Year of 1998.

Knowledge of the One True God, and Jesus Christ whom He sent, is eternal life (John 17:3). Explanation of the names of God and of the position of Jesus Christ are contained in the papers The Names of God (No. 116); God Revealed Chapter 1 - Ancient Monotheism (No. G1); and The Pre-Existence of Jesus Christ (No. 243).

Exodus 16 (before the 10 commandments were given) vs 23 "...then he said to them, This is what the Lord meant: Tomorrow is a Sabbath Rest (how did they know it was the Sabbath since it wasn’t given at Sinai? It must have been through oral transmission from Adam to Moses) a Holy Sabbath to the Lord." Vs 28 "Then the Lord said to Moses ‘How long do you refuse to keep my commandments and my instruction? Vs 29 "The Lord has (past tense) given you the Sabbath...". When did God give them the Sabbath?

A: The law was given to Adam at the creation. Not only was the Sabbath established then but also the sacrifices and the Calendar were established. Abel’s sacrifice was more acceptable to God than Cain’s because it was a blood sacrifice and he was more righteous.

The SDA doctrine of preflood vegetarianism is quite wrong, as is the notion that the law was not given until Sinai. Look at the paper Vegetarianism and the Bible (No. 183); and also Rachel and the Law (No. 281). The Passover also preceded Sinai and the New Moons, and the sequence of the Calendar was set in place from the first week of the creation. Look also at the paper God’s Calendar (No. 156). Look also at the papers The Doctrine of Original Sin Part I The Garden of Eden (No. 246) and Doctrine of Original Sin Part 2 The Generations of Adam (No. 248). The preflood system was destroyed because it broke the laws of God. See the paper The Nephilim (No. 154).

The commandments were in place and known when Abraham went into Egypt. See the paper Abraham and Sodom (No. 91). Look also at the paper The Doctrine of Balaam and Balaam’s Prophecy (No. 204). Abraham tithed to Melchisedek over four hundred years before Sinai. See the paper Melchisedek (No. 128).

The Fourth Commandment covers a system of God’s order and the system will be enforced when Christ returns. Look at the paper Law and the Fourth Commandment (No. 256). The Sabbaths will be kept with the New Moons (Isa. 66:23). The feasts will be kept and the nations will send their representatives to Jerusalem each year, or they will get no rain in due season and the plagues of Egypt will be brought down on them. This is Scripture and Scripture cannot be broken.

Reading the Law

We are seeing instruction at Deuteronomy 31:9-12 to read the Law every Sabbath year at the Feast of Tabernacles. On which day at the Feast is this to be done? The idea that the law is to be read on one day is a Jewish idea and they do it on the Last Great Day.

A: The Law was read over the entire feast in the seventh year. To read the Law and the testimony correctly, utilising the Law and the Prophets and explaining it correctly as Ezra and Nehemiah did at Jerusalem, takes the entire feast of Tabernacles.

That is why God demands it be done every seventh year, and that it is set aside for the purposes of the reading so that Israel does not forget the Laws of God. Look at the papers Reading the Law with Ezra and Nehemiah (No. 250) and also the Law series listed under The Law of God (No. L1) which were read at the last commanded Reading of the law in 1998.

Society

How does the uncleanness until sundown relate to us today as being sanctified? Is there a time now, or a time in the future that He does not want us to sleep with our wives? If so, when and why would this be do you think?

A: The whole process of sanctification for the Seventh of the First month and the Tenth of the Seventh month logically requires fasting from all aspects, including our partners.

The separation from our partners in total will come at the Advent. The High Priests always regarded themselves as being separate when they went into the Temple on the sacred days. They disqualified themselves when ritually unclean. We have to prepare ourselves to enter into a relationship with Christ.

Could you please explain these passages about the days and what is meant about not coming near your wives? I believe this has to do with the second coming of Jesus, but I am not really sure.

A. The process involves the sanctification of the elect. Under the law a man was ritually unclean if he had an issue of semen until sundown and the aim here was to ensure the host of Israel was sanctified in the day that the Lord was to come to them.

The process of the sanctification of Israel is examined and explained in the papers The Sanctification of the Temple of God (No. 241) and also in the paper The Sanctification of the Simple and the Erroneous (No. 291). See also Ezekiel 45:18-20.

The entire process of the calendar and the sanctification that takes place in the structure of the plan of God as explained in the calendar and its Sabbaths new Moons and Holy Days all point to Messiah and the restoration of the planet. Look at the papers God's Calendar (No. 156); and Law and the Fourth Commandment (No. 256).

We are the Temple of God and the Law of God will live in our hearts. We will go from the church to the nations to the world as the Temple of God and will become the City of God. Look at the papers The Oracles of God (No. 184); Measuring the Temple (No. 137); and The City of God (No. 180).

Why was a woman considered unclean for forty days after giving birth to a male child, and eighty days after giving birth to a female child?

A: There are some very difficult issues arising from the laws of female purification (cf. Purification and Circumcision (No. 251)). Science has studied food in many of its aspects, especially its physiology and nutritional value. As a result, we can now understand why certain foods are "clean" and others are not and have been forbidden to us (see the paper The Food Laws (No. 15)). However, for generations we have been following those food laws simply because God told us to. We understand that God gave us His laws in order for us to be able to lead healthy, well balanced, well ordered lives. The laws relating to women have not been studied in the same way, therefore we must do as we have always done. Rely on the fact that if God has said so, then it is in our best interests to do so. These matters are also qualified in and by their spiritual aspects, as they relate to Messiah.

The term "unclean woman" might bother many people. It seems to be offensive, but it is not. It is simply a time of separation because the woman requires rest and understanding. The term "unclean" is not the equivalent of "sinner." The purification is scientifically a time of cleansing for seven days. It is a natural and physical act, where the lining of the womb, in not receiving a fertile ovum for the process of impregnation, is rejected during menstruation. Normally, it is a period of seven days in every 28. This process of cleaning permits the continuation of human kind for which this law, in the same manner as all the others, is a blessing from God (Gen. 1:28). The fulfilling of the laws are tied to the daily life of the human being. The Law of God is in force in its totality both physically and spiritually (2Cor. 7:1).

In the text in Leviticus 12:4 we see the term "to touch not what is holy." In these terms we see the parallel symbolism that goes to setting apart the elect in purification. This distinction was made until Christ. The theory was that the woman in her condition would defile that which was holy. However, that which was holy would also sanctify that which was in a state of purification. For this reason, the woman who was in a state of discharge and in need of cure was made clean by touching Christ’s garment. This did not make Christ unclean but rather the Holy Spirit flowed from Him to her making her clean.

Matthew 9:20-22 And, behold, a woman, which was diseased with an issue of blood twelve years, came behind him, and touched the hem of his garment: 21 For she said within herself, If I may but touch his garment, I shall be whole. 22 But Jesus turned him about, and when he saw her, he said, Daughter, be of good comfort; thy faith hath made thee whole. And the woman was made whole from that hour. (KJV)

This action pointed towards two things. One was that Christ was the new High Priest whose hem was set apart from Exodus 28:33-34; 39:25-26 and whose headband was also Holiness to the Lord (Ex. 28:36; 39:30). The second lesson was that by faith through the Holy Spirit cleanliness and purification are extended to the sick and the infirm. This is repeated again in Matthew, that we might see the importance of the presence of Christ to the impact of the Law and the prophets and the restoration of the sick and the infirm and the unclean.

Thus, from the Law, that which was unholy could not touch that which was holy. This was asked of the priests and the answer was given. Yet from God’s own law and prophecy the same situation pointed towards a time when God would pour out his Spirit on all flesh and make it Holy within His law and He would write it on their hearts. This action was accomplished through Messiah.

Thus all flesh was made holy in the Spirit and was cleansed through Messiah in the Holy Spirit. The Purification legislation pointed towards the cleansing of the human mother as Israel the Church, and Bride of Christ, and mother of the new nation. From this position we see that the mother is cleansed and may partake of the Lord’s Supper and Passover as one of the elect, being cleansed in the Holy Spirit.

If Christians are supposed to keep the Old Testament food laws, what about other Old Testament laws such as not wearing garments mingled of wool and linen? What about the quarantine legislation, and when a woman has an issue of blood? Are Christians to observe these also?

A: Yes, they are supposed to keep those laws. Some matters are covered in the paper Purification and Circumcision (No. 251). Quarantine legislation is very important and badly neglected. TB was eradicated in Australia by concerted effort forty years ago and now, through failure to observe strict quarantine, it is back and some of it is resistant.

When one is asked to testify in a court of law, one is asked to "swear." But I believe scripture indicates not to swear. Any suggestions of how to handle the situation?

A: Israel swore oaths before God. The Law says thou "shalt not swear by my name falsely, nor profane the name of thy God. I am the Lord" (Lev. 19:12). There are many references to Israel swearing to truth. David swore an oath to Jonathan (1Sam. 20:12). Israel was made to swear (Ezra 10:5). Isaiah 65:16 prophecies that the earth shall swear by the God of truth and Scripture cannot be broken.

The idea of not swearing in Christianity comes from Matthew 5:34-36 when Christ said: "Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: Nor by the earth; for it is His footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black."

This was interpreted as meaning you shall not swear an oath at all. For that reason, affirmations were permitted in a court of law. The text by Christ is "let your yes be yes and your no be no." The sense of this was that pagans were swearing by their mother’s graves, and by all sorts of other strange ideas. The oath is: "Do you swear by almighty God to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God?" This is in accord with the sentiment of the text in Isaiah. The word "swear" has been changed to "affirm" and the term "Almighty God" has been removed. Pressure for the change came from Atheists and Pagans, but it also assisted the truly devout to avoid the possibility that they were in contravention of the dictum of Christ here in Matthew 5:34-37. Thus, he produced a hedge around the sentiment of swearing using the texts in Exodus 20:7; Numbers 30:2; Deuteronomy 23:21. Thus, we can deduce that Judah had introduced practices regarding swearing under the Law which contravened the Law and the Spirit of God. Look at the papers Law and the Ninth Commandment (No. 262); Law and the Third Commandment (No. 255) and Swearing By God (No. 32)).

What is your view on what the punishment should be for violence on the innocent?

A: The implementation of punishment is contained in the papers on The Law of God (No. L1). Look at the papers: Law and the Sixth Commandment (No. 259); Law and the Seventh Commandment (No. 260); Law and the Eighth Commandment (No. 261) and Law and the Ninth Commandment (No. 262).

In the second resurrection, violence to the innocent is made good by God. All are resurrected and all are retrained in the Holy Spirit. Look at the logic of the release of Satan. At the end of the Millennium, God orders the release of Satan in order to deal with the planet. He also has allowed him to remain in power on this planet for six thousand years when he has the power to restrain him, and does so restrain him for the Millennium.

In this sense God is complicit in the evils of this world and responsible for allowing the evils to take place. Do we then judge God: By no means. This whole creation is a teaching exercise and at the end of it we will lose no one. We will keep the laws of God and love one another because it is clear to us all what will happen when we do not do so. The purpose of all punishment is the rehabilitation and protection of all people concerned.

What is your position on the death penalty? Is it biblical? If so, how should it be accomplished?

A: Yes, every one of the Ten Commandments is backed by the death penalty. The application of the death penalty is covered in the paper Law and the Sixth Commandment (No. 259) and Law and the Fifth Commandment (No. 258).

Leviticus 19:28 and Deuteronomy 14:2 teaches a Bible student what in relation to tattoos?

A: Tattooing and marking or carapacing is an ancient practice that is forbidden under the laws of God. The origins of the system are found in most ancient societies. The word (tat) actually comes from Polynesia and means, "to strike repeatedly." The history and ancient times in both Egypt and Mesopotamia are in the paper Tattooing (No. 5). The earliest tattoos in ancient Egypt had the form of a fly (associated perhaps or seemingly with the god of Ekron) and also a form of cross like a swastika.

I appreciate the Biblical direction to "Owe no man." I have been reading how the 7th year of a 7-year cycle should work. It would appear to me that there is provision to "owe" others at least for a time, otherwise why would debt that lingered past the 6th year need to be forgiven in the 7th year? In this day and age there seems no way to purchase land or houses within 6 years. How can we live in current economic conditions and obey this law?

A: The Bible is quite clear that it is improper to charge interest on any loan. Our world system makes slaves of our children and our poor. No debt can be carried on past the Sabbath year. We should owe no man anything. We should pay our debts. This is very difficult in modern society. Our people have virtually been sold into slavery by the system we have. We are all trying to get out of debt and simplify our lifestyles. We all find this very hard, and we have made it harder for our children than it was for us. The Jews get around this by saying that only applies to the Jews but they are only one of twelve tribes. Our houses are over priced. Our people are destroyed for lack of knowledge and those who obey God’s Laws make themselves prey. Look at the papers on The Law of God (No. L1) especially at Law and the Eighth Commandment (No. 261).

Is it okay to gamble? Surely it is simply spending hard-earned money to make more?

A: The Law works on productive increase. The making of money off the losses of another is contrary to the spirit of the Law of God. The Roman Catholic Church condones and in fact uses gambling. That is almost unique in the English speaking system. Gambling in America and Australia has been allowed to increase and the poker machine system has intruded virtually everywhere, such that the results are catastrophic. Gambling can become compulsive addictive behaviour for some as is the case with alcoholics and other drugs users. Compulsive gamblers lie, cheat and even steal to maintain and support their habit. At this point it destroys relationships, marriages and families. Many resort to suicide when things are out of control.

Problem gamblers have a specific mind-set in which the brain operates differently to that of other people. The prospect of gain makes the brain cross transfer impulses and produces larger than normal activity. They can’t help what they do. The pleasure is in the rush of actually risking all and losing. It is only the loss that is the true and full release. The social costs of gambling are horrendous and it will be stamped out in a just society

Food Laws

We are careful to obey Gods food laws. A friend of ours does not eat mushrooms because they have spores to reproduce and he does not consider a spore to be a seed. Have I been wrong in eating mushrooms?

A: No, Mushrooms can be eaten. This idea came from the concept that as we were given seeds to eat and clean animals and spore driven items were not specifically mentioned then anything that grows from spores is unclean in that they are not mentioned among the foods to be eaten or not eaten.

If spore borne items were not to be eaten as unclean then we would be in real trouble. We could not eat Leavened Bread at all as yeast is a spore product. The offerings at Pentecost would be a bizarre contradiction as the two loaves at Pentecost are leavened. God would be ordering us to contradict his own laws.

Beer is leavened by yeast. Wine is yeast fermented. Wild spores are in the air and we eat them all the time. All food has been exposed to some spore activity. Yet God tells us that only for seven days are we not to eat leaven. This is a case of excess zeal not according to knowledge. The people who said this no doubt are trying to be faithful to what they know but have picked up this error from some of the more way out groups keeping the food laws.

One of the academics in the Oxford/Cambridge system published a book a few years ago now about Christ and the mushroom cult. That sort of reasoning is the result of an overactive imagination. The Church of God should be able to see through this error.

We know the food laws are in effect, but if someone needs supplements, i.e. calcium, should it be from a clean animal or plant-based or because it is not being consumed for food, it does not matter?

A: This is an interesting point. Most food supplements that are required are necessitated by vegetarianism, which is a perversion of Bible laws. If the food laws are obeyed and clean animals are consumed, the necessity for food supplements is considerably reduced. If quality vegetables are consumed in proportion, then the likelihood is reduced. If vitamins were needed, then the manufacturing process would not normally involve unclean animals. In the case of insulin, there are types available from clean animals. The Food laws protect the planet and its environment as well. Look at the papers The Food Laws (No. 15); Vegetarianism and the Bible (No. 183); Wine in the Bible (No. 188); and Balance (No. 209).

Some people I know refuse to eat pork and certain fish. Are they just being fanatical or could there be a valid reason for this in this century with refrigeration available?

A: There is a valid reason for it. The food laws were given in the Bible. God does nothing without good reason. The food laws were dismissed by anthropologists such as Mary Douglas on taboo grounds. Drs. Nanji and French had demonstrated in 1986 that pork was a cause of cirrhosis of the liver. There are a host of other scientific reasons that are covered in the paper The Food Laws (No. 15).

There are sound reasons for not eating all the unclean varieties prohibited in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 and the handling legislation. The Foodlaws were not eliminated in the New Testament and Acts 10 concerns the conversion of the Gentiles, and not Peter eating unclean food. Look also at the Paper Balance (No. 209); Vegetarianism and the Bible (No. 183) and Wine in the Bible (No. 188).

Do biblical food laws prohibit eating meat? Or just certain meats like pork?

A: The food laws prohibit the eating of certain types of meat such as pork. All animals that chew the cud and have cloven hooves are clean to eat. Thus, one can eat a giraffe but not a pig. The pig, among other things, has been demonstrated to cause cirrhosis of the liver due to a chemical in the soft tissue of its flesh that cannot be removed. There are sound scientific reasons for all the food laws.

Fish that can be eaten must have fins and scales. The reason for this is that fish without scales lack the capacity to isolate heavy metals and toxins making them unavailable for human consumption. For example, one can eat tuna but not shark. The reason is that a tuna has scales and that seems to be indicative of a process whereby the mercury levels, while similar to a shark, are bound up with selenium to make it unavailable for human digestion. The selenium is again bound up with arsenates, which are too small to effect human digestion. Prawns and similar seafood have heavy metals in distributed forms throughout their bodies. Oysters cause various entero-viruses and are reinfective agents. Look at the paper The Food Laws (No. 15).

Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 seem to indicate we are to eat certain types of food and avoid other types of food. Do these food laws tie to the ten commandments?

A: All of the law and the prophets are subtended from the Two Great Commandments. These are:

1. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your mind and with all your strength.

2. You shall love your neighbour as yourself.

The Ten Commandments are directly under these. The first four Commandments hang from the First Great and the last six hang from the Second Great Commandment. The Fifth Commandment ties the two together. The responsibility to "make alive" covers a series of aspects both of the environment and of the individual. The well being of the planet depends in part on the food laws. These are explained at the paper The Food Laws (No. 15).

The relationship to the Law is found in the Law series Law of God (No. L1) and particularly at Law and the Fifth Commandment (No. 258) and Law and the Sixth Commandment (No. 259).

All of the Laws of God tie into the Ten Commandments and the prophets explain them all. The New Testament is simply commentary on them. That is why it is so absurd to suggest that Messiah would have eliminated them in any way. That is why we are commanded to read the Law every Sabbath year so that we understand how the Law works and interacts. All of the Law proceeds from the nature of God and reflects that nature.

Tithes and Offerings

I once belonged to a church, which had special offerings that were taken up on the Feast day, seven times during the year. I’ve also read in Deuteronomy 16 and in Exodus 23 that there are three feasts to attend and that offerings were made here. Wouldn’t God be more pleased with seven annual offerings than with only three?

A: If God had wanted seven offerings in a year, He would have said seven and not three times a year. If He had wanted a weekly offering, He would have said that. Instead, He instituted the tithe system and three offerings a year at the three feast seasons. The issue of tithing and offerings is examined in the papers Tithing (No. 161) and Law and the Fourth Commandment (No. 256).

I was studying your paper Tithing (No. 161), when I saw that offerings are to be 3 times a year not 7. I do agree. You also mentioned Atonement is strictly forbidden as an offering. Could you please tell me where I could find the Atonement offering forbidden in these scriptures?

A: The law regarding the Atonement tax is at Exodus 30:15: "The rich shall not give more the poor shall not give less than half a shekel when they give and offering unto the Lord to make an atonement for your souls." Originally it was a tax without exception in Israel. Now it is a tax without distinction paid for us by Christ, and salvation is open to the Gentiles and they enter Israel by grace and adoption as sons of God.

This concept is developed in Acts 10:34; Rom. 3:22,23; 10:12. The offering is a heave offering. Bullinger also understands this point in his notes to the Companion Bible at Exodus 30:15. When an offering is taken up on Atonement, it is a direct violation of the Law and a rejection of the all-embracing power of the redemption of Christ and the extension of Salvation to the Gentiles.

My pastor says that if a believer does not tithe he is stealing from God and therefore is a thief, and that thieves do not go to heaven. Is he scripturally correct?

A: Your pastor is referring to the text in Malachi 3:7-12. If you do not tithe, you rob God. This is covered in the paper Tithing (No. 161). It is a sign of the return of the individual to God. However, it is only one sign and your pastor cannot have it both ways. The Law of God has to be kept and so do the commandments regarding the festivals. The Tithes and Offerings are tied up with the Feasts of the Lord. Look at the paper Law and the Fourth Commandment (No. 256). It is all too common for ministers to appeal to the law regarding tithing, and yet ignore it on all the other important aspects. You may find it interesting to look at the series on The Law of God (No. L1).

No one goes to heaven. It was the test of a true Christian in the early church. If anyone said that they were a Christian and that when they died they went to heaven, they were not to be believed. That was the test of a Christian and a Gnostic. Anyone who said that when they died they went to heaven, showed by that statement they were a Gnostic and not a Christian (see Justin Martyr, Second Apology). This is covered in the papers The Soul (No. 92) and The Resurrection of the Dead (No. 143).

ISRAEL

Weren’t there 12 judges in Israel? Does this have anything to do with there being twelve tribes?

A: The twelve judges of Israel have a relationship to the twelve tribes and were drawn from them. The apostles also head the twelve tribes and the 144,000 are also allocated to them. The twelve apostles and the twelve judges all represent the twenty-four elders of the inner council, and the twenty-four high priests of the division of the Temple also have this symbolism. Look at the papers The City of God (No. 180) and Samson and the Judges (No. 73).

Do you know how many kings there were in Israel from Saul until the deportation by the Assyrians?

A: There is a list of the kings in the Companion Bible at Appendix 50 but the chronology is completely erroneous. The Kings of the combined kingdom of Israel and Judah were Saul, David and Solomon.

Jeroboam reigned over Israel from the Division, and Rehoboam reigned over Judah. From then on the kings of Israel were: Nadab, Baasha, Elah, Zimri (7days), Omri, Ahab, Ahaziah, Jehoram, Jehu, Jehoahaz, Jehoash, Jeroboam II, Zechariah, Shallum (1 month), Menahem, Pekahiah s. of Menahem, Pekah s. of Remaliah, and Hoshea. In 722 BCE, the fall of Samaria to the Assyrians occurred and Israel was taken into captivity. Total: 22 kings of Israel.

This question involves one of the tribes of Israel. The tribes are numbered as thirteen when the two half-tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are counted separately but when they are counted as one single tribe they are numbered as twelve. In Genesis 49 Ephraim and Manasseh are counted as one tribe. In Ezekiel 48 the two half-tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh are treated as two separate tribes, making the number of the tribes thirteen. Regardless of how one counts the tribes, the fact is Dan has been left out here. Why has Dan been left out of the 144,000?

A: The birthright is with Joseph because Reuben lost it through fornication with one of the wives. Levi was the priesthood and so became the thirteenth tribe, but not taking part in the physical blessings of Israel directly but through the tithe, which was given to it as the priesthood. Joseph, as the birthright holder, had a double portion under the law. This went to Ephraim firstly and Manasseh secondly. Look at the papers Law and the Fifth Commandment (No. 258) and The Law of God (No. L1) and the Law series generally.

In Numbers 10 we see the battle order of the tribes of Israel. These are East: Judah, Issachar, and Zebulun; South: Reuben, Simeon, and Gad; West: Ephraim, Manasseh and Benjamin; North: Dan, Asher, and Napthali. These differ from Ezekiel 48, which is a prophetic or millennial system. In that system, Joseph goes back to one allocation and Dan resumes their order. Reuben goes to the North with Judah as firstborn, and this is now the reverse of the order of battle of the original tribes. There is also an allocation of the lands according to the tribes as well, which is not being examined here. The lands of Israel will stretch to the Euphrates.

The text in Revelation 7 refers to the priesthood for the inner priests of Christ comprising the 144,000. These were drawn out as living sacrifices comprising a council of 72 per year for the forty Jubilees of the church in the wilderness. 72 x 2000 equals 144,000. This is explained in the paper The Harvests of God, the New Moon Sacrifices, and the 144,000 (No. 120). Levi’s major function is as a priest tribe therefore they resume their normal duties and take a share in the priesthood of the 144,000.

To achieve this Dan who has another major birthright promise to take up yields part of its inheritance as does Ephraim and they share in the 12,000 of Joseph who is always a combined tribe. Manasseh takes 12,000 in its own right, which is very interesting. Dan then takes its birthright and becomes judge in Israel as promised in Genesis 49:16. This is the reason for the verse: "I have waited for thy salvation O Lord." Only on the return does Dan take up his inheritance as Judge in Israel. This is Scripture and cannot be broken.

Dan then takes its position at the East gate in Ezekiel’s system with Joseph and Benjamin, the children of Rachel. This is the place of entry of the Messiah and hence the seat of Judgment. There is another point also in the birthright promises that has not been taken up as yet, and that is the calling of the people to Jerusalem. That birthright is taken up by Issachar and Zebulun (Deut. 33:18-19). Look at the paper Calling the Peoples to Jerusalem (No. 238). None of these three tribes has exercised these birthright promises as yet and Scripture cannot be broken. God’s word does not come back void or empty.

Does God give any indication as to the criterion for the order of the tribes for battle (as referenced in your answer citing Numbers 10) and for the order of the tribes at the gates (cited in Ezekiel 48)? Levi is not in the battle order (with Ephraim and Manasseh counted as sons of Israel) but Levi is in the gate order (with Ephraim and Manasseh represented by Joseph)?

A: Levi is in the battle order in Numbers 10 carrying the Ark of the Covenant and the Temple, but is broken up for these purpo