Q&A – Page 73 – Church of the Eternal God

What would have happened if Adam and Eve had eaten from the tree of life? What kind of a world would we have today? Would they still have sinned from time to time? If so, what would have been the consequence?

September 3, 2010

First, let us explain what the two trees in the Garden of Eden symbolized.

We are quoting the following excerpts from chapter 2 of our free booklet, “Human Suffering–Why…And How Much Longer?” :

“When God created the first human being, Adam, and his wife, Eve, He placed them in a garden—the Garden of Eden, also called Paradise. God also created two special trees in this garden—the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He told man that he was allowed to eat from all the trees in the garden with the exception of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. This means that man could eat, and should have eaten, from the tree of life.

“These two trees had special symbolic meaning. They represented two ways of life: Eating from the tree of life would have meant following God in obedience to His Word, thereby reaping the benefits of happiness, joy and peace. Eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil meant disobeying God, and listening to and following Satan instead, thereby reaping the curses of unhappiness, sadness, suffering and war!…

How can we have complete or full joy in our lives?

August 27, 2010

In John 17:13, we read: “But now I come to You, and these things I speak in the world, that they [His disciples] may have MY JOY fulfilled in them.”

Joy is one ingredient of the fruit of the Holy Spirit (Galatians 5:22; compare 1 Thessalonians 1:6). When Christ, through the Holy Spirit, lives in us, then HIS joy is in us and will remain in us, and our joy will become more and more full or fulfilled (John 15:11). As we need to ask God the Father for the daily renewal of the Holy Spirit, so we need to ask for the fullness of God’s and Christ’s joy in our lives (compare John 16:24). It is God who can fill us with all joy (Romans 15:13)–even and especially in times of trials and difficulties. It is possible for us, then, to rejoice always (1 Thessalonians 5:16; compare 2 Corinthians 6:10).

If Satan cannot heal, how do you explain "miraculous healings," which apparently do not originate with God?

August 20, 2010

In our last Q&A, we explained that God did not give Satan or his demons the power to heal human beings. In this Q&A, we want to explain “miraculous healings,” “caused” by Satan, which, upon further scrutiny, prove to be not true healings at all.

In our free booklet, “Angels, Demons and the Spirit World,” we wrote the following in Part 2, “The World of Demons,” on pages 42-44, 51:

“We must not underestimate the power and influence of Satan and his demons. The Bible tells us that Satan ‘deceives the whole world’ (Revelation 12:9). His biggest deception, no doubt, is to convince unsuspecting man that he does not even exist. He deceives others by pretending that he is an ‘angel of light’ (2 Corinthians 11:14). Many preach as ‘his ministers,’ transforming themselves ‘into ministers of righteousness’ (verse 15).

Can Satan heal?

August 13, 2010

The short answer is: Absolutely not. We will explain the reason for this conclusion in this and the next Q&A.

It is important to fully understand that Satan and his demons, as well as God’s holy angels, are not all-powerful. They can only do what God allows them to do. Even in the spiritual created realm, God has placed limitations, as far as power, authority and ability are concerned.

One example is when Gabriel appeared to Daniel to deliver to him a message from God. Gabriel struggled for three weeks to get past the prince of the kingdom of Persia, a very powerful demon. When the archangel Michael came to help, Gabriel was able to free himself from the demon and to reach Daniel. We read in Daniel 10:10-13, 20-21:

“Suddenly, a hand touched me, which made me tremble on my knees and on the palms of my hands. And he said to me, ‘O Daniel, man greatly beloved, understand the words that I speak to you, and stand upright, for I have now been sent to you.’ While he was speaking this word to me, I stood trembling. Then he said to me, ‘Do not fear, Daniel, for from the first day that you set your heart to understand, and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard; and I have come because of your words. But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me twenty-one days; and behold, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, for I had been left alone there with the kings of Persia… And now I must return to fight the prince of Persia; and when I have gone forth, indeed the prince of Greece will come… No one upholds me against these, except Michael your prince.”

Should all of God's ministers forgo employment with the Church and refuse to accept any monetary support from the Church?

August 6, 2010

In our last Q&A, we wrote:

“Paul, in bringing the gospel to the Thessalonians, worked: ‘…nor did we eat anyone’s bread free of charge, but worked with labor and toil night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, not because we do not have authority, but to make ourselves an example of how you should follow us’ (2 Thessalonians 3:8-9).”

Does this mean that God’s true ministers, in following the perceived example of Paul, must not seek employment with the Church of God and that they must not seek to be remunerated or otherwise recompensed by the Church for their services?

This is not what Paul is stating in 2 Thessalonians 3:8-9; nor is it what was implied in our Q&A.

Rather, the Jamieson, Fausset and Brown commentary gives the following explanation:

“They preached gratuitously though they might have claimed maintenance from their converts… The Philippians did not regard it as a ‘burden’ to contribute to his support [Philippians 4:15-16], sending to him while he was in this very Thessalonica… Many Thessalonians, doubtless, would have felt it a privilege to contribute, but as he saw some idlers among them who would have made a pretext of his example to justify themselves, he waived his right.”

Acts 2:44 describes the beginning of the Church of God, and it states that everyone “had all things in common.” How does this apply, today?

July 30, 2010

As other Scriptures show, this event was unique to that time in the building of the Church of God; however, this example also reveals the type of commitment that may be needed when the necessity arises.

The context of this account happened surrounding the Day of Pentecost and then the immediate period of time subsequent—perhaps several weeks and months.

Let’s first take a look at the account as recorded in Acts 2:42-47:

“And they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers. Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles. Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need. So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart…”

Please explain the passage in Habakkuk 1:5

July 23, 2010

Even though most scholars feel that the prophet Habakkuk ministered during the “death throes” of the ancient nation of Judah–just prior to their Babylonian captivity–nothing is known about the prophet, including his age or his family.

It is clear, however, that Habakkuk’s writings are not limited to the time of ancient Judah. Rather, the book of Habakkuk is a prophecy about our times today. For instance, we read in Habakkuk 2:1-3:

“I will stand my watch And set myself on the rampart, And watch to see what He will say to me, And what I will answer when I am corrected. Then the LORD answered me and said: ‘Write the vision And make it plain on tablets, That he may run who reads it. For the vision is yet for an appointed time; But AT THE END it will speak, and it will not lie. Though it tarries, wait for it; Because it will surely come, It will not tarry.”

Did the Father really forsake Christ?

July 16, 2010

When Jesus was dying a terrible death on the cross, He cried out, just before He died, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?” (Matthew 27:46). Did He really mean it? Did the Father forsake Him at that moment? If so, why? And if not, why would Jesus have uttered those words?

Some, not understanding the significance and deep meaning of Christ’s words, say that He just shouted out these words to fulfill a prophecy from Psalm 22:1. They contend that Jesus repeated the words written down by David in the Old Testament, just to show that He was the Messiah.

Even though Jesus had inspired David to pen down these words, which WERE pointing at the time of His crucifixion, this does not mean that they are not to be understood quite literally, and that the Father did not in fact forsake Jesus at that moment. If He did not, then both the prophecy written down in the book of Psalms, referring to Christ, and Christ’s words, while hanging on the cross, would constitute a lie. If the Father did not forsake Christ at that moment, then Christ was saying something which did not occur–and no “interpretation” to the contrary could do away with the fact that Jesus would have lied at that moment.

Does God suffer because of man?

July 9, 2010

Even though this might be difficult for us to understand, God does indeed suffer and experience mental pain when He sees that we suffer. Every loving father or brother would feel mental anguish when he observes that his children or brethren suffer innocently or because they go the wrong way and inflict pain upon themselves […]

Was the harlot Rahab, mentioned in the book of Joshua, the same person who is mentioned in Matthew 1:5, as being an ancestor of Jesus Christ?

July 2, 2010

The answer is yes. She was that very same person. And this is significant, as we will see.

To begin with, we should mention that Christ’s genealogy, as set forth in Matthew 1:1-17, is different, to an extent, from the genealogy as set forth in Luke 3:23-38. The reason is that the genealogy in Matthew “is traced through Joseph, Jesus’ legal (though not natural) father, and it establishes His claim and right to the throne of David (1:6). The genealogy in Luke 3:23-38 is evidently that of Mary…” (compare Ryrie Study Bible).

There can be no doubt that the woman Rahab, who is described in the book of Joshua as protecting and rescuing the Israelite spies in the city of Jericho, was a harlot (see our Q&A on this topic).

In that above-mentioned Q&A, we are also saying that “Rahab later married Salmon and brought forth Boaz. Boaz married Ruth and brought forth Obed. Obed, in turn, brought forth Jesse, the father of David (compare Matthew 1:5-6). David became the forefather of Joseph, the husband of Mary, and of Mary herself… “

We also said: