The Church

If the Song of Solomon is a picture of Christ and His bride, could the Jews appreciate or understand it?

We must remember that many promises in the Old Testament connect Israel in a brideship relation with Jehovah, just as the New Testament promises connect the Lord Jesus Christ in His character as the Lamb, with the Church in a brideship relation. Such Old Testament passages as Hosea 2:2 and Jeremiah 81:32 and Isaiah 54:5 illustrate this. You will see, therefore, that a godly Jew could find much in the Song of Solomon upon which to feed his heart in tender love of Jehovah, but the blessings of Israel under the law were all tentative and conditional, and Israel fell in this relation.

There is indeed a promise with regard to Jehovah, the covenant God of Israel — that that relation shall be restored, (Hosea 2:14-23) yet in the Church as the bride of the Lamb, is found the complete fulfillment of all the beautiful imagery of the Song. There is nothing in the Song, obviously, which prefigures the Church as the body of Christ, so that it remains true that the Old Testament does not see the Church; but as the Old Testament constantly leaves room for the Church, so in this beautiful book, now that we have the New Testament revelation, we may see the very heart of Christ toward His bride.

What is meant by “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it’” — the Church, in Matthew 16:18?

“Hades,” as the word hell should be translated, is the place to which the dead go — entering, as the figure has it, through the “gates.” There is no thought of forces issuing from hades to “attack” the Church, for hades is not the abode of Satan and the fallen angels (demons) but, simply, of the dead. The promise therefore means that the whole Church will not go into hades — the place of the dead.

Why is not the gift of healing being used universally in the church today?

Healing is one of the gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:9), but, like all gifts, it is bestowed not upon all, but “as he will” (1 Cor. 12:11).

Why did the early church need so many exhortations on morality?

The Greek converts especially would have but little conscience as to the sinfulness of matters relating to the moral life, for morality was not in their code of living. “To lie like a Greek,” for instance, was a common expression. Therefore they needed constant instruction and exhortation. By idol pollution Paul had in mind, doubtless, the heathen custom of eating meat offered unto idols, which subject he deals with fully in Romans 14.

To what does the phrase, “the heavenlies” (Eph.
2:6), refer?

That which is heavenly in contradistinction to that which is earthly. The sphere of the believer’s spiritual experience as identified with Christ in nature (2 Pet. 1:4); life (Col. 3:4; 1 John 5:12); relationships (John 20:17; Heb. 2:11); service (John 17:18; Matt. 28:20); suffering (Phil. 1:29; 3:10; Col. 1:24); inheritance (Rom. 8:16, 17) and future glory in the kingdom (Rom. 8:18-21; 1 Cor. 2:9; Rev. 1:6; 5:10). The believer is a heavenly one, — a stranger and pilgrim on the earth (Heb. 3:1; 11:18; 1 Pet. 2:11).

If the seven churches in Revelation 2 and 3 represent epochs in the history of the professing church to the end, and if we are now in the Laodicean period, where do Sardis and Philadelphia belong?

Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea are not so much periods as phases. The professing church had become

Thyatira (Papacy). Then the Protestant Reformation (Sardis) occurred. Sardis is shown, not in the bright morning of the Reformation, but in the period of its arrest. “I have found none of thy works fulfilled” (Rev. 3:2). But Sardis (Protestantism) goes on to the end under two phases, Philadelphia and Laodicea. It is not that a certain body or sect in Protestantism can set up to be Philadelphia and point to all the rest as Laodicea, but that in all the Protestant sects are true believers, men and women, of the Philadelphia type, “Thou hast a little strength, and hast kept my word, and hast not denied my name,” and in all of them the professing Laodicean class: “neither cold nor hot.”

Do not modern conditions require modern rules for the church?

All the rules necessary for the church to the end of this age were given by the Spirit to the writers of the New Testament. The Bible, rightly interpreted, never grows out of date. It is the eternal Word of God, and its divine author when giving it to the world, knew our “modern conditions’’ perfectly — even foretold them.

What was the “rock’’? (Matt. 16:18) upon which Christ promised to build His Church, and what were the “keys” given to Peter?

Christ is the Rock, the “living stone,’ and believers are “living stones” (1 Pet. 2:4, 5) built upon Him as the Rock, and when Peter declared his belief in the revelation of Jesus as the Christ, the keys of the kingdom of heaven, as the sphere of Christian profession (Matt. 13), were given to him. On the day of Pentecost. he used one key, opening the kingdom of heaven to the Jews, preaching Jesus as the rejected “Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36), and in the house of Cornelius (Acts 10:43) he used the second key, opening the kingdom to the Gentiles by preaching remission of sins through the name of Christ.

How can we account for the apparent failure of the church to perform the miracles enumerated in Mark 16:17, 18?

Briefly, three opinions are: (1) That the whole passage, Mark 16:9-19, is spurious. (See note to Revised Version.) (2) That the signs did follow for a time, until Christianity was so established that it constituted in itself a greater miracle. (3) That the passage is eschatalogical — an instruction to those Jewish witnesses who will preach ‘‘the gospel of the kingdom” during the great tribulation which runs its course after the Church is caught away, and before the Lord comes in glory. The latter seems to be the most plausible view, but it is a point upon which no one may dogmatize.

What does it mean to have “crucified the flesh’’ (Gal. 5:24)?

The crucifixion of the flesh in Galatians refers to the co-crucifixion of the believer with Christ. It is neither (1) an act of the believer subsequently to conversion; nor (2) an experience or attainment of the believer after conversion; nor (3) something which the believer is always doing. It is the truth stated explicitly in Romans 6:6. It is true of all who “are Christ’s.”

Does “gathered together in my name’? (Matt. 18:20) apply to any local assembly of believers?

The passage would be better rendered, “‘gathered unto my name. It has no reference to assemblies of a certain kind or cult. It means no more than that where two or three believers are gathered unto His name — whether on the street, in a cave, in a cathedral, or in a meeting of “brethren,” there He is in the midst. It excludes the idea of being gathered unto a human leader, or to a sect name, in any sense which deprives Christ of His alone place as the object of their gathering.

Dr. Bullinger, the Bible exegete, teaches the Israel-bride theory, based on Hosea, etc. How, then, can we

say that the Church is the bride?

The New Testament speaks of the Church as a virgin espoused to one husband, which could never be said of an adulterous wife, divorced by reason of her adulteries. Israel is to be the restored and forgiven wife of Jehovah, and the Church the bride of the Lamb (John 3:29; Rev. 19:6-8), a different and subsequent relationship. A restored wife is neither a “virgin” nor a “bride.” Israel, Jehovah’s earthly wife (Hos. 2:23) — the Church, the Lamb’s heavenly bride (Rev. 19:7). Israel’s honor and distinction, even in this wifely relationship is to be on the earth through and following the millennium, when the new earth shall be established, — that of the Church, — in heaven. Remember that a King is to make a marriage for His Son (Matt. 22:2). Yes, Dr. Bullinger teaches the Israel-bride theory along with other error, forgetting that in relationship the Trinity acts individually.

We must remember that this figure of the bride is one of several to show the close, precious and vital relationship between Christ and believers of this age. Like the types, it cannot be dissected or analyzed as by a student at the dissecting table, else we would be confronted by endless problems; 7. e., how the millions of believers could make one bride, or one body. It is a mystical union, spiritually discerned, not materially. Genesis 2:23, 24 is the key to the mystery, used by the Spirit to unlock the doctrine in the New Testament, as aforesaid.

Does not Romans 7:4 teach that we are now married to Christ?

We must distinguish in Scripture between a figure or illustration, and a doctrine. No doctrine is based on a single passage. Much error and fanaticism arise from so doing. In Romans 7 Paul is illustrating the doctrine of law and grace and the figure he uses is that of marriage. The contrast is between the fruitlessness of the law and fruit brought forth through Christ unto God. John, in Revelation 19:7, 9, reveals the time of the marriage of Christ to the Church, the bride.

Paul, in 2 Corinthians 11:2, reveals the Church’s present relation to Christ, — that of betrothal.