Table of ContentsGlobal Church News - March-April 1996 |
| Open Letter |
| Editorial by Roderick C. Meredith |
| They Shall Call His Name Immanuel |
| Have You Been Convicted---as a Christian? |
| When Should the True Passover Be Observed? |
| A Sense of Family |
Dear Brethren and Friends:
Greetings from San Diego! As you will see in accompanying articles, we had a wonderful Ministerial Conference in late January and the spirit of love and unity was really profound. We were all very grateful for Christ leading in this conference—and for the Work He is using all of us to do as His instruments.
God is blessing us in so many ways. We should all be very thankful and directly express that to God in our prayers every single day. I try to, and sometimes spend up to one-fourth or one-third of my entire prayer time just thanking God. We have had fine growth in the churches and in the Work, and more and more divine healings are being reported. I want to devote a whole article or section to these healings—perhaps in the next issue—so that all of you can realize how REAL it is that God is intervening and healing people today through His faithful ministry!
So we are all thankful to be part of a viable church and have the opportunity to preach the full Truth. Yet, in spite of this, many of God's people in the Global Church and, I hear again and again—in all the branches of God's Church—are very quick nowadays to "get their feelings hurt." They're very quick to threaten to leave the Church or to violently turn on their brethren with accusations and hate. WHY is this? And where will this attitude lead?
This problem is affecting our entire society at this time—not just the Church. For this is the "me" generation—a generation where people are thinking all the time about "self," about their self-image, their constant "fun" and self-fulfillment. For many of these people, General Douglas MacArthur's famous speech on "Duty, Honor and Country" would probably sound like something out of the Dark Ages!
Today, comparatively few people possess the qualities of deep humility, service, sacrifice and steadfast loyalty. They are part of a generation of shifting values and shifting loyalties. They are so concerned with "self that they find it difficult to rise above the self and to totally give themselves in service to God and to their fellow man. The Apostle Paul described our generation in this way: "But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away!" (2 Tim. 3:1-5).
Because of this gross selfishness, we see even brethren in God's Church "turning on each other" time after time. Some will also turn on the minister and begin to berate him for real or imagined faults. Scores of people are writing me also—some wanting this and some wanting that. Some wish I would be even "stronger" and more dogmatic in various ways. Some, of course, think I should "mellow out" and blend in with the woodwork.
Some are very dogmatic about certain doctrines they think we should change. They have studied the issue alone—and are now absolutely sure that they have the "answer." Others, of course, have also studied the issue for months or years and are equally sure of the opposite answer.
Often, it seems that few still have the understanding that Christ promised to guide His faithful ministry in making decisions about how (NOT whether!) to observe His Holy Days, how to resolve disputes among brethren, etc. They forget that Jesus told His ministry, "And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. And I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven" (Matt: 16:18-19).
The biblical commentaries are almost unanimous in understanding that the Hebrew phrase—conveying the meaning of "binding and loosing"—has to do with official decisions of the Church regarding doctrine and discipline. Jesus definitely extended this to all the apostles in Matthew 18:18-19: "Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven."
Later, the Apostle Paul was inspired to write, "And if anyone does not obey our word in this epistle, note that person and do not keep company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet do not count him as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother" (2 Thess. 3:14-15).
Paul instructed the young evangelist, Titus, "For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you" (Titus 1:5). And then he directed Titus, "For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole households, teaching things which they ought not, for the sake of dishonest gain. One of them, a prophet of their own, said, `Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.' This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth" (w. 10-14).
So the New Testament—in this and many other places—makes it abundantly clear that the ministry of God's true Church has the responsibility and authority to make binding decisions about doctrine and church discipline. Any other avenue, frankly, would lead to CHAOS!
Yet since the death of Herbert W. Armstrong in 1986, literally thousands of people have taken it upon themselves to decide almost every phase of church doctrine and practice. Because of the massive apostasy in the main body of the Church of God, many brethren have felt confused, disillusioned and even betrayed. They have not been as careful as they should have in looking around to see where God is REALLY doing His Work. They have not been zealous and conscientious in searching for "the cloud by day and the pillar of fire by night.
Many simply latched on to the first splinter group they came in contact with. They didn't carefully examine several key issues:
1 ) Are these people dedicated to preaching the full Truth? Or have they come up with some "odd" ideas and misapplication of scriptures so they only preach partial Truth plus a whole lot of "weird" ideas?
2) Are these people dedicated and zealous to REALLY doing the WORK of getting out Christ's message to all the nations of the world? Or do they simply talk about doing this someday? Do they want to feel "comfortable," to go along with their friends and be satisfied mainly with preaching to each other?
On the other hand, is their "gospel" mainly an "attack gospel"—belittling and putting down our former association and other groups with vitriolic, self-righteous wrath and making condemnatory statements and perverting scriptures in a massive way to back up their vicious attacks?
3) Are the leaders of any group under consideration really sound and dedicated ministers of Jesus Christ? Or have they been known to "politick," to hem and haw and compromise and "play the game" for months and even years during this ongoing apostasy? Did they boldly take a stand for Truth even when they had to stand ALONE—or did they wait until it was "convenient" to leave and after they had fully assured themselves that their present standard of living would not be measurably reduced?
Regarding another aspect of this, are the leaders of any such group morally "clean" and above reproach? Or have they long had reputations as heavy drinkers, adulterers, liars? For God's Word states of any elder, let alone the top leader or leaders of a church, "He must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil" (1 Tim. 3:7).
4) Does any such church truly practice the pattern of government clearly revealed in the Bible? Or, do they have confusion because of their "politicking" and vying for power and position? Do they have FAITH that the Living Christ will guide and direct His Church through men in whom He has demonstrated for decades the "fruits" of dedication, leadership and sound doctrine?
Brethren, once a Christian has prayerfully and thoroughly "checked out" a branch of God's Church that does measure up to the above qualifications, wouldn't you think he would have faith that Christ would guide and lead it? You would, of course. But in the disillusioned and faithless state in which many find themselves, that is often not the case.
So we need to rebuild that faith and confidence in Christ's leadership of the Church—brick by brick by brick. We need to study and think through how Christ led the early New Testament Church and how His inspired Word tells us, "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever" (Heb. 13:8).
We need to re-read how Christ, the "Rock" of the Old Testament, even guided and inspired the carnal judges of ancient Israel in the decisions they had to make: "Jehoshaphat... set judges... and said to the judges `Take heed to what you are doing, for you do not judge for man but for the LORD, who is with you in the judgment' (2 Chron. 19:4-6).
And in our personal dealings with one another in the body of Christ, we need to actually PRACTICE Paul's inspired instruction: "Let nothing be done through selfish ambition or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than himself. Let each of you look out not only for his own interests, but also for the interests of others. Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 2:3-5).
We all need to recognize the importance of UNITY in God's true Church. In order to be the "light" we should be to the world and in order to really do the Work, we need to reflect that unity: "Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1 Cor. 1:10).
That unity can only be obtained, and that Work can only be done, through a trained and dedicated ministry. And, in spite of human imperfections (NOT grievous sins or false doctrines!), that ministry should be deeply respected: "Remember those who rule over you, who have spoken the word of God to you, whose faith follow, considering the outcome of their conduct" (Heb. 13:7). And again: "Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief for that would be unprofitable for you" (v. 17).
And all of us need to prayerfully heed these words from the Apostle Peter: "Yes, all of you be submissive to one another, and be clothed with humility, for `God resists the proud, but gives grace to the humble.' Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time, casting all your care' upon Him, for He cares for you. Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour" (1 Peter 5:5-8).
Satan the devil certainly is trying to upset and confuse the people of God at the end of this age. He is trying to thwart and to DESTROY the very Work of the Living God! As the end of his reign approaches and as POWERFUL opportunities for preaching the Truth increasingly present themselves, Satan is angry. He will do everything he can to get you and me sidetracked—perhaps in a "spirit of bitterness"—and therefore UNABLE to do the Work of God in a powerful and unified manner.
Truly, we must resist Satan with all of our might. We must learn always to see the Big Picture—and to keep our eyes on the GOAL. If we will humbly and persistently do these things, we will WIN—now and forever!
In this swift-moving, godless society, each one of us had better take the time to decide what we really believe in—what we're willing to "fight" for and, if need be, die for. Today's materialistic, secular culture is almost overwhelming in its influence on most who call themselves Christian.
Most of our confusion or uncertainty of belief lies in the fact that, generally, we never bother to really define what we really have faith in. Most people are "compromisers"—going along with their friends and family and not worrying very much about what they really believe in or what they stand for. Sure, they are—as we say—"nice" people. But they don't stand for anything.
No doubt there were millions of "nice" people in Germany as Adolph Hitler began his ascent to power in the early 1930s. Many of them obviously didn't like the bestial tactics of Hitler and his storm troopers. But they did NOTHING about it. The result of their lack of conviction was inaction—an unwillingness to struggle against that evil to try to prevent Hitler from seizing absolute power. The sad results we all know: World War II—the biggest and most destructive war in history.
The Holocaust happened because of a lack of conviction about extending basic decency and respect toward others who were ethnically different. Once in power, the Nazis fulfilled their openly spoken threats and butchered some six million Jews and millions of others, including Poles, French, Danes, Dutch, Belgians, Slavs and Norwegians. In the aftermath of World War II, most Germans undoubtedly disapproved of such wholesale murder of innocents when they learned about it. But by then it was too late. Again, WHY did that tragedy happen? Because people in Germany and, in fact, people all over the world had not clearly delineated what they stood for—and what they would NOT stand for!
A recent study of American Protestantism indicates "that deeper currents of secularization persist in Protestant ranks, and that Protestants are `confused and disconnected' about the direction of the larger society. Most tend to think and act more as `good Americans' than as `good Protestants.... There isn't a burning quest to know doctrine, substance, the character of God, the work of Christ,' says Gordon Conwell Seminary in Hamilton, Mass. `What you see uppermost in thought are fears of money, stress, workload.... It seems the fires are dying down. Life is getting tougher' (The Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 19, 1995).
Yes, life is getting tougher for most people in this selfish society, a society that God calls "this present evil world" (Gal. 1:4 KJV). But, for true Christians that should drive us to our knees all the more. And it should drive us to really study our Bibles so that we can truly "know" God and be absolutely SURE what we believe, what our lives stand for We need to know and know that we know!
As so many now seem willing to accept watered-down doctrines and practices and approaches that are not biblical at all, we in the Global Church of God must retain our zeal for the full TRUTH. We must let our separated brethren—and our worldly associates and relatives—know that we stand for something. That we will NOT compromise with the basic truths and practices revealed in God's Word. That we will live by this code and, if need be, die by this code.
God tells us that His true Church is "the pillar and ground of the truth" ( 1 Tim. 3:15). We are resolved to hang on to that Truth—and not participate in watering it down. We, together, are in a CRUSADE to proclaim that Troth to all the nations of the earth (Matt. 28:18-20). And in this crusade, we are Christian "warriors. The Apostle Paul said, "You therefore must endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. No one engaged in warfare entangles himself with the affairs of this life, that he may please him who enlisted him as a soldier" (2 Tim. 2:3-4).
Although we are Christian warriors, we can learn many lessons from outstanding carnal warriors who were of great ability and good character as far as they could understand. One of the greatest of these warriors of modern times was General Douglas MacArthur. If you know very much about American history, you know that General MacArthur was an outstanding patriot and leader of men. Because he was a man who truly stood for something.
Near the end of his illustrious career, returning to West Point Military Academy for the last time, he gave what is still regarded as one of the most eloquent speeches of this century. After being greatly honored at West Point, General MacArthur spoke to the assembled Corps of Cadets and many high-ranking dignitaries:
"No human being could fail to be deeply moved by such a tribute as this, coming from a profession I have served so long and a people I have loved so well. It fills me with an emotion I cannot express. But this award is not intended primarily for a personality, but to symbolize a great moral code—the code of conduct and chivalry of those who guard this beloved land of culture and ancient descent.
"Duty, honor, country—these three hallowed words reverently dictate what you want to be, what you can be, what you will be. They are your rallying point to build courage when courage seems to fail, to regain faith when there seems to be little cause for faith, to create hope when hope becomes forlorn.... "But these are some of the things they build. They build your basic character. They mold you for your future roles as the custodians of the nation's defense. They make you strong enough to know when you are weak, and brave enough to face yourself when you are afraid.
Further on, General MacArthur concluded this historic address: "The shadows are lengthening for me. The twilight is here. My days of old have vanished—tone and tints. They have gone glimmering through the dreams of things that were. Their memory is one of wondrous beauty, watered by tears and coaxed and caressed by the smiles of yesterday. I listen, then, but with thirsty ear, for the witching melody of faint bugles blowing reveille, of far drums beating the long roll.
"In my dreams I hear again the crash of guns, the rattle of musketry, the strange, mournful mutter of the battlefield. But in the evening of my memory I come back to West Point. Always there echoes and re-echoes: duty, honor, country.
"Today marks my final roll call with you. But I want you to know that when I cross the river, my last conscious thoughts will be of the corps, the corps, and the corps.
"I bid you farewell." Brethren, unlike General MacArthur and the West Point cadets, we are engaged in a spiritual warfare. But WAR it is, nonetheless! Many of us in the Global Church—like General MacArthur in his day—are "old timers"! We have witnessed many a battle scene of spiritual blood and carnage. We have seen and probably resisted Satan's withering attacks on ourselves, on our friends and on God's Church and His Work again and again.
We know and deeply understand that "our citizenship is in heaven" (Phil. 3:20). That is the "country" we are fighting for! We know that our warfare is not participation in the "Corps" of West Point, but in the Work of the Living God!
So we can, in that light, deeply relate to General MacArthur's words: "Duty, honor, country. As we grow older as a Church and as individual members, let us NEVER forget why we are here. Let us hold our heads high as we charge on day and night to do the Work of God with zeal, with dedication, with courage and with sacrifice.
No military mission was ever so vital. No warfare was ever so important. And no reward was ever so magnificent as the one we will receive if we overcome ourselves and Satan, and if we are zealous and faithful in proclaiming Christ's Message to a world that has truly lost its way.
by John H. Ogwyn
Around 735 B.C., the nation of Judah was being threatened by King Rezin of Syria and King Pekah of Israel. The aggressors' purpose was to compel Ahaz of Judah to join with them in a coalition against Assyria. If he refused to comply with their wishes, they threatened to overthrow his dynasty and put a new king on the throne in Jerusalem. In this context the Prophet Isaiah confronted King Ahaz. He called upon Ahaz to respond in faith and to put his trust in the God of Israel, who would deliver him from his enemies.
The Prophet Isaiah invited King Ahaz to choose a sign from God that would confirm God's intervention on Judah's behalf. Ahaz refused the offer because he already had in mind to bribe the King of Assyria to be his ally against Syria and Israel. He had no interest in either trusting or obeying the God of Israel. As a consequence of Ahaz's refusal to choose a sign, Isaiah announced that God would give a sign, not to the king, but to the whole "house of David. This sign would confirm that the God of Israel was the One who would intervene for His people and would be their true Deliverer.
Isaiah boldly announced, "Hear now, O house of David!... Therefore the LORD Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and shall call His name Immanuel" (Is. 7:13-14). There may have been a fulfillment of this prophecy in type, with a contemporary young woman marrying, becoming pregnant right away, and giving birth to a son during whose infancy the power of the Syrians and the Israelites were destroyed. However, the real implications of the sign went far beyond that.
The context of Isaiah 7-11 makes plain that the sign of Immanuel goes far beyond the days of wicked King Ahaz and really reaches on down to the days of the Messiah. After all, Isaiah 9:6-7 reveals, "For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end, upon the throne of David and over His kingdom, to order it and establish it with judgment and justice from that time forward, even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
Isaiah 11:1 speaks of a rod coming out of the stem of Jesse, while verse 6 looks forward to the time when "the wolf also shall dwell with the lamb. In verse 9 we learn that this is a time when "they shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea." Clearly these prophecies look forward to the days of the Messiah.
The real key to understanding this remarkable prophecy of Isaiah is found in the New Testament. In Matthew 1:18-25 we are given some background to the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. Mary, the espoused bride of Joseph, the carpenter from Nazareth, was pregnant. Joseph was troubled by this and resolved to privately put her away in order to avoid public scandal. However, an angel appeared to him in a dream and told him that the child was the result, not of moral looseness on Mary's part, but of a miraculous conception produced by the power of the Holy Spirit. The angel told him, "Now all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: `Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and bear a Son, and they shall call His name Immanuel,' which is translated, `God with us' (vv. 22-23).
Make no mistake about it, Jesus—who was born in Bethlehem during the waning months of the reign of Herod the Great and who was crucified outside the walls of Jerusalem during the administration of Pontius Pilate—was no ordinary man. He was not simply a "good man" or even a prophet. He was nothing less than Immanuel—God with us!
While there has been much confusion for many centuries on the nature and origin of the One whom we know as Jesus Christ of Nazareth, the Bible is very plain on the subject. If we simply take what is revealed in the pages of Scripture, apart from the theories of men, we will have clarity and understanding.
John 1:1-3 gives the most fundamental explanation of who Jesus of Nazareth was: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made." In verse 14 John explains, "And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." In the beginning of John's gospel we are introduced to two great Personages, identified as God and the Word. The One termed "God" in verse 1, whom we're told "the Word was with," is identified as the Father (v. 14). The Father and the Word, together, constitute the God family Elohim in Hebrew.
Much has been written about John's use of the term o logos, commonly rendered "the Word" in English. The Greeks used logos to refer to reason, rationality or speech. The philosophical writers often personified Reason or Rationality as the means by which the natural world functioned and had been developed. John went far beyond the usage of the philosophers, however. He showed that the term logos, in use among most educated people of his day who were influenced by Greek philosophy, could only properly be applied to Christ. After all; He was the Revelator, the One who perfectly expressed the mind of God. The Logos of whom John speaks was no mere personification of an abstract idea. Rather, He had real individuality and personality. He existed from "the beginning." Yet, He literally became flesh and had earthly existence as the man, Jesus of Nazareth, for 33 1/2 years.
From eternity He had possessed great power and glory which He shared with the Father. On the final night of His human life, just prior to His arrest and subsequent crucifixion, He prayed to the Father, "And now, O Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was" (John 17:5). Though Christ had shared incredible power and glory with the Father from eternity, he voluntarily emptied Himself of that to become our Savior.
Notice how the Amplified Bible presents Christ's assumption of human flesh in Philippians 2:6-7: "Who although being essentially one with God and in the form of God [possessing the fullness of the attributes that make God, God], did not think this equality with God was a thing to be eagerly grasped or retained; but stripped Himself [of all privileges and rightful dignity] so as to assume the guise of a servant [slave], in that He became like men and was born a human being. What the Amplified Bible renders as "stripped Himself," the New King James version translates, "made Himself of no reputation. These are both renderings of a form of the Greek verb kenoo. The Arndt-Gingrich Greek-English Lexicon explains the word usage here as meaning "he emptied himself, divested himself of his privileges" (p. 429).
Paul explained what transpired: "Inasmuch then as the children have partaken of flesh and blood, He Himself likewise shared in the same.... Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest.... For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted" (Heb. 2:14, 17-18). The One who existed from eternity with the Father in power and glory emptied Himself of that power and glory and was born into this world as a tiny, helpless human baby.
God the Father, through the miraculous power of His Holy Spirit, triggered a process we can't fully fathom. An ovum in Mary's uterus supernaturally became a fertilized cell and began the process of embryonic growth and development (Luke 1:31, 34-35). At that point, the One who had existed from eternity with the Father as a powerful, glorified Spirit Being voluntarily gave up that status to become flesh. His Spirit united with the developing human brain in the embryonic Jesus. The Scriptures tell us that to be fully human is to possess a "spirit in man" (Job 32:8), which sets apart the human mind from the animal brain ( 1 Cor. 2:11 ).
The Spirit component in the child that grew inside Mary's womb retained the imprint of the pre-incarnate individuality, character, personality—and even memory—of the pre-existent Word. As Jesus of Nazareth grew and matured that pre-incarnate knowledge began to return (Luke 2:46-52). As a result He remembered seeing Satan fall from Heaven (Luke 10:18) and He remembered the attitude and character of His friend, Abraham (John 8:56-58). At age 30, having reached full physical, mental and emotional maturity, Jesus finally began His public ministry. After 3 1/2 years of preaching, teaching and doing good, the Messiah was arrested and condemned to a horrible death. Then He was tortured and executed as a criminal.
Three days and three nights later (Matt. 12:40), however, He came forth out of the tomb, never to die again—ascending to the Father on High (Luke 24:51; Acts 1:1-3). Today, Jesus Christ is preparing to return to this earth—not in weak, human flesh subject to death, but as King of kings and Lord of lords.
Why was it necessary that this Great Being—"All things were created through Him and for Him" (Col. 1:16)—undergo such events? Why did the Word become flesh and dwell among us? The Bible reveals several reasons. Let's look more closely at some of them.
Christ came to condemn sin in the flesh (Rom. 8:3). He didn't come merely giving the appearance or illusion of being flesh—He was born as a real flesh-and-blood human being (1 John 4:3). Jesus was subject to all the normal pulls of the flesh and was clearly tempted in all points like as we are, yet He never once yielded to that temptation (Heb. 4:15). However, He had to exert Himself to the utmost: "Who, in the days of His flesh, when He had offered up prayers and supplications, with vehement cries and tears to Him who was able to save Him... though He was a Son, yet He learned obedience by the things which He suffered. And having been perfected [equipped by completed experience], He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him" (Heb. 5:7-9). Christ's prayers to the Father were absolutely real and completely heartfelt; they were not merely the recitations of an actor reading his lines.
Christ, therefore, was our perfect example that we should seek to follow in His footsteps (1 Peter 2:21). He triumphed over sin completely and totally by yielding to God in every way and relying on His power.
Jesus Christ came as the Lamb of God, to take away the sins of the world (John 1:29). The blood of the Passover lamb on the doorpost, almost 1,500 years earlier, had caused the death angel to "pass over" those who were underneath it. Even so, the blood of Jesus Christ makes possible our being "passed over" and exempted from death. His life was worth more than the sum total of all our lives. After all, He was the One who created Adam from the dust of the ground and breathed the breath of life into him (Col. 1:16). His blood paid the penalty that you and I have incurred (Rom. 6:23). God demonstrated His love for us in that Christ died in our stead. Through His shed blood our sins can be covered and we can be declared innocent. We are reconciled to God, brought back into harmony from the alienation caused by sin, by the death of His Son (Rom. 5:8-10). He offered one sacrifice for sins forever (Heb. 10:12). The blood of bulls and goats was merely a reminder of the wages of sin and could never really pay the penalty for it (vv. 3-4) and make the sinner innocent before God.
Jesus Christ also came as the "second Adam" (1 Cor. 15:45-47) to conquer Satan (Heb. 2:14) and replace him as the ruler of this earth (John 12:31; 16:11). Adam yielded to Satan and was disqualified to assume his position. Jesus Christ refused to compromise or yield to Satan's temptations (Matt. 4:1-11), but rather overcame them.
Additionally, Jesus the Messiah came to reveal the Father to a world that did not know Him (John 1:11). How did He reveal the Father? He worked the works which the Father gave Him (John 5:36; 9:4) and He spoke the Father's words (John 12:48-50). As Christ explained to the disciples shortly before His crucifixion, "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; and from now on you know Him and have seen Him.... He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, `Show us the Father'? Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me? The words that I speak to you I do not speak on My own authority; but the Father who dwells in Me does the works" (John 14:7, 9-10).
Truly, He was our Savior and Messiah. He was Immanuel. Flesh and blood, yes, but no mere man. He was "God with us." He emptied Himself of great glory to become our Savior and He was restored to glory by the power of the Father that He might be our daily Intercessor and our soon-coming King. As the Apostle Paul expresses it, "For He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him" (2 Cor. 5:21). Simply put, God became man so that man might become God! Jesus Christ became the firstborn of many brethren (Rom. 8:29) because God is through Him, the Captain of our salvation, bringing many sons unto glory (Heb. 2:10).
by Colin Adair
Many of us have come through a difficult time. The past few years have been a shock to our systems as we saw cherished beliefs watered down and finally flushed away. Many brethren have been taken in by wrong teachings and have totally cast aside what they once believed. How did this all happen?
Could it possibly be that their religious beliefs were simply preferences rather than convictions? And when changes in doctrine came that suited them better (such as no longer needing to tithe or observe the Sabbath), then they preferred to accept the new ways.
According to American law, every religious belief can be classified as either a preference or a conviction. In the September issue of the periodical Current Thoughts & Trends, an article by David Gibbs, "Test of Belief: Conviction vs. Preference," states, "In a 1972 landmark case (Wisconsin v. Yoder), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the only religious beliefs protected under the First Amendment are convictions and gave clear criteria for distinguishing them from preferences. A belief is merely a person's preference when certain circumstances will motivate him to change it." It does not matter how strongly or intensely a belief is held if there is no real conviction behind it—it remains a preference. The distinguishing mark of a preference is that it can be changed.
Many things can cause a person to change his preferences. There is peer pressure, family member influence, the threat of litigation or imprisonment, or even the thought of death. If a person can be dissuaded from totally obeying God by any of these factors, then he does not have a conviction. What he initially believed was what he preferred, but when circumstances changed and he was threatened in any way, he was willing to change.
Let's examine the parable of the sower and the seed in Matthew 13: "But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy" (v. 20). The truth is exciting at first to this kind of person, and he may even embrace it enthusiastically and perhaps begin to walk on the new path he has discovered. But it becomes clear that it is just a preference—not a conviction—when future circumstances interfere with the new-found belief.
"Yet he has no root in himself but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles. Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful" (vv. 21-22). Such individuals have not been convicted—they have merely exchanged their "beliefs" for a whole new set. And if life were to become too difficult to continue on the new path, then it would be changed again—anything to avoid difficulties. Real conviction—belief that persists regardless of circumstances—is sadly lacking.
Outlining how the court viewed the case, Mr. Gibbs wrote, "A conviction is not a spur-of- the-moment decision. It is a premeditated response to a situation that was likely to occur. This means that it does not matter whether other people stand with you in the crisis or not. Only conviction can enable you to stand alone. People with preferences will follow the crowd."
A good biblical example of conviction is found in Daniel 3, where we read the story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-nego. King Nebuchadnezzar had built a great image and commanded everyone in Babylon to bow down to it. When the Chaldeans, who hated the Jews, discovered that the three friends refused to obey the king, they were quick to respond. "There are certain Jews whom you have set over the affairs of the province of Babylon: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego; these men, O king, have not paid due regard to you. They do not serve your gods or worship the gold image which you have set up" (v. 12).
The king commanded the three men to be brought before him and laid it on the line. If you don't worship the image, gentlemen, then you will suffer a fiery death! What was their answer? "Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego answered and said to the king, `O Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. If that is the case, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and He will deliver us from your hand, O king. But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we do not serve your gods, nor will we worship the gold image which you have set up' (vv 16-18).
All three men were looking death squarely in the face. If their devotion to the true God had merely been a preference, they would probably have quickly recanted their rebellious position and reasoned their way out of the situation. Their decision wasn't an on-the-spot reaction. They had the courage of their convictions. They were not about to defile themselves. Remember, there were thousands of other Jews in Babylon at this time. But the three men didn't care what others did or what others thought. They were willing to take a stand by themselves.
Another point to consider. They were given a "second chance" to save their lives if they would change their minds and bow down to the image. But they didn't take it. Their beliefs were non-negotiable. If they had been willing even to discuss the possibility of compromising their beliefs, their worship would only have been preference and not conviction. The Supreme Court sees it the same way.
Quoting again from David Gibbs: "The court said that if you need some indication that you're going to win your case before you are willing to stand for your `conviction,' then they are just preferences. Shadrach, Meshach and Abed-nego were confident of God's deliverance, but they said they wouldn't change their minds even if He chose not to deliver them."
Over the centuries, God's people have faced trials, tests, persecution and heresy. Regrettably, many of them compromised their beliefs. They gave up what they once proved to be true—for a variety of reasons. Some couldn't handle the ostracism they faced. Others gave in to pressure from family or friends and embraced false teachings to "keep the peace." Still others were persuaded that false teachings were true, being convinced by clever arguments or false intellectual reasoning.
All had one thing in common. They proved that their previous beliefs were merely preferences—not convictions. Otherwise they would have persevered in them. But those who are convicted of the Truth do not compromise their beliefs for any reason. They prove—and then they live—the Truth! No amount of pressure from any source will convince them to believe "another gospel."
When trials come, whether from religious heresy or from vain secular philosophy, convicted Christians stand firm in their beliefs. Their foundations are not moved or shattered because such believers build on the solid Truths of God's Word. They do not compromise with God's law as their understanding grows. Changes may come within the framework of the Truth, but the basic building blocks of their faith NEVER change! With God's help, they stand fast in their convictions.
We all need to examine ourselves in the light of what has happened to the Church of God in recent years. We all need to make sure we are convicted Christians and have not simply preferred this Church as opposed to another. The Church of God will continue to face persecution and opposition to its teachings, intended to wear down our faith and undermine the Truth. As individuals, this will test our convictions. Our reaction will determine whether our beliefs are just preferences or whether we truly are convicted Christians.
by Raymond F. McNair
Why is there so much confusion in the Christian world today concerning whether Christians should observe the "Passover" or a "Lord's Supper"? And why—even among those churches that believe they should observe the true Passover—is there confusion in the minds of some whether to keep it on the l4th of Abib/Nisan or the l5th, the day which the Jews now keep as their Passover.
Did Jesus keep the Passover while growing up? He certainly did! "His parents went to Jerusalem every year at the Feast of the Passover" (Luke 2:41). During Christ's three-and-a-half-year ministry, He continued keeping the Passover. "Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in His name" (John 2:23). Numerous scriptures reveal that Christ kept God's festivals as commanded in Leviticus 23.
Did Jesus Christ partake of the usual Passover meal (called a seder, consisting of roasted lamb or kid, bitter herbs and unleavened bread—Ex. 12:8), on the very night preceding His crucifixion? Many believe He did. But some now say that Jesus didn't eat the regular Passover meal. Instead, they believe He only ate a "special" Passover meal—at which time He instructed His disciples how to observe the New Testament Passover in coming years.
Furthermore, they argue that the Jews kept their Passover a day after Christ's and the apostles' last observance of it together. Therefore, they conclude that God's people who still observe the true New Testament Passover ought to follow the Jews as to when to keep the Passover—thereby observing that memorial on the l5th day of the first month of the "Sacred Calendar," rather than on the l4th.
Some are willing to acknowledge that Christ ate some kind of a Passover meal with His apostles, but they think He merely ate it a day early—because He would be dead when the true Passover meal was to be eaten in the early hours of the next day, Abib/Nisan 15.
In order to disprove such false teachings, we must first examine the Old Testament Scriptures to see on what day the original Passover was observed: Was it killed and eaten between sunset and midnight on the l4th of Abib/Nisan—or was it killed in the latter part of the daylight portion of the l4th (between early afternoon and sunset) and eaten before midnight on the 15th?
Today, most of the commandment-keeping people of the Church of God (Rev. 12:17) believe the original Passover was kept on the l4th of Abib. But in recent years some misguided teachers have arisen, troubling God's people by telling them that we should not observe the true Passover on the l4th day of the first month. They claim, rather, that we should follow the Jews who kept it partly on the l4th and partly on the l5th.
But how can that be? All of God's Sabbaths, both weekly and annual, were always observed from sunset to sunset. Not one of them, according to God's Word, was ever to be observed on two days (cf. Lev. 23)! It is true that many Jews later began keeping two annual Sabbaths in place of many of God's ordained Holy Days. But God Himself never commanded this!
Does the Bible plainly reveal on which day the Passover was to be killed and eaten? After God instructed the Israelites to select a Passover lamb (or kid) on the 10th day of Abib, He then commanded them, "Now you shall keep it until the fourteenth day of the same month. Then the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it at TWILIGHT [Heb. ben ha arbayim, "between the evenings"]" (Ex. 12:6).
For more than 2,000 years a controversy has raged over the meaning of that verse—in particular, the words ben ha arbayim. What do they really mean? "Between sunset and dusk," as some claim? Or does ben ha arbayim mean from about mid-afternoon to sunset (approximately 3:00 to 5:00 p.m.), as modern Jews interpret the phrase?
Not only does the New King James Version of the Bible say the Passover lamb was to be killed "at twilight," but many other versions also use these same words as the time for the actual slaying of the Passover: New American Standard, New Revised Standard, New International Version, The Complete Bible (by E. J. Goodspeed). The New American Bible uses "during the evening twilight."
Young's Literal Translation of the Bible says the Passover was to be killed "between the evenings." The Jewish Publication Society's Holy Scriptures translation says, "Kill it at dusk." The New English Bible says each head of household in Israel was to slaughter his Passover "victim between dusk and dark," and the Moffatt version of the Bible says, "Israel shall kill it between sunset and dark."
Thus, the proper time for the killing of the Passover should now be very clear. It was to be between "SUNSET and DARK," or in the period known as TWILIGHT.
But what is the meaning of twilight? "TWILIGHT... the light from the sky between full night and sunrise or between SUNSET and FULL NIGHT produced by diffusion of sunlight through the atmosphere and its dust" (Merriam Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary, 10th ed.). The Random House Dictionary of the English Language defines twilight as follows: "TWILIGHT... [is] the soft, diffused light from the sky when the sun is below the horizon, either from daybreak to sunrise or, more commonly, from sunset to nightfall" (2nd ed:, unabridged).
It should therefore be very clear that when God told the Israelites, in Exodus 12:6, to kill their Passover lambs "between the evenings" (ben ha arbayim), it really means they were to sacrifice them in the twilight period "between sunset and dark" (Oxford Illustrated Dictionary), or "between sunset and full night" (Webster's Third New International Dictionary Unabridged).
What is the true meaning of "between the evenings" (Ex. 12:6), as defined by the Jews themselves? The Holy Scriptures (JPS) says the lambs were to be killed "at dusk:' Now there is no way "dusk" can mean several hours before sunset! "DUSK... [is defined as] the darker part of twilight" (Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, 10th ed.). And we have already noted that "twilight" is that period of time "between sunset and dark." Does this sound as though God intended the Passover lambs to be slaughtered in broad daylight, between about 3:00 and 5:00 p.m.?
Also notice how the Jewish Soncino Commentary defines ben ha arbayim: "It is a period of approximately one-and-a-third hours between sunset and the disappearance of the light which subsequently penetrates through the clouds.
There is a verse that some have misunderstood to mean Passover lambs could be killed anytime after 12:00 noon. "You may not sacrifice the Passover within your gates which the LORD your God gives you; but at the place where the LORD your God chooses to make His name abide, there you shall sacrifice the Passover at twilight [Heb. ba erev], at the going down of the sun" (Deut. 16:5-6). In spite of the fact that ben ha arbayim means "between sunset and dark" (as we have amply demonstrated), sometime between Ezra and Jesus Christ, certain Jews began to redefine this term to suit their own purposes.
They began to say that ben ha arbayim could include between approximately mid-afternoon (on the l4th of Nisan/Abib) and sunset. They also began misinterpreting Deuteronomy 16:6—"at the going down of the sun"—to mean anytime in the afternoon of Nisan 14. Though in actual practice they usually took the time for the killing of the Passover lambs to be sometime between approximately 3:00 and 5:00 p.m.
Many Jews had come to observe the Passover on the incorrect day by the time of Christ. How did they interpret the meaning of ben ha arbayim ("between the two evenings") by New Testament times? "This was interpreted by the Pharisees and Talmudists to mean from the hour of the sun's decline [noon] until its setting; and this was the later temple practice (cf. Pesach. v. 1; Jubilees, 49; Jos. bk. vi. ix. 3). The Samaritans [and] Karaites... held that the period between SUNSET and DARK was intended" (James Hastings, A Dictionary of the Bible, vol. 3).
"`Between the evenings,' ben ha arbayim, WAS THE INTERVAL BETWEEN SUNSET AND DARKNESS" (The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 1956). Also notice that The New Brown-Driver-Briggs-Gesenius Hebrew-Aramaic Lexicon defines ben ha arbayim as the time "between the two evenings... between SUNSET and DARK."
The Imperial Bible Dictionary admits that ben ha arbayim refers to the period called in English "between the evenings" as "the period between SUNSET and TOTAL DARKNESS," yet wrongly follows Jewish tradition by thinking the Passover was to have been slain at "the very close of the fourteenth day" ("Feasts," vol. 1, p. 573).
James Hastings states that "the Passover is always carefully distinguished from mazzoth [Unleavened Bread], which begins on the following day [Abib 15]" (A Dictionary of the Bible, "Passover," vol. 3).
According to the Jewish historian Judaeus Philo (c. 30 B.C.-45 A.D.), the Passover was "the day called by the Hebrews in their own tongue, the Pash, on which the WHOLE PEOPLE sacrifice, every member of them, without waiting for the priests, because the law has granted to the whole nation for one special day in every year the right of the priesthood and of performing the sacrifices themselves" (De Decalogue, p. 159).
Philo also says, "After the New Moon comes the fourth feast, called the crossing feast, which the Hebrews in their native tongue call Pascha [Passover]. In this festival many myriads of victims are offered—by the WHOLE PEOPLE, old and young alike, raised for that particular day to the dignity of the priesthood. For at other times the priests according to the ordinance of the law carry out both the public sacrifices and those offered by private individuals. But on this occasion the WHOLE NATION performs the rites and acts as priest" (De Spec., leg. 2, p. 45).
There are some who argue that during the time of Christ, the priests and Levites supervised the killing of all of the sacrificial Passover lambs in the Temple. But this simply is not so. History clearly reveals that many Jews still observed what is called a "domestic Passover," even though they did go up to the central sanctuary (the Temple) at Jerusalem for various worship services during the Passover and Days of Unleavened Bread.
Simple mathematical logic should convince any reasonable person that it would have been utterly impossible for so many scores of thousands of Passover lambs to be accommodated at the Temple.
Josephus says, "So these priests, upon coming of that feast which is called Passover, when they slay their [Passover] sacrifices, from the ninth hour [3:00 p.m.] to the eleventh [5:00 p.m.], but so that a company not less than ten belong to every sacrifice... found the numbers of sacrifices was two hundred and fifty-six thousand five hundred [256,500]; which, upon the allowance of no more than ten that feast together, amount to two million seven hundred thousand and two hundred persons [2,700,200] that were holy and pure" (Wars of the Jews, bk. 6, chap. 9, sec. 3).
Therefore, many, if not most, of the Jews in Christ's day must have sacrificed their own Passover lambs in the Jerusalem area (fulfilling the command of Deut. 16:5-6), but not in the Temple itself. As Philo plainly says, many of the Jews still faithfully adhered to the biblical command to have a "domestic Passover" by killing their own Passover lambs at the place where they were staying in the vicinity of Jerusalem. These people clearly weren't directed by the Levites as to where they would slaughter the lambs. Neither is there any indication they were directed as to WHEN!
In fact, there is no command found anywhere in the Bible that said the people were to have the priests and Levites assist them in sacrificing Passover lambs at the Temple of God. We do find, however, that when the people were ceremonially unclean in the time of King Hezekiah, the priests and Levites did assist them in sacrificing the Passover lambs in the Temple area (2 Chron. 30:13-21). A similar theme is found during King Josiah's famous Passover (2 Chron. 35). Still later, in the time of Ezra, the priests and the Levites, who were themselves purified, "slaughtered the Passover lambs for all the descendants of the captivity [who were ceremonially impure]" (Ezra 6:20).
Now it should be crystal clear why Jesus Christ and His apostles all kept a domestic Passover in the vicinity of Jerusalem, where God had placed His name, according to Deuteronomy 16:6. They certainly could not have gone into the Temple at the beginning of the 14th of Abib to have the priests and Levites assist them in the sacrifice of their Passover lambs. Why not? Simply because the Jews (who then controlled the Temple ritual) would not have permitted anyone to kill their Passover lambs approximately 21 hours before they allowed, and supervised, the killing of Passover lambs in the court of the Temple! Even so, many Jews did sacrifice their own lambs at the God-ordained time—at the beginning (evening twilight) portion of Abib 14.
Jewish historians (especially Josephus) clearly reveal that in the first century A.D., some of the Jews were keeping their Passover on two days—i.e. killing the Passover lambs late on the afternoon of the l4th day of Abib, but roasting and eating it between sunset and midnight on the 15th!
But can we prove from the Word of God that the Passover, as originally commanded, should have been killed just after sunset in the early twilight portion of the l4th of Abib, then was eaten sometime before midnight? We certainly can!
Notice the following facts. After the Israelites killed their Passover lambs, they were to take some of the blood and put it on the doors of their homes. "And you shall take a bunch of hyssop, dip it in the blood that is in the basin, and strike the lintel and the two doorposts with the blood that is in the basin. And none of you shall go out of the door of his house until the morning" (Ex. 12:22). Why were the Israelites forbidden to venture out of their homes "until the morning"?
Simply because to do otherwise could have meant instant death to the Israelites' firstborn. "For the LORD will pass through to strike the Egyptians; and when He sees the blood on the lintel and on the two doorposts, the LORD will PASS OVER the door and not allow the destroyer to come into your houses to strike you" (v. 23).
There are some, however, who foolishly argue that in the Hebrew Bible "morning" could mean any time after midnight. But this is clearly untrue.
What did God mean when He said, "None of you shall go out of the door of his house until the morning [Heb. boqer]"? A careful study of this word boqer will clearly reveal that it never means "night," but always indicates the TWILIGHT period between daybreak and sunrise.
Some have cited the example found in the third chapter of Ruth as proof that this word boqer (morning) can mean "night. But the facts prove otherwise.
"Now it happened at midnight [middle of "night"—Heb. lailah] that the man [Boaz] was startled, and turned himself; and there, a woman was lying at his feet. And he said, `Who are you?' So she answered, `I am Ruth, your maidservant. Take your maidservant under your wing, for you are a near kinsman"' (Ruth 3:8-9).
"Then he said, `Blessed are you of the LORD, my daughter!... For all the people of my town know that you are a virtuous woman' (vv. 10-11).
Boaz then told Ruth, "Stay this night [Heb. lailah], and in the morning [Heb. boqer] it shall be that if he [a relative] will perform the duty of a near kinsman for you—good; let him do it.... But if he does not want to perform the duty for you [marry you], then I will perform the duty for you, as the LORD lives! Lie down until morning (boqer]" (v. 13).
Then what happened? "So she lay at his feet until morning [boqer], and she arose before one could recognize another [in the early twilight period]" (v. 14).
"Also he said, `Bring the shawl that is on you and hold it.' And when she held it, he measured six ephahs of barley, and laid it on her. Then she went into the city" (v. 15).
A careful, honest reading of these verses clearly reveals that Ruth did not rise up until the "morning " at which time Boaz had enough early morning light to be able to put a generous portion of barley in her shawl to take home to her family. Clearly, however, in this early twilight period it was not light enough for the other harvesters (who were undoubtedly sleeping nearby) to discern that the person with Boaz was a woman. For Boaz had strictly charged her, "Do not let it be known that the woman came to the threshing floor" (v. 14). Boaz was himself an honorable man and didn't want others to see Ruth, lest they think wrongly of both her and of himself—thereby starting ugly gossip.
Yet it is also clear from this passage that, when they rose up in the "morning," it was light enough for Ruth to be able to make her way back to the city where she lived. It is unthinkable that such an honorable man as Boaz would have sent Ruth stumbling home during the darkness of "night" (lailah)!
When God commanded the Israelites not to leave their homes until the "morning" (boqer), He clearly meant they were to remain in their houses until after the crack of dawn—until the early morning which we call twilight.
When does God's Word say the Israelites left Egypt? "These are the journeys of the children of Israel, who went out of Egypt.... They departed from Ramses in the first month [Abib]; on the FIFTEENTH DAY of the first month; on the DAY AFTER THE PASSOVER, the children of Israel went out with boldness in the sight of all the Egyptians. For the Egyptians were burying all their firstborn, whom the LORD had killed" (Num. 33: 1, 3-4).
But God's Word also gives us another detail: "Observe the month of Abib, and keep the Passover to the LORD your God, for in the month of Abib the LORD your God brought you out of Egypt BY NIGHT" (Deut. 16:1 ).
So if the Israelites ate the Passover before midnight on the l5th of Abib, they would have to have left Egypt before morning. In fact, those who advocate eating Passover on the l5th claim this very thing—that the departure occurred during the approximately-six-hour period between midnight (which they falsely say was "morning") and sunrise. However, it is ludicrous to say the Israelites ate the Passover between sunset and midnight on the 15th, obeyed God's express command not to leave their homes until the next "morning" (boqer), yet were somehow able to see the Egyptians burying their firstborn dead, who, according to this line of reasoning, had been struck dead only a few hours previously!
There are other problems with a l5th-day Passover too. According to Genesis 46 and 47, Joseph and his Israelite brethren had settled in the "land of GOSHEN," and their descendants remained there until the Exodus (c. 1446 B.C.). Moreover, we must remember that Moses' and Aaron's parents, who lived in Goshen, were near the Nile River, where the daughter of Pharaoh found the infant Moses in a little ark of bulrushes (Ex. 2:1-10). Unger's Bible Dictionary says of Goshen: "This northeastern section of the Egyptian Delta region is usually called `the land of Goshen,' `the country of Goshen' (Gen. 47:27), or simply `Goshen' and `the land of Ramses'.... It extends thirty or forty miles in length centering in Wadi Tumilat and reaches from Lake Timsa to the Nile" ("Goshen," p. 420).
Exodus 13:18 says, "Israel went up in orderly ranks out of the land of Egypt. Since the Israelites (about 3,000,000 according to various commentaries) lived over such a large area in the land of Goshen, it is very difficult to see how they could have possibly gotten all of their things together and trekked to Ramses, as their point of departure, during the pre-dawn hours of the l5th. How on earth could about 3,000,000 people have come together to Ramses (Num. 33:3) and then left as an organized body—in less than six hours? The answer is they didn't!
Another vital point we should consider at this juncture is the origin of the word "Passover." This very word is obviously derived from God's statement in Exodus 12:13: "And when I see the blood, I will PASS OVER you. So the whole idea of the Passover is concerned with observing the fact that God would "pass over" the faithful Israelites who were "under the blood" of the Passover lamb—symbolizing Christians today being under the blood of Jesus Christ, the "Lamb of God" (John 1:29). If God calls Abib 14 "Passover," doesn't it make sense that the death angel "passed over" ancient Israel on that day—-the l4th? But how strange it is that some have tried to have the very celebration of the "Passover" on the fifteenth rather than on the very day from which its name derives!
Putting all the scriptures and common sense together, we can see what really happened. The Israelites who lived throughout the land of Goshen: 1) killed the Passover lambs after sunset in the early hours of the l4th day of Abib; 2) roasted the lamb; 3) ate their Passover meal before midnight, when the death angel passed over (Ex. 12:29); 4) remained in their houses (under pain of death!) all that night (lailah) until the next morning twilight (boqer-Ex. 12:22); 5) burned the inedible remains of their Passover lambs (v. 10); 6) gathered together their families and household goods, their flocks and herds and all they had, and—while watching the Egyptians bury their dead—began making their way (during the daylight hours of the l4th) to the pre-arranged departure point, the city of Ramses; 7) then departed from Ramses by night on the morrow after the Passover—shortly after the sun went down (in the early hours of the l5th—in the full glow of the divinely given "pillar of fire" (Ex. 13:21-22), which led them toward the Red Sea.
When all of the scriptures concerning the Passover and Unleavened Bread are put together, it becomes abundantly clear that the Passover was, in ancient times, both killed and eaten on Abib 14. And the seven Days of Unleavened Bread were then considered to be a separate seven-day festival—following the Passover (Lev. 23:5-8).
Interestingly, the Jews admit in various statements that Passover and Unleavened Bread were once observed as two separate feasts—with the seven Days of Unleavened following the one-day festival of the Passover. Speaking of the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread, the Jewish Encyclopedia freely admits, Two festivals originally distinct have become merged [into one].
Speaking of Passover and Unleavened Bread, Josephus states, "Whence it is that, in memory of the want we were in, WE [Jews] KEEP A FEAST FOR EIGHT DAYS, which is called the feast of unleavened bread" (Antiquities of the Jews, bk. 2, chap. 15, sec. 1).
The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible says, "In contemporary Judaism the word Pesach, or `Passover,' is used to refer to a whole range of observances related to the season. This usage has been customary since ca. [around] the second century of the Christian era.... As the employment of the one title, Passover, indicates, the Mishna, like Josephus, treated all the observances as parts of a single integrated FEAST. This has not always been so.... Amid all the uncertainty about the Passover and Unleavened Bread in Israel there is general agreement on two points: the feast contains TWO ORIGINALLY SEPARATE COMPONENTS" ("Passover and Feast of Unleavened Bread. vol. 3, pp. 663-664).
When and where did this all get changed? We know that Ezra and the Jews of his day would have observed the Passover on the proper date. Yet, when we come to the New Testament, we find that many of the Jews were killing their Passover lambs in the last hours of the l4th, yet roasting and eating them between sunset and midnight on the l5th. We also know that Jesus Christ and His apostles observed what is called a domestic Passover a day earlier than those Jews who had their Passover lambs slaughtered in the court of the Temple. And absolutely nothing whatsoever is said about Christ observing the Passover with His disciples at a wrong time; neither is anything said about the disciples being surprised because Christ was supposedly having them keep the Passover a day early—on the wrong day!
Shall we follow Christ and His apostles, and keep the Passover on the l4th of Abib? Or, shall we keep the Passover on the l5th, following the Jews—who, though they have preserved both the Old Testament Scriptures and the knowledge of God's Sacred Calendar—do not keep the Passover on the proper day, according to the very Word which they themselves have faithfully preserved?
Furthermore, the Apostle Paul very clearly told the Christians at Corinth that he had "delivered" to them Jesus' own instruction to keep the Passover—as Jesus Himself did—"on the same night in which He was betrayed" (1 Cor. 11:23). This is admitted by all scholars to be at the beginning of Abib 14—the exact time we in the Global Church do, in fact, keep the Passover. And both the Bible and secular history reveal that the "night" of the l5th, on which the Jews observed their Passover, was the night after Christ and His apostles observed the true Passover! Then, as now, the Jews incorrectly observed Passover on the l5th.
So it should now be abundantly clear that true Christians will follow not only the Old Testament practice, but the very clear practice and example of both Christ Himself and the Apostle Paul by observing the Passover at the beginning of Abib 14!
by Karen Meeker
There are many losses throughout the course of a human life, but few are as painful or as mind-numbing as the loss of a sense of family In today's climate of job transfers, broken marriages and disenchanted adolescents, blood bonds are often stretched to the limit, or seem to be meaningless. The result can be an acute feeling of loneliness and detachment, which causes some to spend a lifetime searching for relief, trying everything from drugs to gangs to psychoanalysis. Some are fortunate enough to find a "non-blood" family that offers acceptance, traditions and a sense of security. For many of us that family was the Church.
I say was, because in the past couple of years, that which we thought safe, secure and solid was attacked, ravaged and almost broken. The resulting disorientation and sense of loss has caused a pain few of us have escaped. No matter where we go, or with whom we talk, the conversation usually gets around to our common losses—friendships, family unity and traditions.
Dolores Curran, in her book, Traits of a Healthy Family, explores the idea of family traditions. She begins with the observation that the family treasures its legends and characters. Those of us fortunate enough to have fairly healthy relationships in our physical families know that much of the time at family gatherings is spent reminiscing—and that generally the same stories are told by the same people year after year This activity is predictable. It's comfortable (though occasionally annoying to impatient youth). And it's what families do.
Think about this in terms of the Church at Holy Day gatherings, particularly at the Feast of Tabernacles. Isn't much of our anticipation that of seeing old friends, remembering shared activities, recalling interesting people we've met along the way—even engaging in "can-you-top-this" exchanges about lengthy sermons, leaky tents and restless children? Recently we found our sense of community under siege. Beliefs and traditions were attacked repeatedly. We grieved for the dismantling of our "family."
This past Feast of Tabernacles was my first with the Global Church of God, and I admit feeling a little anxious about the direction my life was taking. However, after attending the opening services in Colorado Springs, my concerns vanished. The pervasive atmosphere of joy, thankfulness and reunion buoyed my wounded spirits. The next day, and throughout the rest of the Feast, I spoke with dozens of people. The stories were always the same—how they came to see the Truth; how they became a part of God's Church; how they agonized as they watched their beloved Church viciously attacked at its very foundation; and, finally, how they found themselves alone, sometimes without friends or family support.
But mingled with these sad stories was a spirit of life and vitality. We were all drawn closer together in deep appreciation for the opportunity to fellowship and openly worship God in the way He commands us to. We began to recapture our sense of history and purpose. By the end of the eight days, I was on a high, really wishing it could go on longer. As I look back on it now, the joy I felt was largely due to the reappearance of my sense of family. I knew who I was again!
Curran's second observation is that the family has a person and/or place that serves as a focal point. She mentions that this role is often assumed by a patriarch or matriarch who serves as "chief of hospitality. In my physical family, one constant in our life of frequent transfers was "Grandpa's Lake. For years, our children thought Grandpa Meeker owned the Lake of the Ozarks in Missouri, and, when he died, ownership naturally passed to Grandma! We all made a yearly trek from Wisconsin—Michigan—Illinois—California—converging on a tiny house where two impatient grandparents would be waiting on the porch. They always asked the same question: "What took you so long?" In retrospect that whole ritual was sometimes the only element of stability in our often-frenetic lives.
On a different level, the Church, with its regular Sabbath meetings, serves in the same capacity. I became painfully aware of the importance of that predictable activity when we spent a couple of Sabbaths alone, no longer attached to the body we had once considered our spiritual lifeline. I remember a conversation my husband and I had more than once. We had determined to stand by our convictions even if it meant just the two of us observing the Sabbath in our home FOREVER! That would have been quite a change for us considering that, during our 33 years of marriage, we had celebrated every Sabbath with at least one congregation, sometimes two, unless illness prevented our doing so. All told, we have attended more than 1,700 services together, not counting the Holy Days!
But God didn't allow us to be alone for long. News of small groups forming here and there filtered down and, eventually, we were introduced to Global. Once again, we had a place we could call "home.
Consider another of Curran's descriptions: The family makes a conscious effort to gather as a people. Judging by the list of video groups and churches in the Global Church News, she certainly hit the nail on the head. Thinking back to the Feast, I recall meeting several who were the only ones in their communities or old church areas to desire to meet with other Global brethren. Some were old-timers who traveled great distances to attend Sabbath services when they were first called. Never did they dream that twenty or thirty years later, they would have gone full circle, as it were. One glance at that list will demonstrate that groups have sprung up all around the globe and comprise people who go to great lengths (and distances) to meet with like-minded brethren.
When Curran further comments that "strong families enjoy being together," she can't know how accurate her statement is for all of us. Listen to the happy chatter when we get together at weekly services, on Holy Days or at weddings. What we came so close to losing—our intense sense of fellowship and oneness—is beginning to be a hallmark of our congregations! Now that we feel somewhat secure again, we can offer that same sense of fellowship to new members and visitors who enter our doors. "How much a family opens itself up seems directly related to how strong a family sense it has."
The next point: The family views itself as a link between the past and the future. We in the Church almost lost that link as revisionists passed down a greatly edited and jaded version of the past. In response to these "fairy tales," we have loaded tables at Bible Studies and Sabbath services with photocopies of old articles, correspondence lessons, co-worker letters and booklets. In fact, some of us have read more of Mr. Armstrong's material and listened to more of his tapes than we had at any other time in recent memory.
We frequently see comments in The World Ahead written by delighted individuals who have discovered a familiar message that resonates in their memories. It's like they've found a long-lost friend. People remember the opening nights of Feasts past when a very familiar figure would ask a predictable question: "Why are we here?" That question is now being asked again, but with more understanding of the consequences of losing our sense of identity and purpose.
The last of Curran's points to consider is this: A strong family cherishes its traditions and rituals. She cites Dr James Dobson, who feels that the great value of traditions is that they give the family a sense of identity and "belongingness." Curran agrees, adding, "Families who treasure their traditions and rituals seem automatically to have a sense of family. Traditions are the underpinnings in such families, regarded as necessities not frills.
In viewing the past through the eyes of this author, I see clearly why the blessing of the little children; the baptismal ceremony, the solemn act of footwashing, the eating of unleavened bread, the observance of the yearly festivals and a host of other God-given traditions were—and are—so important! They are such a big part of who we are—of what defines us! They are both our history and our future. And most of all, they are our anchor, holding us stable and secure with a precious sense of family.