Truth Magazine

By Larry Ray Hafley

Question:

From South Carolina: “What day of the week was Jesus crucified? According to Mt. 26:17; Mk. 14:12; and Lk. 22:7, Christ ate the Passover and was crucified the next day which would be the day after the Passover. However, John’s record (19:14) states that Christ was crucified the day before the Passover. All this, of course is conditional upon my clear understanding of the Scriptures involved. “On what day of the week was the Passover that year?”

Reply:

Jesus was crucified on Friday as the following Scriptures clearly show. “Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate” (Matt. 27:62). “And now when even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath” (Mk. 15:42). “And that day (the day Jesus was buried-LRH) was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on” (Lk. 23:54). “There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews’ preparation day; for the sepulchre was nigh at hand” (Jn. 19:42). The preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath, was the day on which Jesus was crucified and buried. The day before the Sabbath is Friday, hence, Jesus was crucified on Friday.

Part of the confusion and misunderstanding over John 19:14 is perhaps due to the lack of familiarity on the part of the common reader. That is a nice way of saying that because we are often ignorant of references to Jewish events, we may reach an erroneous conclusion. John 19:14 is a good example. “And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!” The “preparation of the Passover” does not refer to the preparation of the Passover such as the disciples tended to for Christ (Matt. 26:17-19). The term “Passover” in John 19:14 refers to the entire paschal festival. The preparation of the Passover signifies “the day before the sabbath” (Mk. 15:42), which fell during the week of the Passover. It is the Friday, the preparation day, which occurred within the celebration and commemoration of the Passover. Catholics speak of “Easter Friday.” By this they do not indicate that their Easter is on Friday but that it is the Friday of their Easter activities. So, the parallel runs in John 19:14-the preparation of the Passover simply refers to the preparation of the Sabbath that transpired the week of the Passover festivities. If our querist sees the point, his problem and difficulty is rectified and clarified.

The Passover-What Day?

The passover, like our July 4th, did not fall on the same day of the week every year. It was to be observed on the 14th day of the first month (Ex. 12). Nisan, the first Jewish month, corresponds to April. So, Jesus ate the Passover on what we would call Thursday night. The next day, Friday, was the day of preparation, the day before Saturday, the Sabbath. Jesus was slain and placed in the sepulchre on the day of preparation. The Sabbath, Saturday, found the disciples resting “according to the commandment” (Lk. 23:56). Jesus’ body remained entombed during this day. However, the following day, the first day of the week, Sunday, Jesus rose from the dead (Mk. 16:9; Lk. 24:1, 13, 21).

Truth Magazine XIX: 40, p. 626
August 21, 1975

By A. C. Grider

Recently I started a sermon with this paragraph: “As you know, I am given to some levity in the pulpit. It is a matter of judgment if this is advisable or not. I think some of it is all right or I would not engage in it. One thing is certain, you remember that part of my sermon! At the same time, you may not recall the seriousness of my message. If I preach on the death of Christ, the audience may go to sleep. If I kindly act the fool, all will stay awake and all will remember the things said. If I expound on a material thing, everyone will become especially interested. If I deal with a spiritual matter, many times it is sloughed off as something relatively unimportant.”

Perhaps I was a bit hasty in judgment on saying those things. Perhaps I exaggerated the matter a little. Maybe, with some people, it is the other way around. Some may despise the levity and retain the serious portion of my sermon. But there is, indeed, a lot of “misplaced emphasis” or “misplaced values” as I have headed this piece.

What is your reaction to the subject of eternity? Do you really seriously consider the implications in the scriptures relative to this important subject. The Bible says some shall “go away into everlasting punishment” (Matt. 25:46). Does that word “everlasting” strike you as a very serious thing? Perhaps one of the saddest things recorded in the New Testament is Abraham’s statement to the rich man to the effect that a gulf was fixed and that there could never be any crossing over to the other side. Jesus declared that the hour was coming in which “all that are in the graves shall come forth.” Some to resurrection of life and some to resurrection of damnation. In any case the thing under consideration dealt with eternity. Let us put proper emphasis on eternity and strive to be ready when it begins for us.

Take the subject of sin. Do we consider it seriously enough? Remember, the Bible says, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die” (Ezek. 18:20)! Paul tells us that “All have sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 2:23). Sin will separate us from God so that he will not hear us (Isa. 59:1-2). We had better not treat the subject of sin too lightly. It is a deadly serious subject. We had better give more time to this matter than we do to material things which are for time only.

What about the terrible cost of redemption? Because he loved us, God was willing to “give his only begotten son” for us (John 3:16). Christ was willing to “taste death for every man” (Heb. 2:9). Christ shed his blood that we might have “remission” of our sins (Heb. 9:22). How seriously do we consider this love of God and this sacrifice of Christ? Do we give these matters the kind of attention they deserve? Do we place the right value on this demonstration of love?

I pray that we may all re-evaluate our blessings. I hope we continue to enjoy many material blessings as well as spiritual ones. But may we not get our values mixed. Let us not misplace values. It is better to consider now than to regret later.

Truth Magazine XIX: 39, p. 618
August 7, 1975

By Larry Ray Hafley

QUESTION:

From Ohio: “According to the Scriptures; God demands perfection or near perfection from His subjects. When God destroyed the earth with the flood (except for Noah and his family), why didn’t He destroy Satan and all other evils and bring in this perfect environment we hear about?”

REPLY:

This question has a number of underlying assumptions. First, it assumes that God demands sinless perfection of His subjects before they can be accepted in His sight. Second, it supposes that God’s sovereignty permits Him to act regardless of His nature, character, and purposes. Third, it portrays God as a capricious tyrant who does not always conduct affairs as wisely as He might. Fourth, it smacks of premillennialisrn and of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ brand of “heaven an earth.” Our querist is likely unaware of any of these factors, and may be offended at their expression, but the question reveals these latent ideas nonetheless.

Sin, Obedience, and the Flood

God demands obedience to His will. “He bath shewed thee, Oman, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God” (Mic. 6:8)?Noah was not sinlessly perfect, for all have sinned. Noah was obedient. If Noah’s standing before the Lord depended upon his perfect life, he and his family would have been drowned in the waters of the flood. Man was responsible for his sins in the days of Noah. “And God said that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually . . . . And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth. And hod said unto Noah, the end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and behold I will destroy them with the earth” (Gen. 6:5, 12, 13). Why was the earth corrupt? “For all flesh has corrupted his way.” Haw was the earth “filled with violence?” It was “through them,” through men, that the earth was “filled with violence” arid wickedness. Sin is a two way street. It is not totally the devil’s fault (1 Cor. 10:13; Jas. 1:1315; 4:7; 1 Pet. 5:8,9).

God’s infinite purity, holiness, and justice must be considered. The flood was not initially or essentially designed to provide a “perfect environment.” It was sent “to destroy all flesh” (Gen. 6:17). The greatness of their wickedness made them unfit to live (cf. Rom. I:32). God was so appalled by their evil that it “grieved him at his heart.” Thus, the flood came, not to save, but to condemn. The flood was God’s judgment acting on behalf of his purity, holiness and justice. The judgment of God, whether it be to the blessing or cursing of men, is inevitable in the divine scheme. God’s sovereignty is upheld by the accounting that free will agents must give unto the Most High.

God’s Eternal Purpose

Our querist fails to account for the eternal purpose of God to save all men in Christ. Even at this time, the time of the flood, the divine design was being woven into the fabric of human history. In the garden, the first visible stitch was sewn with the seed of woman that would bruise the serpent’s head (Gen. 3:15). The devil’s dominion was to be broken by the promised seed. That seed is Christ. He was sent to bless all men in turning them from their sins by His death (Acts 3:24-26; Gal. 3:6-15). Since the devil ruled through death, God chose death as the very means to defeat and destroy the devil. He took the devil’s own weapon and beat him over the head with it. That is the height of ignominious defeat! Thus, did the seed of woman, of Abraham, and of David bruise the devil’s head (Heb. 2:14, 15).

The “perfect environment” is now available in heavenly places in Christ. It is not a future realm with respect to the bruising and binding of Satan. It is a present reality (Eph. 1:3; 2:6; 2 Cor. 5:17). The “only” thing left is heaven. Death is abolished. Life and immortality have been brought to light through the glorious gospel of Christ (2 Tim. 1:10). In essence, Christ accomplished for us on the cross what our querist desired of God at the flood.

Conclusion

Let us tread lightly in our wonderings about the workings of God. “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts” (Isa. 55:8, 9). “O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! For who bath known the mind of the Lord? Or who bath been his counsellor” (Rom. 11:33, 34)?

Truth Magazine XIX: 39, p. 616
August 14, 1975

By Luther Blackmon

Everywhere we see evidence of design, planning, contrivance. Even in the animal world about us we see this. For example, there are some fowls, like the chicken, which have a crop (craw) where food is ground or prepared for preliminary maceration. These eat mostly grain and seeds of various kinds. Then there are those like the hawk, eagle, kite, etc., which eat meat. These have a stomach or digestive system entirely different from those like the chicken. Along with this stomach these birds must also have claws on their feet with which to catch the rabbit, mouse, or what ever kind of meat is available. He must also have a hooked bill with which to tear the meat after he catches the prey. Can’t you just see what would result if a bird was hatched with the hooked bill and stomach for eating meat but with feet like a duck? Or vice versa, if he had the feet with the talon, the stomach for meat, and a bill like a goose? But, not only must the various organs of his body conform in this manner, but his surroundings must also be in conformity.

The peculiar bill and tongue and claws of the woodpecker, determine that he search for his food behind the bark of decayed trees where there are insects lodged. If there were no trees with worms in them his special bill and feet and tongue would be of no use. According to the theory of evolution, the various characteristics of these fowls were developed out of necessity as a result of their surroundings. So the woodpecker developed his tongue with the barb on the end, so he could reach into the hole he had made with his unique bill while he was hanging on to the tree with his unusual feet and spear his worm which chance and fate had stored in that tree for him. Now this all comes natural to the 20th Century woodpecker. He has been that way all his life. But how about that woodpecker before evolution developed him all these wonderful accessories? Remember it takes “millions of years” for these changes to become apparent. The old timers must have had it tough. I can’t help wondering also why the worm didn’t develop some sort of escape mechanism for himself while Mr. Woodpecker was accumulating all these features. The worm doesn’t seem to have much going for him, but he is still around.

Then you take the rabbit. Everything that eats meat seems to like rabbit. Not only that, but the poor rabbit has no defense but his color and his speed. Yet after all these years that he has been the victim of all kinds of cats and dogs and wolves and men, there are more rabbits than there are cats and dogs and wolves. Why? I would ride a mule bare-back with a blind bridle and slick bit, twenty miles, to hear some champion of the theory of organic evolution explain how the early rabbits managed to step up the production to stay ahead of the enemy like they have. It won’t do to say that the rabbits with the longest legs ran the fastest and got away, so rabbits naturally developed longer legs, unless he can explain why the dogs and wolves didn’t also develop longer legs so they could catch him. They had an interest in this business too, you know, and they had as much time to do it in as the rabbit. Not only that, but the rabbits still get caught and “et.” So the only explanation, as I see it, is in the production. The rabbits just had to step up production.

There is a wasp that stings the grasshopper in just the right place to paralyze him but not to kill him. This preserves him alive. Then she puts him in a hole, lays her eggs in that hole, and covers both the eggs and the grasshopper. When the eggs hatch the little wasps have food from the grasshopper until they are big enough to make other arrangements. How did the wasp find out just where to sting this fellow without killing him? Instinct of course. But what is instinct, and how did it begin? Where did he get it? There is no creator, no intelligence behind all this, you know. It just happened this way. Such words as “time” and “instinct” cover a multitude of assumptions. When the exponent of evolution is pressed for an answer to some of these things he either “passes” or takes refuge in his favorite mantle, “given enough time.” Reminds me of the doctor who didn’t know what was wrong with his patient. The patient pressed for a diagnosis. The doctor asked, “Have you ever had this before?” “Yes, once,” the patient replied. “Well,” said the physician, “You got it again.”

Truth Magazine XIX: 39, p. 615
August 14, 1975