BIBLE QUESTIONS

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 97, 30 May 1914, Page 5

BIBLE QUESTIONS

(Edited by AQUILA.) Bible questions will be answered nerd if sent to the Editor of this column, accompanied by the names and addresses of the senders. Q. There lias been a lawsuit in Dunedin over the ownership of an "Auld Licht" church there. The deed provided that the congregation w T as during prayer and sit during singing. A few years ago they reversed the practice for some reason, and recently an old, member —"a'raong the faithless, faithful only* he," claimed the church under a clause that provided that it should belong to those who adhered to the-old style. My question is: 'What is the Scriptural posture for prayer? —New Licht.

A. Wheu Solomon dedicated the Temple (1. Kings, 8:54); when Daniel prayed at his window- (Dan. 6:10); when Stephen prayed (Acts 7.60); when Peter raised Dorcas (Acts 9:40) and" when Paul "bowed his knees." (Eph. 3:16) the attitude was kneeling. But Abraham "stood before the Lord" (Gen. 18:22), the Publican and the Pharisee both stood to pray (Luke 18), and Jesus said '' When ye stand to pray, etc." (Mark XI, 25). Again Moses "sat on the stone" (Ex. 17:12), and David sat before the Lord," (II Sam. 7.15). In 2 Kings 20:2 we find Hezekiah praying as he lav upon his bed on his side. In 11. Sam. 12:16 and in Matt. 26:39 prostration is the attitude. Elijah in I Kings 18:42 observes none of these postures, but "threw himself upon the ground and put his face between his knees." It is curious'that in the three great prayers of the three different postures were observed: Abraham stood, Moses sat and Elijah crouched.

Q. All the papers give much prominence to Canon Hughes for knocking out two poor fellows who happened to look in at a church dance. How does this square with the sermon oir the Mount, and the doctrine of turning the other cheek and of not resisting evil? Can the law of Christ be set aside when it comes into contact with' so holy a thing as a church' dance. —■Consistency.

A. It is probable that his straight-out blows were the most popular deliverances ever made by the Canon. , Probably, too, the great majority of those who have read about it will heartily approve of his action, for religion has not benefitted by the over exaltation of the feminine virtues. Your statement does the Canon an injustice.. He intervened when two or three rowdies were attacking an old man whose duty.it was to keep them out. It is difficult to believe that any serious law makes that a fault. Few things have done more harm to religion than requiring its votaries to be meek and submissive to wrong. St. Paul brought his" persecutors up standing when he could; (Acts 16:35 — 40) and" Jesus, though he did not smite with his hands/ except when he ; drove the stall holders out of the temple (Jn. 2:i3—16) smote with his tongue as with lightning. The doctrine of nonresistance in the Sermon on the Mount, is <"held by many good Christians be impracticable if taken literally. ""It is counsel of perfection, an hyperbole of virtue, blowing twenty knots to make the ship go ten. In a literal sense it may have been useful to the infant and defenceless church. But applied to the i world at large it would simply mean.the surrender of everything to the unscru- ! pulous egotism of any bully who might come along. Besides, take careful notice, it does not ask you to turn your sister's cheek to the smiter, or to stand by and see your'neighbour wronged. That is a point that extremists usually overlook entirely. Q.— There is a curious verse in. Acts v., 36. How could Gamaliel in the year 34 or 35, speak in the> past tense of the agitator Theudas, who, according to Josephus, did' not appear till after the year 4.4? Student. A. —The fanatic in question was a Jew, and no doubt had a Hebrew name. Theudas (Theodosius) is the Greek translation of that name, and' might stand for any one .of several names, some think even for Matthias. Hence some infer that Luke and Josephus do not necessarily refer to the same person, for there were abortive risings every year or two. Others have thought that as Josephus mentions several insurrections without giving the names of the leaders, he did not give the name in this case, and that the Christians in the early and uncritical centuries interpolated the name Theudas to make it a support and confirmation'of the Acts, thus getting hoist by their own petard. The theory of verbal inerrancy, however, which requires such explanations, is not now universally held. It was tUe custom of historical writers in those days to put appropriate speeches into the mouths., of their characters to birghten up the narrative. Some of the finest passages in ancient history are in speeches of this kind. Take the. speech of Hannibal at. the foot of the Alps, in Livy; or the speech of Calgascus, the British chief, before the battle of the Grampians, as given by Tacitus. We do not imagine that these are verbatim reports, or even reports at all. They are what might have been very suitably said; yet they do not in the least detract from our estimation of the author as a historian. Now some modern men would say that all that the Christians knew was that Gamaliel had spoken against the persecution and had pointed out that other enthusiasms had come to nought, and that the like would befal Christianity if it were not of God. Luke, writing many years afterwards, puts in Gamaliel's speech, according to the literary custom of his time, and happens to slip in the name of an adventurer who did not arise till some years after the date of Gamaliel's speech. A blunder of this kind, of which there are scores in literature, would not impair the credibility "of any non-Scriptural writer «*n his real personal narrative. Why? Because he would be criticised under a very different and much more reasonable theory. Moderns wish to give Luke and the rest, of the writers of Scripture the advantage of that theory.

Q. —If the Day of Judgment is a day of wrath and mourning, as is generally understood, a day when the earth and all the works therein shall be burnt up, why, in Psalms 67, is it described as a glad time, and in Psalms 96, verses 9 to Id, as a joyful time? —Anxious. A. —The passages you refer to — '' Thou shalt judge the people righteously and govern the nations of the earth,'' and "Say among the heathen that the Lord reigneth, he shall judge the people righteously," have nothing to do with the Day of Judgment. The word "judge" here simply means to rule, or govern. "Eli judged Israel 40 years." (1 Sam. 4: 18). "The Lord execute!h righteousness and judgment (justice) for all 'that are oppressed." (I'salm 10.*!). "Learn to do well; seek judgment, (justice), relieve the oppressed, judge the fatherless (do justice to)." Is. 1: 17. Your passages therefore simply mean that when the righteous rule

the people rejoice. Nor should the Day of Judgment be regarded as other than the re-establishment of universal justice. In the main a good day, though some may have to mourn as they do now when justice is done. You should not allow the pomp and' circumstance, the drapery of descriptions of the great court to terrify you. Believe me, every day is the day of judgment, and we are sinking, or rising, to our natural level according as we live. (Your secioiid question, woiild lead to a breach of bur most absolute rule—not to admit sectarian disputes.)

Q. —You speak of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews being a man of one book. The heading of the epistle is, '' The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Was not Paul a man of varied learning, and'of knowledge of the pagan world? A. —The belief in the Pauline authorship of the epistle has been abandoned for" centuries. The work indicates a man profoundly versed in the Old Testament, in the Septuagint version of-Alex-andria, and familiar with the religious philosophy of Philo of Alexandria. The only man. mentioned in the New Testament who appears to meet these requirements is Apollos, Acts 18,'24. "A certain Jew, named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the Scripturesj etc." You may consult >Cohybeare and Howson 's ''■ St. Paul, J ' and though Pean Alfor<l's Greek-Testa-ment is now somewhat out of date, his introduction gives a fine presentment of the argument for the authorship of Apollos.