BIBLE QUESTIONS

Sun (Christchurch), Volume I, Issue 115, 20 June 1914, Page 5

BIBLE QUESTIONS

(Edited by AQUILA.)

Bible questions will be answered here if sent to the Editor of this column, accompanied by the names and addresses of the senders.

Q. What becomes of those who die in infancy, seeing that the Scriptures teach that admission into the Kingdom is governed by faith, repentance, and baptism? Note. —In Apostolic times faith and repentance always preceded baptism. The antecedent conditions are faith and repentance, which infants do not understand. Hence, what becomes of those who die in infancy, seeing that they have the stain of original sin upon them?—H.B.M. A. It would be well if modem Christians had as much confidence in the equity and commonsense of the Almighty as Abraham had: "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right.'' (Gen. 18-25.) Does our correspondent suppose that any soul is lost because the ''stain of original sin" is on it? That depravity which renders us all inclined to sin, is not itself sin. Head Ezekiel 18th for commonsense on the subject of our not suffering for another 's sin in the sense in which you speak. '' The soul that sinneth IT shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." (20) The whole chapter is an answer to the too common assertion that "The fathers have eaten a sour grape and the children's teeth are set on edge." St. Paul recognises the same principle where he says: "Death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." (Bom. 5, 19.) Not because of another's sins. In the following verse he says that sin is not imputed where there is no law; which would surely apply to infancy, if to any condition. Hereditary tendency is reasonable, and an obvious fact; hereditary guilt, though mentioned by theologians, is an impossibility. (I have' been obliged to omit part of your note, which contained statements calculated to raise sectarian discussion, which is absolutely barred from this column.)

Q. —Were there any human inhabitants of the earth in pre-Adamic times. It seems to me that the words addressed to Adam: "Be fruitful, multiply, and replenish (fill again) the earth" imply that the earth was peopled before his time. Is it not strange, therefore, that most people think that the Bible teaches that Adam was the first man? —H.B.M.

A.—lt is past all reasonable doubt that man has been on the earth for scores of thousands, if not for hundreds of thousands of years. The story of Eden, taken as a piece of literal history, has been a great trouble to the world. Understood as a parable, it is sublime. Even the writer of the story of Cain seems to conceive of other people besides the one family, for Cain "took a wife." Later in the narrative (Gen. 6, 2) the offence of the sons of God taking the daughters of men was probably that of the men of the dominant and superior race marrying with the women of the inferior and conquered race. It is such language as Eebeka might have used about her sons taking the daughters of Heth (Gen. 27, 46).

Q. —Does the Bible teach that Jesus Christ is God, the orthodox teaching? If so, how can He be the "mediator between God and men?" (i. Timothy, 2, 5). I hold that He is simply what He claimed to be, the "Son of God," and that He is the mediator, "the man Christ Jesus." Note. —Isaiah 46, 9, reads: "I am God, and there is none else." Isaiah 45, 5, reads: "There is no God beside me." —F.E.

A.—Certainly the New Testament ascribes to Christ divine names, divine attributes, and divine works, and all the orthodox churches hold that Christ is God. But the Church also holds that God is one, undivided in essence. The modern view of the Holy Trinity is that it is the threefold self-revelation of God. Men first knew God as the Creator, unapproachable and terrible. Then dawned the conception of fatherhood and compassion—"God manifest in the flesh." Then came the thought of God as the moral helper and instructor, the quickener of conscience, which is the Spirit "given to every man to profit withal." According to this view, the Trinity is the historical sequence of the successive revelations of God; or, as some moderns would say, of the stages of the development of the idea of God. We have a similar Trinity in Unity in the universe itself, there is first, the universal ether, the base of alii things, the only solid, the one continuum. Next, we have matter, or ether made manifest. Thirdly, we have energy, which is another manifestation of ether. They are spoken of as different entities; yet they are believed to be one in essence.

Q.~ Are not the words " Devil and "Satan" merely synonyms for sin!— ]sr o te. "Every man is tempted when he is drawn awav of his own lust and enticed" (James 1, 14). To me it is inconceivable that, in addition to man's | inherent tendency to sin, God would permit the existence of a personal immortal Devil, possessed of powers superior to man's, and equal to His own, in order to aim at ruining man body and soul. To teach that God permits this is to maintain that humanity is doubly handicapped in its efforts to overcome evil. If the Devil's powers are equal to God's, then God is not Almighty. Again, if the Devil is a personal being he must be mortal, because he "sinneth from the beginning," and this being so, surely ,the operation of God's law, viz., "The wages of sin is death," would destroy him. —F.E. A. The names "Devil" and "Satan" are not synonymns for sin in the Bible. They are the names of a wicked spirit; but whether real or suppositions I am not discussing. Your quotation from St. James is apt, and its teaching is quite up to date. Still, even in St. James we read, "The devils also believe and tremble," and "Resist the devil and he will flee from you,'' both of which imply personality, | and the latter of which predicates temptation. It is not implied in Scripture, or taught by any church that the devil \is " equal'''to God. '' He knoweth that |ho hath but a short time'' (Rev. 12, 32).

Q.—lf as you state, the Bible styles Satan a person, kindly through your column tell me where to find the passage, and what Christ mennt if he did not mean that Peter was Satan.—J.B.

\. The passages in which Satan is treated as a person are innumerable. I refer you to the temptation of Job (chapters 1. and Li), and to the temptation of Christ (Matt. A). The followin ■>• bears both on your question and on the preceding one, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your

father will ye do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie he speaketh of his own, for he is a liar and the father of it." (John 8, 44). —I have already said that Jesus simply meant that Peter was tempting him. If an elector at a political meeting calls . the speaker, "Judas," does he mean that the speaker is literally Judas, and that there never "was an original Judas? (Considerable correspondence is held over. —Aquila.)