John 10:34-37

Dr. Couch, what is going on in John 10:34-37? ANSWER: The passage reads in part: "Has it not been written in your Law, 'I said, you are gods'?" If [the writer of the Psalms] called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him, who the Father sanctified and sent into the world, You are blaspheming, because I said, 'I am the Son of God?'" Christ had just said that He and the Father "are one" (v. 30). He then asks, why are you [wanting to] stone Me? Jesus is quoting Psalm 82 that is a psalm of Asaph, who is addressing the priests in the OT who acted as judges (vv. 1-2). Psalm 82:6 it speaks of the priests as being like "elohim," as gods, or as the Rabbis translate it, as "God-like." The Rabbis write "as men invested with a Divine prerogative." Verse 6 also says that they were "sons of the Most High." Christ then went from the smallest to the largest. He went from a diminutive idea to a larger idea. If some men could be called God-like then He (Christ) could be called the Son of God, and even God! The priests of the OT could be called gods as representing God, how much more could Christ, who was indeed the God/Man, and also was the Son of God? The Lord verified that the OT priests were "elohim" by "the Word of God which came unto them" (John 10:35). The Father sent and sanctified Jesus whom He had placed in the world (v. 36). To deny this the Jews were blaspheming because Jesus had said "I am the Son of God" (v. 36b). And besides Christ was doing exactly the very "works of My Father" therefore, they should be believing in Him (v. 37). While it is hard for us to fully understand, this section of verses are some of the strongest in terms of Christ's deity. The Jews got it. They again tried to seize Him because He was claiming to be God (v. 39). Thanks for asking. --Dr. Mal Couch (12/10)

Names of Christ

Dr. Couch, what do the names of Christ mean in Isaiah 9:6 from the Hebrew text? ANSWER:  I am glad you asked this because I am now teaching the book of Isaiah on Monday nights at Clifton Bible Church. Actually, there is only one long name (singular) in this verse. In the Hebrew language it looks like this in the English transliteration: Pele-Joez-el-Gibbor-Abi-ad-Sar-Shalom.    In the Jewish translation of the Hebrew, and even in the orthodox Hebrew commentary, they leave the name just like this, thus, unless the readers knew Hebrew, they could not interpret the words that make up this one name!    The Jewish commentary does admit "The meaning of the Hebrew words is 'Wonderful in counsel is God the Mighty, the Everlasting Father, the Ruler of Peace.'" There is more to this one name. By the way, "the Everlasting Father" should better be translated "The Father of Eternity." This is referring to Christ. He is not God the Father, He is God the Son. Therefore, to say He is the Father of Eternity is far more accurate.    PELE means the Messiah is "extraordinarily marvelous," with the idea that He can speak "unheard-of" words. When the Messiah rules He will have awesome powers and will be the most outspoken with wisdom and righteousness.    JOEZ is the simple Hebrew word for "counselor." His advice will be perfect. He will not advise from the human standpoint but from the Divine! No human governor has ever expressed such perfection. He will rule with full authority and absolute wisdom!    EL is one of the most basic words for God. It is often used in a compound. He is "the High God." The Messiah is Very God/Very Man. Whatever can be said of God is said of Christ, the God-Man!    GIBBOR has the idea of God "the Strong One." It is used of a military leader. The Messiah is "manly, vigorous, a benevolent Despot, a hero, a warrior." It is a word used of the most powerful of animals. "The horse, crocodile." These animals represent the most fierce man can encounter—so is the Messiah. There will be no one like Him!    ABI is part of the phrase "ABI-AD, or Father of Eternity." He heads up the realm of The Forever! The Son of God, the Messiah, has always been! He was born into the realm of humanity but in spirit and soul, the Son has always existed, has always been! He is the eternal Son of God with no beginning and no ending.    SAR means "the leading person, the ruler, the chief." He is the Guardian, the military General, the Higher Being! The Messiah is no pushover, He is not passive. He is the ultimate Authority, the final Arbiter. He is the one will command full authority in His eternal earthly and cosmic realm!    SHALOM means the Messiah is the one who is full of kindness, salvation. He represents "personal wholeness" and completeness. When He rules He will have prosperous relationships—peace. He has peaceful intentions in His universal rule.    I trust this will cause a great appreciate for our Savior!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch   (10/10)

Ephesians 4

Dr. Couch, what is going on in Ephesians 4:7-on? And especially with verse 8 about Christ ascending and giving gifts to the captives? ANSWER: The apostle Paul reaches back to Psalm 68:18 and brings a verse forward that illustrates a victorious general who sets the captives free after a battle and then bestows upon them gifts. Ephesians 4:8 (quoting Psa. 68:18) reads: "When He ascended on high, He led captive a host of captives, and He gave gifts to men." The apostle then writes that Christ came to earth (He descended into the lower parts of the earth) and then returned far above into the heavens, "that He might fill [or be in charge] of all things." A.T. Robertson argues that Christ's Descending refers to His Incarnation when He came down "to the earth." This is a genitive of Apposition: Or, "He came down in reference to the earth." He then bestowed gifts to those in the church. Verse 7 better reads: "To each one of us (in the church) 'was gifted' according to the measure of Christ's gifts." I wrote in my nationally published commentary on Galatians-Ephesians (AMG) that "The apostle Paul is arguing in the strongest manner for the deity, sovereignty, and preeminence of Christ as God the Son. No one can look carefully at these verses and deny this fact." Christ then gave gifts to the spiritual body of believers. He gave four offices to the church, not five as the ignorant Charismatics often argue. To the church He gave (1) apostles, (2) prophets (not telling the future but as teachers), (3) evangelists, (4) and pastors INDEED, THAT IS teachers. The "and" (kai) is making these two positions relating. These gifted individuals are to build up the body of Christ: "Until all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God" (v. 13). Psalm 68:18 is a hymn of victory in which God is praised for victory and deliverance. It is freely adapted by Paul, who regards its substance rather than its letter, and uses it as an expression of the divine triumph as fulfilled in Christ's victory over death and sin.—Vincent We cannot do Bible study without knowledge of the Greek text or without good commentary material to help those who are deficient be able to see what is happening in the text. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (10/10)

God walking with people in the Garden

Dr. Couch, Genesis 3:8 says that the Lord walked in the garden in the "cool of the day." Was this in the morning or evening? And, did God have a body like human beings? ANSWER:  The Rabbis note that for the Orient, the cool of the day would be towards evening when a cooling breeze was blowing (See Song of Songs, 2:17). Having made 23 trips to Israel and the Middle East I can concur that it really turns cool at that time of day; in fact, it turns downright cold! Many times I've stood on the ramparts and the walls on the south side of Jerusalem and felt the cool winds blowing off the desert. Great feeling! I could also look south and see in the distance the lights of Bethlehem. I'm sure David did the same thing when he was king!    In the Genesis rabbinical commentary, the Rabbis add: "It was this evening wind that carried to Adam and Eve the sound which heralded the approach of God." The apostle John notes: "No one has seen God at any time, [except] the only born God, who is on the bosom of the Father, He has explained (exegeted) Him" (John 1:18). No one has seen God the Father; only the Son, God the Son, He has "explained" and shown forth Him!    God does not have a body; He is a Spirit. This verse is also speaking of an anthropomorphism, in that the second person of the Trinity, Christ, was in His pre-incarnate body. He is the only one of the Godhead who took upon Himself a human body, a physical appearance.    This was a good question. Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (7-10)

Christ's Knowledge

Dr. Couch, is it true that Christ is unaware of certain truths, such as the day and hour of His coming, as it seems to be mentioned in Matthew 24:36-37? Many believe He set aside His knowledge of that coming day with only His Father knowing. What do you say? ANSWER:  Christ is very God and His knowledge of the events of His creation is the same as the heavenly Father. He could not "de-know" what the Father knows. If so, He would not be God! The verses before speak about "the summer being near," that is, when "He is near" (vv. 32-33). The generation that sees these things coming "will not pass away until all these things take place" (v. 14). Then Jesus says:    "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone. For the coming of the Son of Man will be ..." (v. 36).    The word "to know," is the Greek verb "oida" from the root "eideo." While here it is translated "to know," in the majority of its usage it is translated "to see." In the NT the word is used approximately 627 times. In 66 of those times, it is used as "to know" only 13 times, or 117 times out of the 627 usages. The predominant usage then is to translate the word "to see."    The main point is what God the Father perceives in His office as Ruler and Initiator of His divine plans that will be carried out on earth. The Father is sovereign in regard to the plan of prophecy. It is His prerogative as to what He is "seeing" in regard to the future. It is not the prerogative of the Son, and certainly not of the angels. God the Father "sees" His plans. It will be up to the Son to carry those prophetic plans out on earth.    The timing of Christ's coming is "seen" or "fixed" by the Father. It is determined by the Father and not by the Son. The Son but carries out the purposes and the plans of the Father. The Son is not ignorant of what is going to happen; He will follow through with what the Father has determined to take place!    While we all admit this is a tough passage, I believe this is the best and most feasible explanation of what is happening here.    I hope this helps. Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (5/10)

Location of Gehenna

Dr. Couch, Revelation 14:10 seems to tell us something about the location of Gehenna. And too, it speaks of Christ and the holy angels seeing the torment of the beast, with the smoke of that torment going up forever and ever (v. 11). How could this be? The beast and unbelievers are not in the New Jerusalem in eternity. Is there something in the Greek text that would clarify this? – Reader from England ANSWER:  No, not really. The torment of the beast is repeated in almost the same language in 20:10. "The devil ... was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever."    I think your problem is looking at this issue with a limitation of space. Because Christ and the holy angels witness this torment and wrath coming upon the beast does not mean that the lake of fire is in the New Jerusalem. Christ and the angels can witness this happening because, after all, Christ created all things, even the eternal lake of fire for "the devil and his angels," and of course according to Revelation, this is also the place of confinement of the beast.    Jesus can know all things, and He can see all things which He created. But this does not mean that this place is where the believers will be for eternity. We might all have to admit we do not know the exact location of the lake of fire, but this does not create an interpretative problem. Revelation 14:10 does not contradict 2 Thessalonians 1:9 that reads: the lost "will pay the penalty of eternal destruction, away from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of His power." Christ can still witness the wrath of God and the torment that falls upon the beast, and the lost, for the period of eternity.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Mar., 10)

"It is Finished" and "It is Done"

Dr. Couch, what is the difference in Christ's words "It is finished" and "It is done"? ANSWER:  Glad you asked. "It is finished" was said by the Lord as He gave up His own spirit on the cross. The Greek is "teleo" and is found in John 19:30. It is a Perfect Passive Indicative. Translated: "It was begun in the past and brought up to that moment on the cross, and is now completed, finished!" Christ's sacrifice was completed and His sacrifice for the lost is finalized. Nicoll has a slightly different twist on this and writes:    "The cry 'It is finished' was not the gasp of a worn-out life, but the deliberate utterance of a clear consciousness that His work was finished, and all God's purpose accomplished, that all had now been done that could be done to make God known to men, and to identify Him with men."    Some see a loose connection with Matthew 5:17-19 and 24:35. Christ said that He came not to abolish the Law but to "fulfill" it (Matt. 5:17), and heaven and earth would not pass away until "all is accomplished" (v. 18). This verse 18 fits directly with Revelation 21:6.    With the establishment of the new heaven and the new earth in Revelation 21:6, we see Christ saying "It is done." This is at the very end of history as we know it, and, the beginning of eternity. All of history is completed and we go into the eternal state. "It is done" is a Perfect Active Indicative of "ginomai." What is common with John 19:30 is the Perfect Tense in Greek. The Perfect starts the action in the past and comes up to the present. Christ is saying that a Plan was put forward and is now completed as eternity begins! "It was begun in the past and has come up to completion with the beginning of the new heaven and the new earth!" "Ginomai" carries the idea of "It has come about, taken place, finally arrived, has been attained." There is more finality with this word in that all of history has been wrapped up and finalized. With the Perfect Tense in both "teleo" and with "ginomai" we see a process that has finally been completed. The task is over. God has finalized His Plan around His Son!    A little lesson in Greek: "With the Perfect Tense, action is viewed as a finished product. ... It implies a process as having reached its consummation and existing in a finished state. ... It is best to assume that there is a reason for the Perfect Tense wherever it occurs." – Dana & Mantey    In Revelation 21, all is completed, and eternity has started!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Mar., 10)

Impeccability

Dr. Couch, what is the impeccability of Christ all about? ANSWER:  Christ did not sin nor could He do so. In prophecy, the Messiah is called the Holy One (Psa. 16:10). And in Isaiah 53:9, He had "done no violence, nor was their deceit in His mouth." He is also called "the Righteous One" (v. 11).    Peter reminded the Jews that they participated in Christ's death. He called the Lord "the Holy and Righteous One" (Acts 3:14). The apostle Paul said that God the Father "made Him to be sin, He who knew no sin" so that we could become through Him "the righteousness of God in Him" (2 Cor. 5:21). The writer of Hebrews adds that Christ had "been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin" (Heb. 4:15). And, He was "a high priest, holy, innocent, undefiled, separated from sinners and exalted above the heavens" (7:26). Finally, Peter adds that there was no deceit in His mouth, quoting Isaiah 53:9, and "while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously" (1 Pet. 2:22-23). Christ is called the Just One (Acts 7:52; 1 John 2:1) and the "King of Righteousness" (Heb. 7:2).    None of this can be said of any other religious prophet or Teacher. He is sinless because He is "the Word who was God" (John 1:1). The "was" is Past Tense, meaning that He always existed as God forever in the past. There has never been a time that He was not God!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Mar., 10)

Who is Christ Referring to in Matthew 21:43?

Dr. Couch, what nation is Christ speaking about in Matthew 21:43? Some say this is the church; some say it is referring to the Jews of another generation. What do you say? ANSWER:  The passage reads: "I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you (the Jews of that generation), and be given to a nation producing the fruit of it."    We interpret by observation, observation, observation.    And we observe that Christ is speaking about the "kingdom of God." We know by an undisputed fact that every time "the kingdom of God" and "the kingdom of heaven" is mentioned it is referring to the millennial kingdom of Christ that is yet to come. And that millennial kingdom is the messianic rule of the Son of David sitting on His throne in Jerusalem.    In the verse before (v. 42) Jesus quotes Psalm 118:22 about "the stone which the builders rejected." Those verses in Psalm 118 are talking about Israel and about the "festival sacrifices" and the altar where sacrifices are offered. There is nothing here about the church!    Matthew 21:43 ties into Psalm 118 and Christ starts the verse with "Therefore ..." He is drawing a conclusion about how "The builders," the Jews in Christ's day are to someday be replaced by that other nation. Those who argue that this "nation" is the church quote 1 Peter 2:9-10 and Romans 10:19 and claim that in these passages the church is called "a nation." The Romans passage where "nation" and "people" are mentioned is a quote from Deuteronomy 32:21. This could certainly be a reference to the Gentiles but that is a long stretch to the idea of the church. The church is "the called out" ones (mainly but not exclusively) Gentiles. And to say that God will make Israel jealous by the Gentiles coming to the Lord is still not calling this group of Gentiles the church!    In 1 Peter, the apostle Peter is writing to one segment of the church, the Jews, to those who "are aliens" (or strangers), the Jews who are in the Diaspora (the scattered ones), the Jews who were driven from the Holy Land (1:1). In 1 Peter 2:9 Peter calls these believing Jews "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession." He is compiling several OT passages about the nation of Israel. He says of them that they "were not a people, but now you are the people of God" (v. 10). Now, as Jews, they are "to keep their behavior excellent among the Gentiles" (v. 11). This puts those Peter is writing to in opposition to the Gentile believers, members of the church.    To conclude: Peter is not saying this nation is the church! Neither is Christ saying that in Matthew 21:43!    So the other nation is a later generation of Jews to whom the kingdom of God will be given. Again, the "kingdom of God" is always the Jewish messianic future kingdom; it never is the church!    When interpreting the Bible, keep the lines straight. Don't mix concepts together in order to make a preconceived point. Let the Bible speak for itself.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Feb., 10)

Unity of Christ and the Father while on the Cross

Dr. Couch, it seems the unity or immutability of God is destroyed by the so-called separation of Christ from the Father when He was on the cross. Most Bible teachers seem to just give the usual standard answer and do not work the biblical text on giving the right answer. I know you work the languages, so I'm asking you what the passage (Matt. 27:46) is really saying from the Hebrew and Greek languages. What do you think? ANSWER:  The passage reads, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?" Christ is quoting Psalm 22:1. The Hebrew word for "forsaken" in Psalm 22:1 is A'Zav with the meaning of "to abandon, to take away one's favor," with the idea: "To come up to someone, see a need, and walk away from that need." In Greek the word "forsake" is egkataleipo. It is in an Aorist form and carries the idea "to desert," to "leave one in straits, to leave one helpless, to leave one behind."    The persons in the Trinity did not cut ties when Christ died, and took upon Himself our sins, but the heavenly Father left the Son to face the pain of crucifixion, left Him in the circumstances of the death He was facing. The Father and Son were not breaking their Trinity relationship. They, along with the Holy Spirit, remained as joined as the three persons in the Godhead: Father, Son, and Spirit. They have an eternal relationship that cannot be broken.    The incarnation of Christ is a mystery and it is difficult to understand what happened in Christ's death on the cross. It cannot be said that God died, so His death is indeed difficult to explain! Some argue that only the physical of the Lord actually died. And even with that, we know that Christ did not undergo decay in His body. This is made clear from Psalm 22:10: "Neither will You allow Your Holy One to undergo decay." As deity the Lord did not "disappear." For He said prophetically "My flesh also will dwell securely. For You will not abandon My soul to Sheol [to the grave]" (vv. 9b-10a).    Psalm 22:11 seems to say that Christ, in His death, remained conscience just as we will when we pass. "In Your presence is fullness of joy; in Your right hand there are pleasures forever." In other words, the Lord remained in His relationship, with joy and comfort, with the heavenly Father when He physically died! A lot of this is a mystery but what I've written seems to make sense biblically.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch

Melchizedek Both a Priest and King

Dr. Couch, Hebrews 6:20 says that the Messiah "has become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." Melchizedek was both a priest and a king, thus, the Kingdom Now folks say He is reigning as such, as King, presently. What do you say? ANSWER:  Notice in Hebrews 7 that Melchizedek was "king over Salem, which is peace" (v. 2). But it is true that Christ is both priest and king but that does not mean that He is presently reigning as King. That will happen when He arrives to "sit on His glorious throne" and when, on earth, He begins to rule and judge the nations (Matt. 25:31-34). That is His literal, earthly, historic rule that has not begun yet. You correctly pointed out Luke 1:32-33 where it states "The Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David; and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever; and His kingdom will have no end." Luke uses two future tenses in Greek, and "the house of Jacob" means "the house of Jacob" not the church. Also, "the throne of His father David" does not mean the church.    The rule of interpretation: observe, observe, observe!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Nov., 09)

Greek Word "Glory"

Dr. Couch, does the Greek word "glory" (doxa) refer to heaven or simply the glory of the person of Christ, or of God, etc.? ANSWER:  Some try to claim that the word is never used of heaven but this is not so. They seem to do this in order to avoid the idea that the church goes "into glory, heaven" at the time of the rapture, thus making the church a heavenly people. Yet, there is no question that the church saints also will come back with Christ for the blessed period of the millennial reign on earth. We are given a certain amount of "co-reigning" and authority when He returns.    The word "glory" is sometimes used to describe certain characteristics of God and of Christ. For example, Christ will sit on the throne of His glory (Matt. 19:28), and He will come in the glory of His Father (Mark 8:38), and will finally "enter into His glory" (Luke 21:26). God the Father is assigned glory (John 11:40), Israel is seen in her glory (Rom. 9:4), and too, the church has its glory (1 Cor. 2:7; Eph. 3:21). A woman is the glory of her husband (11:7), the celestial bodies have their glory (15:40), such as the sun (v. 41). The gospel is said to be glorious (2 Cor. 4:4).    But the word glory is still often used to describe heaven: "Christ in us is the hope of glory" (Col. 1:27), and we shall appear with Him IN glory (3:4). As well, we are to be received "up into glory" (1 Tim. 3:16), and "many sons are to be brought unto glory" (Heb. 2:10). Finally, Peter says we have "been called unto His eternal glory" (1 Pet. 5:10).    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Oct., 09)

Luther's Hatred for the Jews

Dr. Couch, how could Martin Luther be so mixed up in his mistreatment of the Jewish people? He wrote terrible things about them because they did not receive Christ as their Savior. Luther was filled with hatred and yet he prayed three or four hours a day. Also, he thought the book of James should not be in the canon of Scripture. This all seems inconsistent with someone who studied and prayed so much! ANSWER:  We can all be impacted by the culture and by the voices that we hear on a continual basis, that are contrary to truth. The people of Luther's day were haters of the Jewish people, and Luther followed what was happening in his society.    God generally does not give us revelation of things that we should find out for ourselves. That is, He does not reveal to us the laws of chemistry or physics. With such things we have to go through a process to learn about. So with the issue of God's working with the Jews. Luther was not reading his Bible carefully enough to be able to set aside his hatred of the Jews.    To put it another way, Luther could have known of the passage of Scripture: "From the standpoint of the gospel [the Jews] are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's election [of the Jews], they are beloved [in His sight] for the sake of the [ancient Jewish] fathers" (Rom. 11:28). Luther in his hatred went against this passage found in the book of Romans.    On the matter of the book of James, Luther objected to it because he felt the book was saying that salvation comes by human effort, human works. He did not interpret James properly. James is saying that we are "justified by works" in the sight of men, though we are "justified by faith" in the sight of God! On one hand, he felt James was part of the Bible, though it had its problems, yet it should be seen in a lesser light because of what he felt was a contradiction.    Harrison says this about Luther and the book of James: "It was not included in the Muratorium canon and was generally ignored until Jerome and Augustine give it their endorsement. Its place in the canon seemed to become secure with its inclusion by the Third Council of Carthage in A.D. 397, but at the beginning of the modern period it was questioned by Erasmus and others. Luther's attitude was one of distrust and disappointment because he found it out of agreement with Paul's teaching on justification by faith. He gave it a secondary position [though still Scripture] and labeled it 'a right strawy epistle.'"    Luther did not have all the information and input that we have today historically. So we have to give him a pass in his understanding, and also in the understanding of others.      God's desire is to strengthen us by His Spirit "in the inner man" (Eph. 3:16) in the spiritual realm but He does not give us objective truth—this we have to dig for!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch  (Sept. 2010)

Inclusivism and Preaching Christ

Dr. Couch, I believe Romans 10:13-14 indicates pagans are lost, so then we should preach Christ to them, right? Otherwise, why not let them be saved by some other way. What do you think of inclusivism? ANSWER:  These verses are looking at the lost from the earthly perspective. And yes, they cannot be saved without accepting Christ, and they cannot hear of Him without a "preacher" ("proclaimer"). This does not negate the doctrine of absolute predestination and election. These verses in Romans are giving us the subjective or the human perspective. If you want to fully understand the doctrine of predestination you need to study Ephesians 1:3-14. Read it carefully and slowly. Notice that "belief" is not mentioned because Paul is taking us up to heaven to observe the Divine perspective on salvation.    Remember my little saying, God is absolutely 100% sovereign and man is 100% responsible. I really cannot understand this but this is what the Bible proclaims from Genesis to Revelation. Paul points out in Romans 1 that men are responsible for seeing God in nature, but even with that revelation, they still refuse to come to Him. Paul is not suggesting that they can be saved by seeing God in nature but his point is that they do not even go past that revelation. They still refuse to believe in Him no matter how great or small the knowledge they have of Him.    Paul's conclusion on the subject is important: He writes "There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks after God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, thee is not even one" (Rom. 3:10-12). This comes under the heading of  Total Depravity! In some ways 1 Corinthians 2:14 is even stronger. "The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for these things are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually understandable." Thus mankind is really cut off from God and does not wish to seek Him!    I am not sure what you mean by inclusivism. Please explain.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch

No Bible because Christ is Sufficient

Dr. Couch, some folks say we do not have to study the Scriptures because after all, Jesus fulfilled the OT, so we do not have to go back and study the Bible passages because Christ has fulfilled many of the prophecies of the Word of God! We just look at Him, because this is sufficient for us today. How do you answer? ANSWER:  We are still commanded, as the Greek text states: "Be zealous, take pains, to stand yourself, approved by testing [with] God as an artisan, a craftsman, who does not need to be ashamed, to cut apart accurately the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15). The reference to "the word of truth" is mainly referring to the OT prophecies!    Wuest has some great notes: "Study means 'to make haste, to exert one's self, endeavor. Paul is saying—I wish to know that you are hurrying on the making of it.' "Put to the test for the purpose of approving, and finding that the person or thing meets the specifications laid down, to put one's approval upon that person or thing." "Rightly dividing  or cutting straight, to hold a straight course, to make straight, to handle rightly," the word of truth.    Note these verses: John 5:46; Luke 22:37; 24:26-35; Acts 10:43; 28:23; 26:22-23. Yes, it is true He fulfills the OT prophecies, but so what? We are still commanded to glean from the Word of God all that it says about Him, and about so many other great doctrines that are laid out for us.    What are the elders supposed to do? Note Titus 1:9 and 2:11-15. Also, 2 Timothy 2:1-2. Too: 1 Timothy 5:17.    Believers are not to be kept uninformed or kept in the dark about Bible prophecy and the plan of God. Paul tells the Romans: "I do not want you, brothers, to be 'ignorant' of the mystery of the hardening of the heart of the Jews, because from Israel (from Zion) will come the Deliverer" (Rom. 11:25-32). "Ignorant" means in Greek "to be unknowing" (agnoein). It is a Present Infinitive. "I don't want you to be right now unknowing!" Paul then reminds his readers of the prophecy of Isaiah 59:20-21. He wants his audience to know what that great prophecy is saying.    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch

Is Exodus 23:20-21 About Christ?

Dr. Couch, what is going on in Exodus 23:20-21? Is this about Christ? ANSWER:  The Lord said through Moses, "I am going to send an angel before you to guard you along the way, and to bring you into the place which I have prepared. Be on your guard before him and obey his voice; do not be rebellious toward him, for he will not pardon your transgression, since My name is in him."    This is very similar to Judges 2:1 where the angel of the Lord speaks a word of rebuke to the Israelites. "I have sworn to your fathers; and I said, 'I will never break My covenant with you.'" In Exodus 23:21 the angel the Lord is sending is the Angel of Jehovah who is the pre-incarnate Lord Jesus Christ. Unger agrees with this. Moses is told "to obey Him,' that is, this Angel. This would certainly make Him the Messiah! Because of the depth of the sins of the people, He will not pardon their transgressions. Only God could pardon sin; therefore, this one is not simply another angel, but the Angel of Jehovah, Christ, who has the ability to pardon, or not pardon!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch