Menu

God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen: The Joy of Christmas

The English language is in a constant state of flux. New words are being added to our vocabulary all the time, while older words change their meaning over the years. This has led to some puzzlement with the text of the Authorized (or King James) Version of the Scriptures, published in 1611. For example, “We fetched a compass” (Acts 28:13) does not mean the speakers obtained one of those direction-finding instruments. It means they turned their ship around. And “we do you to wit” (II Cor. 8:1), means we want you to know. Such changes in language are one reason for the newer Bible versions, published in recent years.

A similar problem can arise when we are dealing with older hymns. An example of that is the carol “God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen,” which gets its title from the first line of the opening stanza. (To see the full text, click here: link ) This song was written about 500 years ago–long enough for language to alter considerably. And it has not helped that some publishers omit the comma after “merry,” obscuring the sense even further. The text does not refer to “merry gentlemen”–as though it were saying, “Have a nice holiday!” to a group of giddy revellers. Nor is the word “rest” used as we would do, today. Five centuries ago it meant make, or keep. A modern paraphrase of the words might read: “May God keep you joyful, gentlemen. May He fill your hearts with gladness!”

The sentiment reflects the message of the angel on that first Christmas night: “Do not be afraid, for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy” (Lk. 2:10). The reason for great rejoicing follows: “For there is born to you…a Saviour” (vs. 11). That is precisely what the carol says: “God rest ye merry, gentlemen, / Let nothing you dismay; / Remember Christ our Saviour / Was born upon this day / To save us all from Satan’s pow’r / When we were gone astray– / O tidings of comfort and joy!” Don’t be dispirited or alarmed, says the unknown author. God has sent His Son to be our Saviour.

Carols were extremely popular by the 16th century (the era of the Reformation). Rather than starting out as church music, they were closer to being folk songs–expressions of a joyful faith by the common people. And originally they were sung for a variety of occasions, not just Christmas. But in 1647 the Puritan English Parliament officially abolished the celebration of Christmas, and all other festivals, as being too worldly and pagan. It was 150 years before the practice of carol singing was revived in England. Queen Victoria enjoyed them, and urged that they be used once again. Soon the English clergy were teaching them to their congregations. “God Rest Ye Merry, Gentlemen” was one of these. Its lively tune appropriately reflects the joy and celebration prompted by news of the Saviour’s birth. The angel told the shepherds his message was “good tidings of great joy,” and they realized it was so. After they had visited the manger in Bethlehem, they “returned, glorifying and praising God for all the things that they had heard and seen” (Lk. 2:10, 20).

And why is Christmas a time of joy? Is it the decorations? Or the parties? Or the presents? As delightful as these may be, Christians point to a far more significant reason for rejoicing–the foundation of all the rest. In the Words of Paul, “We also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom with have now received the reconciliation” (Rom. 5:11). Through personal faith in Christ, God and the sinner are reconciled. That is the true source of Christmas joy!

We Three Kings: He got it wrong.

John Hopkins (1820-1891) was a clergyman and an experienced hymn writer. Most of his work is now forgotten, but Hopkins wrote the words and music for a Christmas song in 1857 which is still in use. The song was created for a Christmas pageant at the General Theological Seminary of New York. And you would think that Doctor Hopkins, writing for this distinguished body, would take care to get his facts straight. But apparently that did not much concern him.

We Three Kings

The carol tells of the visit of the wise men to pay homage to Jesus. Scripture records the event in Matthew 2:1-12. But Hopkins seems to have ignored the facts before him and let his fancy take wing. Consider the title of his carol: “We Three Kings of Orient Are.” (To see the full text, click here: link ) First, the biblical text nowhere tells us how many men there were. They are referred to in the plural, but that could mean there were two or twenty-two. We do not know. That there were three gifts presented tells us nothing. (If you receive three gifts for Christmas, will that without doubt prove there were three separate gift-givers?) Second, they were not kings at all, but wise men or magi. The magi were men expert in the study of the stars. Third, they were not from the “Orient,” which refers to the Far East, or Eastern Asia. Rather, they were from Persia (present day Iraq), in the Middle East. The Persians placed much faith in astrology, which is the reason they needed men trained in the location and movement of the stars.

But where did these men, living hundreds of miles from Palestine, get their knowledge of the coming King of the Jews–and the understanding that He would be more than a mere man, and worthy of their worship (Matt. 2:11)? Likely this information came from the time when the Jews were taken to be slaves in the land of Persia (earlier ruled by the Babylonians). The years of the Captivity (605-535 BC) brought the Persians in contact with the Jewish Scriptures. In fact, one of the greatest of the prophets, a man named Daniel, lived out his whole adult life in the palace of the king. When the Lord revealed to Daniel the hidden meaning of a dream that troubled King Nebuchadnezzar, the Bible says the king “made him…chief administrator over all the wise men of Babylon” (Dan. 2:48).

In this capacity, Daniel no doubt shared prophecies concerning the promised Messiah of his people–One whom he called “Messiah the Prince” (Dan. 9:25). He could have told them that Christ would be called the Prince of Peace, and reign upon the throne of David (Isa. 9:6-7). Or that Jeremiah promised this descendant of David would be called “the Lord [Jehovah] our Righteousness” (Jer. 23:5-6). Or that Balaam prophesied He would be identified by the raising of a kingly Septre and a Star (Num. 24:17). Given Daniel’s powerful influence in the court, it would not be surprising if his teachings were handed on from one group of wise men to the next. That may provide a significant clue to the knowledge of the wise men of Matthew’s Gospel.

To be sure, John Hopkins’s carol contains a number of inaccuracies. But to give credit where it is due, Hopkins rightly identifies the symbolism of the three gifts presented to Jesus. Though the visitors may not have fully understood why, in God’s providence, the gold, frankincense and myrrh were most appropriate. As Hopkins indicates, gold speaks of His kingly majesty–“Gold I bring, to crown Him again.” And “incense owns a Deity nigh,” because its rising smoke symbolizes prayer and worship. Myrrh’s “bitter perfume breathes a life of gathering gloom,” because it was used as an embalming spice (cf. Jn. 19:39-40), pointing to Christ’s death for sin (cf. Matt. 20:28; Eph. 1:7). Thus Hopkins’s song does present Christ in a wonderful, three-fold way: “Glorious now behold Him arise: / King and God and Sacrifice.” In that, he got it right.

Answers: Christmas Bible Quiz

,

Here are the answers to last week’s “Tricky Questions Based on the Bible and Our Carols”:

1) John the Baptist, who was to announce Christ’s coming, was born to Zacharias and Elizabeth (likely Mary’s cousin) six months before Jesus was born (Lk. 1:31, 36, 56-57, 76).

2) The prophet announcing the virgin birth, 700 years before the time of Christ, was Isaiah, in Isa. 7:14, a prophecy Matthew’s Gospel says was fulfilled by the birth of Jesus (Matt. 1:18-23).

3) For answers to a Christmas Bible Quiz like this, you would need to go to Matthew and Luke. Mark’s and John’s Gospels say nothing of the events of Christ’s birth.

4) It is “Silent Night” that is the most popular carol of all. The top three secular songs are: “The Christmas Song” (“Chestnuts roasting on an open fire…”), “Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas,” and “Walking in a Winter Wonderland.”

5) The name Jesus means Jehovah [the Lord] is Salvation, or simply Jehovah Saviour. (“Christ” means Anointed One. It is the Greek form of the Hebrew word Messiah.) Before His birth an angel told Joseph in a dream, “You shall call His name JESUS, for He will save His people from their sins” Matt. 1:21). Years later, when John the Baptist publicly presented Him, he said, “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (Jn. 1:29).

6) The Roman government decreed that everyone had to go to his or her ancestral hometown to be registered in a census. Because they were both descendants of the family of King David, and Bethlehem was his birthplace, that is where they went (Lk. 2:1-5.)

7) It doesn’t. That date of December 25th was chosen for the celebration of Christ’s birth several centuries later. Actually, the weather in Palestine was often bad in December. The Romans would not likely have planned their census for then. Nor would the shepherds be grazing their flocks out in the open fields then. A more likely date for Christ’s birth is some time late September.

8) Back at the beginning of the Middle Ages, on each day during the week before Christmas, there was a church service. What is called an antiphon would be sung then, with choral groups answering back and forth “antiphonally.” The antiphon anticipating the advent of Christ consisted of a single word–a long, drawn-out “Oh!” Called “The Great O of Advent,” it was intended to express a deep sense of longing for the coming of the Saviour. As time went by, other phrases were added to that “O,” such as, “O Dayspring, come and give us light.” Finally, someone thought of combining all the antiphons into a single Latin hymn. In 1851 this hymn was translated into English and became the carol, “O Come, O Come Emmanuel.”

9) We do not know if Jesus was born in a stable. The Bible says there was no room for them in the inn at Bethlehem–likely because so many had come to register in the census. A manger is said to be the place the newborn Baby was laid, but there is no mention of a stable (Lk. 2:7).

10) It is “Silent Night” that says, “Silent night, holy night / Shepherds quake at the sight.”

11) Actually, we are not told that the angels sang at all, though several carols give that impression. The Bible says, “There was…a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, ‘Glory to God in the highest’ (Lk. 2:13-14). The Greek word translated “praising” (aineo) can include praise that is sung, but we simply don’t know for sure.

12) The angel said He would be “wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger” (Lk. 2:12). Swaddling (or swathing) cloths were strips of cloth commonly used to wrap a newborn.

13) The carol is “Away in a Manger.” In 1887, hymn writer and music publisher James Ramsey Murray (1841-1905) produced a book of children’s music called Dainty Songs for Little Lads and Lasses. “Away in a Manger” was included in the book, under this heading: “Luther’s Cradle Hymn, composed by Martin Luther for his children, and still sung by German mothers to their little ones.” It is a touching picture, but not historically accurate. Careful research has shown that the carol was likely written 400 years after Luther’s time, by an anonymous Lutheran living in Pennsylvania.

14) Speaking of the Lord Jesus as “the Word” sent from heaven by God the Father, John’s Gospel declares, “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory” (Jn. 1:14). The carol that refers to this is “O Come, All Ye Faithful.”

15) When the angels appeared to the shepherds, one of them announced the birth of Christ, then they all said, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace” (Lk. 2:11, 14). A carol that describes the incident using the Bible’s wording almost exactly is “While Shepherds Watched Their Flocks by Night.”

16) The carol is “It Came Upon a Midnight Clear.” Though popular, and found in many hymn books, the carol surprisingly says nothing at all about the birth of Christ! Even this line about the angels is not true to Scripture. Nothing is said there about harps!

17) The carol is “O Little Town of Bethlehem.” Though the Bible says nothing about it specifically, it is quite possible the angels gazed upon the Son of God in the manger with “wondering love.” The Apostle Peter says the gospel is something the angels “desire to look into” (I Pet. 1:12).

18) The lines come from Charles Wesley’s great hymn, “Hark, the Herald Angels Sing.” Loaded with references to Scripture passages, it is the most theologically detailed of our carols. Wesley leaves no doubt as to Christ’s identity, saying, “Veiled in flesh the Godhead see, / Hail the incarnate Deity, / Pleased as man with men to dwell, / Jesus our Emmanuel.”

19) That is the original first line of Charles Wesley’s carol, “Hark, the Herald Angels Sing!” “Welkin” is an old word for the sky. But when it fell into disuse and was not widely understood, the line was changed to what we know now.

20) The carol “Angels from the Realms of Glory” in this way invites the wise men to follow the Bethlehem star, and go in search of “the King of the Jews” (Matt. 2:2).

21) The wise men went to the city of Jerusalem (Matt. 2:1-2), likely because they expected a “King” to be born in a palace in the capital city.

22) The Bible says, “He was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him” (Matt. 2:3). No doubt he feared that someone was plotting a political revolt. In the time between the Old and New Testaments, others had arisen claiming to be Israel’s promised Messiah or new ruler.

23) It was the Jewish chief priests and scribes, who quoted the Old Testament words of Micah 5:2 that revealed the birthplace of the coming Messiah (Matt. 2:4-6).

24) Herod was hoping to destroy the baby Jesus (Matt. 2:13). To be sure he got the right baby, Herod ordered “all the male children who were in Bethlehem and in all its districts, from two years old and under” to be slain (Matt. 2:16).

25) The lines are from “The First Noel.” And since the wise men came from far-away Persia, they did not arrive in Bethlehem on the night of Christ’s birth, but some months later. By then, the Bible reveals the family had taken up residence in a house, and Jesus is described, not as a baby, but as a “young Child” (Matt. 2:11).

26) After the wise men left them, the family fled to Egypt, where they remained until they learned of the death of Herod (Matt. 2:13-15.)

27) Noel means birthday. In the Middle Ages, especially in France, travelling troubadours would go from town to town, singing songs and reciting poetry. They also carried the news of the day. And a call of “Noel, noel, noel!” would indicate that an important birth was about to be announced.

28) We are not told how many wise men there were. The traditional thinking that there may have been three comes from the fact that three gifts were presented–gold, frankincense, and myrrh.

29) During His crucifixion, Jesus was offered a drink of wine mixed with myrrh (Mk. 15:23). It was used in this case as a sedative to somewhat dull the pain suffered on the cross. But the Lord refused to drink it. Myrrh was also one of the spices used in the wrapping of Christ’s body at the time of His burial (Jn. 19:38-40).

30) The carol is “I Heard the Bells on Christmas Day,” which expresses a longing for peace on earth. At the time when it was written, the American Civil War was raging. The author, Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, had a son fighting in the conflict, and he was deeply worried about him.

Add up your score. If you got 25-30 correct, you may be a genius! If you got 15-24 correct, you did well. After you have tested your knowledge with this Christmas Bible Quiz and the questions about our carols, you can read the Christmas story in Luke 2:1-20, and Matthew 2:1-11.

Christmas Bible Quiz: Tricky Questions Based on the Bible and Our Carols

,

Test your knowledge with this Christmas Bible Quiz that includes question about our Christmas carols. Some questions are definitely easier than others! (A Hint: In the carol questions, if you can hum the tune that fits the words, you will often guess right!)

1) What baby was born to a relative of Mary’s, about six months before the birth of Jesus?

2) What Old Testament prophet predicted the miraculous virgin birth of Christ?

3) Which two of the four Gospels make no mention of the birth of Christ?

4) Which Christmas carol has been voted the most popular one of all?

5) What is the meaning of the name “Jesus”?

6) Joseph and Mary lived in the town of Nazareth, far to the north of Bethlehem. What was it that brought them to Bethlehem, just before Christ was born?

7) Where does the Bible tell us that Jesus was born on December 25th?

8) What carol began in the ancient church as one single word? And what was that word?

9) Was the Lord Jesus born in a stable?

10) When hosts of angels appear to them, announcing Jesus’ birth, a carol says the “shepherds quake at the sight.” In what carol is the quoted line found?

11) One of our carols begins, “Angels we have heard on high, / Sweetly singing o’er the plains.” What did the angels sing at Jesus’ birth?

12) Since there were likely other babies in Bethlehem at the time what sign did the angel give the shepherds that would enable them to identify the baby Jesus?

13) Mary laid her newborn Son in a manger. A carol says Jesus had “no crib for a bed.” What is the carol?

14) What carol contains the line, “Word of the Father, now in flesh appearing”?

15) What carol quotes the angels saying to the shepherds, “All glory be to God on high, / And to the earth be peace”?

16) What carol fancifully describes “angels bending near the earth / To touch their harps of gold”?

17) What carol says of Jesus’ birth, “While mortals sleep, the angels keep / Their watch of wondering love”?

18) What carol says of Christ’s coming to earth, “Mild He lays His glory by, / Born that man no more may die”?

19) What carol begins, “Hark, how all the welkin rings!”

20) What carol says to the wise men, “Sages, leave your contemplations, / Brighter visions beam afar”?

21) When the wise men arrived in the Holy Land, where did they go first?

22) Herod ruled that area for the Romans. What was his reaction when he heard that a new King had been born?

23) Who was it that told Herod about an Old Testament prophecy that Israel’s Messiah-King would be born in Bethlehem?

24) Herod sent the wise men in search of the Baby. He told them to let him know where to find Him, so he could worship Him too (Matt. 2:8). But what was his real reason for wanting to know where Jesus was?

25) What carol tells us, “Then entered in those wise men three, / Full reverently upon the knee”?

26) Where did Joseph take Mary and the Baby to protect them from Herod’s murderous intentions?

27) What is the meaning of the word “Noel,” as in the carol line, “Noel, Noel, / Born is the King of Israel”?

28) According to the Bible, how many wise men were there?

29) As well as being a gift from the wise men, at what other time was “myrrh” associated with Christ?

30) Referring to the English custom of ringing church bells on Christmas morning, what carol says, “Then pealed the bells more loud and deep” / ‘God is not dead: nor doth He sleep'”?

_______________________________

Answers are available here! 🙂

Christmas Bible Study (2 of 2)

The Christmas scene is familiar, yet there are always new things to learn. In the previous study, we saw events that laid the foundation for the miracle of the incarnation (the coming of the Son of God to earth in human flesh). It was a major turning point in history. If you doubt that, you might want to obtain a copy of the fascinating book What If Jesus Had Never Been Born? In it the authors show the tremendous influence Christ and His followers have had on human history.

The Bible tells us that “when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman” (Gal. 4:4). In God’s providence, Jesus was born just at the right time, when everything was in readiness. Now, Luke continues the amazing story by bringing together two important mothers-to be.

(Please read Luke 1:39-45)

1) Where did Mary go, after Gabriel left her (vs. 39-40)?

2) What two remarkable things happened when the two women met (vs. 41)?

Insight: The Greek word for “filled” can also be translated fulfilled. The filling of the Spirit is a way of describing His special enablement, given to individuals so that they can fulfil God’s purpose. In this case, the outcome of Elizabeth’s enabling by the Lord was that she was given prophetic insight into what had happened to Mary.

3) What supernatural understanding did Elizabeth have about the identity of Mary’s Baby (vs. 43)?

4) What awareness did Elizabeth have about Mary’s response to Gabriel’s message (vs. 45)?

Insight: What follows, in vs. 46-55 sometimes is called the “Magnificat,” taken from the Latin for “My soul magnifies [glorifies] the Lord.” Though the Bible doesn’t say so specifically, likely the Holy Spirit “filled” Mary, as He had Elizabeth, enabling her to pour forth this inspired hymn of praise to God.

(Please read Luke 1:46-55)

5) Some have sought to exalt Mary almost to the level of Christ Himself. But how does Mary see herself (vs. 48)?

6) What statement shows Mary realized she was a sinner in need of God’s grace (vs. 47)?

7) What are some of the attributes of God that are celebrated in Mary’s song (vs. 49-50)?

7b) What do these attributes mean to us, today?

8) According to Mary’s song, through what kind of people is God willing to work (vs. 50, 52, 53, 54)?

Insight: The coming of Christ is rooted in the Abrahamic Covenant (vs. 55). In particular, God had said to him, “In you all the families of the earth shall be blessed” (Gen. 12:3; compare Lk. 2:10, “to all people”). That is the potential of the salvation purchased for us on the cross. It is an eternal blessing accessible to the whole the human race, through faith in Christ (Eph. 2:8-9).

(Please read Luke 1:56-66)

9) Putting vs. 26 and vs. 56 together, it seems that Mary stayed with Zacharias and Elizabeth until what happened?

10) When John was born (vs. 58), there was a disagreement over what his name should be. What was expected by tradition (vs. 59-61)?

10b) How was the argument finally settled (vs. 62-63)?

11) What happened to Zacharias, the moment he named the baby (vs. 64)?

12) What is the significance of these two things (vs. 64) coming together (compare vs. 13, 20)?

12b) Can you think of a situation where tradition might get in the way of doing God’s will today?

13) It is possible Mary was quite a young girl at this time. What kinds of things might she have learned, staying with John’s parents as long as she did?

Insight: The mysterious events surrounding the birth of John brought fear to the community. And they raised questions as to what kind of special work John was destined for (vs. 65-66). In it all, God was preparing the way for His Son.

(Please read Luke 1:67-80)

14) Zacharias had no illusion that his son was the promised Messiah. By the filling of the Spirit (vs. 67) he was given prophetic insight as to John’s ministry. What was it to be (vs. 76; cf. 1:17)?

Insight: Through the Spirit of God, Zacharias, as well as Elizabeth, understood who the Baby was in Mary’s womb. Note that he states, “the Lord God…has raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house of His servant David” (vs. 68-69). Zacharias and Elizabeth were from the tribe of Levi. It was Mary who was from David’s tribe of Judah.

15) Like Elizabeth earlier, Zacharias sees the coming of the Saviour as a fulfilment of what (vs. 72-73)?

Insight: Some churches in our day have opted to set aside the hymn book and sing only simple choruses. The rationale sometimes given is that this is a return to a more scriptural form of worship. It is claimed the hymns are too “doctrinal” or fact-oriented. Something more “contemporary,” is preferred, something to stir the emotions. However, one need only consider the songs of Mary and Zacharias (not to mention the entire book of Psalms) to realize that truly scriptural songs are loaded with doctrinal and rational truth. By using them we are to “teach and admonish” one another (Col. 3:16).

Insight: As with Jesus after him, we are given few details about the childhood of John. He remained in obscurity until the time God would lead him to begin his work as the “announcer” of the Messiah’s coming (vs. 80).

(Please read Luke 2:1-7)

16) What is the importance of vs. 1-2? That is, why would God lead Luke to include this information?

17) Whose command brought Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem (vs. 1, 3-4)?

18) Why was their trip important to Bible prophecy (compare Micah 5:2)?

19) What does this event affecting the whole Roman world tell us about how God works out His will and purpose for us?

20) Was there some practical reason why the inn was full when Mary and Joseph arrived (vs. 7)?

21) What are some reasons people have “no room” for Christ today?

(Please read Luke 2:8-20)

22) What three wonderful titles does the angel give Jesus (vs. 11)?

Insight: “Christ” is the Greek translation of the Hebrew “Messiah,” meaning Anointed One.

Insight: As a direct descendant of David, Jesus had a right to the throne of Israel. The wise men who came seeking Him expected that, being a King, He would likely be born in a palace in Jerusalem (Matt. 2:1-2). Instead He was born in a stable.

23) How do you think the manner of Jesus’ birth affected His later ministry?

24) Why do you think the angel gave a description of how the Baby Jesus would look (vs. 12)? (Hint: Matt. 2:16.)

25) What did the shepherds do when they got the good news from the angels (Lk. 2:15, 16, 17, 20)? And are there lessons in this for us?

26) Do you think most people today find “great joy” in Christ’s coming, at Christmas time? Why? (Or why not?)

27) In the many Christmas cards, and carols, and programs of the Christmas season, what important truths about Christ’s birth are emphasized?

27b) In your opinion, what important truths are sometimes missing from these?

27c) Why is this so? And what can we do about it?

Christmas Bible Study (1 of 2)

The Christmas story, when it is studied, ought to provide both a factual look at the events surrounding the nativity, and some insight into what those events should mean to us. This study (in two parts) will help you with both of those goals.

Four accounts of the earthly life of Christ are given to us in God’s Word. For much of the detail regarding the birth of Christ, we are indebted to Luke’s Gospel. Luke was a medical doctor (Col. 4:14), and a frequent travelling companion of the Apostle Paul’s. The introduction to the book of Acts shows that Luke also authored that book. (Those sections where he uses “we” and “us,” (e.g. Acts 16:10) indicate times he is with Paul.) In the book that has come to be known as The Gospel According to Luke, he shows himself to be a careful historian. He presents many details of the words and works of Christ, particularly emphasizing His humanity. (This book therefore complements John’s Gospel, which focuses more on His deity.) Before he goes on to recount something of the birth and boyhood of Jesus, Luke begins with the birth of John the Baptist, the one who would be Christ’s “forerunner,” announcing His coming.

(Please read Luke 1:1-4)

1) Judging by how Luke addresses him, what seems to have been the relationship between him and the man named Theophilus (vs. 3)?

2) How would Luke’s background prepare him to gather accurate data?

3) Where had Luke gathered his information about the life of Jesus (vs. 2)?

4) What was Luke’s purpose in writing his Gospel (vs. 4)?

(Please read Luke 1:5-25)

5) What tribe in Israel were Zacharias and Elizabeth from (vs. 5)?

6) What was Zacharias’s vocation?

7) How would you describe the spiritual character of this couple (vs. 6)?

8) Like Abraham and Sarah, many years before, they had a problem. What was it (vs. 7)?

9) Did they care about this? (How do you know? See vs. 13, 25)?

10) For what special duty had Zacharias been chosen (vs. 9)?

Insight: King David had divided the priesthood into 24 shifts (I Chron. 24:10). Each shift was called upon to serve in the temple twice a year, one week at a time, from Sabbath to Sabbath. But there were so many priests that the great privilege of burning incense in the holy place came only once in a lifetime, if at all. The fragrant smoke of burning incense was symbolic of prayers ascending up to God (Ps. 141:2; Rev. 5:8).

11) What happened that greatly frightened Zacharias, while he was burning incense on the altar (vs. 11-12)?

Insight: The angel identifies himself in vs. 19 as Gabriel. Gabriel had the responsibility of carrying important messages from God to man. He appeared to Daniel (Dan. 8:16; 9:21), and to Mary, as well (Lk. 1:26-27).

12) What message did Gabriel have for Zacharias (vs. 13)?

13) Several things are specified about the son who was to be born. What was his name to be (vs. 13)? What would be the reaction to his birth (vs. 14)?

Insight: Drinking neither wine nor strong drink (vs. 15) was a requirement for the priesthood (Lev. 10:9). But it may indicate that John was to be a life-long Nazirite, as well. The Nazirites took a special vow of self denial and holiness (Num. 6:2-4).

Insight: It was prophesied John would be “great in the sight of the Lord” (vs. 15). He would be great in terms of the unique mission God would give him (vs. 17), and great in his humble obedience to God (cf. Jn. 3:29-30).

14) In contrast to this kind of greatness, what does it take to be great in the eyes of the world?

14b) Why is this kind of greatness inferior to being “great in the sight of the Lord”?

15) What unusual spiritual enablement was John given (vs. 15)?

15b) What would John’s ministry be (vs. 16)?

15c) And what would be the purpose of this ministry (vs. 17)?

16) How did Zacharias respond to Gabriel’s announcement (vs. 18, 20b)?

Insight: It seemed too late for Elizabeth to have a child (vs. 18), and (in a sense) too early for Mary to have a child (vs. 34). Yet God overruled the natural order of things in each case.

17) What does this tell us about God’s power? And about His timing (cf. Gal. 4:4)?

18) Gabriel says, “Your prayer is heard” (vs. 13). What does Zacharias’s unbelief show about his prayer that may be like some of our own?

19) How was Zacharias disciplined for not accepting the angel’s message (vs. 20)?

Insight: Zacharias was so long at his work in the temple that people became concerned (vs. 21). But they were in for an even bigger surprise. When he emerged, Zacharias could not speak. By sign language he conveyed to them what he had seen (vs. 22). After his week of service, Zachariah returned home (vs. 23). There, in the course of time, Elizabeth conceived, and she remained in seclusion for five months (vs. 24). When Elizabeth was six months into her pregnancy, Gabriel was sent forth on another mission.

(Please read Luke 1:26-38)

Insight: In a few words, Luke gives us quite a bit of information about Mary (vs. 26-27): That she lived in Nazareth; that she had never had physical relations with a man; that she was “betrothed” (a binding marriage contract, in those days) to a man named Joseph; that Joseph was a descendant of David (as Mary was herself).

20) Gabriel had a message for Mary that was cause for rejoicing. Why (vs. 28)?

21) How did Mary react to seeing an angel (vs. 29)?

22) Gabriel reassured her, and told her of a “high favour” God was granting to her. What was it (vs. 31)?

Insight: The name of Mary’s Son was to be “Jesus” (meaning Jehovah is Salvation, or by implication, simply Saviour).

23) What information is Mary given about who the Child is, and what He will do (vs. 32-33)?

24) How is it that a virgin was able to give birth to a Son (vs. 35; cf. Matt. 1:18)?

25) How did Mary’s response to all of this (vs. 34) differ from that of Zacharias (vs. 20)?

26) What is the news about Elizabeth meant to do for Mary (vs. 36-37)?

27) What does Mary’s final response to the angel (vs. 38) show about her attitude and her relationship with the Lord?

28) What does the information given about Zacharias and about Mary tell us about the kind of people God uses? (How does vs. 20 relate to this?)

Go on to the next study…

Bethlehem Star: What Did the Wise Men See?

Bethlehem Star a Mystery! That might be the headline if the birth of Jesus as described in Matthew 2:1-12 took place today. What was the star that the wise men saw? How could a star far out in space travel ahead of them to Bethlehem? There are many questions the Bible leaves unanswered.

The Bethlehem Star

The fact that science cannot explain it has led skeptics to mock the Scriptures on this subject. No natural explanation for the star described by the wise men can account for its unique properties. But that does not mean the record is a myth or a fairy tale. It simply indicates the star was supernaturally prepared and sovereignly directed by Almighty God, the Creator of all things.

The wise men (or magi) were members of the Persian court who studied the stars and made predictions based on what they saw. Thus they were familiar enough with the visible constellations to notice when an new star “appeared” (vs. 7). To them it portended a special event of some kind. But how did heathen fortune tellers in another land make the connection to a “King of the Jews” (vs. 2)? Though it is not mentioned, they may have received a revelation from the Lord, perhaps through the angel Gabriel who was actively involved with the events of that first Christmas (cf. Lk. 1:26-27).

Whether this occurred or not, apparently the ministry of Daniel, long before in the Babylonian (later Persian) court, had left a legacy of awareness of the Hebrew Scriptures. Daniel’s own prophecies also spoke of the Messiah’s coming (cf. Dan. 9:24-27). And centuries before Daniel’s time, a mercenary prophet named Balaam presented a messianic prophecy. By revelation from the Lord He declared, “I see Him, but not now; I behold Him, but not near; a Star shall come out of Jacob; a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel” (Num. 24:17).

If the star appeared at the time of Christ’s birth, it may well have been six months to a year later when the magi arrived in Bethlehem, since Persia was hundreds of miles distant. (Manger scenes picturing the shepherds and the wise men gathered together in the stable are in error. By the time the wise men arrived the family was living in a “house” and Jesus was a “young Child,” vs. 11.)

And that is hardly the end of the mysteries of the star. Did it appear to the magi, and then disappear for a time? The wording of vs. 2 seems to imply that possibility. (Perhaps the night sky was overcast for awhile.) The trip to the capital city of Jerusalem may have been based more on their own logic than on divine direction. They expected that a new king would be born in the capital city, with great fanfare and celebration. Little did they know how shocked Herod would be to hear about the birth of a potential rival (vs. 3)!

While the men were in Jerusalem the star–whether identifiable by its colour or its unique brilliance–reappeared (vs. 9). This time in the southern sky, since Bethlehem is a few miles south of Jerusalem. More remarkably, it seemed to move, leading the men onward, until it stopped over the place where Jesus was. J. B. Phillips paraphrases vs. 9, “[The star] went in front of them as they travelled until at last it shone immediately above the place where the little Child lay.”

This precise movement indicates that even if it had originally been in the distant heavens, it was now low enough to provide precise direction. An unusual “star” to say the least! Rather than being a true star in the sense of a distant sun, it may have been something else, star-like in appearance. It could have been an angel. Or a manifestation of the Shekinah, the glory light of God by which He revealed His presence to the Old Testament saints (cf. Exod. 25:22; Ps. 80:1). The phenomenon may have been similar to the pillar of fire by which the Lord led Israel through the wilderness (Exod. 13:21-22).

This could also explain why no one else seems to have observed this incredible sight. God may have sovereignly blocked the view of others, as He did when the pillar of fire stood between the camp of Israel and the Egyptian army (Exod. 14:19-20). But why do that? Why convey the announcement of Christ’s birth to some peasant shepherds, and few other Jews? Why bring the Gentile magi to Bethlehem, and no others? We simply do not have all the answers–not yet.

We do know that the shepherds were men of faith (Lk. 2:8-20). And that they likely raised sheep to be offered in the temple sacrifices. Perhaps the revelation to them in particular was because this One who was born would bring the fulfillment of all the symbolic offerings of Judaism. The wise men were clearly men of faith as well. And possibly their involvement is a foreshadowing of the time when Christ will return to reign over all as “King of kings” (Isa. 9:6-7; 60:1-3). In the future, “the kings of the earth [will] bring their glory and honour into [the heavenly city]” to worship the Lamb (Rev. 21:23-24).

In vs. 2 the wise men tell Herod, “We have seen His star in the East.” “East” is more literally translated “in its rising,” or “when it rose.” It is the same Greek expression Zacharias uses to say, “The Dayspring [Daybreak] from on high has visited us” (Lk. 1:78). No doubt Zacharias called to mind the words of Malachi near the end of the Old Testament which promised, “The Sun of Righteousness shall arise with healing in His wings” (Mal. 4:2).

This was a supernatural event. But the Bethlehem star, whatever it was, symbolized the dawning of a new day, and signalled the coming of One who said of Himself, “I am the light of the world” (Jn. 8:12), and called Himself “the Bright and Morning Star” (Rev. 22:16). To the extent they realized the true identity of the Lord Jesus, it is no wonder the wise men bowed before Him in worship (vs. 2, 11).

Date of Christmas: Was Jesus Born on Christmas Day?

Date of Christmas? Was it December 25th? The short answer is: probably not. We do not know with certainty the date of Jesus’ birth, but the traditional date is less likely than another, as I will explain.

What Year?

First of all, let’s consider the year when this great event took place. Although many use the dating terms B.C. (Before Christ) and A.D. (Anno Domini, Latin for the Year of Our Lord), Jesus was not born at the point where those two intersect. A sixth century monk named Dionysius was commissioned to set up a calendar of church festivals. No one knows for certain how he calculated the date of Christ’s birth but, because he apparently lacked accurate historical information, he missed the actual date by several years.

Herod the Great figures prominently in the story of the first Christmas (Matt. 2:1-8). But we have credible historical records putting the date of Herod’s death in the spring of 4 B.C. That means the dating of the visit of the wise men had to come some time before that.

Contrary to the pictures on some Christmas cards, the shepherds and the wise men did not arrive at the stable together. The wise men saw the star at the time of Christ’s birth. Then, they had to organize a caravan to travel some 600 miles from Persia, first to Jerusalem, then on to Bethlehem. All of that took several months. By that time, Mary and Joseph were living in a “house” (Matt. 2:11), not a stable.

Notice that when Herod tried to kill the Baby Jesus, he commanded that all the baby boys in the environs of Bethlehem who were two years old and under were to be slain (Matt. 2:16). (The two year age limit may have been simply to make Jesus’ death a certainty, even if information about His exact birth date was somewhat uncertain.) Perhaps all of that took about a year. If so, a likely year for the birth of Christ would then be 5 B.C.

What Day?

Now, as to the month and day, there are a couple of clues in the biblical record. Luke tells us a census was taken of the Roman world (Lk. 2:1-3), for which each person had to go and register in his ancestral town. That is what brought Mary and Joseph to Bethlehem (vs. 4-5). The Romans knew the weather was sometimes bad in December. They would not have chosen that time for a census, as the roads might have been unpassable. The more likely time would be in September or October, after the harvest was over.

This is confirmed by the fact that shepherds were pasturing their flocks out in the fields overnight (Lk. 2:8). They only did this from April to October. Any later than October, the pasturage was poor, and the weather was cold and wet. The flocks were penned at home in December, in whatever shelter could be provided.

An article on the Web uses the date of the priestly service of Zacharias, and the birth of John the Baptist (Lk. 1:5, 8), to calculate the time of Jesus’ birth, since we know Jesus was born 6 months after John (Lk. 1:36). The author reasons the likely date of Christ’s birth is September 29th, 5 B.C. This would have been the beginning of the Feast of Tabernacles, a most appropriate occasion for Jesus to be born.

That feast celebrated the time when the Israelites camped in the wilderness, on their way to the Promised Land. When the camp was set up, their worship centre, called the tabernacle, was placed in the middle. There the Lord manifested His presence in the midst of His people in a pillar of cloud and fire (Exod. 40:36-38). That parallels the description John gives us of Christ’s coming when, “The Word [Christ] became flesh and dwelt [literally tabernacled] among us” (Jn. 1:14). Again, we cannot be absolutely certain, but the September date is more likely than the one used today.

Why December 25th?

Why, then, do we call December 25th Christmas Day? There is no record of this celebration until we get to the third century. Early on, it was a pagan holiday in the Roman Empire, a feast to Mithras, the sun god, conqueror of darkness. One theory is that church officials may have hoped that by putting a Christian celebration honouring the birth of the Son on the same day as the festival honouring the sun god, Christianity would gain greater focus and attract more people to the church.

This happened during the rule of the emperor Constantine (280-337 A.D.), who proclaimed tolerance for Christianity in 313 A.D. Suddenly, it became acceptable–and even popular–to call yourself a Christian. As a result, there was a great influx into the church of people who still clung to their old heathen ways. Many who professed Christ were not truly born again.

The idea of combining a day honouring the sun god with one honouring the incarnation of God the Son to benefit Christianity did not work well. The manoeuvre in itself did not likely interest many pagans in converting. Contrarily, it encouraged a practice called syncretism, the attempt to combine biblical faith with other religious views–to add the Lord Jesus to whatever other gods you had. This cannot be done. The Bible presents Christ as the one and only Saviour (Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12), and the God of the Bible as the one true God (Exod. 20:2-6; Isa. 45:5). Still today we see heathen practices combined with Christianity, and it is wrong and extremely harmful.

What Now?

This historical background has led some to reject all Christmas celebrations completely. But I do not believe we have to go that far. The day is what you make it. No Christian that I know of tries to honour Mithras on Christmas Day. (He would not likely even know who Mithras is!) In the words of Charles Dickens’ character Ebenezer Scrooge, “Keep Christmas in your own way, and let me keep it in mine.”

Though these words were spoken when Scrooge was lacking in any true Christmas spirit, the point is well taken. We are not to judge one another in the way we celebrate certain days. “Who are you to judge another man’s servant?…One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind….Each of us shall give account of himself to God” (Rom. 14:4-5, 12).

As the saying goes, “Jesus is the reason for the season.” A truly amazing thing took place on Christmas Day (whatever the exact date may be). Through a miracle of the Holy Spirit, and the humble instrumentality of a virgin peasant maiden from Nazareth, God the Son took on our humanity (Matt. 1:18-21; Lk. 1:34-35). He did that so He might give His life as a ransom for lost sinners (Mk. 10:45). That is worth celebrating! And though the commercialism and overindulgence of the season is sadly out of character with the true significance of the day, there is still much about it that is commendable.

It is a time of joy and light, a time of lovely music, a time of fellowship and family, a time of charity and generosity. And for many it is a special day of worship for the church of Jesus Christ, as we commemorate His coming. These things ought not to be lost. For myself, I plan to continue celebrating Christmas on December 25th, trying to do so in a way that will honour the Lord who came to save me.

Editor’s Note: If you would like a different perspective on the date of Jesus’ birth, arguing that it actually could have been in early winter, check out When Was Jesus Born?

Christmas Defended: Is it right for Christians to celebrate Christmas?

,

Question: I have a friend who’s conscience was offended when we sang traditional Christmas hymns during our Sunday p.m. service at church, and now plans to be absent from this Sunday’s Christmas Cantata. She is an avid Internet user and has seen the sites that speak against it because of its pagan or Catholic origins. I would appreciate any Scriptural counsel you could give.

Christmas candle

Answer: What a good question–and a timely one! I’m sorry to hear that your friend is depriving herself of the joys of the Christmas season. I always find it to be a wonderful time of personal blessing and ministry to others.

Since I don’t know in detail the basis for your friend’s conclusions, but since she sent you the article mentioned [in her questioner’s fuller e-mail], I’ll assume that it represents her views, and will try to respond to the strange logic therein. (And an aside here: Be cautious of what you find on the Internet. Almost any point of view imaginable can be found there.)

Is it true that Christmas is not in the Bible, and that therefore we shouldn’t be celebrating it? Leaving aside the name of the day, “Christmas,” (I’ll get to that in a moment) the record of the birth of Christ is certainly in the Bible, and His coming was definitely celebrated. This is the day when “the Word [Christ] became flesh and dwelt among us” (Jn. 1:14). It’s a momentous and history-altering event, worthy of remembrance.

After Jesus’ miraculous conception in the womb of Mary, but before His actual birth, John the Baptist celebrated His coming, even while in the womb of Elizabeth (Lk. 1:44), Mary celebrated it (Lk. 1:46-47), Zacharias celebrated it, saying, “The Dayspring [Dawning] from on high has visited us” (Lk. 1:68-69, 78). Later, the angels celebrated His birth (Lk. 2:13-14), the shepherds celebrated it (Lk. 2:20), Simeon celebrated it (Lk. 2:28-30, and Anna celebrated it (Lk. 2:38). The wise men, also, some weeks or months afterwards, celebrated Christ’s birth, and gave gifts to Him (Matt. 2:1, 9-11).

Should we not do so too? And is it not helpful to set aside a special day or season of the year to do this–even though we can also rejoice in His coming at any time of year? Thanksgiving is similar in that regard. We should be thankful all the time (I Thess. 5:18). But it seems to me quite appropriate that we designate a Thanksgiving Day when that is given special emphasis. (Even though we, in Canada, have chosen a different day from you Americans.)

It’s quite true that we don’t know for certain the exact date of Jesus’ birth–not even the year of the event. It likely occurred in late September, in 5 BC, but that is only an educated guess. There is some disagreement about the year of the crucifixion as well, and even of the day of the week–though most take it to have been a Friday. And what about the exact date of Pentecost and the birth of the church? That is the day when “the stone which the builders rejected [Christ, became] the chief cornerstone.” It’s “the day the Lord has made, and we will rejoice and be glad in it” (Ps. 118:22-24; cf. Acts 4:11). Many evangelical churches don’t celebrate Pentecost, but it would be quite appropriate to do so if they chose to.

The author quotes the Lord’s condemnation of the Pharisees for their addition of man-made rules to what God had ordained in His Word (Mk. 7:6-8). Does he not realize that is exactly what he is doing? He is adding his own rule: “Thou shalt not celebrate Christmas,” and giving it the force of a divine command. This he does, largely on the basis of silence–that since the Lord does not say we should celebrate the birth of Christ, this is his proof that we should not.

Something Mr. Frye doesn’t mention in his article is that even keeping Sunday in a special way as the Lord’s Day is not commanded in Scripture. In the beginning, the Christians seem to have met daily (Acts 2:46). Sunday seems to have been chosen by consensus in the early church, because it was the day of Christ’s resurrection, and of the birth of the church. But there is scant evidence in the Bible for it being kept as a special day. It’s a tradition. So, should we abandon Sunday worship as a result? Or go back to keeping Israel’s Sabbath?

Churches didn’t begin to have buildings to meet in until the second or third century. Should we therefore reject having facilities to meet in too? This is nonsense. If we abandon anything not mentioned in the Bible we’d better stop using Sunday School curricula, church bulletins, tracts, video projectors, sound systems, offering plates, hymn books–the list is endless. Many things are not mentioned as being part of first century church life simply because believers hadn’t got to them yet. To condemn anything not specifically found in the Bible makes no sense at all.

It smacks of the kind of rigid rule-keeping that plagued the Pharisees–and later the Puritans. To take a verse only slightly out of context, “Why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?” (Acts 15:10). This is the kind of logic that declares we must only sing the Bible’s psalms, no hymns or gospel songs written since Bible times. Where is the liberty of life under grace? Where is the freedom to set new precedents that will honour the Lord? The woman who anointed Jesus did that. Rather than condemning her, the Lord commended her (Mk. 14:3-9).

The church our family attended in my youth had an annual Candlelight Carol Service. It was beautiful and inspiring, something looked forward to every year. But there were always a few who complained that to use candles was Catholic. How foolish. The Church of Rome didn’t invent candles–nor did our church light them as prayer candles, appealing to Mary on behalf of the dead. They were simply an alternate means of illumination. Let’s get real.

Mr. Frye surely knows he’s using religious slight of hand, and not being fully honest, when he tries to condemn us for having Christmas trees by quoting the Old Testament law about carving trees into idols (e.g. Jer. 10:2-4). No one that I know worships his Christmas tree! It’s a decoration that we enjoy, not an idol we adore. Blame Luther, if you like–who seems to have thought of the idea. As for me and my family–and the church we attend–we enjoy our trees. “God…gives us richly all things to enjoy” (I Tim. 6:17–a verse which, in the context, deals with using but not abusing material wealth.

As to the word “Christmas” itself, yes, it seems to be a contraction of Christ’s Mass. But there are millions of people who don’t know that, nor are they Catholic, nor do they celebrate a Mass at Christmas time. The days of the week are named after false gods (Wednesday is Woden’s day, Thursday is Thor’s day, etc.) Would Frye have us change the names of the days on that account?  “Christmas” is what you make of it, which is not necessarily the same as what some people in the distant past erroneously made of it.

The Bible says,  “Let no one judge you…regarding a festival” (Col. 2:16). “One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind” (Rom. 14:5). If Mr. Frye, or others like him, prefer not to celebrate Christmas, they have the freedom to take that stance. But it is not right for them to condemn others who find great joy in the season. As Augustine put it, “In majors unity; in minors liberty; in all things charity.”

It is easy to find a list of those who didn’t agree with celebrating Christmas, as the author does. But we could compile another list–likely far longer–of those who did–and do. I’m so glad many hymn writers have given us songs to express our worship and praise for Christ’s coming. Charles Wesley’s words lift our souls and unite us in worship as we sing: “Hark! The herald angels sing, ‘Glory to the newborn King; / Peace on earth, and mercy mild, God and sinners reconciled!’ Joyful, all ye nations rise, / Join the triumph of the skies; / With th’angelic host proclaim, / ‘Christ is born in Bethlehem!’”

Merry Christmas to you! And God bless us, every one!

Future of Earth: Is the Present Earth Eternal? Or will it be Destroyed?

,

Future of earth? It is being debated. Recently a couple of evangelical TV preachers have been promoting the theory that the earth is eternal. That it will not be destroyed in a final fiery cataclysm, making way for a new heavens and new earth. They argue that the present earth will only be refreshed and renewed, with the evidence of the present evils removed. But let me give you a few thoughts as to why I believe this is incorrect, and that the present earth will be utterly destroyed.

The future of earth - will it last forever?

1. The Bible Says So

If language means anything, the traditional view (if I may call it that) is supported over and over in the Word of God. Here are some passages to consider. I have added an amplification of the meaning of some words in squared brackets, and italics are mine, for emphasis.

a) Psalm 102:25-26. “Of old You [Lord] laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish [be destroyed, vanish away].”

b) Isaiah 65:17. “For behold I create new heavens and a new earth; the former [heavens and earth] shall not be remembered or come to mind.”

c) Matthew 24:35. “Heaven and earth will pass away [perish].”

d) II Peter 3:10-13. “The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise [disappear with a horrific noise], and the elements [the fundamental building blocks of which all material things are made] will melt with fervent heat [melt away in a blaze], both the earth and the works that are in it shall be burned up [consumed by fire, utterly burned up*]. Therefore, since all these things will be dissolved [melt away and be destroyed], what manner of persons ought ye to be in holy conduct and godliness, looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved [broken up, demolished, destroyed], being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat? Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new** heavens and a new** earth, in which righteousness dwells [i.e. has its permanent residence].”

A couple of things to note in what Peter says (*):

*This particular expression is a difficult one for translators. The NKJV, NASB, and the Amplified Bible, as well as Kenneth Wuest’s Expanded Translation, all have “burned up.” Williams New Testament has “the earth with all its works will melt away.”

But the words can also mean laid bare. Those who believe the earth is eternal latch onto this possibility, saying it means that the surface of the earth will be scraped clean and that is all. But “laid bare” might mean it will be “exposed to judgment” (NLT). The thought would then be that the earth will not escape the fiery judgment long promised. God has held back His final judgment, giving human beings time to repent (vs.9). But in the end, it will come, and the earth will be exposed to it.

**The argument against this verse meaning that the earth will only be renewed on the surface, as opposed to being completely destroyed and made over, is supported by the double use of the word “new.” The universe will be destroyed and made new (the word means new in form and substance, of a new and unprecedented kind). And precisely the same word is used of the earth. It too will be made new.

e) Revelation 20:11. [John says that before the Lord on His great white throne] the earth and the heaven fled away [they vanished!]. And there was found no place for them [they were no more to be found].”

f) Revelation 21:1-2. “Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth*: for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away [had disappeared, ceased to exist]. Also there was no more sea. Then I, John, saw the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.”

*”New earth”: the same words as in II Peter 3:13–new in form and substance, of a new and unprecedented kind. This will be needed because the old earth will have passed away, and ceased to exist.

2. “Forever” Can Mean For All the Present Time

There are a number of Old Testament texts that say the earth will abide “forever” (cf. Ps. 78:69; 104:5) But we must be careful of that word. It may be speaking of an eternal forever, or it may only be referring to a temporal forever. It can mean such things as: perpetually, continually, always. And it can mean for all time, as well as eternally. We need to study the context to be sure which is indicated.

For example Exodus 21:6 describes an ear-piercing ceremony under the Mosaic Law by which an individual committed himself to being another’s slave “forever” (the same word as is used of the earth). But I know of no Bible scholar who would suggest the poor man will be enslaved eternally to his human master. It simply means for as long as he lives.

In the same way, the present earth will continue to exist until its God-ordained purpose is fulfilled. For all the present time, until it is time for God to bring into being the new creation.

3. The Earth Is Part of the Universe

Since there seems to be no question among these revisionists that the universe will be destroyed and recreated, they need to accept the obvious–that the earth is part of the universe, made of the same substance.

As to why it is singled out for special mention, that is not surprising, since it has been the object of the special attention of the Creator from the beginning, and has been the scene of the worst evils against man, the crown of God’s creation, and against the Son of God Himself. Since the earth has been the scene of the grossest evil ever (the crucifixion of Christ), it is hard to imagine that it would be treated more leniently than the rest of the universe.

4. Peter’s Reference to the Flood Not Conclusive

One proponent of the new theory points out that Peter talks about the destruction of the flood in Second Peter chapter 3, just before speaking of the fiery judgment to be visited upon the earth. He then advances the hypothesis that since the earth was not utterly destroyed by the flood, it won’t be by fire either–and that Peter, in fact, meant to convey that!

But the flood is not mentioned so we can draw an exact parallel between that and the end-time judgment. It is spoken of to refute the skeptics’ utter refusal to believe in the coming of a final judgment, saying “all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation” (vs. 3-4). The flood proves this is not so. God stepped into history once, in great judgment, and He will again, and in an even more decisive way.

5. Earth’s Coming Destruction No Reason for Carelessness

One who advanced the new theory said he wondered whether the traditional belief that the earth would be destroyed has led to carelessness with earth’s resources on the part of believers. (“Who cares? It’s only going to be destroyed anyway!”) That seems a stretch! The notion that God’s only going to scrape the earth clean and fix up everything wrong with the earth in the end could lead to the same conclusion.

The majority of those who are polluting our planet are likely secular humanists and evolutionists who believe the earth will be around virtually forever. But they act out of corporate greed, not because they believe a deity will never destroy the planet. Christians understand that our world is a stewardship from God. Though we don’t always do right in this area, I doubt that it is because of the reason suggested.

6. The Elements Dissolved and Reconstituted

There is a kind of mediating position to be considered. The Lord need not call a new creation into being out of nothing (ex nihilo) as He did at first (Gen. 1:1; Heb. 11:3). By His mighty power He can reconstitute the elements used previously and refashion them. Einstein has taught us that matter can be transformed into energy (E=MC2). Could Almighty God not use the energy released in the cataclysm (II Pet. 3:10) to refashion matter of His choosing?

In this sense, the new heavens and new earth would have some continuity with the old, just as our resurrection bodies, though new and different, will have a continuity with the old ones (I Cor. 15:42-44). Yet both will also be truly new.

7. No Reason to Reject a Long-standing Position

What is the future of earth? It has been the understanding of the majority of conservative Bible scholars over many years that the earth will be destroyed to make way for an entirely new creation. This view is supported by many of the major Bible translations of the relevant Scriptures. While tradition can never be the bottom line in determining the proper interpretation of the Word of God, I believe we should use great caution in jettisoning teaching that has been so well and so long established in the community of Bible believing Christians.

Load More