Letters

Samuel’s Lineage

Dear Bro. George,

I wish you all the best as you take on the responsibilities of editor of the magazine. And also a special thanks to Bro. Don for his many years of service. I have read the magazine extensively over the years and appre­ciate the many thought-provoking articles and comments and exhor­tations it has contained.

Just a note on your comment on Samuel’s Farewell. You suggest that Samuel’s was not exactly the correct lineage for the role of priest. Have you compared 1 Sam. 1:1 with 1 Chr. 6: 33-35? It would seem to me from the Chronicles account that perhaps Samuel’s father Elkanah was a Levite living in Ephraim, and on that basis was referred to as an Ephramite.

Theo Readman

Thanks for your comments re­garding the magazine. I can only hope that, with God’s help, we can continue the diversity and scholarship exempli­fied by The Tidings in Bro. Don’s years as editor.

As to your comment about Samuel’s lineage, I think you are exactly right. The “Ramathaim-zophim”mentioned in 1 Sam. 1:1 seems to have been a town in the hill country of Ephraim (1 Sam. 1:1,19; 2:11), where Samuel’s parents lived. It would have been near Beth-horon — a city of Kohathites (Jdg. 21:20-22).

All this, of course, suggests that Samuel was a Levite and descendant of Kohath, but not a direct descendant of Aaron, and therefore not in the lineage of the priests. But it does also appear — and there may be an im­portant lesson here — that, when one institution failed temporarily in its purpose (as did the priesthood in the days of Eli’s wicked sons), God was willing to make an exception to His Law, and take an alternate course by choosing Samuel to fill the role of priest in the interim.

George

Civil Disobedence

Dear Bro. George,

It was quite a shock to see the suggestion that “the interests of a religious body being above civil law was certainly not a first century Christian doctrine” [Christians and the Law (3): Copyright, Alan Eyre, May 2006 issue, p. 222]. I find that very disrespectful to the many bro­thers and sisters who were executed in barbaric fashion for the amusement of the Roman government and its pagan citizens during that first century…

Even through the last hundred years Christadelphians have been abused, imprisoned and even shot by firing squad for refusing to comply with the civil law of military conscription. When our responsibilities to Christ and the true gospel conflict with civil law it has traditionally been the absolute understanding among believ­ers in the true gospel that God’s requirements take precedence, even at the expense of civil compliance.

Jim Dillingham

It is quite right that God’s require­ments of believers take precedence over the laws of the land. When threatened by the Jewish authorities, Peter and the other apostles replied: “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29), and continued right on with their preaching in the face of civil penalties.

I feel sure Bro. Alan would agree wholeheartedly with this assessment too. In the last article in his series [June, p. 272], he wrote admiringly of brethren in Germany and Russia in the 20th century who sacrificed their freedom and sometimes their lives when the absolute commitments of their faith conflicted with secular authority.

The subtitle of the article you cited — “Copyright” — as well as the context of the sentence you quoted, says it all. Clearly, when Bro. Alan encouraged obedience to civil law, he had in mind particular aspects of that law, and not an overriding principle. The overriding principle is surely expressed in the Acts verse above.

However… when the believer is able to obey the laws of his country without violating the law of God, he is bound ­ even by God’s law — to do so. This is surely the intent of Jesus’words in Matt. 17:24-27; 22:21; Mark 12:17; and Luke 20:25 (all about paying taxes), as well as Paul’s teaching in Rom. 13:1-7.

In this, as in other matters, we should all be careful not to make sweeping generalizations.

A covering of skins

Regarding Bro. John Launchbury’s May article, Bro. Ken Sommerville writes:

“I have enjoyed Bro. John Launch­bury’s series very much. I believe it has raised our awareness and interest in the current work of our Lord Jesus and our relationship to it. It articulates some questions many of us have discussed, and provides some in­teresting thoughts that we will have to ponder a bit…

“God’s providing the covering is consistent with His providing Jesus (‘God will save’) for our salvation and so fitting with Rev. 13:8, where Jesus is referred to as ‘the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world’…

“New ways of looking at things can be very stimulating and useful if carefully and critically considered.”

To this Bro. John has replied:

“I am very familiar with the traditional linking of the skins with the death of Christ. I am also struck by the complete silence in Scripture regarding such a connection. Nowhere does Paul or anyone else link the garments of skin with Christ. That starts to make me a little cautious about asserting such a link. Then when we examine it further it seems tenuous at best: (a) Genesis says nothing about what kind of animal the skins came from — perhaps a lion, or a bear? (b) There is no mention of blood, and in Christ there is no mention of skin; (c)

The phrase ‘crucified from the foundation of the earth’ surely refers to earlier than this: I presume the full work of Christ was already in God’s mind from Day 1 of Creation. That’s certainly the sense I get from John 17.”

* * * * *

The editor comments:

I believe Bro. John has made a good point: the connection that we usually make between the skins and the death of Christ is not irrefutably proven by any single Bible passage. It may be implied in the proximity of Gen. 3:21 and Gen. 3:15; many may say it is VERY STRONGLY implied — but the link is not irrefutably made.

There are other instances of this in the Bible, and as Bible students (and teachers and preachers), it is a good idea for us to distinguish between what is certain (well, anyway, as certain as anything can logically be) and what is merely very probable. It generally doesn’t do our cause any good, with thoughtful and reasonable people, to make absolute assertions that can only be “proven” by inferences. Surely it is better, in such instances, to say: ‘This would SEEM to be the case’… or… ‘It certainly looks as though such-and­ such is true’… or… ‘This verse provides evidence (or perhaps, strong evidence) for that idea.’

Certainly in the area of yet-to-be-­fulfilled Bible prophecy, we might all do with a pinch of skepticism. Better to say, for example, ‘Here is a probable scenario for this Last Days’ fulfillment’ — instead of, ‘There can be no doubt that this is the ONLY possible way this vision can come to pass!’

However, in Rev. 13:8 (“the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world”), the word translated “foundation” is “katabole” — literally, that which is cast down. I would suggest the best way to read this would be that Jesus is the Lamb who was seen (or foreordained, or chosen: cp. also 1 Pet. 1:20) from the time when the world was cast down. The “casting down” of the world would be a good way of describing the curses of Gen. 3:14-19, and the driving out of Adam and Eve from the Garden of God’s Presence (vv. 23,24). And then of course, in the very midst of these verses is the seemingly very significant making of “garments of skin” for Adam and Eve (v. 21).

Does this PROVE that the skins were made from slain lambs? Or that they directly pointed to Jesus Christ? Not necessarily. But I would suggest the connection is more than simply “tenuous”.

A second point: Bro. John has suggested — coincidentally (?), tongue in cheek (?) — that the skin may have come from a “lion” and not a “lamb”! A fascinating idea. In C.S. Lewis’ “Chronicles of Narnia”, the proverbial Christ-figure is the great lion, Aslan; in the climactic scenes of the book, and the movie, Aslan the lion is slain (and soon thereafter raised from the dead). But in the Book of Revelation, John (that’s the apostle, not the Launchbury!) sees the elders waiting for the arrival of the “Lion of the tribe of Judah”, who “has tri­umphed” and “is able to open the scroll” (Rev. 5:5). But of course, when the “Lion” finally appears, he is seen — not as a Lion! — but as “a Lamb, looking as if it has been slain” (Rev. 5:6). Christ the Lion-Lamb (or the Lamb-Lion) is a wonderfully multi­faceted Scriptural figure.

A thought in passing

A believer who specializes in showing mercy and compassion is no better or worse than the believer who specializes in the study of prophecy (just using this as an example). God is not a respecter of persons.

Several years ago I met a “famous” Christadelphian, and was clueless as to his identity (until he was introduced as the guest speaker later that day). I walked away from the initial encounter totally impressed: “Now there goes a kind and gracious old brother — I wish there were more like him.” For all I knew he could have been the ecclesial gardener or handyman back home — it didn’t matter — the love of Christ was in his kind face and gentle manner. If I had asked a stupid question (like I sometimes do) I’m certain he would not have mocked or ridiculed me. The books he’d written are extremely valuable to Christ­adelphia, but as far as I’m concerned it was his attitude that was priceless.

The bottom line is we need each other, and all things (from sweeping ecclesial floors to writing books) should be done for the edification and benefit of the body, and to the glory of God.