Loveland Protestant Reformed Church

709 East 57th Street; Loveland, CO 80538

Services: 9:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. (7:00 p.m. June through August)

Pastor: Rev. Garry Eriks Phone: (970) 667-9481

Vol. 7, No. 11

Homepage on Internet: http://www.prca.org


Content:

The Last Days
Parable or Fact?
Public Transportation on the Sabbath?


The Last Days

Scripture speaks often of the last day or days and of the last time (Gen. 49:1; Is. 2:2; Mic. 4:1, Jn. 6:39; Acts 2:17; II Tim. 3:1; Heb. 1:2; Jas. 5:3; I Pet. 1:5; I Jn. 2:18; Jude 18). It also speaks of the end of the world or the end of the age (Matt. 13:39, 40; I Cor. 15:24; I Pet. 4:7; Rev. 2:26).

When are these last days - this last time? Are they near or far in the future? Do they have any relevance for us today? What is the end of the world? These are questions that must be answered.

Scripture is clear that the whole NT age is the last time, the end. We see this in I Corinthians 10:11, where Paul enforces his teaching by telling the Corinthians believers and us that the ends of the world are come upon us. Likewise, Hebrews 9:26 says that it was at the end of the world that Christ came "to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself" (cf. also Heb. 1:2; I Pet. 1:5; 20; 4:7; I Jn. 2:18).

While it is not unbiblical to refer to the second coming of Christ and the great judgement as the end of the world (Mk. 13:7) and to the days immediately preceding as the last days (II Tim. 3:1), it is clear that this is not a special and separate age, but part of the NT age. This age in which we live, this "day," this time, is the last. There is nothing to follow but the new creation, the new heavens and earth.

It is difficult for us to believe that if this is already the end of the age, the last time, that then the world can still last many thousands of years before the Lord returns, as some suggest. Will the end be longer than the beginning, longer than all the history that has preceded it? That would be a strange end indeed.

Scripture views this whole age as the last time and as the end, in light first of all of the promise that Christ shall come quickly, but also because it is the time in which God finishes His work "and cuts it short in righteousness" (Rom. 9:28). The two are related. That Christ comes quickly is not to be measured so much in number of years, as that God is finishing His work and will send Christ as soon as that work is fully accomplished.

This truth that the whole of the present age is the end is also of enormous practical significance. It means (1) that we are all living in the end and will experience to some degree the events of the end (Matt. 24:34); (2) that we must all live in expectation of the end and not as though it is far in the future, without any immediate relevance for us (I Cor. 10:11); and (3) that our hope must be in that which is to come and not in this world and the things of this world. They have come to their end!

What a frightening, yet wonderful thing it is to know that we live in the last days. We stand always, as it were, within sight both of the final judgment and of the coming of our Saviour. We preach knowing the terror of the Lord. We live as pilgrims and strangers, knowing that our journey must soon be finished and we have our first sight of the eternal city. We acknowledge that we live in perilous time, yet we are not afraid, for we see our redemption drawing nigh. We know the end has come. Rev.R. Hanko


Parable or Fact?

One of our readers has inquired concerning the passage in Luke 16:19-31, a passage which records the story of the rich man and Lazarus. It is too long to quote here, but our readers are urged to look it up in their Bibles. The question is: "Could you explain whether this passage is parabolic -- a 'kingdom' parable -- or to be interpreted literally?"

It is clear from several considerations that the passage is a parable. The first is that it was a part of a series of parables which Jesus is using to illustrate His teachings while he was in Perea. Luke 15 includes three such parables. Luke 16:12 records another. This passage fits in with the whole context as a parable.

The second consideration is that it fits in with what Jesus is discussing with the wicked Pharisees. He had told the disciples the parable of the clever steward (vss. 1-12) and the Pharisees had overheard it. Especially Jesus' concluding remarks, which are recorded in vs. 13, pricked them. They were covetous and "they heard these things." So they began to deride Jesus (vs. 14). Although there is the insertion of a passage concerning divorce (vs. 18) -- perhaps because the covetousness of the Pharisees extended to coveting their neighbor's wife -- the parable of the rich man and Lazarus extends Jesus' instruction concerning the evil of covetousness by demonstrating what happens to covetous people in the world to come -- after death.

The third consideration which proves this is a parable is the fact that the story contains elements which cannot possibly be true in life. It speaks of the rich man in hell being able to see heaven: "And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom" (vs. 23). It speaks even of conversation between the inhabitants of hell and the inhabitants of heaven. The rich man and Abraham carry on a discussion. If, in fact, these things were possible, Scripture's description of the bliss of heaven would be incorrect. Heaven would not be the blessed state that it is if we, while in heaven, were able to witness things taking place in hell and even converse with those who are in hell. We may thank God that that is not true.

While we ought to be warned by the parable of the terrible consequences of covetousness, it is not out of order to call attention to a few truths found in the parable.

One aspect of the parable is particularly striking. I refer to the fact that really Jesus includes in this one parable, two separate parables, although they are related. The final end of the rich man and the final bliss of poor Lazarus are graphically described. But the latter part of the parable (vss. 27-31) deals with another subject.

The rich man seems to have forgotten his request for a drop of water to cool his tongue and now begins to think of his brothers. Some have interpreted this request of the rich man to be a mark in his favor. He can be concerned about the eternal welfare of his brothers in the hopes that they will not share in his sad end.

But we must not interpret his request in this way. It was, in fact, extremely wicked. There are at least three considerations which show the evil of the request of the rich man. 1) If the request were pleasing to God, this parable would teach that the wicked in hell can do things pleasing to God. This is manifestly impossible.

2) The rich man, by his request, was really seeking to ease his own punishment in hell. He was probably the eldest son and responsible for the conduct of his younger brothers. One of the great horrors of hell is the fact that those who go there will be every moment confronted by people whom they have led astray and for whom they are responsible. False shepherds will be confronted forever with the church members they deceived. Mothers who aborted their babies will have to look into the accusing eyes of these murdered infants. The rich man would have to face the stares of brothers whom he taught to be covetous

3) The rich man, by his request, is really attacking God's justice. He means to say that his brothers do not have sufficient warning of the consequences of their covetousness. And, of course, if they do not have sufficient warning, then the rich man did not have sufficient warning as well. It is a clever way of shifting the blame for his punishment to God.

This latter point illustrates the whole point of the last part of the parable. The rich man (and his brothers) were brought up in the nation of Israel where they had and were taught in the Holy Scriptures. Now the rich man is saying to God: But those Scriptures are not enough. We need (like the Charismatics?) special signs and wonders. We need people coming back from the grave. We need something besides the gospel. Thy way is insufficient. If we had had more, we would have understood.

Abraham says: That is wicked. They have Moses and the prophets. Let them hear them. And when the rich man nevertheless argues about it, Abraham shuts him up with the devastating truth: If they will not hear Moses and the prophets, they will not be persuaded though one rise from the dead.

The gospel is enough. Believe in that. And if you will not believe in that gospel, then nothing will change your hard and stubborn heart.

There is profound warning here, also for you and me. Prof. H. Hanko


Public Transportation on the Sabbath?

The question for this issue of the News is: "Is it against God's law to use public transport on the Sabbath to travel to and from a place of worship?" This is a vexing question especially for those (like the writer) who have no other means of transport to the worship services of a local church.

We understand the writer here to be referring to the Christian Sabbath of the first day of the week, and will so use the word "Sabbath" in our reply without entering the whole question of the identity of the 7th day Sabbath of the OT and the 1st day Sabbath of the NT. That question we have dealt with in a previous issue.

Let us note first that the objections raised are not to the use of transport, but public transport. I know of no one who believes that it is wrong to use ones car, bicycle, or legs to attend public worship. Usually the objection to using public transport is that it contributes to the breaking of the Sabbath in that others must work on the Sabbath in order to provide such transportation.

We find this argument some what difficult to follow through, though we can certainly see the logic of it. The difficulty is this: If we are not to do anything on the Sabbath that contributes to others breaking it, how can we on the Sabbath use electricity or gas, the petrol in our cars, food or drink (if we do not raise our own), since by our use of these things we also contribute to the breaking of the Sabbath?

We would not, therefore, forbid others to use public transportation on the Sabbath, nor would we hesitate to use it ourselves if absolutely necessary. Our attitude would be that the ungodly are breaking the Sabbath anyway, in spite of all our protestations to the contrary, and if their Sabbath-breaking enables us to keep the Sabbath, then it is better keep it, either by getting to church to hear the Word and worship God, or by using electricity, gas, petrol, food and drink to fulfill our Sabbath obligations.

We would add, however, that this should be done only where necessary. It is better, and usually possible, for those who have no transportation of their own to get transportation from other members of the church. That also allows the different members of the church to help one another and bear one another's burdens, as they ought.

Our answer, however, is not just a matter of convenience, but reflects what we believe to be the teaching of Scripture regarding the Sabbath:

(1) the mere observance regulations is not Sabbath keeping (Matt. 12:1-9);

(2) the main purpose of the Sabbath is the worship of God and in that connection, every kind of well-doing (Matt. 10:10-13). The keeping of the Sabbath, if we are to keep it properly, is something very positive (Mk. 2:23). It is the heart-felt expression of the Christian's joy and thanks to God for His salvation, using the great opportunity God has given for doing this (1 day in 7);

(3) that we set aside everything else for this purpose, as much as possible (Is. 58:13, 14). Ceasing from other activities is neither holy nor profitable in itself;

(4) that therefore, the general rule for what must and may be done on the Sabbath, is "works of necessity and mercy" - if it is not necessary or merciful we do not do it, not because it is wrong, but because we have more important things to do - that great work of worshipping God both publicly and privately. Rev. Ronald Hanko