Is there a difference in the meaning of ‘unclean’ in the Old Testament and the New Testament?  It is my understanding that many things in the Old Testament that were considered unclean weren't necessarily wrong or sinful, but in the New Testament, my understanding is that the word ‘unclean’ is for things that are wrong or should be avoided.  Thanks!

Sincerely,
Scrubbed Up

Dear Scrubbed Up,

The word ‘unclean’ refers to anything that is ‘contaminated or unholy’.  Many times that is in reference to something contaminated by sin – in which case, ‘unclean’ is referring to something sinful (some good examples of this are Rom 1:24, Eph 4:19, and Lam 1:8).  However, some things that were unclean were simply things that a Jew needed to purify themselves from if they came in contact with it (i.e. leprosy, dead bodies, pus, or other body ailments – Num 5:2-3).  It wasn’t a sin to be a leper, but it was a contaminated condition, and there was a need for quarantine.

In both the Old and New Testaments, we must always use context to decide whether the word ‘unclean’ is in reference to sin or merely referring to something that is contaminated in some way.  For example, 1 Cor 7:14 refers to the children of unbelievers as being ‘unclean’… but that isn’t referring to sin.  All children are born without sin, but the children that are born into a christian home are purified from many of the struggles that an unbeliever’s child must face.  We give this example simply to show that not all New Testament uses of the word ‘unclean’ refer to sin.  The deciding factor is always context.  The word means ‘contaminated or unholy’… context will tell you whether the contamination is sin.

In the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus says not to call any man "father".  Then later, Jesus Himself refers to Abraham as "father" in the story of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16).  Also, when God gave Moses the Ten Commandments, God Himself commands us to honor "father" and mother. Even if Jesus means "father" in a spiritual sense and not a strict literal or biological sense, then why does Paul under inspiration of the Holy Spirit refer to himself as a spiritual "father" to the Corinthians? (1Cor 4:14-15)  There are many more New Testament passages where the term "father" is used in both physical and spiritual senses.  Is this an example of a biblical contradiction?

Sincerely,
Taking Titles

Dear Taking Titles,

There are three basic senses in which the word ‘father’ is used in the New Testament – and as you mentioned, context is very important in understanding which definition is being used.

1. ‘Father’ can mean ‘biological founder’.  This is the most literal sense of the word ‘father’.
2. ‘Father’ can refer to a ‘spiritual founder’.  This is what Paul meant when he talked about being the Corinthians’ father (1 Cor 4:14-15).  However, it is worth noting that even when Paul says this, he clauses the statement by saying that he “begat them through the gospel”.  Paul recognized that he was only their father inasmuch as he led them to the true Father of their souls.
3. ‘Father’ can also refer to ‘him who guides and rules’.  This is what Jesus was referring to in Matt 23:8-10, and it is the same in Heb 12:9.  It is wrong for a christian to place their total faith in any man.  We must always turn to God and trust His will above man’s.  Paul may have started the Corinthian congregation, but he wasn’t their leader.  In fact, Paul made it very clear that no christian should ever revere a person above God (Gal 1:8).

When we keep in mind the context of the various passages, each verse is using the word ‘father’ in a way that matches perfectly.  It isn’t a contradiction but simply a matter of multiple uses for the same word… something we see in normal speech all the time.

(This is a follow-up to “Up In The Air”)

I've actually never heard this idea that THE great tribulation has already happened.  I've considered this idea with an open mind and have only gained a deep concern for those who support this theory… mostly because the temple was, of course, destroyed in 70 AD, and we know John recorded his vision around 90 AD.  What good would it have been for John to prophesy on things which already took place (Rev 10:11)?  Also, if you were to believe this idea, the answer to the question asked in Matt 24:3 would have been 70 AD, but since we humans are still in existence, either Jesus was lying (which He was not) or the tribulation was not fulfilled in 70 AD.  Furthermore, if you carefully study the context surrounding the statement in Matt 24:34, you see Jesus was still speaking on this age of false prophets and messiahs to come.  He said (in context), "This generation of false prophets and messiahs will not pass until the work of the tribulation is complete." He was not referring to the generation that was currently alive when He said these things.  Also, we all know when God says things are to happen soon (Rev 1:1), God's judgment of time is supremely different than ours.  I do not claim to be in full understanding of Revelation, but I would greatly suggest to those who support the idea you hold to prayerfully and logically reconsider their interpretation of the  book of Revelation.  Please reply; I am still open-minded to what you have to say.  Thank for all you do.

Sincerely,
Looking Ahead

Dear Looking Ahead,

Thanks for your reply.  I think we got our wires crossed somewhere.  The book of Revelation doesn't discuss the fall of Jerusalem ­– it discusses the persecution of christians under the Roman Empire.  We agree that it is most likely that John wrote Revelation after 70 AD.  However, Matt. 24 does refer to 70 AD, and Jesus even clarifies that is what He is talking about in Matt. 24:2 when He mentions the stones of the temple would be torn down (something that happened in the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD).  You referenced Matt 24:3; it is important to note that the words "end of the world" found in some translations are not technically correct.  The word 'world' is literally 'age'.  It isn't the word 'kosmos' which is what is normally used for 'world' throughout the Bible.  Jesus was telling them that the end of the Jewish age was about to occur and that there would be certain signs they should watch for.  As for your reference to Matt 24:34, the words 'false prophets and messiahs' aren't in that verse.  All it says is "this generation shall not pass away until all these things are accomplished" – we don't know what translation you are using, but those words that prove your point simply aren't in the text of the major translations of the Bible.  Matthew 24 is dealing with 70 AD (and Jesus said those things before 70 AD); Revelation is a separate topic.

One other thing, you mentioned that you don't have a full understanding of Revelation.  Here is our challenge to you.  Listen to the series of classes we linked to you on that book (for our readers, that link is here).  After listening to the classes, feel free to write in with any objections you have to the logic used in the teaching.  We would happily welcome your criticism.  If we are wrong, we want to change.

The scripture 1 Jhn 5:16-17: what sins are we not forgiven for?  If you are a christian and use the Lord's name in vain, can you be forgiven?  The way I read it in the Bible, you can't be; please help me understand all this.

Sincerely,
Looking For The Line

Dear Looking For The Line,

John says that there is a sin that leads to death – that sin is the sin against the Holy Spirit (Mk 3:29).  Any sin can be repented of and forgiven (1 Jn 1:9)… except for the sin against the Holy Spirit.  Now, let’s explain what that sin is.

When Jesus says that any sin will be forgiven except for someone blaspheming the Holy Spirit (Mk 3:28-30), He said it to the crowd that accused Him of casting out demons by the power of Satan (Mk 3:23).  That crowd could have been forgiven of any sin, but instead they rejected the miracles that testified that Jesus was from God.  Contrast that crowd’s attitude with Nicodemus’ attitude.  Nicodemus understood that the only way that someone could perform a miracle was if God was with him (Jhn 3:2).  When that crowd rejected the evidence that the Holy Spirit provided (in this case, the miracles), they rejected any chance to receive the forgiveness found in Jesus’ teachings.  When we reject the truth of God (the Bible), we reject the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit’s primary job is to bring the truth of the gospel to mankind (see the post “What the Holy Spirit Does” for more details).  Someone blasphemes the Holy Spirit by rejecting the truth that the Holy Spirit sent us in the Bible.  Any sin can be forgiven if we will turn to God’s Word and obey it (Rom 10:17, Heb 5:9), but there is absolutely no hope for someone if he or she will not accept the Holy Spirit’s Bible.

At what point in The Great Tribulation are we, the church, raptured?  I struggle to understand who this "multitude" mentioned in Revelation chapter 7 is and at what time they arrived.  Is there any information from the Bible that gives us any idea of when we will be raptured?  Do we suffer through the tribulation with the unsaved?  Do we all die as martyrs?  Do we get "caught up" before the Tribulation begins?

Sincerely,
Looking Ahead

Dear Looking Ahead,

The word ‘rapture’ means ‘caught up’ in Latin.  The term ‘rapture’ is used to describe an event that many think will take place right before the days of tribulation in Revelation.  The problem with this theory is that it is wrong.  There will be a time when all christians will be caught up into the air to be with Christ – the end of time (1 Thess 4:14-18).  The book of Revelation doesn’t describe events in the future; it describes events in the past.  The book of Revelation deals with problems that the church was to “shortly” see come to pass (Rev 1:1).

Furthermore, the tribulation taught by many denominations is based off of a misinterpretation of Matthew chapter twenty-four.  Matt 24 is dealing with the fall of Jerusalem and destruction of the Jewish temple that would happen in 70 AD.  If we carefully pay attention to the context, Jesus is talking about the Jewish temple’s destruction, not a worldwide trial thousands of years in the future (Matt 24:1-2).  Jesus specifically said that the tribulation would occur within that generation’s lifetime (Matt 24:34).

There will be a day when all the faithful are caught up to meet Christ in the heavens.  The day He returns (Acts 1:11), all mankind will be judged at the same time (Jhn 5:28-29).  In that great day (Jude 1:6), the whole world will be burned up with fire (2 Pet 3:10-12).  There will be no post-tribulation, pre-tribulation, semi-tribulation, etc.; there will only be the great Day of Judgment (2 Pet 3:7, 1 Jn 4:17). If you would like a more in-depth look at the book of Revelation, we have a series of classes on the book that can be found here.