QUES. 7. – Did the apostles, in writing the New Testament, understand all they wrote; or did the Holy Spirit, in inspiring them, lead them to write beyond their understanding ?

ANS. – Had you asked this concerning the Old Testament writers, we would have said, "No; the writers had not the full understanding of all they wrote, and this on the ground of 1 Peter 1:10-12." Concerning the New Testament writers, however, it is different, as 1 Cor. 2 :10-16 shows. Christ had come, unlocking by the Cross all the great purposes of God. In consequence, the Holy Spirit had come and taken up His abode in the saints to give them the full intelligence of these purposes. It seems evident that, in unfolding them, the writers themselves understood fully all they wrote. Nevertheless, the perfection of what the Spirit gave by their means is a matter that neither they nor we have fathomed. Many things too in the simple narrative of the Gospels, the Acts, in Rev. 1-3, etc., etc., have such marvelous connections and dispensational application that it is hardly possible that the instrument used in writing could possibly have apprehended.

QUES. 8.-What is meant in Rev. 3:5 by "I will not blot out his name out of the book of life " ? Can any one's name be blotted out of that?

ANS.-It seems so plainly from chapter 22:19. It cannot be, however, " the Lamb's book of life " (chap. 21:27); for this one is surely kept with inerrant precision. There is no doubt the " book of life," here, is the record of our confession of faith in Christ, and of discipleship, in which, by our profession, we have as it were written our own name.

QUES. 9.-Is Rev. 3:19, 20 a purely individual communion? and is the assembly, or collective testimony, disowned?

ANS.-This is plainly individual communion here, as indeed all true communion must ever be. It is also plain that God is here about to spew out of His month that which calls itself the Church ; but it must not be forgotten that Philadelphia goes on to the end, as well as Thyatira and Sardis ; and that such in Laodicea as sup with Him, and He with them, are not Laodicean in character, but Philadelphian. Nor is God less pleased with their collective testimony than in brighter times. The admonition, "Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together," is the more urgent "as we see the day approaching." We need not surely, in so doing, call ourselves Philadelphia, nor pretend to anything, but the Lord will prove His pleasure in us.

QUES. 10.-What do the two sons and the servants of Luke 15 :11-32 represent ?

ANS.-First of all, in the pictures such as this given in Scripture there is one special lesson intended to be taught. If we want to make every detail teach, instead of gathering the great central lesson, we shall miss the object the Spirit has in view.

The two sons represent the two classes mentioned in verses 1 and 2 ; the younger one is the publicans and sinners; the elder, the Pharisees and scribes. The servants (not hired servants, as the Prodigal calls them) would naturally make us think of the angels.

QUES. 11.-Scripture says, "Woman praying, or prophesying, with her head uncovered dishonoreth her head." (1) Does this mean her husband only, or her brethren also ? (2) Does it mean audibly, or in private prayer also, as its being on account of the angels seems to indicate? (3) Does the covering mean the hair itself? (4) Does this apply to house-to-house meetings as well?

ANS.-(1) "The head of the woman is the man." So, in praying or prophesying with uncovered head, she dishonors man in general, not merely her husband. (2) It means anywhere when in the attitude of prayer. Wherever the man should uncover his bead, the woman should cover hers. (3) No; the hair is only the sign that she should be covered-put on a covering ; as the short hair on man is a sign that he should be uncovered-put off his covering. (4) Yes ; however informal the covering may be, it is God's order in all places where we have to do with His holy things.

QUES. 12.-Would it be wrong for a Christian to marry a woman who is good and gentle, with uplifting ideals and high aspirations, a professing Christian, yet evidently a stranger to Christ?

ANS.-Children of God may be very ignorant of truth which, when presented to them in love, they will receive with gladness. If, however, one is truly a stranger to Christ, giving no sign of a real conversion, it matters not how lovely his natural disposition maybe:the plain language of Scripture to the Christian is, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers:. . . for what communion hath light with darkness? … or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?" (2 Cor. 6 :14, 15.) If the children of God violate the word of God in any part, they may rest assured of reaping bitter fruit.

Is it not already a mark of a bad spiritual state for a Christian to form an attachment at all with one who is not a Christian?