The notion that everything made by humans “has guilty associations” that are relevant because of Romans 3:23 is a faulty notion.¹ Consider what Scripture teaches in the following passages about something that certain humans made or used.

The Holy Anointing Oil

God commanded certain humans to make this holy anointing oil:

Exodus 30:25 And thou shalt make it an oil of holy ointment, an ointment compound after the art of the apothecary: it shall be an holy anointing oil.

All the humans that ever obeyed this command had “sinned and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). Nonetheless, God commanded them to make an oil that God declared was holy. In obedience to God, many people in Israel’s history made this holy oil.

Asserting that this holy anointing oil had “guilty associations” because of Romans 3:23 because those who made it were sinners does not establish anything of relevance or significance concerning divine acceptance of the legitimate human making of that oil and of the legitimate human use of that oil for the purposes for which God commanded that it would be used in His service.

The Sacrifices of Cain and Abel

From the standpoint of Romans 3:23, both Cain and Abel were humans who had “sinned and come short of the glory of God.” God, however, accepted Abel and his sacrifice, but did not accept Cain and his sacrifice:

Gen. 4:3 And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the Lord.

4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering:

5 But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.

Clearly, the notion that everything “has guilty associations” because of Romans 3:23 is a faulty and irrelevant notion for explaining God’s differing responses to the worship offerings and activities of these two sinful humans.

A Woman’s Anointing Jesus with Spikenard

Mark 14 provides another passage that refutes the faulty notion that everything “has guilty associations” based on the teaching of Romans 3:23:

Mark 14:3 And being in Bethany in the house of Simon the leper, as he sat at meat, there came a woman having an alabaster box of ointment of spikenard very precious; and she brake the box, and poured it on his head. . . .

6 And Jesus said, Let her alone; why trouble ye her? she hath wrought a good work on me. . . .

8 She hath done what she could: she is come aforehand to anoint my body to the burying.

9 Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached throughout the whole world, this also that she hath done shall be spoken of for a memorial of her.

A woman anointed Jesus with some very precious ointment of spikenard. Scripture does not reveal anywhere that there were any divine commands for her to do so. We know, therefore, that the divine acceptance of her use of that ointment was not because she was doing something that God had commanded to be done.

Furthermore, because Scripture does not provide any evidence that Jesus Himself made the ointment, we know that whoever formulated or compounded the ointment was a sinner. The woman who applied the ointment to Jesus was also a sinner.

Nonetheless, Jesus declared that she “wrought a good work on” Him. Undeniably, therefore, what she did was acceptable to God, and the manmade product that she used to do what she did was acceptable to God for use in the way that she used it.

Any possible considerations about the ointment or the woman or her actions having “guilty associations” because of Romans 3:23 were totally irrelevant and are of no significance for our understanding that what she did with something made by sinful humans was acceptable to God and did not have any “guilty associations” worth considering or mentioning.

Conclusion

The treatment above of three passages shows clearly how Scripture itself refutes the notion that everything “has guilty associations” that are relevant and must be taken into account because of Romans 3:23. Arguing on such a basis and in such a manner is unbiblical and invalid.

¹ This post combines and expands on material from three posts that I made in a discussion on Sharper Iron.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

There will be no shortage of wood for cremation on this occasion. Nonetheless, God has ordained that there will be no cremation–all the multitudes will still be buried, including all remaining bones of any humans. Such burial of those bones will be necessary in order for the land to be cleansed.

Cremation of those bones will not cleanse the land. By the direct ordination of God, multitudes will be buried in order to cleanse the land.

This passage proves conclusively that burial is the will of God even for vast hordes of unbelievers even when there will be far more wood available than would be needed to cremate all of them.

There is zero biblical basis for any Christian to support cremation.

Note: I will likely be adding to this table and revising its contents repeatedly in the future. Its content, therefore, will likely be continually changing.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

I believe that Scripture provides clear evidence that king Solomon was saved. I have written five articles that provide multiple reasons for holding that view and for believing that he did not perish eternally:

I. Nine Good Reasons Why Solomon Did Not Perish Eternally

For at least 9 good reasons, we can be confident that Solomon was saved and did not perish eternally.

1. Solomon did not completely turn away from God

2. God’s promises to David about Solomon

3. God’s loving Solomon at his birth

4. Solomon loved God

5. God’s chastening Solomon

6. The record of Solomon’s life in Second Chronicles

7. A striking passage that includes an emphatic statement about God’s love for Solomon

8. Solomon was not an apostate writer of multiple books of Scripture

9. No mention of Solomon in the NT as an example of one who apostatized

II. Another Reason Why Solomon Did Not Perish Eternally

A comparison of the biblical record about Samson with that of Solomon supports holding that Solomon was saved and did not perish eternally.

III. If Solomon Were in Hell

Holding the view that king Solomon is now in hell has profound implications for what a believer would also have to hold to be true if it were true that Solomon is now in hell. Solomon was saved and is not in hell now.

IV. Did Solomon Repent Before He Died?

Three biblical considerations show that Solomon did repent before he died. He was saved and did not perish eternally.

1. A written record of all that Solomon did

2. Jesus as a greater than Solomon

3. Solomon’s porch in the Temple

V. Hebrews 11 and the Eternal Destiny of Solomon

The lack of mention of Solomon in Hebrews 11 does not at all prove that he perished eternally. Solomon was saved and is in heaven.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

Second Samuel 21:1-14 relates an account that seems to clearly show king David’s righteous “use” of guilt by association (GBA) in a forensic context.

Atonement through Divinely Approved Judicial Selection of Those Who Were Put to Death

When God judged His people with a famine, David inquired of Him and learned that it was because Saul killed some of the Gibeonites:

2 Samuel 21:1 Then there was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David enquired of the LORD. And the LORD answered, It is for Saul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Gibeonites.

David then consulted with the Gibeonites about the matter and asked what he could do to atone for Saul’s wrongdoing:

2 And the king called the Gibeonites, and said unto them; (now the Gibeonites were not of the children of Israel, but of the remnant of the Amorites; and the children of Israel had sworn unto them: and Saul sought to slay them in his zeal to the children of Israel and Judah.) 3 Wherefore David said unto the Gibeonites, What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement, that ye may bless the inheritance of the LORD?

The Gibeonites told him that they wanted to execute 7 descendants of Saul. David agreed to do so:

4 And the Gibeonites said unto him, We will have no silver nor gold of Saul, nor of his house; neither for us shalt thou kill any man in Israel. And he said, What ye shall say, that will I do for you. 5 And they answered the king, The man that consumed us, and that devised against us that we should be destroyed from remaining in any of the coasts of Israel, 6 Let seven men of his sons be delivered unto us, and we will hang them up unto the LORD in Gibeah of Saul, whom the LORD did choose. And the king said, I will give them.

David spared Mephibosheth, who was lame in both feet, which makes it very unlikely that he had participated directly in the slaying of the Gibeonites:

7 But the king spared Mephibosheth, the son of Jonathan the son of Saul, because of the LORD’S oath that was between them, between David and Jonathan the son of Saul.

David handed over two sons of Saul and 5 grandsons of Saul to be put to death by the Gibeonites:

8 But the king took the two sons of Rizpah the daughter of Aiah, whom she bare unto Saul, Armoni and Mephibosheth; and the five sons of Michal the daughter of Saul, whom she brought up for Adriel the son of Barzillai the Meholathite: 9 And he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the LORD: and they fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest, in the first days, in the beginning of barley harvest.

God approved of what David as the king¹ did by “being intreated for the land,” which clearly implies that He ended the famine as a result of what David had done:

2 Samuel 21:14 And the bones of Saul and Jonathan his son buried they in the country of Benjamin in Zelah, in the sepulchre of Kish his father: and they performed all that the king commanded. And after that God was intreated for the land.

Discussion

The passage does not say anything about God’s revealing supernaturally to David which living descendants of Saul had personally participated in the unrighteous killing of the Gibeonites. The passage also gives no indication of David’s making a very thorough inquiry and investigation to make sure that he only delivered up descendants of Saul who were actually guilty by having directly participated in the wrongdoing.

Rather, David seems to have used guilt by association in selecting the seven descendants of Saul who were executed to atone for Saul’s wrongdoing.

Conclusion

As the Spirit has framed this account, it seems clear that David righteously “used” GBA in this forensic context to deliver over 7 descendants of Saul to be put to death by the Gibeonites.

¹As the king, David was the supreme human judicial authority over the people in his kingdom (2 Sam. 8:15; cf. 1 Kings 10:9; 1 Pet. 2:13-14)

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

The Spirit has revealed that there will be a binding of Satan for a thousand years that will take place:

Revelation 20:1 And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. 2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

Some believers assert that this binding has already happened. One person with whom I recently interacted said that this binding happened when Jesus sent out the seventy (cf. Luke 10:17-20).

A close examination of Revelation 20:2-3, however, shows that it is false to hold that Satan has already been bound in the way spoken of in this passage.

Shut Up and Sealed in the Bottomless Pit

Revelation 20:2-3 expressly states that Satan will be bound for a thousand years in a bottomless pit, shut up in it, and have set a seal upon him during the time that he is in that pit.

The text is very plain that Satan will not be free to do anything on the earth during this time. To assert otherwise is to make a mockery of the text’s saying that he will be shut up and sealed in that pit.

Furthermore, many NT passages speak explicitly of Satanic activity in the world during the entire lifetimes of the Apostles, as recorded in Scripture. A right handling of these passages shows that the binding of Satan revealed in Revelation 20:1-3 could not have taken place and did not take place at any time prior to the writing of the book of Revelation.

1 Peter 5:8

For example, Peter taught that the devil was freely walking about on the earth seeking people to devour:

1 Peter 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: 9 Whom resist stedfast in the faith, knowing that the same afflictions are accomplished in your brethren that are in the world.

It is nonsensical to say that the devil was bound in the specific manner spoken of in Revelation 20:1-3 at the time that 1 Peter 5:8 was inspired by the Spirit.

Comparing 1 Peter 5:8 with two texts in Job further confirms that there had not been any change in Satan’s freedom to roam around on the earth from the time of Job to the time 1 Peter was written:

Job 1:7 And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

Job 2:2 And the LORD said unto Satan, From whence comest thou? And Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it.

Both in Job’s day and at the time First Peter was written, Satan was freely walking about on the earth. He was not bound, shut up, and sealed in a bottomless pit when Peter wrote First Peter.

Revelation 2

Moreover, the glorified Christ directed the apostle John to write seven letters to seven churches late in the first century AD (Rev. 2-3). In 2 of those letters, Christ Himself revealed the active workings of Satan at the very time those letters were written:

Revelation 2:10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer: behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life.

Here, Christ talks about the devil’s direct attacks on believers in the church at Thyatira. Satan certainly was not bound, shut up, and sealed in the bottomless pit at that time.

Revelation 2:13 I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan’s seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.

Here, Christ talked about Satan’s seat being in Pergamos and his dwelling there. Obviously, because Satan was dwelling there, he certainly was not at that time bound, shut up, and sealed in the bottomless pit.

Conclusion

It is a faulty handling of Scripture to say that the NT supports holding that the binding of Satan spoken of in Revelation 20 has already taken place. It has not taken place!

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.

Through my continuing studies in the book of Daniel, I have found several significant ways that comparing Scripture with Scripture provides important illumination about passages. Looking closely at Daniel 5 compared to Daniel 3 reveals a valuable insight about the dedication of the image that Nebuchadnezzar made.

Daniel 5

The Spirit begins Daniel 5 by telling us that Belshazzar made a great feast in which a large number of people participated:

Daniel 5:1 Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand.

A thousand lords were present at this feast! Beyond the king and the 1000 lords, others were also participants:

Daniel 5:2 Belshazzar, whiles he tasted the wine, commanded to bring the golden and silver vessels which his father Nebuchadnezzar had taken out of the temple which was in Jerusalem; that the king, and his princes, his wives, and his concubines, might drink therein. 3 Then they brought the golden vessels that were taken out of the temple of the house of God which was at Jerusalem; and the king, and his princes, his wives, and his concubines, drank in them.

From Daniel 5:1-3, we learn that there were considerably more than a 1000 participants in this feast.

Daniel 5 versus Daniel 3

Strikingly, the Spirit has chosen to give us a large specified number for how many people participated in Belshazzar’s feast, but He has not done so for how many people worshiped the image that Nebuchadnezzar made! Why did the Spirit want us to know numerical information about the former but not about the latter?

Although we cannot know the answer to this intriguing question, Daniel 5 illumines Daniel 3 in an important way, as follows.

We know that there were more than 1000 participants in Belshazzar’s feast. Given the greater importance of the event in Daniel 3, we should therefore hold that there were more people at the dedication of the image than at Belshazzar’s feast.

This comparison thus teaches us that there surely were well over a thousand people at the dedication of the image in Daniel 3.

Because at least some of the king’s army also seems to have been present at the dedication (cf. Dan. 3:20), and a well-armed presence of a sufficient number of trusted soldiers would have been necessary for ensuring the safety of the king and his guests, we should expect that there would have been more armed soldiers present than there were present officials in Nebuchadnezzar’s government. Reasoning in this way teaches us that there were at least more than 2000 people present at the dedication of the image.

Even if one says that Nebuchadnezzar may have had only half as many lords in his government as Belshazzar did in his, the presence of the army would still mean that there were more than 1000 people at the dedication of the image.

Copyright © 2011-2024 by Rajesh Gandhi. All rights reserved.