Earl R. Borders

This Scripture is expressly clear—the New Testament was "of no strength at all while the testator liveth." Before Christ went to Calvary and purchased redemption's plan, the Old Testament was still in effect. Colossians 2:14 says, "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances [the Old Testament ordinances] that was against us, which was contrary to us, and [He] took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." 

The Old Testament was still in force until Christ went "to his cross." New Testament benefits were not available, and the new birth is a New Testament benefit. This is why, prior to being seized in the garden, Jesus told His disciples, "It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter ['the Holy Ghost'; John 14:26] will not come unto you" (John 16:7). 

The Holy Ghost had not been given prior to when as Jesus said, "But if I depart, I will send him unto you" (John 16:7). In John 7:39, the inspired penman wrote, "The Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified." If "the Holy Ghost was not yet given," one could not be "born of the Spirit" (John 3:6). 

This is the reason, even after His Resurrection, Jesus instructed the disciples to "tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high" (Luke 24:49). Luke continued in the Book of Acts, revealing what this power is. "But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you" (Acts 1:8). The first aspect of this "power" received from the Holy Ghost is referred to in Romans 8:2 as "the Spirit of life," which brought "newness of life" (Romans 6:4).

In Luke 24:49, Jesus spoke of this as "the promise of my Father." Hebrews 11:39, speaking of the Old Testament brethren, reads, "And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, RECEIVED NOT the promise." The Old Testament brethren did not have the same experience we enjoy in this New Testament dispensation—it was not available. Since the "testator" had not yet died, and the old covenant was still in force, the disciples also did not enjoy the new birth until the Spirit was given.

Consider these words of our Lord: "In the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory ..." (Matthew 19:28). This expressly shows "regeneration" was not available until Christ was back on "the throne of his glory," after the Resurrection and Ascension. In Luke 22:32, Jesus told Peter, "When thou art converted ...." Obviously, at that juncture, Peter was not "converted." He did not yet have New Testament conversion.

Earl R. Borders

Some have asked if this text is talking about backsliding; it is not. If it were, it would be "impossible" (verse 4) for them ever to get right again. In verse 6, the writer revealed the condition he was dealing with when he spoke of "fall away." The Greek word is parapipto, and it means "to apostatize."

This question must be answered in view of the context. He was speaking of those who had fallen away. It is "impossible" to "renew them" (verse 6) because they are under a deception. They think they are all right; they think they are still new. Therefore, you cannot "renew them." The life they live with a profession and not a possession is what crucifies Christ and puts Him "to an open shame." 

Initially, Christ was crucified because of unbelief and rejection backed by a religious spirit, and that is the same thing apostates do yet today! Babylon continues to crucify the Lord afresh daily when they teach one can live in iniquity and still be a Christian. Second Timothy 2:19 reads, "Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity." Any experience that leaves you in wickedness or spiritual bondage while under the deception that you are spiritually fine (a new creature), crucifies "the Son of God afresh" because He came to set men and women free.

Earl R. Borders

I think Strong's is the most accurate place to start with its numerical reference to the Hebrew and Greek words. For a more expansive reference, I use several different reference materials. One of the most valuable I have found is Strong's Expanded Dictionary of Bible Words including Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary. For the New Testament, I use Thayer's Greek Lexicon of the New Testament, among others. For the Old Testament, I use:
 
• Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon
• Gesenius' Hebrew-Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament 
• Theological Word Book of the Old Testament

As with any reference material, you must exercise caution and listen to Holy Ghost direction and enlightenment. As with most words, there are more than one definition, and it takes both considering the context and listening to the Holy Spirit to determine which is the appropriate definition for the particular passage under consideration.

Earl R. Borders

The Old Testament Levitical Law included stringent dietary restrictions. Leviticus, Chapter 11, as well as other Mosaic writings, sets forth those restrictions. Leviticus 11:4 says, "Nevertheless these shall ye not eat," and Moses proceeded to set forth specific instructions in the following verses of that chapter. However, with the introduction of the New Covenant, or Testament, there has been a transition. 

The Apostle Paul wrote in Colossians 2:14 that through Christ's redemptive work on Calvary, there was a "blotting out [of] the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." The Old Testament dietary law was one of those "ordinances that was against us," which Christ's Crucifixion nailed "to his cross" and abolished.

The Old Testament practices under the Mosaic Law "was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ" (Galatians 3:24). The inspired penman said in Galatians 3:25, "We are no longer under a schoolmaster." When the Apostle Peter received a vision in Acts  10:12 of all manner of unclean animals under the Jewish law and was enjoined to "kill, and eat" (verse 13), he initially refused. 

However, the Lord clearly told Peter in Acts 10:15, "What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common." Thus, the Old Testament dietary laws were no longer in force.  In I Timothy 4:3, the Apostle Paul spoke of those "commanding to abstain from meats," and he designated such teaching as "doctrines of devils" (verse 1). He went on to write in verse 4, "Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused." Verse 5 says, "It is sanctified by the word of God and prayer."

In Matthew 15:17-20, Jesus established a clear principle that an individual's spiritual state is not affected by dietary issues. Jesus was rebuked by the religious leaders of that day because "thy disciples ... wash not their hands when they eat bread" (verse 2). In response to this, our Lord proclaimed, "Whatsoever entereth in at the mouth goeth into the belly, and is cast out into the draught" (verse 17). Christ revealed, it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a man but rather what comes out of the mouth (verse 18)! What a man eats has nothing to do with what could defile the spirit of man.

To answer this question requires the consideration of other underlying questions. The first one is, What necessitated the development of the King James Bible? Contrary to what some may think, it was not the lack of an English Bible but due to the fact that there were several English versions in use. In England, the Church of England was the established state church, and the king was its head, even as he is today. 

Among the versions being used was the Tyndale New Testament, translated in A.D. 1525. Unfortunately, William Tyndale was put to death in A.D. 1536. At the time of his death, he had only translated fifteen of the thirty-nine books of the Old Testament, and it had to be finished by others. 

Tyndale's translation was included in the Coverdale Bible (1535), the Matthew's Bible (1537), the Great Bible (1539), the Geneva Bible (1560), and the Bishop's Bible (1568). Using these various versions in the Church of England became an issue because of the lack of uniformity in the various congregations throughout the realm. Therefore, King James I was approached about having an "Authorized Version" to provide uniformity. At the front of many older Bibles is a copy of the authorization to show that they were an "authorized version." Certainly, there is much more detail, but these were the predominant facts. 

The scholars commissioned to translate by King James I produced what we term as the King James Version. They relied greatly on the Tyndale Version. Tyndale used both the ancient copies and the Vulgate Version. The King James translators also utilized the Bishop's Bible and the Geneva Bible, which were popular at that time. Thus, the King James translators used a combination of these various renderings. 

I believe the Lord inspired the production of this version and that it is the best English version. It has proven itself to be effective over the centuries in producing the saving of multiplied thousands of souls and in bringing a people to "the knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4).

I believe the King James Version should be our mainstay, or standard. The Apostle Paul penned in 2 Timothy 3:16, "All scripture is given by inspiration of God," and that is so. However, the Scriptures were not originally written in English. Many words (especially Greek words) have several definitions. Unfortunately, the translators did not always translate every word correctly. Thus, it behooves us to "study" (2 Timothy 2:15) so "the Spirit of truth" (John 16:13) can enable us to be "rightly dividing the word of truth." 

The Strong's Exhaustive Concordance assigns a number to the Hebrew and Greek words. Then defined therein are the accurate words from the Greek and Hebrew. These may have originally been translated from the Bishop's or Geneva Bibles (or others), and then placed in the King James Version. It picks up, as the origin, those Greek and Hebrew words. I feel the numbers assigned and the definitions are accurate and dependable

We must first consider the context in which this verse is housed. Beginning in Hebrews 9:18, the sacred writer spoke of "the first testament," and he wrote, "Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood." Then, he continued to speak of the institution of the old covenant in the succeeding verses. 

In verse 20, he penned, "Saying, This is the blood of the testament [quoting Exodus 24:8]." Verse 22 tells us, "Almost all things are by THE LAW purged with blood; [the semicolon indicates a continuation] and without shedding of blood is no remission." This is clearly talking about the position of "blood" under "the law." 

Verse 22 alludes to the words of the Law recorded in Leviticus 17:11. Under the old covenant, there was the "shedding of blood." Hebrews 9:7 explains on that Day of Atonement, "Into the second [room of the Old Testament Tabernacle] went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood." This "blood" came from "the sin offering" (Exodus 30:10), which required an animal's blood to be shed. 
Contextually, Hebrews 9:22 is speaking of what occurred under "the law." It is not speaking of "the blood of Christ," spoken of earlier (Hebrews 9:14). Just as those under the old economy looked forward each year to the Day of Atonement, in like manner, those who embraced John's message looked forward in faith. They were instructed "that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus" (Acts 19:4). 

When they did that, they became "just men" (Hebrews 12:23). The adherents of John's message were justified by their faith. They were looking forward to that new day of atonement. Their "remission" was based on the blood to be shed and offered as an atonement. The distinction was the superiority of "the blood of Christ" (Hebrews 9:14), the atonement He provided, and the redemptive plan He instituted by the shedding of that "blood." This is another element of transition from the old covenant to the new covenant. (See the Q&A section of the February 2026 issue for more detail concerning the transition time.) They looked forward to the redemptive work, and we look back to it. 

When Christ shed His blood, it was first applied "for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament" (Hebrews 9:15). That included those who were baptized under John's ministry. (The February 2026 issue provides more detail and insight concerning the work and position of John the Baptist, or Baptizer.) When they believed, there was justification, but the "remission" did not truly occur until Christ shed His blood on the Cross and the New Testament atonement plan was implemented. 

Earl R. Borders

Sadly, this question has engendered confusion over the years. In the truest, most absolute sense, the Scriptures speak of "that first covenant [the Old Testament]" and "the second [the New Testament]" (Hebrews 8:7). So, there are only two Testamental Dispensations. 

The Hebrew writer penned: "For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead" (Hebrews 9:16-17). So, in reality, the New Testament was not in force until Christ died.

Many times, confusion arises because our understanding is deficient in some manner. Certainly, the Lord does not want us confused, and He certainly never gave us His Word to confuse us ("God is not the author of confusion"; 1 Corinthians 14:33). We are instructed to "study" to be "rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Timothy 2:15). This requires us to do as Isaiah 28:13 admonishes and lay "precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little." Every Scripture must be compatible with the entire harmony and scheme of the Scriptures. 

To properly understand there was a time of transition, we must recognize some truths concerning the ministry of the one styled in Matthew 3:1 as "John the Baptist" ("Baptizer"; Wuest's Expanded Translation of the Greek New Testament) and of Christ. John was a unique man who was a definite fulfillment of prophecy. 

In Malachi 4:5, the prophet wrote, "Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." Concerning John in Matthew 11:14, Jesus proclaimed, "If ye will receive it, this is Elias [Greek for the Hebrew Elijah], which was for to come." John was designated as "my messenger," who "shall prepare the way before me" (Malachi 3:1). In Matthew 11:10, Jesus said this was fulfilled in John. 

Notice the curious statement Jesus made concerning John. Matthew 11:11 states, "Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist ['baptizer'; Wuest's]: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he." How can these expressions be so? It is because John was one who was "born of women," and the "least in the kingdom" is "born of the Spirit" (John 3:6). 

In Matthew 11:9, Jesus was speaking of John when He said, "A prophet? yea, I say unto you, and more than a prophet." John occupied the position as the last of the Old Testament prophets, and he came "in the spirit and power of Elias [Elijah]" (Luke 1:17). There had not been a public message from God since Malachi, 434 years earlier. (These 434 years were the "threescore and two weeks" the Prophet Daniel prophesied of in Daniel 9:25.) 

John's role was unique. He was "to make ready a people prepared for the Lord" (Luke 1:17). Jesus said John was "more than a prophet" because of the special position he occupied. He came "in the spirit and power of Elias [Elijah]," and he was "saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand" (Matthew 3:2).   John was preaching "the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" (Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3). All this was "to make ready a people prepared for the Lord" (Luke 1:17).

One truth that must be recognized—the doctrine of repentance is not solely a New Testament doctrine. Ezekiel 14:6 records, "Thus saith the Lord God; Repent, and turn yourselves from your idols." Ezekiel 18:30 says, "Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions." The repentance aspect of John's message was the same as the Old Testament message. The distinction was what followed his message of repentance—"the kingdom of heaven is at hand." For people to be made ready (Luke 1:17) required sin to be dealt with. Thus, it was necessary to "preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" (Mark 1:4). 

Israel was covenantally still under the Old Testament. When Jesus healed the ten lepers (subsequent to John's ministry), He said, "Go shew yourselves unto the priests" (Luke 17:14), in compliance with the Law (Leviticus 14:2).  However, the ministry and message of John were unique; no other prophet had that message. This aspect of "remission" was a precursor to a new dispensation that was "at hand" (Matthew 3:2). It was John's message concerning "remission," "prepare," and "the kingdom" that was transitory, and Christ continued this message concerning "the kingdom" (Matthew 4:17; Mark 1:15; Luke 4:43). 

Prior to John's ministry, access into "the kingdom of God" (Luke 16:16) was not an availability. However, "since that time [John] the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it" (Luke 16:16). Thus, at that juncture, a positive response to the message enabled people to enter "into it." The Emphatic Greek Diaglott renders it as, "Every one into her presses." 

Repentance and remission were necessary, and the result was the ability to enter the kingdom. However, "the kingdom of God" did not "come with power" (Mark 9:1) during John's ministry, nor during the earthly ministry of Christ.   Christ said in Mark 9:1, "Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power." It came "with power" on the Day of Pentecost (A.D. 33), as Christ told them in Acts 1:8, when He said, "Ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you." The experience the people had (with repentance and remission) also had a preparation component. 

Acts 19:4 reads, "That they should believe on him which should come after him [John], that is, on Christ Jesus." They had to have an operation of faith. When they exercised that faith, they became "justified by faith" (Romans 5:1).

Earl R. Borders

​The answer, as evidenced by James 5:14-15, is a resounding yes! Part of the divine commission Jesus gave prior to His Ascension was, "They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover" (Mark 16:18). Recovery is not instantaneous healing. The instruction in James is predominantly for those cases where brethren are there, but one with "the gifts of healing" is not present. Thus, any God-called minister has the liberty to participate in laying hands on and praying for the sick. They do not have to either wait for or seek out one who has the special gifts. Provision has been made through this avenue recorded in James.

These are separate gifts for separate and distinct purposes. Let us consider "the working of miracles" (1 Corinthians 12:10). Jesus manifested this gift. John 2:1-10 relates the account of Jesus turning the water into wine. That was a miraculous event! Three Synoptic Gospel accounts relate Christ feeding five thousand men, not counting the women and children (Matthew 14:21). Afterward, He had "twelve baskets full" (Matthew 14:20) remaining. A miracle is not always related to healing, though it may be. 
​
"Gifts of healing" (1 Corinthians 12:9) are specific for that purpose—"healing." The Apostle Peter had those "gifts" (it is mentioned in the plural because there are many different manifestations). When Peter spoke to the lame man "at the gate ... which is called Beautiful" (Acts 3:2), he said, "Such as I HAVE give I thee ... rise up and walk" (Acts 3:6). The Apostle Peter had a special gifting. In Acts 5:15, we read of people being divinely healed by "the shadow of Peter passing by." These "spiritual gifts" (1 Corinthians 12:1) differ in their purpose and performance.

First Corinthians 12:9 speaks of "to another faith by the same Spirit." This could be exhibited by such events as when the Apostle Paul received the divine call to "come over into Macedonia and help us" (Acts 16:9). The next verse reveals how they took faith in the call—"immediately we endeavored to go into Macedonia." That was "faith" operating

There is no Scriptural premise that indicates any individual has, or will, receive "all of them." First Corinthians 12:11 speaks of the Spirit "dividing to every man SEVERALLY as he will." God may desire to use certain brethren for a very certain, and special, sacred service; so He equips them with various and several gifts for that usage. The Spirit will witness to the individual the gifts they have and for what purpose. "The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit" (Romans 8:16). 
​
The wise man penned in Proverbs 18:16, "A man's gift maketh room for him." When an individual truly has a gift, or gifts, bestowed upon him, the saints will recognize it, and spiritual leadership will make "room for him.

First Corinthians 12:11 addresses this question, saying, "dividing to every man SEVERALLY as he will." So, the answer is yes. Peter and Paul are prime examples of this. The Apostle Peter had "the gifts of healing," but he also had "discerning" (1 Corinthians 12:9-10). Consider his discernment concerning Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11). Peter had "prophecy" (1 Corinthians 12:10). Second Peter, Chapter 2, is full of "prophecy." Peter also operated the gift of "tongues" (1 Corinthians 12:10) in Acts, Chapter 2.
​
The Apostle Paul had "the word of wisdom" and "the word of knowledge" (1 Corinthians 12:8). Peter said in 2 Peter 3:15-16, "Even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood." 

No doubt, the Apostle Paul had other gifts, such as "faith" (Acts 27:21-44; 28:3-6), "prophecy" (Acts 20:29-30; 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12; 1 Timothy 4:1-4; 2 Timothy 4:1-4) and "discernment" (Acts 14:9 says "perceived," which means "to discern clearly"; Strong's Exhaustive Concordance). I am certain many other Scriptures and gifts could be cited.

A spiritual "gift" is just that—a "gift." It is something one did not have before and was then divinely given. A "talent" is not to be confused with the Parable of the Talents, in which talents were instruments of monetary value. A "talent" such as we think of today has a totally different meaning. (Webster's New World Dictionary defines talent as "any natural ability or power; natural endowment; a special, superior ability in an art, mechanics, learning, etc.") 

The key word for describing a talent is NATURAL (natural ability, natural endowment). "Spiritual gifts" (1 Corinthians 12:1) are supernatural. They come from a supernatural source. "But all these ['all' the 'gifts'] worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit" (1 Corinthians 12:11). 
​
A "talent" comes from a natural source or inclination. When an individual is saved (gains a real experience of salvation), and he presents his body "a living sacrifice" (Romans 12:1), the Greek word for "bodies" is soma. According to The New Strong's Expanded Dictionary of Bible Words With Vine's Complete Expository Dictionary, "The word stands ... for the complete man." 

When an individual consecrates or sanctifies himself, it includes a surrendering of "natural" talents for sacred, or sanctified, use. When that individual yields that talent or talents to God, then certainly the Lord blesses the talent presented to Him. However, there is still a distinction between the "natural ability" that was developed and a spiritual gift that was given. It could become a sanctified natural talent, or the Lord could choose to add a supernatural gift (or not to add the gift) to the individual. The decision belongs to the Divine

Satan's ability is revealed and set forth in Biblical principles. Jude 3 says we all have a "common salvation." "The devil" (Matthew 4:1) is styled as "the tempter" (Matthew 4:3). The Apostle Paul penned in 1 Corinthians 10:13, "There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man." Therefore, we have Biblically established the following principles:  (1) we have a "common salvation"; (2) there is one denoted as "the tempter," and there is a divinely established boundary within which he must operate; and (3) all that he can work is that which is "common to man." 

James 1:14 reads, "Every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust [The Emphatic Greek Diaglott says 'inordinate desire,' or desires satisfied in an inordinate manner] and enticed." This reveals the next principle: (4) Satan's approach is universal. Just as Acts 10:34 tells us, "God is no respecter of persons," the Lord has set that same boundary on the devil.

What ability does Satan have? Obviously, he can speak to us, trying to affect our thoughts, and if these thoughts are embraced (as in the case of Adam and Eve), he will affect our actions. First John 2:15-16 reveals what avenues ("desire") he appeals to: "the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life." This is "all that is in the world." The enemy has a divine boundary imposed—to use ONLY these three avenues. We see them used on Eve (Genesis 3:1-6) and on Christ (Matthew 4:1-11; Luke 4:1-12).

Satan works by injecting thoughts into our minds to produce temptation. He uses the three avenues we mentioned to appeal to our desires. This is why we are told, "The weapons of our warfare are not carnal" (2 Corinthians 10:4), and we are instructed to be "bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ" (2 Corinthians 10:5). 

James 4:7 tells us: "Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you." If we follow this admonition, we can be "more than conquerors" (Romans 8:37). We can be one who "always ... triumph in Christ" (2 Corinthians 2:14) because of "God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Corinthians 15:57).

Earl R. Borders