======================================================================== WRITINGS OF CLINT BRANHAM by Clint Branham ======================================================================== A collection of theological writings, sermons, and essays by Clint Branham, compiled for study and devotional reading. Chapters: 19 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TABLE OF CONTENTS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. 01.01. Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth 2. 01.02. Context - Culture, Practices and Beliefs 3. 01.03. Blessed or Cursed? 4. 01.04. Something to Consider 5. 01.05. A Modest Translation 6. 01.06. Liar, Liar Pants on Fire 7. 01.07. Sabbath NT Commandment 8. 01.08. The Sabbath 9. 01.09. I have some serious questions... 10. 01.10. The Fruit of Wolves 11. 02.0. Paul, Apostle to the Gentiles, Least in the Kingdom 12. 02.1. Jesus' Relationships 13. 02.2. The Testimonies of Stephen, James & the Elders 14. 02.3. Testimonies of Paul, Prophets and Kings 15. 02.4. God’s Criteria for the Messiah and Prophets 16. 02.5. The Testimony of Peter 17. 02.6. Paul’s Writings and their Witness 18. 02.7. Pharisaic Judaism and Conclusions 19. 02.8. Appendix One – What does “fulfil” mean? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 1: 01.01. RIGHTLY DIVIDING THE WORD OF TRUTH ======================================================================== Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth! by Clint Branham clint@AwakenedChurch.com http://AwakenedChurch.com 2 Timothy 2:15-16 KJV Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. We have all heard this verse for many, many times. What does it really mean? The phrase “rightly dividing” is from the Strong’s number G3718 G3718 ὀρθοτομέω orthotomeō or-thot-om-eh’-o From a compound of G3717 and the base of G5114; to make a straight cut, that is, (figuratively) to dissect (expound) correctly (the divine message): - rightly divide. The Noah Webster’s 1828 Dictionary of American English defines Dividing as: Dividing DIVIDING, ppr. 1. Parting; separating; distributing; disuniting; apportioning to each his share. 2. a. That indicates separation or difference; as a dividing line. DIVIDING, n. Separation So when we divide scripture we dissect it to expound the correct meaning; we are to “shun profane and vain babblings”. Let’s look at the Strong’s and Webster’s definitions of: 1. Shun G4026 2. Profane G952 3. Vain Babblings G2757. Webster’s Shun SHUN, v.t. 1. To avoid; to keep clear of; not to fall on or come in contact with; as, to shun rocks and shoals in navigation. Strong’s G4026 περιΐ́στημι periistēmi per-ee-is’-tay-mee From G4012 and G2476; to stand all around, that is, (near) to be a bystander, or (aloof) to keep away from: - avoid, shun, stand by (round about). Webster’s Profane PROFA’NE, a. [L. profanus; pro and fanum, a temple.] 4. Polluted; not pure. Obscene; heathenish; tending to bring reproach on religion; as profane fables. To put to a wrong use. Strong’s Profane G952 βέβηλος bebēlos beb’-ay-los From the base of G939 and βηλός bēlos (a threshold); accessible (as by crossing the door way), that is, (by implication of Jewish notions) heathenish, wicked: - profane (person). Webster’s Vain VAIN, a. [L. vanus; Eng. wan, wane, want.] 1. Empty; worthless; having no substance, value or importance. 1 Peter 1:18. Babbling BAB’BLING, ppr. 1. Talking idly; telling secrets. Strong’s Vain Babblings G2757 κενοφωνία kenophōnia ken-of-o-nee’-ah From a presumed compound of G2756 and G5456; empty sounding, that is, fruitless discussion: - vain. Let’s look at some foundational concepts about the Messiah. One of the first prophecies of the Messiah is found in Deuteronomy: Deuteronomy 18:14-20 KJV For these nations, which thou shalt possess, hearkened unto observers of times, and unto diviners: but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do. The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. This is Moses talking: Deuteronomy 18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; Jesus is the “Prophet Like Unto Moses” In light of these passages of Scripture, here are thirty (30) ways in which the Lord Jesus resembled Moses: 1. Just as there were 400 years of silence before God sent Moses to deliver Israel from her bondage to Pharaoh, so there were 400 of years of silence before God sent His own Son, Jesus the Messiah, to utterly deliver Israel from her ultimate bondage to sin and death. 2. Both Moses and Jesus were sent from God (Exodus 3:1-10; John 8:42). 3. Both Moses and Jesus were Hebrew(Exodus 2:1-2; Matthew 1:1-16; Luke 1:1-2; Hebrews 7:14). (Note: This is no small thing, since Muslims claim that Muhammad is the prophet Moses referred to here; which is obviously incorrect, since the Mashiach must be a Jew - see John 4:24). 4. Both had faithful Hebrew parents (Exodus 2:2; Hebrews 11:23; Matthew 2:13-14). 5. Both were born under foreign rule (Exodus 1:8-14; Luke 2:1). 6. Both were threatened by wicked kings (Exodus 1:15-16; Matthew 2:16). 7. Both Moses and Jesus spent their early years in Egypt, miraculously protected from those who sought their lives (Exodus 2:10; Matthew 2:14-15). 8. Both rejected the possibility to become rulers in this age. Moses was raised as a son in the royal family and could have enjoyed a lavish lifestyle as a powerful ruler, but he chose differently (Hebrews 11:24); Satan offered Jesus the rule over the kingdoms of this world (Matthew 4:8-9), but rejected that offer and chose to suffer and die for the sake of the people of Israel. 9. Both Moses and Jesus were "sent from a mountain of God" to free Israel. Moses was sent from (physical) Mount Sinai in Midian, Arabia; Jesus was sent from a spiritual "Mount Zion" in Heaven (Hebrews 12:22). 10. Both were initially rejected by the Hebrews (Exodus 32:1; Isaiah 3:1; Matthew 27:21-2; Romans 11:25). 11. Both were accepted by Gentiles (Moses by the Midianites (Exodus 2:14-22); Jesus by the world (Acts 10:45; 1 Timothy 3:16)). 12. Both were criticized by their families (Numbers 12:1; Mark 3:20-35). 13. Both knew God panim l’panim (face to face). God spoke directly to both Moses and Jesus (Exodus 3:1-10; Deuteronomy 34:10; Luke 9:34-36). All other prophets received their revelation by visions or dreams (Deuteronomy 34:10; John 1:18). Both were authoritative spokesmen for God (Matthew 17:5; John 3:34). 14. Both were teachers (Deuteronomy 4:1-5; Matthew 22:16; John 3:2). 15. Both revealed God’s Name (Exodus 3:13-14; John 17:6, John 17:11-12). 16. Both were faithful to God (Numbers 12:5-7; Hebrews 3:1-2). 17. Both gave the people bread from Heaven (Exodus 16:14-15; Matthew 14:19-20) and performed various miracles (Exodus 4:21-8; Deuteronomy 34:10-12; John 5:36; John 12:37-38). 18. Both were appointed as saviors of Israel (Moses as Israel’s deliverer from the bondage to Pharaoh; Jesus as Israel’s deliverer from the bondage to Satan). 19. Both were shepherds of Israel (Moses led the Israelites through the wilderness (Exodus 3:1; Numbers), Jesus led His followers as the Good Shepherd (John 10:10-11; Matthew 9:36)). 20. Both were humble servants of the LORD (Numbers 12:3; Luke 2:46-47; Php 2:8-9). 21. Both fasted for forty days in the wilderness (Exodus 34:28; Matthew 4:2). 22. Both were Mediators of a covenant of blood: Moses of the older covenant (Exodus 24:7-8) and Jesus of the new covenant (Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; Hebrews 9:11-15; 1 Corinthians 11:25; 2 Corinthians 3:6). 23. Both offered to die on behalf of the people’s sins (Exodus 32:30-33; John 17). 24. Just as Moses instituted the LORD’s Passover on Nisan 14 as the means by which the Angel of death would pass over those Israelites who trusted in God’s promise regarding the blood of the lamb (Exodus 12:11-12), so Jesus offered Himself as the sacrificial Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world (John 1:29). 25. Just as Moses brought about the “resurrection” of the children of Israel as they passed through the Red Sea; so Jesus became the Firstfruits of resurrection as He rose from the dead. 26. Just as the Law was given to Israel fifty days after the Exodus from Egypt (on Pentecost or Shavu’ot), so Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to form the Church fifty days after His resurrection. 27. Both of their faces shone with the glory of heaven - Moses on Mount Sinai (Exodus 34:34-5) and Jesus on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matthew 17:2). 28. As Moses lifted up the brazen serpent in the wilderness to heal his people (Numbers 21:8-9); so Jesus was lifted up on the cross to heal all believers from their sin (John 12:32). 29. As Moses conquered the great enemy of Israel, the Amalekites with his upraised arms (Exodus 17:11), so Jesus conquered our ultimate enemy of sin and death by His upraised arms on the cross (John 19:18). 30. As Moses sent twelve spies to explore Canaan (Numbers 13:1-33), so Jesus sent twelve apostles to reach the world (Matthew 10:1); and as Moses appointed seventy rulers over Israel (Numbers 11:16-7), so Jesus anointed seventy disciples to teach the nations (Luke 10:1). How was Jesus a Prophet like Moses? Like Moses, He was a Hebrew, a Leader, a Prophet, a Lawgiver, a Savior, a Teacher, a Priest, an Anointed One, a Mediator between God and man -- speaking the words of God -- and like Moses, He offered himself to die for the sins of the people. *Adapted from Hebrew for Christians Copyright © John J. ParsonsAll rights reserved.www.hebrew4christians.com Now, how can we know what is the Truth? I will offer some concepts that we all should be able to agree on. Foundational statements for “Rightly Dividing” 1. God never changes! The same yesterday, today, and forever. 2. God’s Word is true! 3. God’s Word NEVER contradicts itself! If WE think it does, WE do not understand it in the correct light! 4. God Cannot Lie! 5. Satan is a liar and the father of all lies. 6. Satan’s ultimate goal is to pervert God’s Will and turn his people from Him. We all agree on these fundamental and foundational statements. Now let’s look at the teachings of Jesus concerning the law. Jesus says: Matthew 5:17-19 KJV Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. God never changes. Jesus affirms the law, torah, of the Old Testament! God’s Word is true! This does not go against the only scripture available, the Old Testament God’s Word NEVER contradicts itself! If Jesus taught against the law it would go against Deuteronomy 18:14-20. If it was understood that Jesus was saying that we don’t have to follow the law, then those that heard it were commanded to kill him. Deuteronomy 18:20 But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. God Cannot Lie! If Jesus taught against the law it would either make “the Law” a lie, or Jesus a liar. Satan is a liar and the father of all lies. To use the word “fulfill” to say that we are not to follow the law because Jesus fulfilled it. Not only is this a lie, it doesn’t even make sense. Matthew 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Satan’s ultimate goal is to pervert God’s Will and turn his people from Him. If Jesus had done away with “the Law” and contradicted Deuteronomy 18:14-20, Satan would have the Ultimate perversion of the will of God! Let’s look at what Paul says in: Romans 10:1-5 KJV Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man which doeth those things shall live by them. God never changes. This appears that Paul says that Christ does away with the law. God’s Word is true! How can this be true when Matthew 5:17-19 appears to say the opposite? God’s Word NEVER contradicts itself! This appears to contradict the teachings of Jesus himself, in Matthew 5:17-19 God Cannot Lie! If all scripture if inspired of God it appears that someone is lying. What will help us to resolve these seemingly insurmountable roadblocks? Context Let’s look earlier in Paul’s letter to the Romans: Romans 2:13 KJV For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. Romans 3:20 KJV Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. Romans 3:31 KJV Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. Romans 7:7 KJV What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. Lets also look at Paul’s background: Acts 22:3 KJV I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day. Acts 23:6 KJV But when Paul perceived that the one part were Sadducees, and the other Pharisees, he cried out in the council, Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee: of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question. Gamaliel bears the title "Rabban", a rabbinic title given to the Nasi (head) of the Sanhedrin. Many believe that under Gamaliel’s teaching that Paul was being groomed to be the next head of the Sanhedrin. Gamaliel’s students would know the Law (the first five books of the Old Testament) frontwards and backwards and have the entire Old Testament memorized. So, Paul had the best teacher, the best upbringing, and was extremely knowledgeable regarding matters of the law and anything in the entire Old Testament. Now let’s look at the textural contest. Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. The word that is the hinge point of this verse is “end” Strong’s - end G5056 τέλος telos tel’-os From a primary word τέλλω tellō (to set out for a definite point or goal); properly the point aimed at as a limit, that is, (by implication) the conclusion of an act or state (termination [literally, figuratively or indefinitely], result [immediate, ultimate or prophetic], purpose); specifically an impost or levy (as paid): - + continual, custom, end (-ing), finally, uttermost. Compare G5411. Let’s also look at one way that the word τέλος was translated from Hebrew in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament by 70 Hebrew scholars approximately 300 BC.) H8548 תּמיד tâmîyd taw-meed’ From an unused root meaning to stretch; properly continuance (as indefinite extension); but used only (attributively as adjective) constant (or adverbially constantly); elliptically the regular (daily) sacrifice: - alway (-s), continual (employment, -ly), daily, ([n-]) ever (-more), perpetual. We are faced with two diametrically opposed definitions of the word “τέλος”. One is: to limit, conclusion, and termination, the other is: to stretch, continuance, and constant. When we are “rightly dividing the word of truth” from this passage which definition agrees with our foundational statements? God never changes. To limit, conclusion, and termination. This must be rejected because it makes the law of no effect To stretch, continuance, and constant. This is consistent with the Old Testament teaching on the law God’s Word is true! To limit, conclusion, and termination. . This would make the Old Testament be a lie To stretch, continuance, and constant. This is consistent with the Old Testament teaching on the law and it makes the passage make better sense given the context God’s Word NEVER contradicts itself! To limit, conclusion, and termination. This contradicts the earlier passages written by Paul in Romans and the entire Old Testament teaching on the Law To stretch, continuance, and constant. No contradiction at all. God Cannot Lie! To limit, conclusion, and termination. Jesus, Paul, and all the other inspired writers of scriptures would have lied for this use to be true. To stretch, continuance, and constant. completely consistent with other teachings given the full context. Satan is a liar and the father of all lies. To limit, conclusion, and termination. This plants the seed that we don’t need to follow the instructions of God To stretch, continuance, and constant. This is the definition that Satan DOES NOT want to be recognized Satan’s ultimate goal is to pervert God’s Will and turn his people from Him. To limit, conclusion, and termination. This definition that has led to blasphemous doctrine that has robbed God’s people from his blessings. To stretch, continuance, and constant. What better way for Satan to pervert the scriptures to mean the opposite of what was intended. I hope that you have seen that Satan has had a hand in keeping God’s people from knowing his truth. But you will say that this goes against everything that we have always been taught. Let me leave you with two quotes: “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” Joseph Goebbels, leader of the Nazi Party’s propaganda unit. Jeremiah 16:19 O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 2: 01.02. CONTEXT - CULTURE, PRACTICES AND BELIEFS ======================================================================== Context - Culture, Practices and Beliefs by Clint Branham clint@AwakenedChurch.com http://AwakenedChurch.com When we read the New Testament - modern fundamentalist evangelical Christians don’t have a clue as to what the context of the writings are. We view ALL of the scriptures thru our 21st century gentile-Christian world filter. Most if not all of the writings are deeply engrained in Jewish culture and beliefs, and couple that with the fact that God’s word never contradicts itself. It is difficult, if not impossible; to understand what was written without understanding the circumstances, religious teachings, common practices and customs. Our “World View Filter” affects everything that we do, and perceive. Here are 2 examples: Oriental World View: “Among the Chinese, slurping and belching at the table is acceptable, as these gestures are perceived as signs that one is appreciating the meal.” Western World View: “People should see you eat, not hear you eat. This means that slurping, smacking guzzling, sucking the teeth and belching are good examples of bad manners.” So, if we were at a banquet that was served in Hong Kong and the guests “could be heard slurping and belching” we would view this as rude, crude and socially unacceptable. Since we refrained from slurping and belching, they would view us as un-appreciative and rude. This silly little example shows the huge difference, opposite in fact, between 2 modern day cultures. How can we fool ourselves into thinking that because the King James Bible says so, in plain English, that we can truly know the meaning without understanding the culture, practices and beliefs? Here is a scriptural example that is often used to justify divorce. Matthew 19:3-9 KJV The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away? He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so. And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. Well that seems straightforward enough, if the spouse commits fornication, other passages – adultery, then divorce is acceptable, and the offended spouse is free to re-marry. But, there is quite a bit of difference between fornication – (intercourse of unmarried persons) and adultery (intercourse with the spouse of another). How could fornication and adultery be used interchangeable? How can there be a circumstance that divorce is alright even though God hates divorce? Malachi 2:16 KJV For the LORD, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth violence with his garment, saith the LORD of hosts: therefore take heed to your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously. The answer to that apparent conundrum is to understand the culture and practices. Let’s look at part of the Jewish marriage: “Betrothal (kiddushin, or erusin) was a much more formal concept in Jewish antiquity than our modern state of engagement. A betrothed couple was, for all legal purposes, considered to be married. For example, men who were betrothed, even if not actually married, were subject to the one year exemption from military service (Deuteronomy 21:7). The only respect in which this was not true was sexual---consummation of the marriage before the actual nuptials was forbidden.” So now that we better understand the Jewish marriage ceremony - both fornication and adultery would make sense. Fornication – the marriage had never been consummated, Adultery – they were legally married. Since husband and wife had never been joined together, the husband would be free to marry another. Also adultery was a crime and the adulterer would have been tried and sentenced according to Jewish law. Technically the spouse of an adulterer would have been free to remarry, since the adulterer would have been put to death by stoning. This special circumstance used to try and entrap Jesus still aligns with the fact that God hates divorce, and the Bible doesn’t contradict itself and say that; “Divorce is OK if Adultery was committed”. How many “foundational” scriptures are there that we have misinterpreted for lack of understanding? Let’s look at the scripture that is used to say that animals/foods are clean. Acts 10:11-16 KJV And saw heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, and let down to the earth: Wherein were all manner of fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. And there came a voice to him, Rise, Peter; kill, and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common. This was done thrice: and the vessel was received up again into heaven. That is straight forward enough, isn’t it? Let’s look at a cultural fact: unclean animals weren’t forbidden food, they couldn’t be considered food. Telling Peter to eat a pork chop or shrimp would be similar to telling us to chow-down on roach and slug stew. No-way, no-how would we ever even consider eating that - no matter how hungry we were. It just isn’t food. Peter happened to have the vision while he was hungry, back up a verse and look at Acts 10:10 “And he became very hungry, and would have eaten: but while they made ready, he fell into a trance,” When Peter fell into the trance and saw the vision he wasn’t a little hungry, he was very hungry. What did he say when he woke up? Not: get me some shrimp, a pork chop, ham and some bacon. Acts 10:17 KJV Now while Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean, behold, the men which were sent from Cornelius had made enquiry for Simon’s house, and stood before the gate, Again, Peter was hungry, very hungry; doesn’t it seem strange that the modern church’s interpretation of that passage is all animals/food are now clean? Acts 10:17 “…Peter doubted in himself what this vision which he had seen should mean,” then a few verses later the answer to the vision is revealed: Acts 10:28-29 KJV And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me? Let’s recap: 1. Peter was very hungry. 2. He had a vision of unclean animals, he was told to kill and eat, 3 times. 3. Peter never ate any unclean animal, not before, not during or after the vision. 4. Peter wasn’t sure what the vision could mean, and was perplexed by it. 5.Peter says that the vision was about the Gentiles and they could receive the Gospel. From this scripture what does the modern church teach: all animals/foods are now clean! Why? That is what our ancestors and bible commentaries have taught. But that is not what God’s word actually says. 2 Peter 3:15-17 KJV And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; 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, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. We have been taught by teachers that are spoken of in 2 Peter 3:16 “they that are unlearned and unstable”. And what have we believed? An interpretation of God’s word that is twisted, twisted unto OUR destruction. Matthew 7:22-23 KJV Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. What will you do? What is common and comfortable? Or what God’s Word commands. 2 Chronicles 7:14 KJV If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 3: 01.03. BLESSED OR CURSED? ======================================================================== Blessed or Cursed? by Clint Branham clint@AwakenedChurch.com http://AwakenedChurch.com How many of modern evangelical church-goers are just going thru the motions of church and worship, feeling that something is missing or a general apathy toward worship and church? Far too many. I will attempt to show that this apathy and emptiness is a result of the practices of the modern church are in direct contradiction with scripture, and as a result; the Church is reaping a Curse. Stephen was stoned to death because of False accusations of blaspheming the Temple and the Law. Acts 6:8-14 KJV And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people. Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake. Then they suborned men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council, And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law: For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us. C.H. Spurgeon called by many - one of the greatest Preachers of the 19th century, preached extensively about the role of the Law in the Church: “Now, what has our Lord to do with the law? He has everything to do with it, for he is its end for the noblest object, namely, for righteousness. He is the "end of the law." What does this mean? I think it signifies three things: first, that Christ is the purpose and object of the law; secondly, that he is the fulfillment of it; and thirdly, that he is the termination of it.” Do Spurgeon’s statements align with Scripture? The Bible is clear that Stephen was stoned because of False accusations: Acts 6:13-14 KJV And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law: For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us. The False witnesses said these things; Stephen never spoke against the Law, customs of Moses or that Jesus did away with the Law. Paul was also falsely accused while in Corinth: Acts 18:12-13 KJV And when Gallio was the deputy of Achaia, the Jews made insurrection with one accord against Paul, and brought him to the judgment seat, Saying, This fellow persuadeth men to worship God contrary to the law. Paul was again falsely accused at the Temple: Acts 21:27-28 KJV And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him, Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place. What the Bible recorded as the false accusations of Stephen and Paul; Spurgeon and all modern evangelical preachers have taken these false accusations and twisted them to be accepted as truth - and the basis for hundreds of denominations. The Bible is very clear about such teachings: 2 Peter 3:15-17 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him has written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable twist, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. You therefore, beloved, seeing you know these things beforehand, beware lest you also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own steadfastness. This is a warning to all believers, not to follow such teachings, or teachers. These same types of teachers are spoken of in Matthew: Matthew 7:22-23 KJV Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Iniquity is an unfamiliar term to most of us. Vine’s Dictionary of New Testament terms defines iniquity as: “lit., "lawlessness" (a, negative, nomos, "law"), is used in a way which indicates the meaning as being lawlessness or wickedness.” 1 John 3:4 KJV Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. When the modern church accepted what Spurgeon preached: “that he (Christ) is the termination of it (the Law)” the Church has adopted the doctrine of iniquity – lawlessness. What is the logical conclusion to this lawlessness doctrine? Here is the logical progression of this type thought: 1. Christ terminated the Law. 2. We are under grace, only. 3. We aren’t under the Law. 4. Without the Law there is no Sin. 5. Without Sin all things are permissible. 6.All things are forgiven – we are under Grace. This is borne out in the culture of the modern church: · General disdain for families with over 3 children (the birthrate in the church is the same as the general population) ·Segregation of families (nursery, children’s church, youth ministries, college ministries, young adults, senior adults) ·Children and youth who do not respect their parents. · Youth ministries that supersede parental authority and go against scripture. ·Teens and youth leaving the Church (over 85% of “church youth” who are college freshmen stop attending church) ·Teenage promiscuity ·Out of wedlock pregnancies ·Couples choosing not to marry. · Marriages that end in divorce. (the modern church’s divorce rate is Higher than Atheists) ·Church leaders with public moral failures… (Jimmy Swaggard, Jim Baaker, Ted Haggard, plus hundreds, if not thousands of others that are not public) ·Tolerance of homosexuality ·Embracing homosexuality ·Homosexual Marriage ·Homosexual Clergy from the Lutheran, Methodist, Episcopalian and other denominations ·Catholic Priests accused of molesting thousands of boys. If lawlessness is left un-checked it leads to Anarchy. – WordNet by Princeton University defines anarchy as: “lawlessness (a state of lawlessness and disorder (usually resulting from a failure of government))”. John 17:17 KJV Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. Jesus is praying to the Father, and prays for US to be sanctified thru the Father’s truth – His Word. At the time His Word was what we call “The Old Testament” the “New Testament” was years away from being penned. If “His Word is truth” how could Jesus do away with any part of it? If we do away with the truth what are we accepting? Untruth, Lies. Does The Father or Jesus ever accept Untruth? No. Could they accept lies? No. Proverbs 28:4 KJV They that forsake the law praise the wicked: but such as keep the law contend with them. Proverbs 28:9 KJV He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination. What else does Scripture have to say about ignoring the Law? Deuteronomy 27:26 KJV Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen. Deuteronomy 28:15 KJV But it shall come to pass, if thou wilt not hearken unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to observe to do all his commandments and his statutes which I command thee this day; that all these curses shall come upon thee, and overtake thee: Deuteronomy 28:41-46 KJV Thou shalt beget sons and daughters, but thou shalt not enjoy them; for they shall go into captivity. All thy trees and fruit of thy land shall the locust consume. The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low. He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail. Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the LORD thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee: And they shall be upon thee for a sign and for a wonder, and upon thy seed for ever. John 7:49 KJV But this people who knoweth not the law are cursed. By adopting a “grace only” doctrine, the church has forsaken the warnings throughout scripture and is reaping the curse. Isaiah 5:20-24 KJV Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! Woe unto them that are mighty to drink wine, and men of strength to mingle strong drink: Which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him! Therefore as the fire devoureth the stubble, and the flame consumeth the chaff, so their root shall be as rottenness, and their blossom shall go up as dust: because they have cast away the law of the LORD of hosts, and despised the word of the Holy One of Israel. Woe unto the Modern Evangelical Church! Deuteronomy 11:26-28 KJV Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God, but turn aside out of the way which I command you this day, to go after other gods, which ye have not known. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 4: 01.04. SOMETHING TO CONSIDER ======================================================================== Something to Consider By Tracey Jenkins traceyljenks@yahoo.com If you do not believe the Torah (the writings of Moses, aka, the Law) is applicable to our lives today, just look at what Yeshua says about it in John 5:46-47 : "For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, because he wrote about Me. But if you don’t believe his writings, how will you believe My words?" And, Paul obviously has the same beliefs, because he confesses it in Acts 24:14 : "But I confess this to you: that according to the Way, which they call a sect, so I worship my father’s God, believing all the things that are written in the Law and in the Prophets." Think about it, if Paul taught against the Law (which are the instructions of God, that teach us how to live holy (set apart) lives, devoted to loving Him and others) why does he confess to believing it? If we believe, we obey. That is the essence of faith, is it not? James 1:25 tells us: "the one who looks intently into the perfect law of freedom and perseveres in it, and is not a forgetful hearer but a doer who acts- this person will be blessed in what he does". Psalms 119:1-176 is the longest psalm in the book, but please read what David has to say about the Law before you continue reading this message! YHWH explains (in His Law) how He wants to be worshiped and how He wants His people to live holy (set apart) lives from the rest of the world. He explains how He wants His people to live together in unity, peace, and love. He made the rules, He is The Creator, and He can do whatever He wants. However, the Israelites just couldn’t get it! They were always falling into judgment because they were committing spiritual adultery by adopting the pagan practices of other nations, they rebelled, they were unwilling to listen, and they rejected His ordinances, profaned His Sabbaths, and did not follow His statutes. (Ezekiel 20:1-31) We, on the other hand, do have an advantage over the ancient Israelites. We have the Spirit of YHWH dwelling in us! Paul encourages us to walk in the Spirit (Galatians 5:16). We also have the New Covenant, of which Yeshua is the mediator (Hebrews 9:15), “But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; after those days, saith YHWH, I will put My Law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. (Jeremiah 31:33) See, the Law didn’t change; He just wrote it on a different tablet, our hearts. Paul speaks of this circumcision of the heart in Romans 2:1-29; you really need to read that entire chapter! Let me ask you one question about covenants; When YHWH makes a new one does the old one get abolished? If you say that it does, then you would have to say that YHWH is not faithful to His word! Every covenant He has ever made remains eternal! Do you remember Noah? How about Abraham? We are still waiting for the promises of that one now aren’t we? If these covenants still remain, why would the covenant made at Mt. Sinai between YHWH and His people, mediated by Moses, not still be valid? It is not rational to think that way, is it? “Know that YHWH your God is God, the faithful God, who keeps His gracious covenant loyalty for a thousand generations with those that love him and keep his commands”(Deuteronomy 7:9). Do you really believe that YHWH would bring His chosen people out of bondage (Egypt) only to enslave them again to His Law? (Leviticus 26:13)I pray your reply is, "of course not". I know that Paul’s writings are hard to understand at times, but he was refuting Phariseeism (consisting of man-made laws, and traditions of men), asect ofJudaism (see Galatians 1:13-14).Judaism deviated from biblical truth, by adding to God’s word; i.e., the teachings of the Rabbi, the Talmud, etc.In Matthew 23:8, Yeshua tells us to call no one Rabbi.He is our only Rabbi and we are all brothers/sisters.A very large portion of the gospels quote Yeshua rebuking the Pharisee’sfor not obeyingYHWH’s laws, and instead, teaching asdoctrines thecommandments of men (Matthew 15:9).Peter even warns us about Paul’s writings being hard to understand and how the untaught and unstable twist them to their own destruction, as they also do with the rest of the Scriptures (2 Peter 3:15-16).I believe Paul is trying to make the message of salvation through faith clear to Jews who were still trying to make the works of the Law their means of obtaining salvation. Think about it like this, are you willing to throw away (or consider irrelevant) the writings of Moses (actual words spoken by YHWH directly to His chosen people (Exodus 1:1-17) - and indirectly - through Moses), the writings of the Prophets (the words of YHWH spoken through the prophets to the people who were living in disobedience to the Torah, and who had adopted the pagan practices of other nations), and the actual words of Yeshua (the Son of YHWH and His Word made flesh), because of some verses in the writings of Paul that you don’t have a clear understanding of? Salvation is through Yeshua not Paul. Personally, I would rather throw away Paul’s writings than the rest of Scripture. But, that is just me. Thankfully, because of my current understanding of Paul’s epistles, I don’t even consider that…anymore. Believe me, at first, I certainly wanted to disregard everything Paul had written. But, I kept reminding myself, that his writings are there for a reason, and Scripture cannot contradict itself. So, I kept digging for understanding. And, as I studied more and more about Judaism, I began to understand more about who Paul was writing to and why. I believe that if we don’t understand the culture, we can’t possibly understand the language. Don’t get me wrong, I am not trying to say that I think I have knowledge that no one else has. Since I have begun this journey, I have realized there are LOTS of believers out there who have the same knowledge. And, most of them have come out of New Testament churches. I find these are people who seek truth and question the traditions (of men) that have been inherited and passed along from generation to generation. Many of the traditions of men originated from the Roman Catholic Church. “But an hour is coming and is now here, when the true worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth. Yes, the Father wants such people to worship Him. God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth.” (John 4:23-24) Only having part of the truth is not Truth! In Matthew 7:21-23, Yeshua is obviously speaking to believers when He says; "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name and in thy name have cast out devils? And in thy name done many wonderful works?And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity." Do you know that the definition of iniquity is lawlessness?Transgression of the Law is defined as sin (1 John 3:4).The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23).YES, Messiah paid our penalty for transgressing the Law (Isaiah 53:5)!However, contrary to what most people have been taught and/or choose to believe, The Messiah NEVER abolished the Law!That would have made Him a walking contradiction. Besides, don’t you think that something as important as the abolishment of the Law (The Word of YHWH) would have been prophesied of in the writings of the prophets? Don’t you believe that YHWH, who loves us so much, would warn us of the change in His instructions for living? Yeshua says in Matthew 5:17-19:"Don’t assume that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets.I did not come to destroy but to fulfill.For I assure you: Until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or one stroke of a letter will pass from the Law until all things are accomplished.Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches people to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven.But whoever practices and teaches these commandments will be called great in the kingdom of heaven."I don’t think that heaven and earth have passed away, nor are all things accomplished. Here is an interesting analogy I like to use; if you get a speeding ticket and I go to the judge and pay your fine so that you don’t have to pay it yourself, does that mean the speed limit has been abolished? Furthermore, if you continued to disregard the speed limit law and kept accumulating fines because of your disobedience/rebellion, I would be insulted by your actions because I had tried to help you out, show you mercy, favor (or grace), kindness, and love. But there you are still continuing to break the law because you know I will pay the fine for you and you don’t have to pay the penalty of breaking the law. WOW, that is a major show of disrespect, is it not? See Hebrews 10:26-29. I know how I would feel, how about you? We should never feel obligated to do anything, but why would we not want to? We should want to obey out of love and gratitude for all that He has done for us. He is a good and faithful Father who loves us and wants to give us the best of everything! Are we willing to lose our life in order to gain it? Like it or not, the ENTIRE Word of YHWH (Genesis through Revelation), is about loving Him and others. That is the Law. Keeping the commandments teaches us how to love YHWH and our neighbor as ourselves according to His rules and regulations, not based on what we want to do or what we think is best or what is convenient to us and relevant to today. Contrary to popular belief, we should NEVER try to make the Word relevant to our lives, but we should make our lives relevant to the Word! I don’t believe that we are allowed to make our own rules for worshiping Him. Isn’t that what always got the ancient Israelites into trouble (remember the golden calf of Exodus 32:5)? Exodus 1:1-7 tells us that the Law reveals YHWH’s nature.As believers we should desire to live in concert with YHWH’s character, thereby using the Law is a guide for living.Our motive should never be to earn salvation, for that is solely by grace through faith, but to demonstrate the love ofMessiah in our hearts (“If you love Me, you will keep My commandments” John 14:15). Moses said to YHWH, “If I have found grace (favor) in Your sight, please teach me Your ways, and I will know You and find grace (favor) in Your sight.”(Exodus 33:13) Therefore, the only way to know YHWH is to learn of His ways in His Law! If the idea of keeping the commandments bothers you, then maybe you should complain to the ONE whogave them to you. Not that it would do you much good, you see, He has already told us His commands are not too difficult or beyond our reach. (Deuteronomy 30:11) “For this is what love for God is: to keep His commands. Now His commands are not a burden” (1 John 5:3). In Matthew 19:17, Yeshua says, "...If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments." For those of you who have been concerned about me and the direction I have gone, I want you to know, The Foundation of my faith is truth as revealed in Yeshua, The Messiah, I also believe He is The Word made flesh (the Word that was in the beginning, from Genesis not Matthew),He is The Living Torah, He walked it, talked it, and taught it to His disciples, because He is it!His disciples taught it as well!The Messiah bears witness to the truth by obeying it. He would never disobey the Father. That would be sin, and we know that He was sinless! Go back to the beginningand read it for yourself, just like I am doing, from beginning to end, and in context!You will be amazed at what you find when you take away the preconceived ideas about the Law.And remember this, YHWH never changes (Malachi 3:6), His Word never changes (Matthew 24:35), and His Word cannot contradict itself because YHWH cannot lie (Titus 1:2, Hebrews 6:18). Furthermore, the Eternal One of Israel does not lie or change His mind, for He is not a man who changes His mind (1 Samuel 15:29)!In Psalms 89:34 YHWH says; “My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.” The God of the Old Testament is the same God of the New Testament.His nature doesn’t change because He doesn’t change (Hebrews 13:7-8). Also, because some of you want to tell me how legalistic I have become, let me give you my definition of legalism- keeping the commandments, rules, and regulations of men that make up the religious systems of this world- leading to bondage. Now, let me give you my explanation of obedience- keeping the commandments of YHWH- leading to freedom and life (see Psalms 119:1-176). “If you continue in My word, you really are My disciples. You will know the truth and the truth will set you free” (John 8:31-32). So you see, I am not being legalistic, I am being obedient to my Father, whom I love more than the things of this world. “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law” (Romans 3:31). Here is something else to think about, when the New Testament speaks of the Scriptures, it is always in reference to the Old Testament.The New Testament wasn’t written until years after the resurrection of Messiah.It wasn’t evenconsideredscripture until a few centuries later.Do you realize how much of the New Testament is actually direct quotes from the Old Testament?Please understand me; I am not trying to offend you by telling you these things.Do your homework and look all this up for yourself.I have spent months doing nothing else but searching the Scriptures for answers to questions and denominational doctrines that didn’t make any sense to me.SO MANY things that the New Testament church (and others too, I am not picking on any one of them specifically) teaches comesdirectly from Catholicism (the definitionof this word means universal, and that scares me becauseuniversalism is the popular theme of the world today, and isa trait of the political/religious beast described in Revelation 13:1-18).Most people don’t understand that Catholicism is paganism/ Babylonian sun god worship!In fact, the Catholic Church is the entity who thought to change the Sabbath from the 7th day to the 1st day- Sunday. (Ref. to The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p.50, 3rd ed, 1957)This is also where Christmas and Easter come from (Google it, I dare you).It is paganism! Ever wondered why those holidays aren’t mentioned in your Bible.Hmm, imagine that, theCatholic Churchclaiming enough authority to change even the Laws of The Almighty Himself (this is also prophesied in Daniel 7:25).Yes, I can back up my claims with evidence, or I wouldn’t say things like that.I have many legitimate sources for this information. Please understand me, I am angry with the lies, not the people.Listen to what Jeremiah says aboutthe lieswe have inherited in Jeremiah 16:19;"O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit." I believe that Iwas deceived by false teachings and I want everyone to know, because I love you, and I don’t want you to be deceived either.The enemy comes to steal, kill, and destroy. (John 10:10) Don’t let him rob you of your blessings! In Revelation 22:14,Yeshua says;"Blessed are those who keep His commandments, so that they may have the right to the tree of life and may enter the city by the gates."This is one of the very last things mentioned in His Word and I think itis very important!As a matter of fact, in the last days, worship will be the central issue. Have you read the book of Revelation lately? Just as adding to His word is deviating from the truth, so is taking away from it. Neither is truth and both will bring a curse from YHWH (Revelation 22:18-19). I have only used a few examples of scripture to back up my claims, there are MANY more.I pray that you will go back and read this again, searching the Scriptures to prove me wrong. We should be diligent in our study to present ourselves approved to the Father. (2 Timothy 2:15) Look carefully for yourself, and always remember, when what you are reading seems to contradict the rest of scripture, your understanding is at fault, because Scripture cannot contradict itself, dig deeper.Have fun treasure hunting!!!!!!! Truly, these are the days of Elijah, declaring the Word of the LORD.And these are the days ofyour servant, Moses, righteousness being restored.And though these are days of great trial, of famine, and darkness, and sword.I amthe voice in the desert crying;"Prepare ye the way of the LORD!" Your sister in the fellowship of our blessed Messiah, Tracey P.S.S. I am always here to talk to any one about any of this, and I am willing to hear any rebuttal that will come my way! I will continue to search the Scriptures for truth, as I feel we should never stop learning or ever get to a point where we feel like we already know everything there is to know. This has turned out to be quite an adventurous journey and a very scary one as this all began. It has been a great test of loyalty, faithfulness, and most of all love. I’m not there yet, but I have become willing to sacrifice everything for Him and His Word. That is what He wants of His children and it should be our goal. As we seek Him more, He reveals more. And there is always more to learn. If He is calling you closer, you will know. I am here praying for you, that you will find your way through the narrow gate (Matthew 7:13). “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him…Everyone who has listened to and learned from the Father comes to Me” (John 6:44-45). Proverbs 28:9 He that turneth away his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer shall be an abomination. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 5: 01.05. A MODEST TRANSLATION ======================================================================== A Modest Translation by Clint Branham clint@AwakenedChurch.com http://AwakenedChurch.com The year is 1238 A.A. (After Annihilation) it is estimated that the year reckoned the old way would be 3250 A.D. (Anno Domini) An excerpt of an Ancient American text was recently discovered outside the capital, and was given to a professor at the university for analysis, translation, and publication. American texts were extremely rare since the annihilation. Ancient America was a place that was filled with bizarre rituals (worshiping strange gods; electronics, sporting events, vocations, clothes, and religion). They exported drug use to the entire world, killed unborn babies to placate their gods, and their culture that was replete with charlatans, con-men, liars, thieves, and war-monger. Thankfully, the holocaust against the Ancient American way of life had been swift, and extremely successful. Very little information on the culture was known to exist, other than the reasons for the holocaust that everyone learned early in life. However a treasure trove of documents had been discovered about 60 years ago. They have been locked away deep inside the world archives. Access to those documents has been extremely difficult to obtain. The professor had hoped to turn the excerpt over to the team at the world archives, but the timeframe just didn’t work out. Because the text made so little sense to the professor he had his top English grammar expert translate it and glean as much information as possible from the text. The Scholar was the perfect choice; he had scored perfect scores on all 3 of his university entrance examinations. He had graduated top in his class at the University where he majored in Ancient American Language. His only exposure to the language was strictly an academic one. Since English had been considered a dead language for 1000 years, he had never actually spoken English to a native English speaker. This is The Scholar’s introduction and translation of the paragraph: This is a story of terror, mayhem, drug use, cover-up involving Bill and Mary-Jane that takes place in New England in approximately 1835 A.D (177 P.A. - Pre-Annihilation) Bill was on a bizarre restricted diet; he was hallucinating and realized instead of adding additional boards to the dining room table, he was mutilating a horse. Mary-Jane wanted them to stop mutilating the horse and set fire to some nearby road bridges. Bill’s only concern was hiding the weapon by burying it and consuming a hot liquid drug to calm his nerves. Bill worshiped the mutilated horse by offering a two wheeled wagon in front of it and while he was offering the wagon he fell down to worship, and so that he could tie a rope to the spring of the wagon and complete the ceremony. Here is the original Ancient American text: Bill had already eaten supper and was as full as a tick. He was fixing to leave the table when he realized, he was beating a dead horse. He didn’t want to burn any bridges with Mary-Jane, he wanted to bury the hatchet and just get a cup of coffee. Bill was putting the cart before the horse; he realized that he should just go ahead and fall for her, so that they could tie the knot in the spring. The Scholar was confronted by the World Archive researchers that had immersed themselves in Ancient American culture, customs, and idioms. Their contention was that the paragraph should be interpreted quite differently. The paragraph was full of idioms and probably was not from the 1835 A.D. but could have been written, even last week, and pretty much from any location where these idioms are understood. It had a simple interpretation that had nothing to do with any religious practice; after a particularly filling meal, John, a love sick man, was getting up from the table, when he began to contemplate his feelings for Jane, and decided that he should propose to her so that they could be married in the spring time. This was absolutely insulting. The Scholar was incredulous that anyone would question his translation, with such a simple fanciful tale. This was obviously opposite the real meaning, Love and romance vs. Mayhem and cover-up. 1835 A.D. vs. last week, New England vs. anywhere, indeed… this was absolutely infuriating to The Scholar. He would publish his research to lay this nonsense to rest: Timeframe: The origins of this story are unclear but by examining the context we can date the story. Cart – a two wheeled wagon, this placed the time of the story before the invention of the automobile, around 1900. The second clue is in the phrase “burn any bridges”. Shortly after the invention of the automobile bridges began to be constructed out of steel and concrete this dates the paragraph to before 1900. Carts were in use from the 1500’s until the late 1800’s. However Carts with springs were an invention of the early 1800’s. It is not likely that we will know the exact date this story was written, but with a great deal of certainty we can ascertain that the date was approximately 1835. Location: Within the context of the story two facts give us a clue as to the region of America that these events took place. Mary-Jane wanted to “burn some bridges” this lets us know that more than one bridge was within walking distance. The only place in America that this could have taken place is a region known as New England. This is also verified by the fact that the dining room table had “leaves” (extensions made of wood to make a table larger) during the 1830’s this technology was also primarily available in the New England area as well. Theme: This is a dark, bizarre tale of a reign of terror of two Ancient Americans Bill and Mary-Jane in the 1830’s. Their exploits include the mutilation of horses, sabotaging the bridges and a schizophrenic attempt at cover up. The names Bill, and Mary-Jane also point to the drug culture and a drug deal gone bad. Bill – a document stating an amount of money owed for a debt. Mary Jane was another name for Marihuana, like Coffee another drug of the era. The choice of these names points to a drug deal gone awry. Even though the exploits of this notorious couple are not verified within the history of the 1830’s they very probably happen in the climate of New England in the 1830’s. Spiritual Content: This practice that is so bizarre to us - was more than likely very common to the Ancients. Mutilation, mayhem, and sacrifice were all very consistent with Ancient American worship practices. The one glaring inconsistency is that the sacrifice involved an animal. For all the detestable faults the Ancients, they had an extreme reverence for animals, above that of their own offspring. It is unclear why a horse and not a child was chosen for mutilated. Phrase by Phrase comparison: Bill had already eaten supper and was as full as a tick. Bill was on a bizarre restricted diet; (a tick is a tiny parasitic animal, to be full as a tick is to be sustained by a tiny amount of blood.) He was fixing to leave the table when he realized, he was hallucinating and realized instead of adding additional boards to the dining room table, (awakening from a drug induced stupor, Tables often have additional boards or leaves that can be added to them to make them larger, to fix is analogous to add) he was beating a dead horse. he was mutilating a horse. (he was “beating” with a hatchet, i.e. mutilating) He didn’t want to burn any bridges with Jane, Mary-Jane wanted them to stop mutilating the horse and set fire to some nearby road bridges. (obviously Jane wanted to stop the gruesome task of mutilating the horse and do something less grotesque like arson) he wanted to bury the hatchet Bill’s only concern was hiding the weapon by burying it (burying the hatchet i.e. hide the weapon) and just get a cup of coffee. and consuming a hot liquid drug to calm his nerves. (coffee a known drug, had a calming effect on the nerves on this that were addicted.) Bill was putting the cart before the horse; Bill worshiped the mutilated horse by offering a two wheeled wagon in front of it (unknown significance to putting the wagon in front of the horse, more than likely one of the Ancients bizarre worship practices.) he realized that he should just go ahead and fall for her, and while he was offering the wagon he fell down to worship (another bizarre sacrificial ordinance.) so that they could tie the knot in the spring. so that he could tie a rope to the spring of the wagon and complete the ceremony. (Finalizing his worship by linking the sacrifice to the god.) The Scholar was steadfast in his translation and these claims of hidden idiomatic meanings should not be believed or even tolerated. The “Revelation” of the World Archive researchers goes against the plain reading of the text and against what has been taught about the Ancient American Culture since the Annihilation. For over 1000 years it has been an established fact, that all Ancient Americans were liars, swindlers, thieves, and could never be trusted. Perhaps the researchers have also adopted those aspects of the Ancient American Culture as well. What were some of the pre-conceived ideas that The Scholar had about Ancient Americans? They were charlatans, con-men, liars, swindlers, thieves, and war-mongers that practiced bizarre rituals and worshiped strange gods: electronics, sporting events, vocations, clothes, and religion. Did the Scholar accept those pre-conceptions as fact? Yes, “For over 1000 years it has been an established fact…” Did the pre-conceived ideas affect the translation? Yes! Did the Scholar make the story fit his distorted set of “facts”? Absolutely! The Scholar had definite pre-conceived ideas. He had no concept of American culture or idioms, and only had the raw meanings of the words to use for translation. Given these facts would you or I have come to a different translation? I dare say no, we wouldn’t! Was the translated version definitionally correct? Yes. Did he take liberties with content to make it make sense? Yes. The Scholar took the fact of burying the hatchet and made the logical leap that the beating instrument must have been the hatchet, and because it was being buried it was a conspiracy to hide the events. This idiotic confusion was because the Scholar had not actually spent any time talking to native English speakers, or studying the American Culture and understanding that a great deal of English conversation is in the form of idioms. This is not a literary anomaly that is unique to English; every language has idioms. So, what exactly is an idiom? An idiom refers to a grammatical construction unique to a certain people, region, or class that cannot be translated literally into another language. It is interesting that a similar situation to the above story happened with the translators and modern readers of the English Bible. What were some of the pre-conceived ideas that a modern reader of the New Testament might have? ·Gentiles superseded the Jews in the early church, by God’s design ·The Church is the Bride of Christ ·Worship is on Sunday, Sabbath was changed. Because Jesus rose on Sunday, ·The religion of the Jews was what the Old Testament was about · The Law is done away with therefore we are free from the “Old Testament Stuff” ·Jews shouldn’t be trusted, (they killed Jesus) ·Only the Jews, and those saved after the rapture will be here during the tribulation. None of these ideas have ever been presented as pre-conceived ideas or bias, they are just “Right”. They have been taught for several hundred years, we trust those that pass down this information. They would not willingly deceive anyone. They are not ever questioned, because they are so deeply engrained on all aspects of Bible study and worship. Where do these pre-conceptions originate? To a great extent they are rooted in our English bible, and those that controlled the Church. From the early 2nd century on, all understanding of the Hebrew and Jewish culture was vilified and made to be treated as a cancerous plague. The translators of the King James Bible were not exempted from this view of the Hebrew culture, it had been taught as fact for over 1,000 years. Their world view was shaped by the Crusades, the Inquisitions and the breakaway of the Church of England from the Catholic Church. Not particularly glorious times in Church history, especially concerning Jewish and Hebrew culture. But, even thse events were spoken of by Jesus: John 16:1-2 KJV These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended. They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. The translators had dictionary knowledge of the Hebrew language but not cultural and idiomatic knowledge. They had access to Greek and Hebrew manuscripts and other translations of the scriptures; but, they translated the New Testament from a Greco-Roman perspective that did not recognize a Hebrew mindset or Hebrew idioms. Even though the Text was penned using Koine Greek, the culture being described was definitely Hebrew. When persons with an understanding of the Hebrew Language and culture read the New Testament they were amazed at the Hebrew grammatical structure and the amount of Hebraisms in a Greek text. There are two types of Greek: Classical and Koine. In order for the 70 scholars that translated the Septuagint to have the Greek translation maintain some of the Hebraic intent of the original scriptures the resulting Greek grammar was so poor that the term Koine Greek or common Greek was “coined”. Most other Greek works were in Classic Greek. Through this type of analysis has convinced many leading linguistic scholars that the New Testament was originally written in Hebrew, Translated to Greek (the common language of the time) then, from a Greek translation into English. Examples of some of the Hebrew idioms in the New Testament: Matthew 6:22-23 NIV "The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eyes are good, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eyes are bad, your whole body will be full of darkness. If then the light within you is darkness, how great is that darkness!” There are two Hebrew idioms in these verses. “Eyes are good” is an idiom for generosity, and “eyes are bad” is an idiom for stinginess. This also fits into the explanation given in the very next verse. Matthew 6:24 NIV "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money.” Another idiom in Matthew Matthew 5:17-20 KJV Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. “Jesus quoted a Hebrew idiom when He said He came not to destroy the Law or the prophets. He was using a familiar phrase easily understood during Biblical times. Jesus had been accused of misinterpreting the Torah, yet He said that He was actually rightly and correctly teaching it. Traditional Jewish writings support this idiom, "Should all the nations of the world unite to uproot one word of the Law, they would be unable to do it," Leviticus Rabbah 19:2. To understand the meaning of this verse, everything hinges on the meaning of the words "destroy" and "fulfill" in verse 17. What does Jesus mean by "destroy the Law" and "fulfill the Law"? "Destroy" and "fulfill" are technical terms used in rabbinic argumentation. When a sage felt that a colleague had misinterpreted a passage of Scripture, he would say, "You are destroying the Law!" Needless to say, in most cases, his colleagues strongly disagreed. What was "destroying the Law" for one sage was "fulfilling the Law" (correctly interpreting Scripture) for another," wrote Bivin and Blizzard in their book Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus (Yahshua). “There are many of these Hebraisms, one of the most common of them being "Son of man." What does "Son of man" mean in English, Spanish, German, or any other language? Absolutely nothing -- except in Hebrew. The expression "Ben Adam" means literally "son of Adam" and by extension "son of man," and "man," Adam being of course the first man alive. In any street corner in Israel you may hear, "Here comes this Ben Adam," meaning, "Here comes this man." This example, which occurs no less than 92 times in the Tanak (the Jewish Scripture) and 43 times in the New Covenant (Cruden’s Concordance) is obviously the same Hebrew idiom. It is said that the New Covenant was written in Koine Greek, common Greek, because it is found to be a poor kind of Greek. When we find these many Hebraisms as there are there, we begin to understand that it is not Koine Greek lying there, in the substratum of the text, but a Hebrew original. Since the Hebrew original was almost literally translated into Greek, the text sounds like poor Greek. Let us take another example, the idiom "Peace be to you," appearing twelve times in the New Covenant. What kind of a greeting is "Peace be to you" in English, Spanish, French, or any other language -- except Hebrew? It is meaningless, again. Only in Hebrew does it make any real sense. This is the most common, everyday greeting in Israel today, the world-famous "shalom." It literally means "peace," but it is used as an everyday greeting meaning anything from "Hi" to "How are you?" according to the intonation and the mood of the speaker” Julio Dam - Beit Shalom Messianic Congregation in Asuncion, Paraguay Did Jesus ever instruct others to participate in Sacrifice? Yes. Matthew 8:3-4 KJV And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed. And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, show thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them. The entire 14th Chapter of Leviticus outlines all the sacrifices that are to be offered after leprosy has been cured. Why did they choose to use the word gift instead of sacrifice? I believe that this is a direct result of the translators’ biases creeping into interpretation. If we do not at least investigate the possibility of the idiomatic meaning and cultural context in scripture “we have our blinders on” and are “like an ostrich with its head buried in the sand”. You may seem “out of your element” even to consider this, because the implications will cause you to “go back to square one” and “start from scratch.” Blindly following because of tradition is not scriptural! Acts 17:10-11 KJV And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so. The Prophet Elijah told the children of Israel to follow truth and the true God no matter who it was. 1 Kings 18:21 KJV And Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two opinions? if the LORD be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word. Not because he told them, not because he was the God of their Fathers. They had to determine this for themselves that He was the True God! Faith comes from a changed heart, not from superior intellect. Php 2:11-12 KJV And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. John 17:3 KJV And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent. Am I saying that I believe that all English Bibles are completely wrong? No, But I don’t believe that there are any inspired translations or translators. Excerpts from The Original Preface To The King James (Authorized) Version 1611 • Another thing we think good to admonish thee of, gentle reader, that we have not tied ourselves to an uniformity of phrasing, or to an identity of words, as some peradventure would wish that we had done, because they observe that some learned men somewhere have been as exact as they could that way. • Now if this happen in better times, and upon so small occasions, we might justly fear hard censure, if generally we should make verbal and unnecessary changings. • Lastly, we have on the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who leave the old Ecclesiastical words, and betake them to other, as when they put washing for Baptism, and Congregation instead of Church: • He removeth the scales from our eyes, the vail from our hearts, opening our wits that we may understand his word, enlarging our hearts, yea correcting our affections, that we may love it to the end. Ye are brought unto fountains of living water which ye digged not; do not cast earth into them with the Philistines, neither prefer broken pits before them with the wicked Jews. • …the first that fell in hand with translating the Scripture into English, and consequently destitute of former helps. •Neither did we think much to consult the translators or commentators, Chaldee, Hebrew, Syrian, Greek, or Latin, no, nor the Spanish, French, Italian, or Dutch; Rules of the King James Translators: 1. The ordinary Bible read in the Church, commonly called the Bishops Bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the Truth of the original will permit. 2. The names of the Prophets, and the Holy Writers, with the other Names of the Text, to be retained, as nigh as may be, accordingly as they were vulgarly (meaning commonly) used. 3. The Old Ecclesiastical Words to be kept, viz. the word Church not to be translated Congregation &c. 4. When a word hath divers significations, that to be kept which hath been most commonly used by the most of the ancient fathers, being agreeable to the propriety of the place, and the analogy of the Faith. 12. Letters to be sent from every Bishop to the rest of his Clergy, admonishing them of this translation in hand; and to move and charge as many skilful in the tongues; and having taken pains in that kind, to send his particular observations to the company, either at Westminster, Cambridge, or Oxford. Speaking specifically of the King James Version; Were the translators good men? Yes. Were they eminent scholars? Yes. Did they have a common set of worship practices, traditions and doctrines? Yes. Would the King have allowed them to go against his established practices, traditions and doctrines? No. Did the translation shape the translators doctrine, or did their doctrine shape the translation? Their doctrine definitely shaped the translation. Did the Translators understand the cultural and idiomatic nature of scripture? Apparently not… Is the King James Version the best translation for the English Language? Yes, I believe it is, when it is understood that it is a translation - not the original, it has doctrinal biases that creep in from time to time (some slight - others major), and the cultural practices, historical context and idioms couldn’t necessarily be translated. When a person relies solely on a translator to provide the basis for doctrine (by only reading the text - without studying culture, context and idioms), there is no telling the number doctrines that can be created. The fact that there are 38,000 different Christian Denominations world-wide testifies to that fact. Romans 16:17-20 KJV Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil. And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen. Let me be clear: Paul is speaking of the same doctrine that is in John 7:16-19 and 2 Timothy 3:15-17. It is not the doctrine that is prevalent in the 38,000 different Christian Denominations. http://www.search.com/reference/Christian_denominations John 7:16-19 KJV Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory: but he that seeketh his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him. Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me? 2 Timothy 3:15-17 KJV And that from a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Was the New Testament “the Scripture” that Paul was talking about? Emphatically, Un-categorically, and Absolutely Not! The Holy Scripture referred to by Paul was the Hebrew Tanach; the Old Testament! Jesus Christ was, and is, the Hebrew Messiah, the Hebrew Messiah, not a Greco/Roman/Gentile Messiah. The coming of the Messiah was first prophesied in Genesis. Since the entire Bible is built on a foundation of the Torah, the Law, was the abolition or nullification of the Law prophesied? If, in fact, that was the pre-determined will of the Father, it would have been prophesied! But it wasn’t. Did you catch that? The abolition of the Law was never prophesied! In fact Moses prophesied about those that come and speak against the Law: Deuteronomy 18:17-20 KJV And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. Jesus Christ did not start a new religion; he “fulfilled” the faith of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, because, thru his Grace HE Saved us from the penalty of the Law. Grace doesn’t replace the Law, supersede the Law, negate the Law, and isn’t liberty from the Law. 1 John 3:4 KJV Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. Sin is transgression of the law. Transgress;offend,infract, violate, go against, breach, break(act in disregard of laws, rules, contracts, or promises) Deeper insight to 1 John 3:5-9 (and the entire question of Law vs. Grace) can be gained by substituting that definition to restate what sin is: no sin – doesn’t break God’s Laws sinneth not - doesn’t continually violate God’s Laws sinneth - continually break God’s Lawsdoth not commit sin - doesn’t break God’s Laws 1 John 3:5-9 KJV [emphasis mine] And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins [breaking of the Laws of God]; and in him is no sin [doesn’t break God’s Laws]. Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: [doesn’t continually break God’s Laws] whosoever sinneth [continually breaks God’s Laws] hath not seen him, neither known him. Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He that committeth sin [breaks God’s Laws] is of the devil; for the devil sinneth [continually broke God’s Laws] from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin [doesn’t break God’s Laws]; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin [break God’s Law], because he is born of God. Grace is the only mechanism to save us from the penalty for breaking God’s Laws - death and eternal separation from Him. This is an extremely sobering passage: “whosoever sinneth [continually breaks God’s Laws] hath not seen him, neither known him.” Romans 6:1-2 KJV What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? The vast majority of Christian religions must deal honestly with 1 John 4:1-9, and accept what it teaches. When they do it will make the books of the Apostles, Acts, and the writings of Paul make perfect sense! There are hidden gems within scripture that can actually bring the scriptures to life! These gems can only be unlocked when we understand, accept, and embrace the Hebrew origins and roots of our faith. Nothing would better suit Satan than to perpetrate a massive deception to rob “the saved” of the blessings that God has promised his children. I am convinced that this deception is so well established and deeply rooted, that to even suggest that the New Testament should be interpreted from a Hebrew perspective is viewed as blasphemy. My salvation and that of my family has been questioned, because of my belief that following the Law and the Saving Grace of the Messiah are not mutually exclusive, and Grace should not be preached as a “get out of hell free card”. I hope this story “doesn’t get your nose out of joint”. I don’t mean “to rock the boat” And please realize that I have “gone out on a limb” to share this with you. It is time for you to “hit the books” and “put your nose to the grindstone”. “Make no bones about it”, “don’t turn a blind eye” to this because “the ball is in your court”. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 6: 01.06. LIAR, LIAR PANTS ON FIRE ======================================================================== Liar, Liar Pants on Fire by Clint Branham clint@AwakenedChurch.com http://AwakenedChurch.com Your perspective, on any given circumstance is based on the set of experiences and education. This explains why, for the most part, liberals have liberal kids, conservatives have conservative kids. Why Catholics beget little Catholics, Baptists little Baptists, Muslims little Muslims, Buddhists little Buddhists, you get the picture. Why is this? It is part of our nature to trust those in authority over us, Parents especially. So this is a continuing cycle that is based on the trust of children in their Parents, them in theirs, and so on back the family tree. When Children “rebel” against authority it is this in-born belief system that they are challenging. Sometimes the rebellion sticks, conservatives become liberals and vice versa. But most of the time the “rebel” reverts back to the dogma of the parents. What about our spiritual teachers? Our Pastors learned from their parents but also from “spiritual parents” at seminaries and thru the reading of commentaries. This trust is just as great as those for parents sometimes more so. When a liberal hears that raising taxes is the wrong way to stimulate the economy this goes against the very core of their beliefs. To the evangelical Christian the writings in the “New Testament” are the basis for all of their doctrines (except tithingJ) but when we look at the doctrines that are practiced - the New Testament is full of conundrums and contradictions, that are called "Mysteries." When the doctrines are analyzed against scripture and not the commentaries of the Church, these Doctrines make no sense and fall apart and have to be stitched back together with tradition and the writings of “Scholars”. Summary of the Universal Doctrines: 1. Jesus started a new religion, Christianity. 2. Even though Jesus “Came not to do away with the Law” - by fulfilling it, he did away with the need to follow it. 3. Grace covers all Sin, Grace supersedes the Law. 4. Paul makes this crystal clear that “The Law” was completely and utterly done away with. 5. Following “The Law” is legalism. 6. The Church supersedes Israel as the bride. We will look at each of these points and measure them against the entire scripture. There are some fundamental precepts that I will follow in all Doctrinal analysis and will be used in this article: God’s word is Truth. God never changes. God’s word will not and cannot contradict itself. Who was “Jesus”? He was born of the tribe of Judah. He was a Prophet. He was the Jewish/Hebrew Messiah. He was the focus of the entire “Old Testament”. Jesus/Yehoshua was a Kosher observant Rabbi. Jesus/Yehoshua was prophesied from the beginning of the Scriptures. Point 1: “Jesus started a new religion, Christianity.” What would constitute a “New Religion?” What is the definition of “new?” New NEW, a. 1. Lately made, invented, produced or come into being; that has existed a short time only; recent in origin; novel; opposed to old, and used of things; as a new coat; a new house; a new book; a new fashion; a new theory; the new chemistry; a new discovery. So if the “New Religion” is opposed to the “Old Religion” can that be supported by scripture? Acts 3:22-26 KJV For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people. Yea, and all the prophets from Samuel and those that follow after, as many as have spoken, have likewise foretold of these days. Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities. What is the original Scripture that the writer of “Acts” is referencing? Deuteronomy 18:17-20 KJV And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. According to Deuteronomy 18:20 IF Jesus created a “New Religion” that was opposed to the words of The Father, that were given to Moses, then he was/is a false prophet, a false Messiah, and should have been put to death for going against the words of Moses. Was this charge ever made against Jesus? No, it wasn’t. So the first assertion that Jesus started a “New Religion” CANNOT reconcile both the old and new testaments. Point 2: “Even though Jesus ‘Came not to destroy the Law’ - by fulfilling it, he did away with the need to follow it.” Matthew 5:17-20 KJV Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. “Jesus quoted a Hebrew idiom when He said He came not to destroy the Law or the prophets.He was using a familiar phrase easily understood during Biblical times.Jesus had been accused of misinterpreting the Torah, yet He said that He was actually rightly and correctly teaching it.Traditional Jewish writings support this idiom, "Should all the nations of the world unite to uproot one word of the Law, they would be unable to do it," Leviticus Rabbah 19:2.To understand the meaning of this verse, everything hinges on the meaning of the words "destroy" and "fulfill" in verse 17. What does Jesus mean by "destroy the Law" and "fulfill the Law"? "Destroy" and "fulfill" are technical terms used in rabbinic argumentation. When a sage felt that a colleague had misinterpreted a passage of Scripture, he would say, "You are destroying the Law!" Needless to say, in most cases, his colleagues strongly disagreed. What was "destroying the Law" for one sage was "fulfilling the Law" (correctly interpreting Scripture) for another," wrote Bivin and Blizzard in their bookUnderstanding the Difficult Words of Jesus (Yahshua). Does this explanation of this statement fit within the context? Yes, extremely well. Let’s look at the next few verses: Matthew 5:21 KJV Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: Matthew 5:27-28 KJV Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. Each one of these examples is a correct interpretation of the Old Testament Law - the Torah. He was giving Full interpretation of the Scriptures. He is teaching intent or deeper meaning of the Law not the letter of the Law. Point 3: Grace covers all Sin, Grace supersedes the Law. Romans 6:14 KJV For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. This one appears to be this appears to be an open/shut case. There in verse 14 it says it plainly “for ye are not under the law, but under grace.” But most don’t want to acknowledge the very next verse. Romans 6:15 KJV What then? shall we sin, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God forbid. This clarifies the previous verse. But it brings up the question: How does the Scripture define “sin”? 1 John 3:4 KJV Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. Transgression TRANSGRES’SION, n. The act of passing over or beyond any law or rule of moral duty; the violation of a law or known principle of rectitude; breach of command. Let’s restate Romans 6:15 : What then? Shall we violate the law, because we are not under the law, but under grace? God Forbid. As we can see in this example it is clear that Grace does not supersede the law. Point 4: “Paul makes this crystal clear that “The Law” was completely and utterly done away with.” Really? Let’s look at an instance that absolutely proves the opposite. Acts 18:18 KJV And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow. What vow? Acts 21:17-22 KJV And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. Paul was before James and the Elders in Jerusalem, They are dealing with a false rumor about Paul teaching the Jews that are among the Gentiles to practice things contrary to Moses. Acts 21:23-24 KJV Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. The phrase: “and be at charges with them” is translated in many other translations as “pay their expenses” Acts 21:25 KJV As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. This is a restatement of the counsel of Jerusalem where James and the Elders decided the “minimum requirements” for Gentile converts in Acts 15:1-41 : Acts 15:19-21 KJV Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. Back to Acts 21. Acts 21:26-28 KJV Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them. And when the seven days were almost ended, the Jews which were of Asia, when they saw him in the temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him, Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teacheth all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place. So what was this vow? According to J.Vernon McGee: “The vow he (Paul) took is actually not in the word of God. It was never part of the Law, it was something they (the Jews) added.” Paul and the four men had the same vow. The vow required entering the Temple, Shaving of their heads, Offerings, and Expenses. Is there a vow described in scripture that fits these criteria? Yes there is - J. Vernon McGee is wrong. It is the Nazarite vow that is described in Numbers 6:1-27. Please read this passage for yourself. Here is a summary: 1. Abstinence from wine and strong drink, 2. Refraining from cutting the hair off the head during the whole period of the continuance of the vow, and… 3. The avoidance of contact with the dead. Numbers 6:13-20 KJV [Emphasis mine] And this is the law of the Nazarite, when the days of his separation are fulfilled: he shall be brought unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: And he shall offer his offering unto the LORD, one he lamb of the first year without blemish for a burnt offering, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish for a sin offering, and one ram without blemish for peace offerings, And a basket of unleavened bread, cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, and wafers of unleavened bread anointed with oil, and their meat offering, and their drink offerings. And the priest shall bring them before the LORD, and shall offer his sin offering, and his burnt offering: And he shall offer the ram for a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD, with the basket of unleavened bread: the priest shall offer also his meat offering, and his drink offering. And the Nazarite shall shave the head of his separation at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall take the hair of the head of his separation, and put it in the fire which is under the sacrifice of the peace offerings. And the priest shall take the sodden shoulder of the ram, and one unleavened cake out of the basket, and one unleavened wafer, and shall put them upon the hands of the Nazarite, after the hair of his separation is shaven: d the priest shall wave them for a wave offering before the LORD: this is holy for the priest, with the wave breast and heave shoulder: and after that the Nazarite may drink wine. Do you see the significance of this vow to the argument that “Paul made it clear that the law was done away with?” This is why J. Vernon McGee lied about it. It goes against his underlying premise of the New Testament that the Law is done away with. There was Sacrifice!! Burnt Sacrifice! And to top that off one of the animals was a SIN Sacrifice! And Paul paid for 3 animals per person 15 animals!!! This could easily amount to over $5,000! Not an insignificant amount! If Paul was against the Law… why did he take on the Nazarite Vow? why did he participate with 4 other men? why did he participate in Burnt offerings and Sacrifices? why did James and the Elders urge him to do this? why would Paul pay for the 4 other men’s sacrifice? then the false accusations were not false. If all the sacrifices were nailed to the cross… why did Paul participate in a vow that required sacrifice? why did James (Jesus’ brother) and the Elders even suggest it? If Jesus was the ONLY sin offering… why would Paul participate in a Sin Sacrifice? Clearly Paul was Not against the Law, and Sacrifice was not done away with or made into a sacrifice of Praise. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 7: 01.07. SABBATH NT COMMANDMENT ======================================================================== Sabbath is never commanded on the New Testament… Or is it? by Rodney Baker http://jeremiah31-10.net/ Shall we have a look at Hebrews 4:1-16 verse by verse and get some context? Hebrews 4:1-16 NET. (1) Therefore we must be wary that, while the promise of entering his rest remains open, none of you may seem to have come short of it. What is the “therefore” there for? To link this with Hebrews 3:1-19; which speaks of the rebellion in the wilderness. Apart from the grumbling and complaining, what was one thing that they struggled to do? Keep the Sabbath. Remember God’s chastisement of them when they went out looking for manna on Shabbat? (2) For we had good news proclaimed to us just as they did. But the message they heard did them no good, since they did not join in with those who heard it in faith. Good news came to us (in the person of Jesus/Yeshua) just as to them (in the form of redemption out of slavery and bondage.) But the message only benefits those who listen. Are we listening? (3) For we who have believed enter that rest, as he has said, "As I swore in my anger, ’They will never enter my rest!’ " And yet God’s works were accomplished from the foundation of the world. Direct quote from Psalms 95:11, which also speaks of the rebellion in the wilderness. (4) For he has spoken somewhere about the seventh day in this way: "And God rested on the seventh day from all his works," Hmmm – I wonder where it said that. Genesis perhaps? In the beginning? What rest is the writer therefore referring to? Sabbath perhaps? The Seventh Day, with “do enter” in the present (passive) tense. (5) but to repeat the text cited earlier: "They will never enter my rest!" (6) Therefore it remains for some to enter it, yet those to whom it was previously proclaimed did not enter because of disobedience. What was that? They failed to enter his rest (Sabbath) because of disobedience. Please, am I reading into the text something that’s not there? I don’t think so! (7) So God again ordains a certain day, "Today," speaking through David after so long a time, as in the words quoted before, "O, that today you would listen as he speaks! Do not harden your hearts." (8) For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not have spoken afterward about another day. (9) Consequently a Sabbath rest remains for the people of God. (10)For the one who enters God’s rest has also rested from his works, just as God did from his own works. When did God rest from His works? On the seventh day. When do we rest from our works? On the seventh day. When will we rest from all our works and enjoy His provision, rule and teaching? On the seventh day, in the “Sabbath Millennium”, which is what the weekly Sabbath is a rehearsal of. (11) Thus we must make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one may fall by following the same pattern of disobedience. Why should we strive to enter into that rest each week? So that we don’t fall by the same sort of disobedience as our fathers in the wilderness. This is part of God’s survival plan for us during the tribulation. (12) For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any double-edged sword, piercing even to the point of dividing soul from spirit, and joints from marrow; it is able to judge the desires and thoughts of the heart. See, this passage is directly related to the obedience of keeping Sabbath. It is about the heart attitude. Willingness to be obedient in the “little” things, like Sabbath, is a direct indicator of one’s obedience in greater things and one’s heart attitude towards our Creator. If we cannot obey God in even that, how can He expect us to be obedient and faithful in other things? Wasn’t that exactly His complaint with our fathers in the wilderness? (13) And no creature is hidden from God, but everything is naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must render an account. Yes, we will all be called to give account. How will you answer him? Were you faithful in the “little” things, so that he could entrust much to you? (14) Therefore since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast to our confession. (15) For we do not have a high priest incapable of sympathizing with our weaknesses, but one who has been tempted in every way just as we are, yet without sin. Jesus is our great High Priest. He was tempted as we are, yet overcame temptation. We don’t always get it right, and He fully understands that. He knows our weaknesses and does not expect perfection. He only asks that we give it our “best shot” and trust Him to make up the shortfall (that is propitiation). But we have to at least make an effort to be obedient. (16)Therefore let us confidently approach the throne of grace to receive mercy and find grace whenever we need help. When and how do we draw near? For that, you have to understand the term “Korban” which teaches us how we are to approach the throne of grace. It is particularly connected with Sabbath. We don’t come to God empty handed, neither with our own righteousness. We come with the righteousness and sacrifice of Jesus. Sabbath is that day of the week that God has set aside to meet with His people. Who are “His” people? I seem to remember words to the effect of “By this we shall know that we love Him, if we keep His commandments“, or perhaps, “…those who keep the Commandments and hold to the testimony of Jesus”. What’s it to be? Obedience or the same rebellion as our fathers in the wilderness? You know what the consequences for them were – only the two who were obedient entered the Promised Land (Joshua and Caleb). The rest died in the wilderness. Will you continue to set aside the Law of Moses in favor of the traditions of men? Or will you repent, take a stand and say, “As for me and my house, we will serve YHVH”? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 8: 01.08. THE SABBATH ======================================================================== The “First day of the Week”, “The Lord’s Day” and Sabbath by Clint Branham clint@AwakenedChurch.com http://AwakenedChurch.com Why do I think that I have gotten this knowledge when thousands of scholars over a hundreds of years haven’t come to the same conclusions? Ya’ll aren’t the first to ask us this. This is the very question that we and I have asked each other many times when we started down this path. 1. I had the same mindset as these “thousands of scholars” until a couple of years ago, Sunday was the only day to worship. End of story. It was never an issue for me, or my Father, any of his preacher friends, or any of their friends. It wasn’t an issue for my grandfathers, great grand fathers, great-great grandfathers; basically it wasn’t an issue with anyone I knew. 2. My prevalent thought was that anyone that worships on Saturday was part of a cult. 3.Why should I even look at anything that is, and has been settled for hundreds of years? Anyone who kept Sabbath is part of a cult. When Clinton started asking Lynn and me “Why do we believe what we believe?” and “Why do we worship the way we do?” and “Why do we worship on Sunday, and not on Thursday?” My answer to all three questions was “Because it is right!” or “That is what God intended for us to do!” To a 19 year old those kinds of answers were pretty shallow, and in reality, they were. Lynn and I were scared to death that Clinton was: “going off the deep end”, “Leaving the Faith”, “becoming an Atheist”. We knew that in order to keep our oldest son from leaving the faith we had no choice but to answer his questions without “because I said so” answers. Because we knew what we believed was right these questions should be easy to answer. Once Lynn and I had the challenge of proving Clinton wrong, we first chose the question of Sabbath vs. Sunday. We were on a quest to utterly prove Biblically that Sunday was the only choice. Even considering this question is ridiculous to the vast majority of scholars, (why look at a settled issue). We knew that we had to have Biblical as well as historical evidence to back up our original flippant reply. At this point we were not worried about whether Sabbath worship was a cult. To be honest, we were 200% confident that we would find so much evidence pointing to Sunday being The Lord’s day that it would be embarrassing to Clinton. We had tools at our disposal that scholars of old, and not so old, could never have imagined. With the computer we were able to search historical documents that were not within reach of 99.9% of scholars 200, 100, 50, 25 nor even 10 years ago. Not only did we have access to read these documents, we also were able to search and cross reference them electronically. We had access to scholarly and historical works that earlier we would have been unaware that even existed. Another and potentially the biggest advantage over the earlier scholars was the ability to have a Bible computer program that allowed us to read, search dozens of bible translations, do in-depth word studies, search original language with Strong’s numbering, lookup words in dictionaries, and cross reference scriptures in concordances. We were confident that with the tools available to us, this one would be easy… Here is some of the research that we did in our quest to discover: Who, what, when, where, and how was the Saturday Sabbath changed to Sunday? First, there is no question that the day of worship in Old Testament times is the Saturday Sabbath. Genesis 2:2-3 KJV And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made. Second, there is no direct change given in scripture. The word “Sunday” never appears in Scripture. However, the phrase “First day of the Week” does appear 8 times in Scripture. And “The Lord’s Day” appears once. In that phrase first day of the week, you will notice that the word “day” is in italics. Here is a quote explaining why certain words are italicized: “The King James Version used italics to indicate words that had no exact equivalent in the original text, but had been supplied by the translators for various reasons, usually to make the text read properly in English.” Obviously there is a Greek phrase for “day”, so, what is the original phrase? Matthew 28:1 In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulcher. Mark 16:2 And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulcher at the rising of the sun. Mark 16:9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils. Luke 24:1 Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them. John 20:1 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulcher, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulcher. John 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. Acts 20:7 And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. 1 Corinthians 16:2 Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. You will notice that the first six verses are referring to the same day; Resurrection Day. The passage in Acts and 1 Corinthians are both approximately 35 years later. So there are only 3 separate days referenced and called the “First day of the Week”. Let’s look at the phrase with the corresponding Strong’s concordance numbers: Matthew 28:1 the firstG3391 day of the week, G4521 [mian sabbaton] Mark 16:2 theG3588 firstG3391 day of theG3588 week, G4521 [mias sabbaton] Mark 16:9 the firstG4413 day of the week, G4521 [prote sabbatou] Luke 24:1 theG3588 firstG3391 day of theG3588 week, G4521 [mia ton sabbaton] John 20:1 TheG3588 firstG3391 day of theG3588 weekG4521 [mia ton sabbaton] John 20:19 theG3588 firstG3391 day of theG3588 week, G4521 [mia ton sabbaton] Acts 20:7 theG3588 firstG3391 day of theG3588 week, G4521 [mia ton sabbaton] 1 Corinthians 16:2 Upon the firstG2596 G3391 day of the weekG4521[mian sabbatou] Let’s look at the Strong’s definitions for the words used in these passages: The – G3588 ὁ, ἡ, τό ho he to ho, hay, to - The masculine, feminine (second) and neuter (third) forms, in all their inflections; the definite article; the (sometimes to be supplied, at others omitted, in English idiom): - the, this, that, one, he, she, it, etc. The First - G3391 μία mia mee’-ah Irregular feminine of G1520; one or first: - a (certain), + agree, first, one, X other. The First - G4413 πρῶτος prōtos pro’-tos Contracted superlative of G4253; foremost (in time, place, order or importance): - before, beginning, best, chief (-est), first (of all), former. Upon the - G2596 κατά kata kat-ah’ A primary particle; (preposition) down (in place or time), in varied relations (according to the case [genitive, dative or accusative] with which it is joined): - about, according as (to), after, against, (when they were) X alone, among, and, X apart, (even, like) as (concerning, pertaining to, touching), X aside, at, before, beyond, by, to the charge of, [charita-] bly, concerning, + covered, [dai-] ly, down, every, (+ far more) exceeding, X more excellent, for, from . . . to, godly, in (-asmuch, divers, every, -to, respect of), . . . by, after the manner of, + by any means, beyond (out of) measure, X mightily, more, X natural, of (up-) on (X part), out (of every), over against, (+ your) X own, + particularly, so, through (-oughout, -oughout every), thus, (un-) to (-gether, -ward), X uttermost, where (-by), with. In composition it retains many of these applications, and frequently denotes opposition, distribution or intensity. Week - G4521 σάββατον sabbaton sab’-bat-on Of Hebrew origin [H7676]; the Sabbath (that is, Shabbath), or day of weekly repose from secular avocations (also the observance or institution itself); by extension a se’nnight, that is, the interval between two Sabbaths; likewise the plural in all the above applications: - sabbath (day), week. Almost all English translations render the Greek phrasesmian sabbaton,mias sabbaton,mia ton sabbaton, andprote sabbatouas "first day of the week." However, none of these Greek phrases can literally be translated that way. The Greek wordmiaand all of its forms represent the cardinal number "one." The Greek wordprotosis the ordinal "first." In the New Testament,mia,mian, andmiasappear 79 times. They are rendered as "first" eight times in theAuthorized King JamesVersion, seven of them in the "firstdayof the week" passages (Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; John 20:1; John 20:19; Acts 20:7; 1 Corinthians 16:2), and also in Titus 3:10 (where a better translation would be "once"). In Greek, the phrase "first day of the week" is properly renderedprotes hemeras tes hebdomados. Interestingly, the Greek word for "day" does not appear in any of the "firstdayof the week" verses in the New Testament. In the King James Concordance we can look at how a word Greek word was translated into English: G4521 σάββατον sabbaton Total KJV Occurrences: 68 sabbath, 59 Matthew 12:1-2 (2), Matthew 12:5 (2), Matthew 12:8, Matthew 12:10-12 (3), Matthew 24:20, Matthew 28:1, Mark 1:21, Mark 2:23-24 (2), Mark 2:27-28 (3), Mark 3:2, Mark 3:4, Mark 6:2, Mark 16:1, Luke 4:16, Luke 4:31, Luke 6:1-2 (2), Luke 6:5-7 (3), Luke 13:9-10 (2), Luke 13:14-16 (4), Luke 14:1, Luke 14:3, Luke 14:5, Luke 23:54, Luke 23:56, John 5:9-10 (2), John 5:16, John 5:18, John 7:22-23 (3), John 9:14, John 9:16, John 19:31 (2), Acts 1:12, Acts 13:14, Acts 13:27, Acts 13:42, Acts 13:44, Acts 15:21, Acts 16:13, Acts 17:2, Acts 18:4, Colossians 2:16 week, 9 Mark 16:1-2 (2), Mark 16:9, Luke 18:12, John 20:1 (2), John 20:19, Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:2 So What?!?! Well when we look at ALL the scriptures that refers to “First day of the Week”: The word translated “day” is not there in the Greek. It was added for “Clarity” The word translated “first” is usually translated as “one” The word “week” is overwhelmingly translated “Sabbath” (outside these passages we are looking at only Luke 18:12 translates “Sabbaton” as week.) If we look at a literal rendering of these phrases, we see that they would be better translated as "one of the Sabbaths" (mian sabbaton, mias sabbaton, and mia ton sabbaton), or "First Sabbath" (prote sabbatou). Again… So what? This is where a little history and understanding the Biblical feasts come in. After Passover is First Fruits, after First Fruits there is Pentecost, This feast is 50 days after the Sabbath of First Fruits. Leviticus 23:15-16 KJV And ye shall count unto you from the morrow after the sabbath, (First Fruits) from the day that ye brought the sheaf of the wave offering; seven sabbaths shall be complete: Even unto the morrow after the seventh sabbath shall ye number fifty days; and ye shall offer a new meat offering unto the LORD. “Seven sabbaths were to be counted from the Feast of First-fruits or Passover. Consequently, these came to be known as "First Sabbath," "Second Sabbath" etc., down to the seventh. And according to Julian Morgenstern, former President of Hebrew University, this practice continued in Galilee till the time of Christ or the Common Era. It is still observed by some groups in Palestine today. Thus, there was an annual date known as "First Sabbath," just after Passover.”(p.230,The Life of Christ in Stereo) Johnston M. Cheney . Is there any New Testament scripture to support this? Yes there is… Luke 6:1 KJV And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the first, that he went through the corn fields; and his disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat, rubbing them in their hands. This is referring to the Second weekly Sabbath After First Fruits in the time between Passover and Pentecost. What does this prove? All of the verses that have the phrase “First day of the Week” occur during this 50 Day period between Passover and Pentecost. So the English translation for that phrase doesn’t fit with the literal Greek or the cultural context. As a matter of fact, it actually ignores the historical and cultural significance of the First of the Sabbaths, and the counting of days until Penticost. What about the phrase “The Lord’s Day”? Revelation 1:10 KJV I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, This phrase only occurs once in the bible. It is often used as “proof” that Sabbath was changed to Sunday. But that thought process doesn’t fit with what Jesus said. Matthew 12:8 KJV For the Son of man is Lord even of the Sabbath day. Mark 2:27-28 KJV And he said unto them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath: Therefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath. Luke 6:5 KJV And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath. By Jesus’ own words; the Lord’s Day would be Sabbath. Does Jesus ever allude to the fact that the Sabbath was, is, or would ever be changed to Sunday? No. In fact he says the opposite. This passage is one of the premier scriptures that the law was done away with. Matthew 5:17-20 KJV Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven. “Jesus quoted a Hebrew idiom when He said He came not to destroy the Law or the prophets. He was using a familiar phrase easily understood during Biblical times. Jesus had been accused of misinterpreting the Torah, yet He said that He was actually rightly and correctly teaching it. Traditional Jewish writings support this idiom, "Should all the nations of the world unite to uproot one word of the Law, they would be unable to do it," Leviticus Rabbah 19:2. To understand the meaning of this verse, everything hinges on the meaning of the words "destroy" and "fulfill" in verse 17. What does Jesus mean by "destroy the Law" and "fulfill the Law"? "Destroy" and "fulfill" are technical terms used in rabbinic argumentation. When a sage felt that a colleague had misinterpreted a passage of Scripture, he would say, "You are destroying the Law!" Needless to say, in most cases, his colleagues strongly disagreed. What was "destroying the Law" for one sage was "fulfilling the Law" (correctly interpreting Scripture) for another," wrote Bivin and Blizzard in their book Understanding the Difficult Words of Jesus (Yahshua). Just a couple of verses later Jesus is fulfilling (correctly interpreting) the Law Matthew 5:21-24 KJV Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire. Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift. A few verses later is another example of fulfilling the Law: Matthew 5:27-28 KJV Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. If the interpretation of Matthew 5:1-48 (the Law was “fulfilled”) is license to ignore the law or end the law, then the following passage doesn’t fit. Matthew 24:19-21 KJV And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath day: For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. If Jesus knew that the Sabbath was being changed to Sunday, why would he be worried that your flight was on the Sabbath? This doesn’t make sense if it was changing to Sunday. Obeying the Sabbath (commandment #4) doesn’t even qualify as one of the “least of the commandments”. Even breaking one of those will make you least in the kingdom. Does Paul or the other Apostles ever allude to the fact that the Sabbath was, is, or would ever be changed to Sunday? No, as well. The book of Acts covers the timeframe from the ascension of Jesus until Approx AD 61. This is plenty of time to record the change from Sabbath to Sunday. Acts 13:27 KJV For they that dwell at Jerusalem, and their rulers, because they knew him not, nor yet the voices of the prophets which are read every sabbath day, they have fulfilled them in condemning him. Acts 13:42 KJV And when the Jews were gone out of the synagogue, the Gentiles besought that these words might be preached to them the next sabbath. Acts 13:44 KJV And the next sabbath day came almost the whole city together to hear the word of God. Acts 15:21 KJV For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. As a matter of fact there are 84 worship services on the Sabbath recorded in Acts (Acts 13:14; Acts 13:44; Acts 16:13; Acts 17:2; Acts 18:4; Acts 18:11) If Sabbath was changed/changing to Sunday wouldn’t it have been recorded in Acts??? Now let’s look at prophecies concerning the Tribulation and Millennial Reign and see if Sabbath is ever mentioned. If it was changed to Sunday, it would have to be reflected in the prophecies. Isaiah 66:22-23 KJV For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD. (Prophecy of the New Temple in the Millennial Reign.) Ezekiel 44:24 KJV And in controversy they shall stand in judgment; and they shall judge it according to my judgments: and they shall keep my laws and my statutes in all mine assemblies; and they shall hallow my sabbaths. Ezekiel 45:17 KJV And it shall be the prince’s part to give burnt offerings, and meat offerings, and drink offerings, in the feasts, and in the new moons, and in the sabbaths, in all solemnities of the house of Israel: he shall prepare the sin offering, and the meat offering, and the burnt offering, and the peace offerings, to make reconciliation for the house of Israel. Ezekiel 46:1-3 KJV Thus saith the Lord GOD; The gate of the inner court that looketh toward the east shall be shut the six working days; but on the sabbath it shall be opened, and in the day of the new moon it shall be opened. And the prince shall enter by the way of the porch of that gate without, and shall stand by the post of the gate, and the priests shall prepare his burnt offering and his peace offerings, and he shall worship at the threshold of the gate: then he shall go forth; but the gate shall not be shut until the evening. Likewise the people of the land shall worship at the door of this gate before the LORD in the sabbaths and in the new moons. Does it make sense that for the first four thousand years, worship was on the Sabbath? Then, for the next two thousand years it was changed to Sunday, and for the millennial kingdom it will be back to Sabbath? No, God is consistent and not the author of confusion. I have one more section that has a lot of information in it. I pray you can see that Sabbath was not changed by Jesus, Paul, or any of the Apostles. The fact remains that worship was changed and this next section tells us by whom. So how did we get to this point? History records there were pagans that crept into the church and tried to include pagan worship into the Early Church. This was also prophesied by Paul. Acts 20:29-30 KJV For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. None of the early historians record First Century Christians worshiping on Sunday. World leading historians also confirm that the Sabbath was kept by both Jews and believing Gentiles until about 120 A.D. When the persecution of the Jews and believing Gentiles became so great, many Christians decided to start keeping Sunday to avoid persecution and death, using the excuse that it was in honor of the resurrection. In the battle of Milvian Bridge in 312 A.D., Constantine looked up at the Sun and saw a cross of light and the words “In this Victory”. According to the early Church historian Eusebius, this was Constantine’s conversion to Christianity. In 313 A. D. “The Edict of Milan” was signed by Constantine and Licinius. This edict gave religious tolerance throughout the Roman Empire. In 316 A.D. Constantine led the first battle of Christian on Christian warfare against the Donatists; a schism that more closely adhered to scripture. Constantine won and that wining group of Christians went on to become the Catholic Church we are now familiar with. In 321 A.D., Constantine became Caesar in Rome and he began to see the balance of power shift from paganism to the Church. He passed the first law enforcing Sunday observance. "On the venerable day of the Sun let the Magistrates and the people residing in the cities rest, and let all workshops be closed." Codex Justinian 3.12.2 Until then, there had never been a law enforcing Sunday observance. Keep in mind he supposedly converted in 312 A.D. His conversion was more than likely politically motivated since many years after his “conversion” Constantine commissioned coins with the phrase “Sol Invictus” meaning “Unconquered Sun” with an image of the Sun god Sol pressed in the coin. In order to control the eastern and western halves of his empire, he moved his capital from Rome to Byzantium by building a new city there. He named Constantinople after himself and hence transferred his headquarters over to Constantinople, leaving Rome vacant. As a result the Papacy moved in and sat on the throne of Caesar and so the Church took over Rome. "Thus we learn from Socrates (H.E., vi.c.8) that in his time public worship was held in the churches of Constantinople on both days.... The view that the Christian’s Lord’s day, or Sunday, is but the Christian Sabbath deliberately transferred from the seventh to the first day of the week does not indeed find categorical expression till a much later period.... The earliest recognition of the observance of Sunday as a legal duty is a constitution of Constantine in A.D. 321, enacting that all courts of justice, inhabitants of towns, and workshops were to be at rest on Sunday (venerabili die Solis), with an exception in favour of those engaged in agricultural labour... Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1899 Edition, Vol. XXIII, page 654 This was further strengthened by the council of Laodicea: "Christians shall not Judaize and be idle on Saturday, the Sabbath, but shall work on that day; but the Lord’s day (Sunday) they shall especially honor, and, as being Christians, shall, if possible, do no work on that day. If, however, they are found Judaizing, they shall be shut out from Christ." ---Canon 29, Council of Laodicea, 364 C.E. Statements by the Catholic Church about the Sabbath. “Some theologians have held that God likewise directly determined the Sunday as the day of worship in the New Law, that He Himself has explicitly substituted the Sunday for the Sabbath. But this theory is now entirely abandoned. It is now commonly held that God simply gave His Church the power to set aside whatever day or days she would deem suitable as Holy Days. The (Roman Catholic) Church chose Sunday, the first day of the week, and in the course of time added other days as holy days.” John Laux, A Course in Religion for Catholic High Schools and Academies, 1936 edition, vol. 1, p. 51. “Nowhere in the Bible is it stated that worship should be changed from Saturday to Sunday...Now the Church...instituted, by God’s authority, Sunday as the day of worship. This same Church, by the same divine authority, taught the doctrine of Purgatory long before the Bible was made. We have, therefore, the same authority for Purgatory as we have for Sunday.” Martin J. Scott, Things Catholics Are Asked About, 1927 edition, p. 136. “Protestantism, in discarding the authority of the (Roman Catholic) Church, has no good reasons for its Sunday theory, and ought logically to keep Saturday as the Sabbath.” John Gilmary Shea, American Catholic Quarterly Review, January 1883. “The Catholic church for over one thousand years before the existence of a Protestant, by virtue of her divine mission, changed the day from Saturday to Sunday...The Protestant World at its birth found the Christian Sabbath too strongly entrenched to run counter to its existence; it was therefore placed under the necessity of acquiescing in the arrangement, thus implying the (Catholic) Church’s right to change the day, for over three hundred years. The Christian Sabbath is therefore to this day, the acknowledged offspring of the Catholic Church as spouse of the Holy Ghost, without a word of remonstrance from the Protestant World.” James Cardinal Gibbons in the Catholic Mirror, September 23, 1983. Most Christians assume that Sunday is the biblically approved day of worship. The Catholic Church protests that it transferred Christian worship from the biblical Sabbath (Saturday) to Sunday, and that to try to argue that the change was made in the Bible is both dishonest and a denial of Catholic authority. If Protestantism wants to base its teachings only on the Bible, it should worship on Saturday.” Rome’s Challenge www.immaculateheart.com/maryonline Dec 2003 Why would the Translators have kept the Catholic Tradition of Sunday Worship? From 321 A.D. until the Reformation in 1517 A.D., the Catholic Church had dominated the entire world. They had instilled an utter hatred for Jews and anything Jewish during the inquisition. After the Reformation, Martin Luther translated the Scripture into German. All priests and monks that translated the scripture had been trained in the Catholic Traditions and like Luther, had an anti-Jewish bias. To illustrate this; one of Adolph Hitler’s favorite books was written by Martin Luther: On the Jews and their Lies (1543). It was quoted extensively in all the Third Reich material about the Jews. Even though Martin Luther had little if anything to do with the translation of the scripture into English, the same Anti-Semitic teachings from the Catholic Church and the Church of England existed among the King James translators as well. The only logical reason that the translators substituted Sunday for Sabbath, was that it was politically expedient; it would have been viewed as heresy for the Authorized Version to suggest otherwise, since the Church of England had been worshiping on Sunday for centuries. Since the Law is done away with what does this matter? Let’s look at what scripture says: Matthew 24:15-24 KJV When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:) Then let them which be in Judea flee into the mountains: Let him which is on the housetop not come down to take any thing out of his house: Neither let him which is in the field return back to take his clothes. And woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give suck in those days! But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day: For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened. Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. John 5:45-47 KJV Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? 1 John 5:1-3 KJV Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him. By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. Revelation 12:17 KJV And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. Revelation 22:12-16 KJV And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last. Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city. For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star. The matter of worshipping on Sabbath or Sunday is not a simple matter of preference. Thru this study I have come to the belief that Sabbath, the Saturday Sabbath, is the day that was ordained by God to be a day of rest and to be kept Holy. I also believe that Sabbath was never done away with by God, His Son Jesus, Paul, or Jesus’ Apostles. And as a result our family has stopped observing Sunday as the day for worship. I further believe that the teaching of worship on Sunday by the modern church is a result of deception by the Catholic Church and engrained traditions that are rooted in centuries of practice. Even though this has been practiced for centuries it does not mean that the practice must continue to be observed. I have been striving to do the things that are acceptable and pleasing to God. Once I realized that Sabbath was set apart by God, and that was never changed, why should I settle for the pagan practices of the Catholic Church? Romans 6:1-2 KJV What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Jeremiah 16:19-21 KJV O LORD, my strength, and my fortress, and my refuge in the day of affliction, the Gentiles shall come unto thee from the ends of the earth, and shall say, Surely our fathers have inherited lies, vanity, and things wherein there is no profit. Shall a man make gods unto himself, and they are no gods? Therefore, behold, I will this once cause them to know, I will cause them to know mine hand and my might; and they shall know that my name is The LORD. You may not agree with me, because these things are very radical according to what we have always practiced. But in studying these things it has become crystal clear that God has not changed on his sanctification of the Sabbath. Coming to this realization has not been easy and it pains me greatly to know that I have caused any of you pain. No matter how much I care for you all, I must be true to God, His Son, and God’s unchanging Word. Malachi 3:6-7 KJV For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. Even from the days of your fathers ye are gone away from mine ordinances, and have not kept them. Return unto me, and I will return unto you, saith the LORD of hosts. But ye said, Wherein shall we return? Hebrews 13:8-9 KJV Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and today, and forever. Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein. In studying Scripture in order to prove our wayward son wrong and teach him a lesson, we discovered, to our surprise, that nowhere in scripture has Sabbath been changed. Sunday worship is one of the divers and strange doctrines that were instituted almost 300 years after the resurrection. It is a man-made tradition, not ordained by God. Additional Catholic Statements on the Sabbath “Is not every Christian obliged to sanctify Sunday and to abstain on that day from unnecessary servile work? Is not the observance of this law among the most prominent of our sacred duties? But you may read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, and you will not find a single line authorizing the sanctification of Sunday. The Scriptures enforce the religious observance of Saturday, a day which we never sanctify.” James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of Our Fathers (1917 edition), p. 72-73 (16th Edition, p 111; 88th Edition, p. 89). “For example, nowhere in the Bible do we find that Christ or the Apostles ordered that the Sabbath be changed from Saturday to Sunday. We have the commandment of God given to Moses to keep holy the Sabbath day, that is the 7th day of the week, Saturday. Today most Christians keep Sunday because it has been revealed to us by the [Roman Catholic] church outside the Bible.” Catholic Virginian, October 3, 1947, p. 9, article “To Tell You the Truth.” Who Made Sunday Holy? “Written by the finger of God on two tables of stone, this Divine code (ten commandments) was received from the Almighty by Moses amid the thunders of Mount Sinai...Christ resumed these Commandments in the double precept of charity--love of God and of the neighbour; He proclaimed them as binding under the New Law in Matthew 19:1-30 and in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:1-48)...The (Catholic) Church, on the other hand, after changing the day of rest from the Jewish Sabbath, or seventh day of the week, to the first, made the Third Commandment refer to Sunday as the day to be kept holy as the Lord’s Day...He (God) claims one day out of the seven as a memorial to Himself, and this must be kept holy...”The Catholic Encyclopaedia, vol. 4, “The Ten Commandments”, 1908 edition by Robert Appleton Company; and 1999 Online edition by Kevin Knight, Imprimatur, John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York. “Question: How prove you that the church had power to command feasts and holydays? “Answer: By the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of and therefore they fondly contradict themselves by keeping Sunday strictly, and breaking most other feasts commanded by the same church. “Question: Have you any other way of proving that the church has power to institute festivals of precept? “Answer: Had she not such power, she could not a done that in which all modern religionists agree with her; -she could not have substituted the observance of Sunday the first day of the week, for the observance of Saturday the seventh day of the week, a change for which there is no Scriptural authority.” Stephen Keenan, A Doctrinal Catechism On the Obedience Due to the Church, 3rd edition, Chapter 2, p. 174 (Imprimatur, John Cardinal McCloskey, Archbishop of New York). “Perhaps the boldest thing, the most revolutionary change the Church ever did, happened in the first century. The holy day, the Sabbath, was changed from Saturday to Sunday. ‘The day of the Lord’ was chosen, not from any direction noted in the Scriptures, but from the (Catholic) Church’s sense of its own power...People who think that the Scriptures should be the sole authority, should logically become 7th Day Adventists, and keep Saturday holy.” St. Catherine Church Sentinel, Algonac, Michigan, May 21, 1995. “Question - Which is the Sabbath day? “Answer - Saturday is the Sabbath day. “Question - Why do we observe Sunday instead of Saturday? “Answer - We observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church, in the Council of Laodicea (A.D. 364), transferred the solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.” Peter Geiermann, C.S.S.R., The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine, p. 50, 3rd edition, 1957. “Is Saturday the seventh day according to the Bible and the Ten Commandments? I answer yes. Is Sunday the first day of the week and did the Church change the seventh day - Saturday - for Sunday, the first day? I answer yes. Did Christ change the day’? I answer no!” “Faithfully yours, J. Card. Gibbons.” James Cardinal Gibbons, Archbishop of Baltimore, Md. (1877-1921), in a signed letter. “Question. What warrant have you for keeping Sunday preferably to the ancient sabbath which was Saturday? “Answer. We have for it the authority of the Catholic church and apostolic tradition. “Question. Does the Scripture anywhere command the Sunday to be kept for the Sabbath? “Answer. The Scripture commands us to hear the church (Matthew 1:1; Luke 10:16), and to hold fast the traditions of the apostles. 2 Thessalonians 2:15. But the Scripture does not in particular mention this change of the Sabbath. “St John speaks of the Lord’s day (Revelation 1:10) but he does not tell us what day of the week that was, much less does he tell us what day was to take the place of the Sabbath ordained in the commandments. St.Luke speaks of the disciples meeting together to break bread on the first day of the week. Acts 20:7. And St. Paul (1 Corinthians 1:1) orders that on the first day of the week the Corinthians should lay in store what they designated to bestow in charity on the faithful in Judea: but neither the one or the other tells us that this first day of the week was to be henceforth a day of worship, and the Christian Sabbath; so that truly the best authority we have for this ancient custom is the testimony of the church. And therefore those who pretend to be such religious observers of Sunday, whilst they take no notice of other festivals ordained by the same church authority, show that they act more by humor, than by religion; since Sundays and holidays all stand upon the same foundation, namely the ordinance of the (Roman Catholic) church.” Catholic Christian Instructed, 17th edition, p. 272-273. Whose Day of Worship is Sunday? “They [the Protestants] deem it their duty to keep the Sunday holy. Why? Because the Catholic Church tells them to do so. They have no other reason...The observance of Sunday thus comes to be an ecclesiastical law entirely distinct from the divine law of Sabbath observance...The author of the Sunday law...is the Catholic Church.” Ecclesiastical Review, February 1914. “The Sunday...is purely a creation of the Catholic Church.”American Catholic Quarterly Review, January 1883. “Sunday...is the law of the Catholic Church alone...” American Sentinel (Catholic), June 1893. “Sunday is a Catholic institution and its claim to observance can be defended only on Catholic principles...From beginning to end of Scripture there is not a single passage that warrants the transfer of weekly public worship from the last day of the week to the first.” Catholic Press, Sydney, Australia, August 1900. “It is well to remind the Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, and all other Christians, that the Bible does not support them anywhere in their observance of Sunday. Sunday is an institution of the Roman Catholic Church, and those who observe the day observe a commandment of the Catholic Church.” Priest Brady, in an address reported in The News, Elizabeth, New Jersey, March 18, 1903. Who Do We Reverence and Pay Homage to by Keeping Sunday Holy? “From this we may understand how great is the authority of the church in interpreting or explaining to us the commandments of God - an authority which is acknowledged by the universal practice of the whole Christian world, even of those sects which profess to take the holy Scriptures as their sole rule of faith, since they observe as the day of rest not the seventh day of the week demanded by the Bible, but the first day. Which we know is to be kept holy, only from the tradition and teaching of the Catholic church.” Henry Gibson, Catechism Made Easy, #2, 9th edition, vol. 1, p. 341-342. “It was the Catholic church which...has transferred this rest to Sunday in remembrance of the resurrection of our Lord. Therefore the observance of Sunday by the Protestants is an homage they pay, in spite of themselves, to the authority of the (Catholic) church.” Monsignor Louis Segur, Plain Talk About the Protestantism of Today, p. 213. “Sunday is our mark or authority...the church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.” Catholic Record of London, Ontario, September 1, 1923. “Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change (Saturday Sabbath to Sunday) was her act...And the act is a mark of her ecclesiastical authority in religious things.” H.F. Thomas, Chancellor of Cardinal Gibbons. “I have repeatedly offered $1,000 to anyone who can prove to me from the Bible alone that I am bound to keep Sunday holy. There is no such law in the Bible. It is a law of the holy Catholic Church alone. The Bible says, ‘Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.’ The Catholic Church says: ‘No. By my divine power I abolish the Sabbath day and command you to keep holy the first day of the week.’ And lo! The entire civilized world bows down in a reverent obedience to the command of the holy Catholic Church.” father T. Enright, C.S.S.R. of the Redemptoral College, Kansas City, in a lecture at Hartford, Kansas, February 18, 1884, printed in History of the Sabbath, p. 802. “Protestants...accept Sunday rather than Saturday as the day for public worship after the Catholic Church made the change...But the Protestant mind does not seem to realize that...In observing the Sunday, they are accepting the authority of the spokesman for the church, the Pope.” Our Sunday Visitor, February 15, 1950. Conclusion and the Challenge. “The (Roman Catholic) Church changed the observance of the Sabbath to Sunday by right of the divine, infallible authority given to her by her founder, Jesus Christ. The Protestant claiming the Bible to be the only guide of faith, has no warrant for observing Sunday.” The Catholic Universe Bulletin, August 14, 1942, p. 4. “Sunday is founded, not of scripture, but on tradition, and is distinctly a Catholic institution. As there is no scripture for the transfer of the day of rest from the last to the first day of the week, Protestants ought to keep their Sabbath on Saturday and thus leave Catholics in full possession of Sunday.” Catholic Record, September 17, 1893. “Regarding the change from the observance of the Jewish Sabbath to the Christian Sunday, I wish to draw your attention to the facts: “1) That Protestants, who accept the Bible as the only rule of faith and religion, should by all means go back to the observance of the Sabbath. The fact that they do not, but on the contrary observe the Sunday, stultifies them in the eyes of every thinking man. “2) We Catholics do not accept the Bible as the only rule of faith. Besides the Bible we have the living Church, the authority of the Church, as a rule to guide us. We say, this Church, instituted by Christ to teach and guide man through life, has the right to change the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament and hence, we accept her change of the Sabbath to Sunday. We frankly say, yes, the Church made this change, made this law, as she made many other laws, for instance, the Friday abstinence, the unmarried priesthood, the laws concerning mixed marriages, the regulation of Catholic marriages and a thousand other laws... “It is always somewhat laughable, to see the Protestant churches, in pulpit and legislation, demand the observance of Sunday, of which there is nothing in their Bible.” Peter R. Kraemer, Catholic Church Extension Magazine, USA (1975), Chicago, Illinois, “Under the blessing of the Pope Pius XI” “I am going to propose a very plain and serious question to those who follow ‘the Bible and the Bible only’ to give their most earnest attention. It is this: Why don’t you keep holy the Sabbath day?... “The command of the Almighty God stands clearly written in the Bible in these words: ‘Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work.’ Exodus 20:8-10... “You will answer me, perhaps, that you do keep the Sabbath; for that you abstain from all worldly business and diligently go to church, and say your prayers, and read your Bible at home every Sunday of your lives... “But Sunday is not the Sabbath day. Sunday is the first day of the week: the Sabbath day is the seventh day of the week. Almighty God did not give a commandment that men should keep holy one day in seven; but He named His own day, and said distinctly: ‘Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day’; and He assigned a reason for choosing this day rather than any other - a reason which belongs only to the seventh day of the week, and cannot be applied to the rest. He says, ‘For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested on the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it’, Exodus 20:11, Genesis 2:1-3. Almighty God ordered that all men should rest from their labor on the seventh day, because He too had rested on that day: He did not rest on Sunday, but on Saturday. On Sunday, which is the first day of the week, He began the work of creation; He did not finish it. It was on Saturday that He ‘ended His work which he had made: and God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it He had rested from all His work which God created and made.’ Genesis 2:2-3... “Nothing can be more plain and easy to understand than all this; there is nobody who attempts to deny it. It is acknowledged by everybody that the day which Almighty God appointed to be kept holy was Saturday, not Sunday. Why do you then keep holy the Sunday and not Saturday? “You will tell me that Saturday was the Jewish Sabbath, but that the Christian Sabbath has been changed to Sunday. Changed! But by whom? Who has the authority to change an express commandment of Almighty God? When God has spoken and said, ‘Thou shalt keep holy the seventh day’, who shall dare to say, ‘Nay, thou mayest work and do all manner of worldly business on the seventh day: but thou shalt keep holy the first day in its stead?’ This is a most important question, which I know not how you answer... “You are a Protestant, and you profess to go by the Bible and the Bible only; and yet, in so important a manner as the observance of one day in seven as the holy day, you go against the plain letter of the Bible, and put another day in the place of that day which the Bible has commanded. The command to keep holy the seventh day is one of the Ten Commandments; you believe that the other nine are still binding. Who gave you authority to tamper with the fourth? If you are consistent with your own principles, if you really follow the Bible, and the Bible only you ought to be able to produce some portion of the New Testament in which this fourth commandment is expressly altered.” Excerpts from “Why Don’t You Keep Holy the Sabbath Day?”, pages 3-15 in The Clifton Tract, vol. 4, published by the Roman Catholic Church 1869. “The arguments...are firmly grounded on the word of God, and having been closely studied with the Bible in hand, leave no escape for the conscientious Protestant except the abandonment of Sunday worship and the return to Saturday, commanded by their teacher, the Bible, or, unwilling to abandon the tradition of the Catholic Church, which enjoins the keeping of Sunday, and which they have accepted in direct opposition to their teacher, the Bible, consistently accept her (the Catholic Church) in all her teachings. Reason and common sense demand the acceptance of one or the other of these alternatives: either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicism and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible.” James Cardinal Gibbons, in Catholic Mirror, December 23, 1893. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 9: 01.09. I HAVE SOME SERIOUS QUESTIONS... ======================================================================== I have some serious questions... by Jon Sherman - jds6958@gmail.com http://www.thenewreformation.org If God asked us these questions, would we be able to answer them? 1) Can perfect be made better? 2) Can we be freed from freedom? 3) Can Truth be made not Truth? 4) Can the path of righteousness be changed into a new path? 5) Can the Ways of God change into a different way? 6) Can forever, perpetual, and lasting throughout the generations to come turn into intermittent and sporadic? 7) Can what defines sin be nullified? 8) Can what is light change into a different light? 9) Can what is life no longer be life? 10) If God is the Word can the Word (and thus God) change? 11) Can something we are to delight in become something we teach against? 12) Can walking as Jesus walked mean not walking as Jesus walked? 13) If Jesus is the Word made flesh, did He get on the cross to abolish Himself? 14) Can instructions for love one day be worthless instructions the next day? 15) Can what is stated to be made for us and to bless us no longer bless us? Some may need to start preparing their answers as it might take a while to prepare a good defense when YHWH asks these questions at the Bema Seat. This is the judgment for all believers when we get our rewards/crown for obedience to His Word and we find out if we are to be least or great in His Kingdom for all eternity. I actually say nothing new here in what Christian teachers already understand and teach. However, now here comes the practical application: You might ask, "Why would one even need to ask these questions?" Do you believe the new and modern Christian doctrine of today? 1) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches that God’s law has been made better in the New Covenant. 2) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches that God’s law is bondage and that Christ came to set us free from His Law. 3) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches that some things in God’s Word are no longer True (i.e. Leviticus 11:1-47 and Leviticus 23:1-44). 4) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches that what scripture defines as a path and instructions in righteousness are no longer instructions in righteousness. 5) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches that God changed His Way to a new Way. 6) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine takes God’s written commandments that are clearly established to be forever in the context in which it was used. Select commandments become something that are applicable before Christ, not applicable after Christ (now), and suddenly applicable again when Christ returns (1000 year reign). 7) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine changes what scripture defines as sin and says it is no longer sin. 8) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine changes what scripture says is a light to our path to something that is no longer a light to our path. 9) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine takes commandments that were stated to be made for us and to benefit us are now taken away and no longer for us. 10) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine changes God’s Word when God says He is the Word. 11) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches against parts of God’s Word that God’s Word says we are to delight in. 12) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches that we do not have to walk as Jesus walked. 13) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches that Christ (the living Word) abolished Himself on the cross (abolished the Word). 14) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches that commandments that are stated to be given to us to love God and love others now suddenly does neither. 15) ...because new and modern Christian doctrine teaches that obedience to certain select commandments now suddenly curses us instead of blesses us. Contrary to new and modern (Roman) Christian doctrine, this is what God’s Word says: 1. The Law blesses (obey) and curses (disobey). (Deuteronomy 11:26-27)(Psalms 112:1)(Psalms 119:1-2)(Psalms 128:1)(Proverbs 8:32)(Isaiah 56:2)(Matthew 5:6) (Matthew 5:10)(Luke 11:28)(James 1:25)(1 Peter 3:14)(Revelation 22:14) 2. The Law defines sin. (Jeremiah 44:23)(Ezekiel 18:21)(Daniel 9:11)(Romans 3:20)(Romans 7:7)(1 John 3:4) 2. The Law is perfect. (Psalms 19:7)(James 1:25) 3. The Law is liberty. (Psalms 119:45)(James 1:25, James 2:12) 4. The Law is the way. (Exodus 18:20)(Deuteronomy 10:12)(Joshua 22:5)(1 Kings 2:3)(Psalms 119:1)(Proverbs 6:23)(Isaiah 2:3)(Malachi 2:8)(Mark 12:14)(Acts 24:14) 5. The Law is the truth. (Psalms 119:142)(Malachi 2:6)(Romans 2:20)(Galatians 5:7)(Psalms 43:2-4)(John 8:31-32) 6. The Law is life. (Job 33:30)(Psalms 36:9)(Proverbs 6:23)(Revelation 22:14) 7. The Law is light. (Job 24:13)(Job 29:3)(Psalms 36:9)(Psalms 43:2-4)(Psalms 119:105)(Proverbs 6:23)(Isaiah 2:5)(Isaiah 8:20)(Isaiah 51:4)(2 Corinthians 6:14)(1 John 1:7) 8. The Law is Jesus, the Word made flesh. (PERFECT-LIBERTY-WAY-TRUTH-LIFE-LIGHT). (Psalms 27:1)(John 1:1-14)(John 14:5-11)(1 John 1:7) 9. The Law is also for the Gentiles (foreigner/alien) who are grafted in. (Exodus 12:19) (Exodus 12:38) (Exodus 12:49) (Leviticus 19:34) (Leviticus 24:22) (Numbers 9:14) (Numbers 15:1-41, Numbers 16:1-50) (Numbers 15:29) (ie: Ruth) (Isaiah 42:6) (Isaiah 60:3) (Matthew 5:14) (Ephesians 2:10-13) (Acts 13:47) (Romans 11:16-27) (Jeremiah 1:1-34) (Ezekiel 37:1-28) (1 John 2:10) (1 John 1:7) 10. The Law is God’s instructions on how to love God, how to love others, and how to not love yourself. (Exodus 20:6)(Deuteronomy 5:10)(Deuteronomy 7:10)(Deuteronomy 11:13)(Deuteronomy 11:22)(Deuteronomy 30:16)(Deuteronomy 6:5) (Leviticus 19:18)(Nehemiah 1:5)(Daniel 9:4)(Matthew 22:35-37)(Matthew 10:39)(Matthew 16:25)(John 14:15)(John 14:21)(Romans 13:9)(1 John 5:2-3)(2 John 1:6) Remember: ALL (not some) scripture is given by inspiration of God. ALL (not some) scripture is profitable for doctrine. ALL (not some) scripture is for rebuking and correction ALL (not some) scripture is for INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS 2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 2 Timothy 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. And... John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not Proverbs 28:9 "He who turns away his ear from hearing the Law, Even his prayer is an abomination." And no, Paul did not teach against God’s law either, unless you are comfortable making the "error of the lawless" in interpreting Paul’s letters (2 Peter 3:14-17) Related Studies for Your Consideration - Please Test EVERYTHING to God’s Word as Commanded! If you believe and act on anything before testing it to scripture you are putting your faith and obedience in men and not God. Test first and hold on to what is good. Do and believe nothing until you read it in scripture first! This is what we will be accountable to in the end. You are commanded to test every word to scripture that comes out of your teachers’ mouth. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 10: 01.10. THE FRUIT OF WOLVES ======================================================================== The Fruit of Wolves by Jon Sherman - jds6958@gmail.com http://www.thenewreformation.org Can you scripturally discern between a wolf and a shepherd? Examine the fruit and characteristics of the wolf, the hireling, and the Good Shephard. In doing a study to teach on fruit, I noticed that scripture states that "wolves" have fruit (Matthew 7:1-29). As a rabbit trail, I began to examine the "fruit of wolves" so that it would be recognized. This of course is the rotton/corrupt fruit. It ended up being quite interesting...here is a sample. Ezekiel 22:23-28 Again the word of YHWH came to me: "Son of man, say to the land, ’You are a land that has had no rain or showers in THE DAY OF WRATH.’ There is a conspiracy of her prophets within her like a roaring lion tearing its prey; they devour people, take treasures and precious things and make many widows within her.Her priests do violence to MY LAW and profane MY HOLY THINGS; they do NOT distinguish between the holy and the common; they teach that there is NO difference between the unclean and the clean; and they SHUT their eyes to the keeping of my Sabbaths, so that I am PROFANED among them. Her OFFICIALS/LEADERS within her are like WOLVES tearing their prey; they shed blood and kill people to make UNJUST GAIN. Her prophets WHITEWASH THESE DEEDS for them by false visions and lying divinations.They say, ’This is what Sovereign YHWH says’-when YHWH has NOT spoken. Zephaniah 3:2-4; Zephaniah 3:9-10, Zephaniah 3:12-13 (last days) She obeys NO one, she accepts NO correction. She does NOT trust in the YHWH, she does NOT draw near to her God. Her officials are roaring lions,her rulers are evening WOLVES, who leave nothing for the morning. Her prophets are ARROGANT; they are treacherous men. Her priests profane the sanctuary and do violence to the LAW.... "Then will I purify the lips of the peoples, that all of them may call on the name of YHWH and serve him shoulder to shoulder. From beyond the rivers of Cush my worshipers, my SCATTERED PEOPLE, will bring me offerings.... But I will leave WITHIN YOU the meek and humble, who TRUST in the name of the YHWH. The REMNENT of ISRAEL will do no wrong; they will speak no lies, nor will deceit be found in their mouths. They will eat and lie down and no one will make them afraid." Acts 20:28-31 (Paul to Ephesus/Greeks) Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood.I know that after I leave, SAVAGE WOLVES will come in AMONG you and will not spare the flock.Even from YOUR OWN number men will arise and DISTORT the truth in order to draw away disciples after them.So be on your guard! Remember that for three years I never stopped warning each of you night and day with tears. 2 Peter 3:16 He (PAUL) writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are HARD TO UNDERSTAND, which ignorant and unstable people DISTORT, as they do the other scriptures, to their own destruction. Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be ON YOUR GUARD so that you may not be carried away by the ERROR OF LAWLESS MEN and fall from your secure position. (Distorting Paul’s writings generate lawlessness!) Matthew 7:15-23 "Watch out forfalse prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardlythey are ferocious WOLVES. By their FRUIT (works)you willrecognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? Likewise every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus, by their fruit YOU WILL recognize them. "NOT everyone who says to me, ’Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the WILL OF MY FATHER who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ’Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ’I NEVER KNEW YOU. Away from me, you evildoers!’ Based on the previous scripture what is the fruit of ferocious wolves? What are their characteristics? -Pull disciples after themselves -Distort truth -Do not do the will of YHWH -Do many things in YHWH’s name -Conspire (unlawful alliance) against YHWH -State that the unclean is now clean -Profane YHWH by NOT keeping the Sabbath -Make such sinful deeds whitewashed with smooth words -Say that YHWH said such things about His law when He has said no such thing Why are there wolves? 2 Timothy 4:3 For the time will come when men will NOT put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit THEIR OWN DESIRES, they will HEAP UP to them a GREAT number of TEACHERS to say what their itching ears WANT to hear. Because we not only wanted it, we wanted a great number of them... That is quite depressing. Luke 10:3 Go! I am sending you out like lambs among WOLVES. Matthew 10:16 I am sending you out like sheep among WOLVES. Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves. In scripture, sheep are ripped up and destroyed by wolves. In an effort to guard against the WOVLES, Jesus commanded us to be shrewd, but at the same time, maintain our innocence and not allow ourselves to be corrupted while amongst the WOLVES. Shrewd means:Astute, sharp, on the ball, smart, perceptive, insightful, wise, cunning, clever, sharp witted, and canny. The opposite means to be NAIVE. Therefore, be like the Bereans, and test everything to scripture and study the scriptures to show yourself approved. 1 John 2:27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you,and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things,and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. There is one more interesting characteristic to note about wolves. Jesus speaks of this in John 10:11-13 "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. The HIRED HAND is not the shepherd who owns the sheep. So when he sees the WOLF coming, he ABANDONS the sheep and runs away. Then the WOLF attacks the flock and SCATTERS it. The man runs away because he is a hired hand and CARES NOTHING for the sheep." There are three persons as types that teach us something here.... The Good Shepherd is Jesus, and scripture states that He is the Living Word. He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, which is another reference to being the Word. Therefore, if the sheep would stay IN THE WORD and LED BY THE WORD, they would be much better off than if they relied on the HIRED HAND who will abandon them when THEY NEED SHEPHERDING IN TRUTH the most. The hired hand is simply shepherding the flock, but not because they really care about the flock. They are doing it for other reasons, other purposes. The wolf wants the sheep even more than the hired hand. The hired hand steps aside and does not put up a fight like the Good Shepherd would, who is the Truth and the Word. The hired hand does not care for the sheep and therefore does not use the Truth and the Word to protect them. As a result, the sheep are SCATTERED. If this happens often enough, I suppose you could end up with 33,000 deonominations in 258 countries each with their own unique doctrinal coverings. Jude 1:3-4 Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for filthyness and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord. James 3:1 Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly. As evidenced in the above, there is an apparent scriptural dichotomy between a wolf and a good shepherd. Specifically, the wolf teaches that there is no difference between the clean and the unclean. The wolf teaches others to not observe the Lord’s Sabbath. The wolf distorts the Truth and teaches as God’s word things God never stated. The wolf takes what scripture defines as sin and calls it not sin. On the flip side we can only conclude that a good shepherd teaches a difference between the clean and unclean and clearly teaches others to observe the Lord’s Sabbaths (which includes His Feast days). This is what His true teachers teach and feed the flock according to His written Word. The question is this, what side of the coin do you find yourself on, the wolves or the good shepherds? The below is what scripture teaches about God’s law, if anyone is teaching anything different then they themselves are decieved: 1.The Law blesses (obey) and curses (disobey). (Deuteronomy 11:26-27)(Psalms 112:1)(Psalms 119:1-2)(Psalms 128:1)(Proverbs 8:32)(Isaiah 56:2)(Matthew 5:6)(Matthew 5:10)(Luke 11:28)(James 1:25)(1 Peter 3:14)(Revelation 22:14) 2.The Law defines sin. (Jeremiah 44:23)(Ezekiel 18:21)(Daniel 9:11)(Romans 3:20)(Romans 7:7)(1 John 3:4) 2.The Law is perfect. (Psalms 19:7)(James 1:25) 3.The Law is liberty. (Psalms 119:45)(James 1:25, James 2:12) 4.The Law is the way. (Exodus 18:20)(Deuteronomy 10:12)(Joshua 22:5)(1 Kings 2:3)(Psalms 119:1)(Proverbs 6:23)(Isaiah 2:3)(Malachi 2:8)(Mark 12:14)(Acts 24:14) 5.The Law is the truth. (Psalms 119:142)(Malachi 2:6)(Romans 2:20)(Galatians 5:7)(Psalms 43:2-4)(Joshua 8:31-32) 6.The Law is life. (Job 33:30)(Psalms 36:9)(Proverbs 6:23)(Revelation 22:14) 7.The Law is light. (Job 24:13)(Job 29:3)(Psalms 36:9)(Psalms 43:2-4)(Psalms 119:105)(Proverbs 6:23)(Isaiah 2:5) (Isaiah 8:20)(Isaiah 51:4)(2 Corinthians 6:14)(1 John 1:7) 8.The Law is Jesus, the Word made flesh. (PERFECT-LIBERTY-WAY-TRUTH-LIFE-LIGHT). (Psalms 27:1)(John 1:1-14)(John 14:5-11)(1 John 1:7) 9.The Law is also for the Gentiles (foreigner/alien) who are grafted in. (Exodus 12:19) (Exodus 12:38) (Exodus 12:49) (Leviticus 19:34) (Leviticus 24:22) (Numbers 9:14) (Numbers 15:1-41, Numbers 16:1-50) (Numbers 15:29) (ie: Ruth) (Isaiah 42:6) (Isaiah 60:3) (Matthew 5:14) (Ephesians 2:10-13) (Acts 13:47) (Romans 11:16-27) (Jeremiah 31:31-34) (Ezekiel 37:1-28) (1 John 2:10) (1 John 1:7) 10.The Law is God’s instructions on how to love God, how to love others, and how to not love yourself. (Exodus 20:6)(Deuteronomy 5:10)(Deuteronomy 7:10)(Deuteronomy 11:13)(Deuteronomy 11:22)(Deuteronomy 30:16)(Deuteronomy 6:5) (Leviticus 19:18)(Nehemiah 1:5)(Daniel 9:4)(Matthew 22:35-37)(Matthew 10:39)(Matthew 16:25)(John 14:1-15)(John 14:21)(Romans 13:9)(1 John 5:2-3)(2 John 1:6) Remember: ALL (not some) scripture is given by inspiration of God. ALL (not some) scripture is profitable for doctrine. ALL (not some) scripture is for rebuking and correction ALL (not some) scripture is for INSTRUCTION IN RIGHTEOUSNESS 2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, forcorrection, for instruction in righteousness: 2 Timothy 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. And... John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not And no, Paul did not teach against God’s law either, unless you are comfortable making the "error of the lawless" in interpreting (twisting) Paul’s letters (2 Peter 3:14-17) Proverbs 28:9 "He who turns away his ear from hearing the Law, Even his prayer is an abomination." ======================================================================== CHAPTER 11: 02.0. PAUL, APOSTLE TO THE GENTILES, LEAST IN THE KINGDOM ======================================================================== Paul Apostle to the Gentiles Least in the Kingdom? by Clint Branham - AwakenedChurch.com email: clint@AwakenedChurch.com Introduction: Biblical Inerrancy and the New Testament Almost all Christian denominations teach biblical inerrancy: all Scripture is without error and true. I have no issue with this concept at all; in fact, I wholeheartedly agree with it. However, I take exception with the modern Church’s implementation of this concept as it is applied to the New Testament. Before you label me a heretic, please hear me out. We all approach the New Testament from the standpoint that it was written to you, or me, or a group of which we have been a part, or that church down the street. And because it was written to me, I instinctively understand all of the concepts and issues that are being discussed. I was even urged to substitute my name in certain passages to make it “real to me.” Consciously or unconsciously we have all been lazy in our study and reading of Scripture. We never take the time to learn about the cultural practices, mindset, religious practices, language and historical background of the biblical time period. In the past when I read seemingly contradictory passages, I would simply shrug and wonder what it meant, or just call it a “mystery,” but I can no longer ignore these types of passages. The following passages are some of the Scriptures with which I am currently wrestling. Paul stated that the law is “done away with” and he appears to promote a “no-law” doctrine. Romans 10:4 KJV For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. Jesus appears to promote the opposite “pro-law” doctrine: Matthew 5:19 KJV Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. On the other hand, Paul says: 1 Corinthians 11:1 ESV Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ. In this paper I will attempt to present evidence and evaluate the Scripture adherence to either the “no-law” doctrine or the “pro-law” doctrine. Is it possible for us to reconcile these two opposite passages and still align with biblical inerrancy? Here are a few formatting conventions: I will color my commentary blue, as I have in this preface. Scripture will either be black or red, depending on whether they are the words of Christ. Any italics, bold, and underlining, or any combinations of these, are my attempt to add emphasis. Scripture References or Strong numbers will be Green. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 12: 02.1. JESUS' RELATIONSHIPS ======================================================================== Paul Apostle to the Gentiles Least in the Kingdom? Matthew 5:18-19 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Part One – Jesus’ Relationships In order to get a sense of the true ministry of Paul, we must first examine the focus of Paul’s ministry: Jesus. We will start by examining the relationships of Jesus. Jesus’ Relationship to the Father: John 5:30 I can of mine own self do nothing: as I hear, I judge: and my judgment is just; because I seek not mine own will, but the will of the Father which hath sent me. John 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. John 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. John 12:49-50 For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak. (50) And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak. John 10:37-38 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not. (38) But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him. Jesus’ Relationship to the Religious Leaders of the Day: John 7:19 Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law? Why go ye about to kill me? Luke 11:46 And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! for ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of your fingers. Luke 11:52 Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. Read all of Matthew 23:1-39 to understand the Savior’s disdain for the hypocritical leaders, the Pharisees. John 3:10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things? Matthew 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. Jesus’ Relationship to the Laws of God, given to Moses, the Writings and the Prophets: John 10:35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. Matthew 5:17-19 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. (19) Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. John 15:10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his love. Matthew 19:1 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. Mark 12:29-31 And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: (30) And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. (31) And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these. From these words of our Savior, I am forced to come to these conclusions: 1.Relationship to the Father a.Jesus is not teaching his own doctrine, he is only teaching what the Father has allowed him to speak. b.The words of Jesus are magnifications of the Father’s laws –all of them, not just the famous Ten Commandments. i.In fact, the commandment Jesus named as the “greatest commandment” is a direct quotation from Deuteronomy 6:4-5. Even today, this passage is known as the Shema, the watchword of the Jewish faith. It is the first thing the observant Jew recites when he wakes, the last thing he says when he goes to bed, and is even the last thing on his lips before death. There are accounts of the Nazis hearing desperate cries of the Shema from the gas chambers before the deadly silence during the Holocaust. c.Jesus is not teaching something new, he is reiterating God’s laws that are eternally true. 2.Relationship to the Religious Leaders of the Day: a.The lawyers, Pharisees, masters, and scribes may have had head knowledge of the laws of God, but not heart knowledge. b.They were not teaching the laws of God, they were teaching something else. i.The added laws of man (covered in Part Seven). 3.Jesus’ Relationship to the Laws of God, given to Moses, the Writings and the Prophets: a.The Scripture cannot be broken. i.Heaven and earth are still here, therefore, so is the law. b.Keeping the commandments is the way that our love of Jesus and the Father is manifested. c.Keeping the commandments is how we “abide” in Jesus’ love. i.According to Webster’s, the word “abide” means, “to remain stable or fixed in a state.” d.According to Matthew 5:19, keeping and teaching the commandments has a direct correlation to rewards within the Kingdom of Heaven. i.Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: ii. but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. e.Teachers are NOT to teach against the commandments (the entire law, not just the Ten Commandments). i.How can the law of the Father be “done away with” if Jesus’ doctrine is not his, but the Fathers, and the Father doesn’t change? ii. Nowhere in Scripture was it prophesied that the instructions of God, the law, would be nullified. 1.They are prophesied to continue forever. a.Psalms 111:9 He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name. Examining Jesus’ relationships portrays him in a very different light than is commonly taught, but consider the following: 1. God’s Word is true - John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. 2. God never changes - Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. 3. God’s Word cannot contradict itself - 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. ======================================================================== CHAPTER 13: 02.2. THE TESTIMONIES OF STEPHEN, JAMES & THE ELDERS ======================================================================== Part Two – The Testimonies of Stephen, James and the Elders In Part One we saw how the words of Jesus are in stark opposition to the doctrine that “the law is not for modern believers.” Do New Testament accounts of the apostles’ actions support that Jesus taught them a “pro-law” doctrine? Or do their actions support a “no-law” doctrine? Acts 6:9-14 (Emphasis Mine) Then there arose certain of the synagogue, which is called the synagogue of the Libertines, and Cyrenians, and Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and of Asia, disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake. hen they suborned men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses, and against God. And they stirred up the people, and the elders, and the scribes, and came upon him, and caught him, and brought him to the council, And set up false witnesses, which said, This man ceaseth not to speak blasphemous words against this holy place, and the law: For we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered us. Stephen was falsely accused of speaking against the temple and the law. What was his blasphemy against the law? Jesus would change the customs of Moses! This was the false accusation! Jesus never changed the customs of Moses! Or did the writer of Acts lie? Acts 21:18-26 (Emphasis Mine) And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: And they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them; Them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from strangled, and from fornication. Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for every one of them. There are several points in this passage that strengthen the argument that Jesus’ doctrine is “pro-law.” The Jews who were zealous for the law had been told that Paul was teaching the dispersed Jews to forsake the law of Moses, not to circumcise the children and to go away from the customs of Moses. The latter half of verse 24 tells us that the information was false (nothing). It is plainly stated that Paul walked orderly and kept the law. But there is something of even greater significance going on in this passage, and that is what James and the elders told Paul to do. There were four men who were under a vow, and Paul was to purify himself with them, and pay for the expenses associated with the completion of the vow. It is recorded that Paul began his vow while in Cenchrea: Acts 18:18 And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow. There is only one vow that appears in the law that involves shaving the head, days of separation, the temple, offerings and expenses: the Nazarite vow. Because we are not familiar with the law, New Testament believers don’t fully understand the significance of what Paul was told to do. Let’s look at the laws concerning the completion of the Nazarite vow given in Numbers: Numbers 6:13-21 And this is the law of the Nazarite, when the days of his separation are fulfilled: he shall be brought unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation: And he shall offer his offering unto the LORD, one he lamb of the first year without blemish for a burnt offering, and one ewe lamb of the first year without blemish for a sin offering, and one ram without blemish for peace offerings, And a basket of unleavened bread, cakes of fine flour mingled with oil, and wafers of unleavened bread anointed with oil, and their meat offering, and their drink offerings. And the priest shall bring them before the LORD, and shall offer his sin offering, and his burnt offering: And he shall offer the ram for a sacrifice of peace offerings unto the LORD, with the basket of unleavened bread: the priest shall offer also his meat offering, and his drink offering. And the Nazarite shall shave the head of his separation at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall take the hair of the head of his separation, and put it in the fire which is under the sacrifice of the peace offerings. And the priest shall take the sodden shoulder of the ram, and one unleavened cake out of the basket, and one unleavened wafer, and shall put them upon the hands of the Nazarite, after the hair of his separation is shaven: And the priest shall wave them for a wave offering before the LORD: this is holy for the priest, with the wave breast and heave shoulder: and after that the Nazarite may drink wine. This is the law of the Nazarite who hath vowed, and of his offering unto the LORD for his separation, beside that that his hand shall get: according to the vow which he vowed, so he must do after the law of his separation. The Nazarite vow has very specific laws, practices, offerings and burnt sacrifices that are commanded to be followed. When a person chooses to take the Nazarite vow, they are choosing to separate themselves unto the LORD. In order for all of the hair of their separation to be able to be sanctified to the LORD, participants are to start the vow with a shaved head, hence, the reference to Paul shaving his head in Cenchrea. 1. James and the elders knew that there was no other set of practices that could confirm and uphold Paul’s adherence to the law more dramatically than the completion of the Nazarite vow at the door of the temple in front of all the zealous believers. 2.In addition, the elders told Paul to “be at charges with them.” a.In order for the vow to be completed, the lamb, ewe, ram, unleavened bread and wine had to be purchased and made ready. i.The animals would have been prized, not any old animal from the herd. 1. The cost in today dollars could easily have been $1,000 - $2,000 per person. 2. Paul would have paid $5,000 - $10,000 for himself and the four others. 3.This is an act that would not have been easy to keep quiet. b.Some translations make this statement to be “pay to have their heads shaved.” i.This is ridiculous; the person under the vow is to shave their own head at the door of the temple. ii.A better reading would be: “pay their expenses so that they may complete the vow.” 1.History records that it was a common practice for the wealthy to pay for the sacrificial animals of the poor. a.It is recorded in the rabbinic writings that King Agrippa and his brother paid for the sacrificial animals of 300 poor men who were under the Nazarite vow, totaling 900 animals! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The accounts of real events solidify the assertion that Jesus’ doctrine is “pro-law.” The account in Acts 21:1-40 either delivers a devastating blow to the claim that Jesus “did away” with the law and ALL burnt sacrifices, or Stephen, Paul, James and the elders were deceivers and liars! If you are to be intellectually honest, you must explore the possibility that the teachings of Jesus and the testimonies from Stephen, James and the elders bring the “no-law” doctrine into serious question! ======================================================================== CHAPTER 14: 02.3. TESTIMONIES OF PAUL, PROPHETS AND KINGS ======================================================================== Part Three – The Testimonies of Paul, John, King David, King Solomon, Isaiah and other Prophets Paul gives record concerning his personal adherence to the law: Acts 25:7-8 And when he was come, the Jews which came down from Jerusalem stood round about, and laid many and grievous complaints against Paul, which they could not prove. While he answered for himself, neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended anything at all. These “grievous complaints” were false. Romans 6:1-2 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Grace, which came through the Savior, is not a license to sin. John gives record of the law and the commandments: 1 John 2:3 And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments. 1 John 3:4-6 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. 1 John 3:22 And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. 1 John 5:2-3 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous 2 John 1:6 And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it. Can these passages be interpreted any other way than “they mean what they say”? To interpret them differently goes against many, many, many New and Old Testament Scriptures. Revelation 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. Revelation 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus. The dragon was angry with those who kept the commandments, so those that didn’t keep the commandments were of no concern to the dragon, or worse. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The Psalms of David, the man after God’s own heart: Psalms 19:7 The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. Psalms 111:9 He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name. Psalms 119:44 So shall I keep thy law continually for ever and ever. Psalms 119:47 And I will delight myself in thy commandments, which I have loved. Psalms 119:48 My hands also will I lift up unto thy commandments, which I have loved; and I will meditate in thy statutes. Psalms 119:53 Horror hath taken hold upon me because of the wicked that forsake thy law. Psalms 119:89 LAMED. For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. Psalms 119:97 MEM. O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day. Psalms 119:126 It is time for thee, LORD, to work: for they have made void thy law. Psalms 119:136 Rivers of waters run down mine eyes, because they keep not thy law. Psalms 119:142 Thy righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and thy law is the truth. Psalms 119:151 Thou art near, O LORD; and all thy commandments are truth. Psalms 119:160 Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever. Psalms 119:165 Great peace have they which love thy law: and nothing shall offend them. The words of Solomon, the wisest man to ever live: Proverbs 28:4 They that forsake the law praise the wicked: but such as keep the law contend with them. Proverbs 28:7 Whoso keepeth the law is a wise son: but he that is a companion of riotous men shameth his father. Proverbs 28:9 He that turneth away his ear from hearing the law, even his prayer shall be abomination. The words of Isaiah: Isaiah 24:5 The earth also is defiled under the inhabitants thereof; because they have transgressed the laws, changed the ordinance, broken the everlasting covenant. From the writer of Chronicles, possibly Ezra: 1 Chronicles 16:15-17 Be ye mindful always of his covenant; the word which he commanded to a thousand generations; Even of the covenant which he made with Abraham, and of his oath unto Isaac; And hath confirmed the same to Jacob for a law, and to Israel for an everlasting covenant, From the writer of Kings, possibly Jeremiah: 2 Kings 17:37 And the statutes, and the ordinances, and the law, and the commandment, which he wrote for you, ye shall observe to do for evermore; and ye shall not fear other gods. 2 Kings 17:38 And the covenant that I have made with you ye shall not forget; neither shall ye fear other gods. 1.All of these passages align EXACTLY with the teachings of Jesus, and the testimonies of Paul, Stephen, James and the elders! a.Consistency in message: i.God’s Word is true - John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth. ii.God never changes - Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. iii. God’s Word cannot contradict itself - 1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. 2. In order for the “no-law” doctrine to stand, the teachings and testimonies of these great men MUST be overlooked, ignored or twisted. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Can we continue to trivialize the words of these great men that were inspired by God Almighty? Can we continue to discount the words of his Son? Can we continue to ignore the words of the Father, given through Moses? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 15: 02.4. GOD’S CRITERIA FOR THE MESSIAH AND PROPHETS ======================================================================== Part Four – God’s Criteria for the Messiah and Prophets Deuteronomy 13:1-18 and Deuteronomy 18:1-22 are the criteria given by God to Moses concerning every prophet and the prophesied Messiah. Deuteronomy 13:1-5 (Emphasis Mine) If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul. Ye shall walk after the LORD your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him. And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, and redeemed you out of the house of bondage, to thrust thee out of the way which the LORD thy God commanded thee to walk in. So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee. Deuteronomy 18:17-22 (Emphasis Mine) And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him. But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die. And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him. 1.The teachings of Jesus from Part One align EXACTLY with these criteria! a.This is exactly what we would expect. i.Because God never changes and ii. God’s Word is true and iii. He doesn’t contradict himself 2.The testimonies of Stephen, James and the elders align EXACTLY with these criteria! a.Exactly what we would expect! 3. The New Testament passages about Paul and the Nazarite vow align EXACTLY with Numbers 6! Acts 7:37-38 This is that Moses, which said unto the children of Israel, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me; him shall ye hear. This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us: 1.Stephen also confirms the exact alignment of the teachings and life of Jesus with Deuteronomy 18:1-22. a.As a side note, this passage also talks of the Church in the wilderness at Mt. Sina/Sinai, 1,500 years before the Acts 2:1-47 account of Pentecost. i.Was Stephen lying or perhaps mistaken? Deuteronomy 13:1-18 and Deuteronomy 18:1-22 was the driving force that sparked the Bereans search of the Scriptures. Acts 17:10-12 (Emphasis Mine) And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few. 1.The Bereans confirm the exact alignment with Deuteronomy! a.They also confirm the alignment with ALL Scriptures concerning the Messiah! b.If they had discovered that Paul and Silas were teaching about a Messiah that did away with the law, or even slightly changed one point, the Bereans would have had scriptural justification to kill them! 2.The Bereans only used the Old Testament for their study of Scripture! a.The New Testament was not written yet! b.The New Testament was not written yet! i.They were LIVING out the New Testament, not studying it! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ How can these passages be reconciled to doctrines that “do away” with the law, especially in light of the Bereans searching only the Old Testament? Remember, the New Testament wasn’t even written yet! Is God’s Word true? Does God change? Can God’s Word contradict itself? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 16: 02.5. THE TESTIMONY OF PETER ======================================================================== Part Five – The Testimony of Peter Peter, the apostle, addresses the writings of Paul: 2 Peter 3:15-16 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; 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, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. I have some questions; here are a few: 1. What was the culture of first century Jerusalem like? 2. Were idioms used in the first century culture? 3. What was/were the predominant language(s)? Was Greek really the predominant language? 4. What was the role of the temple in everyday life? 5. What were the methods of teaching used in the synagogue? 6. Was there a difference in how the Hebrews thought vs. the Greeks? 7. What was a Hellenized Jew? 8. What was the relationship between the Pharisees and the Sadducees? 9. What was the role of the scribes? 10. Why didn’t the scribes teach with authority? How did the scribes teach? 11. How did the rabbis, Pharisees and Sadducees come about, because they are never mentioned in the Old Testament? 12. How did the Sanhedrin come into place? 13. What were the differences in what the Pharisees’ and Sadducees’ practiced and believed? Most, if not all, of the first century Church would have known the answers to these basic questions. Even small children would have known the answers to these questions. The learned would have been able to expound and go into great detail in answering each question. Paul was a scholar trained at the feet of Gamaliel; he excelled in his study of the oral laws of Judaism. Even Peter, who was a companion of the Messiah and heard the very words of Jesus himself, says parts of ALL of Paul’s writings were hard to understand. Most Christians aren’t even aware that the oral laws of Judaism exist, let alone study them. We must conclude that virtually all 21st century students of Scripture cannot claim to be learned in regard to Paul’s writings. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Can we consider ourselves learned based on the above questions? Does your pastor or Sunday school teacher know more than a couple of the answers to these questions? We are willingly and wholly naive historically concerning Paul’s audience. If we don’t even know some basic information about the context of Paul’s writings, isn’t it arrogant to believe that we KNOW what Paul is talking about and that he was teaching a “no-law” doctrine? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 17: 02.6. PAUL’S WRITINGS AND THEIR WITNESS ======================================================================== Part Six – Paul’s Writings: A Witness for the “No-Law” or “Pro-Law” Doctrine? The following are quotations from Paul’s writings regarding the law: Acts 25:8 While he answered for himself, Neither against the law of the Jews, neither against the temple, nor yet against Caesar, have I offended any thing at all. Romans 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. Acts 24:12-14 And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city: Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me. But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets: 1 Corinthians 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. Romans 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law. Galatians 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. Romans 7:12 Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. Galatians 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. Romans 7:22 For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: Romans 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. Php 3:5-6 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless. 1.By analyzing these passages, logic would dictate that Paul was one of the following: a.A con-man, phony, liar, fake, schizophrenic or bipolar 2.But God’s Word cannot contradict itself! a.If Paul was following the Messiah, his writings would not contradict other Scriptures. i.In the book of Acts, it is recorded over and over again that Paul always kept the laws of God! b.1 Corinthians 11:1 ESV Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ. i.John 15:10 ESV If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love. ii.John 7:16 Jesus answered them, and said, My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me. iii. 1 Timothy 6:3-5 ESV If anyone teaches a different doctrine and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that accords with godliness, he is puffed up with conceit and understands nothing. He has an unhealthy craving for controversy and for quarrels about words, which produce envy, dissension, slander, evil suspicions, and constant friction among people who are depraved in mind and deprived of the truth, imagining that godliness is a means of gain. iv. So… if we imitate Paul, we imitate Christ, because both kept the Father’s commandments! c.Hmmm… What else could that mean, except exactly what it says? i.If we imitate Paul, we keep the commandments of the Father! 1. This is in direct and utter opposition to the “no-law” doctrine. 2. This fits perfectly with the “pro-law” doctrine. 3.When Paul says we “are not under the law” a.He cannot be talking about the laws of God given through Moses. i.This would violate dozens, if not hundreds, of Scriptures. b.He must be talking about some other set of laws from which we are now free. 4.The key to understanding Paul’s writings lies in the study of the culture, mindset, language, Pharisaic laws and practices, and most importantly, the laws of God given through Moses. a.As you can see in the above passages, Paul seemingly contradicts both the “no-law” and “pro-law” doctrines. He even seems to contradict himself. 5.Paul was an expert on more than one legal system: Pharisaic laws and practices, the laws of God given through Moses, and Roman law. He was a Pharisee of the Pharisees. a.Galatians 1:14 And profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers. b.Acts 22:3 I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day. Paul’s seemingly contradictory statements must make us realize that if Scripture cannot contradict itself, then what in the world was Paul talking about? There must have been a reason that Paul was chosen to be the apostle to the gentiles. Could it be to protect the gentile believers from false teachers and ravenous wolves who had a history of adding and taking away from God’s Word? The Father chose to dramatically convert an extremely zealous person and bring him out ofthis system, which had a tendency toward hypocrisy. Galatians 1:13-17 NET. For you have heard of my former way of life in Judaism, how I was savagely persecuting the church of God and trying to destroy it. I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries in my nation, and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my ancestors. But when the one who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I could preach him among the Gentiles, I did not go to ask advice from any human being, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before me, but right away I departed to Arabia, and then returned to Damascus. I am persuaded that God chose the best person alive to combat the blasphemous and hypocritical practices of some of the scribes and Pharisees. Who could have been a better choice than their most zealous star pupil, the best of the best? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 18: 02.7. PHARISAIC JUDAISM AND CONCLUSIONS ======================================================================== Part Seven –Pharisaic Judaism and Conclusions The teachings of Pharisaic/Rabbinic Judaism are virtually unknown within Christian churches, but they MUST be understood when studying Paul’s writings. 1.Here is just a tiny sampling of the practices of Pharisaic Judaism known as the Oral Law, today known in Rabbinic Judaism as the Talmud. a.Adding to Scripture, the rabbis enacted 1,400 additional laws regarding the Sabbath (Scripture has seven). b.The rabbis define three different types of physical male circumcision (Scripture records one). c.The rabbis teach that their enactments supersede Scripture. i.“If there are 1000 prophets, all of them of the stature of Elijah and Elisha, giving a certain interpretation, and 1001 rabbis giving the opposite interpretation, you shall incline after the majority, and the law is according to the 1001 rabbis, not according to the 1000 venerable prophets.” (Maimonides Introduction to the Mishna) ii.“Even if they instruct you that right is left, or left is right, you must obey them.” (Sifrey Deuteronomy S154 on Deuteronomy 17:11) iii.“A person must not say, ‘I will not keep the commandment of the elders because they are not from the Torah.’ The Almighty says to such a person, ‘NO My Son! Rather all that they decree upon you, Observe! As it is written, According to the instruction which they teach you.’ (Deuteronomy 17:11) ‘EVEN I [YHVH] MUST OBEY THEIR DECREE, as it is written, You will decree and HE will fulfill it.’ (Job 22:28)” (Pesitka Rabbati 3) d.It was a sin for Jews to associate with gentiles. Please take the time to read Matthew 23:1-39. Jesus is speaking to the scribes and Pharisees. Here are excerpts of how the Savior addresses these “out of order” men: (13) But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! … (16) Woe unto you, ye blind guides… (17) Ye fools and blind: … (24) Ye blind guides… (26) Thou blind Pharisee… (33) Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers … The Messiah calls them hypocrites, blind guides, fools, blind, serpents and vipers. He wasn’t exactly trying to win friends! I wonder if the Messiah would have a different message to the pastors and leaders of today’s prosperity-driven mega-churches? I doubt it. Paul left the hypocrisy of Pharisaic Judaism on the way to Damascus. It was Pharisaic Judaism’s oral laws that were burdensome and all but impossible to follow, not God’s Levitical laws. The oral laws were added to God’s laws and were built on the traditions of men. Paul left these blasphemous practices on the road to Damascus. The laws of God were zealously followed by Paul, Stephen, James, John, Peter, all of the apostles and even a great many of the scribes and Pharisees! Nowhere is it ever recorded that true followers of the Messiah taught others to break them. God’s Word is true. God doesn’t change. God’s Word cannot contradict itself. Here is a comparison between the Pharisees and the modern Church: 1.According to the Pharisees: a.The Oral Law was the “truth filter” that was applied to all Scripture, and it is still used by Rabbinic Judaism to this day. i.The only true interpretation of all Scripture could be attained through this filter 1.This filter ignored contradictory Scripture. 2.If a Scripture didn’t fit, they concocted some method of scriptural interpretation in order to make it fit or explain it away. a.The seven rules of Hillel, the thirteen rules of Ishmael, the thirty-two rules of Eliezer b.Traditions of the fathers and rabbis became more important than Scripture. c.Through skillful twisting, the Scripture could be made to say whatever they wanted. d.Anyone who disagreed was called a heathen, blasphemer or heretic. 2.According to the modern Church: a.The “no-law” doctrine is the “truth filter” that is applied to all of Scripture. i.The only true interpretation of all Scripture can be attained through this filter. 1. This filter ignores contradictory Scripture. 2.If a Scripture doesn’t fit, they concoct some method of scriptural interpretation to make it fit or explain it away. a.Progressive Revelation, Dispensationalism, Supersessionism, Covenant Theology, Ultradispensationalism b.Traditions of the church and church fathers became more important than Scripture. i.Even traditions with clearly dubious origins can be overlooked by saying, “That’s not what it means to me,” or, “It’s a mystery.” c.Through skillful twisting, the Scripture can be made to say whatever is required. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Conclusions~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The “no-law” doctrine has taken Paul’s “hard to understand writings” and interpreted them to mean that the laws of God given through Moses are no more, and in so doing, have elevated Paul’s teachings above the teaching of Jesus and the very words of God. Jesus is the Messiah, not Paul! Salvation comes through Jesus, not Paul! We are to follow the Gospel of Christ, not the Gospel of Paul! This isn’t easy! Paul’s writings are HARD to understand; the apostle Peter said so! We must realize that the writings of Paul are not exempt from these scriptural truths. We cannot ignore or twist his difficult writings to make them support beloved and long-held doctrines. I have not been able to reconcile “the law is not to be followed by modern believers” with Scripture. The only conclusion I have been able to come to, without going against Scripture, is that the law is still in effect for modern believers, not as a condition of salvation, but as a reflection of how the Father wants us to be a holy and set-apart people, and out of love and obedience to him. This is an EXTREMELY unpopular stance, but what does the Savior have to say about it? Matthew 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. Will Paul be called least in the Kingdom? No, he never taught against God’s laws! Paul will be called GREAT in the Kingdom of Heaven! Will your Sunday school teacher? Will your pastor? Will you? ======================================================================== CHAPTER 19: 02.8. APPENDIX ONE – WHAT DOES “FULFIL” MEAN? ======================================================================== - Appendix One - What does “fulfil” mean? New Testament uses of the Greek word G4137 πληρόω plēroō in the form of: πληρωσαι πληρωσαι appears four times in the New Testament: Matthew 3:15 KJV And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him. Matthew 5:17 KJV Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. Romans 15:13 KJV Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost. Colossians 1:25 KJV Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; Old Testament References from the Greek translation of Hebrew Scriptures: The Septuagint (LXX) For those of us not familiar with the Septuagint (LXX), here is a summary from Wikipedia: The Septuagint (pronounced /ˈsɛptʊ.ədʒɪnt/), or simply "LXX", referred to in critical works by the abbreviation, is the Koine Greek version of the Hebrew Bible, translated in stages between the 3rd and 1st centuries BCE in Alexandria. It was begun by the third century BCE and completed before 132 BCE. It is the oldest of several ancient translations of the Hebrew Bible into Greek, lingua franca of the eastern Mediterranean Basin from the time of Alexander the Great (356-323 BCE). The Septuagint was held in great respect in ancient times; Philo and Josephus (associated with Hellenistic Judaism) ascribed divine inspiration to its authors. Besides the Old Latin versions, the LXX is also the basis for the Slavonic, the Syriac, Old Armenian, Old Georgian and Coptic versions of the Old Testament. Of significance for all Christians and for Bible scholars, the LXX is quoted by the New Testament and by the Apostolic Fathers. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint) Our access to this translation is of immense value because it gives us tremendous insight to the usage and meanings of New Testament Greek words in their first century context. Uses of the Greek word G4137 πληρόω plēroō in the form of: πληρωσαι πληρωσαι appears nine times in the Septuagint - I have placed its English translation (the Brenton) beside the King James for comparison: Numbers 7:88 Brenton All the cattle for a sacrifice of peace-offering, twenty-four heifers, sixty rams, sixty he-goats of a year old, sixty ewe-lambs of a year old without blemish: this is the dedication of the altar, after that Moses consecrated Aaron, and after he anointed him. Numbers 7:88 KJV And all the oxen for the sacrifice of the peace offerings were twenty and four bullocks, the rams sixty, the he goats sixty, the lambs of the first year sixty. This was the dedication of the altar, after that it was anointed. Numbers 7:88 LXX+ πασαι G3956[A-NPF] αι G3588[T-NPF] βοες G1016[N-NPF] εις G1519[PREP] θυσιαν G2378[N-ASF] σωτηριου G4992[N-GSN] δαμαλεις G1151[N-NPF] εικοσι G1501[N-NUI] τεσσαρες G5064[A-NPM] κριοι [N-NPM] εξηκοντα G1835[N-NUI] τραγοι G5131[N-NPM] εξηκοντα G1835[N-NUI] αμναδες [N-NPF] εξηκοντα G1835[N-NUI] ενιαυσιαι [A-NPF] αμωμοι G299[A-NPF] αυτη G3778[D-NSF] η G3588[T-NSF] εγκαινωσις [N-NSF] του G3588[T-GSN] θυσιαστηριου G2379[N-GSN] μετα G3326[PREP] το G3588[T-ASN] πληρωσαι G4137[V-AAN] τας G3588[T-APF] χειρας G5495[N-APF] αυτου G846[D-GSM] και G2532[CONJ] μετα G3326[PREP] το G3588[T-ASN] χρισαι G5548[V-AAN] αυτον G846[D-ASM] 1 Chronicles 29:5 Brenton for thee to use the gold for things of gold, and the silver for things of silver, and for every work by the hand of the artificers. And who is willing to dedicate himself in work this day for the Lord? 1 Chronicles 29:5 KJV The gold for things of gold, and the silver for things of silver, and for all manner of work to be made by the hands of artificers. And who then is willing to consecrate his service this day unto the LORD? 1 Chronicles 29:5 LXX+ δια G1223[PREP] χειρος G5495[N-GSF] τεχνιτων G5079[N-GPM] και G2532[CONJ] τις G5100[I-NSM] ο G3588[T-NSM] προθυμουμενος [V-PMPNS] πληρωσαι G4137[V-AAN] τας G3588[T-APF] χειρας G5495[N-APF] αυτου G846[D-GSM] σημερον G4594[ADV] κυριω G2962[N-DSM] 2 Chronicles 13:9 Brenton Did ye not cast out the priests of the Lord, the sons of Aaron, and the Levites, and make to yourselves priests of the people of any other land? whoever came to consecrate himself with a calf of the heard and seven rams, he forthwith became a priest to that which is no god. 2 Chronicles 13:9 KJV Have ye not cast out the priests of the LORD, the sons of Aaron, and the Levites, and have made you priests after the manner of the nations of other lands? so that whosoever cometh to consecrate himself with a young bullock and seven rams, the same may be a priest of them that are no gods. 2 Chronicles 13:9 LXX+ η G2228[CONJ] ουκ G3364[ADV] εξεβαλετε G1544[V-AAI-2P] τους G3588[T-APM] ιερεις G2409[N-APM] κυριου G2962[N-GSM] τους G3588[T-APM] υιους G5207[N-APM] ααρων G2[N-PRI] και G2532[CONJ] τους G3588[T-APM] λευιτας [N-APM] και G2532[CONJ] εποιησατε G4160[V-AAI-2P] εαυτοις G1438[D-DPM] ιερεις G2409[N-APM] εκ G1537[PREP] του G3588[T-GSM] λαου G2992[N-GSM] της G3588[T-GSF] γης G1065[N-GSF] πας G3956[A-NSM] ο G3588[T-NSM] προσπορευομενος G4365[V-PMPNS] πληρωσαι G4137[V-AAN] τας G3588[T-APF] χειρας G5495[N-APF] εν G1722[PREP] μοσχω G3448[N-DSM] εκ G1537[PREP] βοων G1016[N-GPM] και G2532[CONJ] κριοις [N-DPM] επτα G2033[N-NUI] και G2532[CONJ] εγινετο G1096[V-IMI-3S] εις G1519[PREP] ιερεα G2409[N-ASM] τω G3588[T-DSM] μη G3165[ADV] οντι G1510[V-PAPDS] θεω G2316[N-DSM] Job 20:23 Brenton If by any means he would fill his belly, let God send upon him the fury of wrath; let him bring a torrent of pains upon him. Job 20:23 KJV When he is about to fill his belly, God shall cast the fury of his wrath upon him, and shall rain it upon him while he is eating. Job 20:23 LXX+ ει G1487[CONJ] πως G4459[ADV] πληρωσαι G4137[V-AAN] γαστερα G1064[N-ASF] αυτου G846[D-GSM] επαποστειλαι [V-AAN] επ G1909[PREP] αυτον G846[D-ASM] θυμον G2372[N-ASM] οργης G3709[N-GSF] νιψαι G3538[V-AAO-3S] επ G1909[PREP] αυτον G846[D-ASM] οδυνας G3601[N-APF] Psalms 20:4-5 Brenton (Psalms 19:4) Grant thee according to thy heart, and fulfill all thy desire. (Psalms 19:5) We will exult in thy salvation, and in the name of our God shall we be magnified: the Lord fulfil all thy petitions. Psalms 20:4-5 KJV Grant thee according to thine own heart, and fulfil all thy counsel. We will rejoice in thy salvation, and in the name of our God we will set up our banners: the LORD fulfil all thy petitions. Psalms 20:4-5 LXX+ (19:5) δωη G1325[V-AAO-3S] σοι G4771[P-DS] κατα G2596[PREP] την G3588[T-ASF] καρδιαν G2588[N-ASF] σου G4771[P-GS] και G2532[CONJ] πασαν G3956[A-ASF] την G3588[T-ASF] βουλην G1012[N-ASF] σου G4771[P-GS] πληρωσαι G4137[V-AMD-2S] (Psalms 19:6) αγαλλιασομεθα [V-FMI-1P] εν G1722[PREP] τω G3588[T-DSN] σωτηριω G4992[N-DSN] σου G4771[P-GS] και G2532[CONJ] εν G1722[PREP] ονοματι G3686[N-DSN] θεου G2316[N-GSM] ημων G1473[P-GP] μεγαλυνθησομεθα G3170[V-FPI-1P] πληρωσαι G4137[V-AMD-2S] κυριος G2962[N-NSM] παντα G3956[A-ASM] τα G3588[T-APN] αιτηματα G155[N-APN] σου G4771[P-GS] Isaiah 8:8 Brenton and he shall take away from Juda every man who shall be able to lift up his head, and every one able to accomplish anything; and his camp shall fill the breadth of thy land, O God with us. Isaiah 8:8 KJV And he shall pass through Judah; he shall overflow and go over, he shall reach even to the neck; and the stretching out of his wings shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel. Isaiah 8:8 LXX+ και G2532[CONJ] αφελει [V-FAI-3S] απο G575[PREP] της G3588[T-GSF] ιουδαιας G2449[N-GSF] ανθρωπον G444[N-ASM] ος G3739[R-NSM] δυνησεται G1410[V-FMI-3S] κεφαλην G2776[N-ASF] αραι G142[V-AAN] η G2228[CONJ] δυνατον G1415[A-ASM] συντελεσασθαι G4931[V-AMN] τι G5100[I-ASN] και G2532[CONJ] εσται G1510[V-FMI-3S] η G3588[T-NSF] παρεμβολη [N-NSF] αυτου G846[D-GSM] ωστε G5620[CONJ] πληρωσαι G4137[V-AAN] το G3588[T-ASN] πλατος G4114[N-ASN] της G3588[T-GSF] χωρας G5561[N-GSF] σου G4771[P-GS] μεθ G3326[PREP] ημων G1473[P-GP] ο G3588[T-NSM] θεος G2316[N-NSM] Isaiah 13:3 Brenton I give command, and I bring them: giants are coming to fulfil my wrath, rejoicing at the same time and insulting. Isaiah 13:3 KJV I have commanded my sanctified ones, I have also called my mighty ones for mine anger, even them that rejoice in my highness. Isaiah 13:3 LXX+ εγω G1473[P-NS] συντασσω G4929[V-PAI-1S] και G2532[CONJ] εγω G1473[P-NS] αγω G71[V-PAI-1S] αυτους G846[D-APM] ηγιασμενοι G37[V-RMPNP] εισιν G1510[V-PAI-3P] και G2532[CONJ] εγω G1473[P-NS] αγω G71[V-PAI-1S] αυτους G846[D-APM] γιγαντες [N-NPM] ερχονται G2064[V-PMI-3P] πληρωσαι G4137[V-AAN] τον G3588[T-ASM] θυμον G2372[N-ASM] μου G1473[P-GS] χαιροντες G5463[V-PAPNP] αμα G260[ADV] και G2532[CONJ] υβριζοντες G5195[V-PAPNP] Jeremiah 33:5 Brenton (Jeremiah 40:5) to fight against the Chaldeans, and to fill it with the corpses of men, whom I smote in mine anger and my wrath, and turned away my face from them, for all their wickedness: Jeremiah 33:5 KJV They come to fight with the Chaldeans, but it is to fill them with the dead bodies of men, whom I have slain in mine anger and in my fury, and for all whose wickedness I have hid my face from this city. Jeremiah 33:5 LXX+ (Jer 40:5) του G3588[T-GSN] μαχεσθαι G3164[V-PMN] προς G4314[PREP] τους G3588[T-APM] χαλδαιους G5466[N-APM] και G2532[CONJ] πληρωσαι G4137[V-AAN] αυτην G846[D-ASF] των G3588[T-GPM] νεκρων G3498[N-GPM] των G3588[T-GPM] ανθρωπων G444[N-GPM] ους G3739[R-APM] επαταξα G3960[V-AAI-1S] εν G1722[PREP] οργη G3709[N-DSF] μου G1473[P-GS] και G2532[CONJ] εν G1722[PREP] θυμω G2372[N-DSM] μου G1473[P-GS] και G2532[CONJ] απεστρεψα G654[V-AAI-1S] το G3588[T-ASN] προσωπον G4383[N-ASN] μου G1473[P-GS] απ G575[PREP] αυτων G846[D-GPM] περι G4012[PREP] πασων G3956[A-GPF] των G3588[T-GPF] πονηριων G4189[N-GPF] αυτων G846[D-GPM] The context of the instances πληρωσαι in the LXX doesn’t even hint to a definition of “to end” or “completed.” Given that this word πληρωσαι is not only used as fill and fulfil but also as dedicate, dedication and consecrate, it is safe to say that the first century usage of this particular form of πληρωσαι would not and could not be translated as “to end” or “completed.” The dedication of the altar was not “the end of it." The consecration of one’s self was not “the end” of his service or life, it was a renewed beginning. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Let’s look once again at the New Testament verses using the definition of πληρωσαι as consecrate (to set apart and make Holy) instead of fulfil (to end or completed): Matthew 3:15 KJV And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to consecrate all righteousness. Then he suffered him. Matthew 5:17 KJV Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to consecrate. Romans 15:13 KJV Now the God of hope consecrate you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost. Colossians 1:25 KJV Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to consecrate the word of God; Does it make sense? Yes. Does this fit the context? Yes! If this is the correct interpretation of πληρωσαι, does it remove any question of what Matthew 5:17 is really talking about? Yes!! ======================================================================== Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/writings-of-clint-branham/ ========================================================================