Видео

What life is wasted and what exactly is "nonsense." As for being a slave, everyone is a slave to something. You choose your own master.

You are correct that some are tempted due to a lack of teaching and some are tempted to not teach the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:26, 27). Others are tempted because they do not like the teaching of God by asserting their will in place of God's. Isaiah also says, "Surely you have things turned around! Shall the potter be esteemed as the clay; For shall the thing made say of him who made it, He did not make me? Or shall the thing formed say of him who formed it, He has no understanding?" (Isa. 29:16). We are under the New Covenant today and are bound to what the blood of Jesus ratified. We are not under the Law of Moses or the covenant that was given from Mount Sinai. To assert such would cause one to commit spiritual adultery (Rom. 7:1-4). The Law that we were delivered from in Romans 7:6 is the law that also says "You shall not covet" (Rom. 7:7). The point is that while covetousness is still a sin, we are not under the Law that was given to Israel on Mt. Sinai--the Ten Commandment Covenant.

@@stevenwallace3822 You are correct we are no longer under the Law that were given to Moses in Leviticus and Deuteronomy yet God's Laws written in stone in the book of Exodus apply for all time which so many claim we need not follow and this is what grieves me and ministry seems to reject.

@@DanHutchings-xx7ug Thank you for your response, friend. Paul was quoting from the tenth commandment in Romans 7:6, 7 and said we are delivered from that law. Again, that doesn't mean we are permitted to covet. Covetousness is sin and a form of idolatry (Col. 3:5).

@@stevenwallace3822 The law yes but not the Commandments, there is a big difference and even in Romans Paul recognized that difference and the importance of the law and taught it and honored it. Paul in Romans alone talks of the law 67 times and 42 more times in his other letters. Romans 2:7, it leads to eternal life; Romans 2:18, it is God's will, it is the essentials; Romans 3:19, makes all of mankind accountable to God; Romans 3:20, the law brings knowledge of sin; Romans 3:31, faith establishes the law; Romans 6:15-19, obedience to it brings sanctification; Romans 7:12, the law is Holy and righteous, Romans 10:4, Christ is what you look like, following the law and Romans 14:17, the law is in the kingdom of God. These are a few just in Romans alone where Paul shows us the importance of keeping God's law and there are many more to go along with these. God Bless you and rest in God's grace this night.

@@DanHutchings-xx7ug Thank you so much for your cordial response. Let me clarify the issue a little more with my argument above and then a short answer to your the rest of your response follows. In Romans 7:6, Paul writes: “But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.” Paul clearly says believers are no longer under the “oldness of the letter,” which refers to the Mosaic Law, including the Ten Commandments. This statement about being “delivered from the law” is clarified in verse 7, where he specifically references one of the Ten Commandments-“You shall not covet.” By quoting the Tenth Commandment, Paul shows that the law we are delivered from includes the Ten Commandments. Paul’s point here isn’t that the law itself is unrighteous, but that we are no longer bound to it in the same way because we are now under grace (Romans 6:14). Answering Other Points Briefly: Romans 2:7 - Paul says that those who “by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality” will receive eternal life. This is part of his larger argument that no one achieves this through the law because all have sinned (Romans 3:23). It’s not the law that leads to eternal life but faith in Christ. Romans 2:18 - The law indeed revealed God's will, but Romans 10:4 clarifies that Christ is the “end of the law for righteousness” to all who believe. Romans 3:19-20 - The law makes people aware of sin, but it doesn’t justify (Romans 3:28). The law exposes sin, but salvation is through faith. Romans 3:31 - Paul says faith “establishes” the law, not by requiring us to keep it as a means of salvation, but by fulfilling its purpose through Christ, who kept the law perfectly. Romans 6:15-19 - Obedience to God is essential, but here Paul speaks of being “slaves to righteousness,” which is found in Christ, not under the Mosaic Law. Romans 7:12 - The law is “holy and righteous and good,” but we are no longer under it (Romans 6:14), as shown by Paul’s statements about being delivered from the law. Romans 10:4 - Christ is the culmination of the law; following Christ, not the letter of the law, leads to righteousness. Romans 14:17 - Paul’s discussion of the kingdom is focused on righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit-not on observing the law. In summary, Paul’s writings in Romans are not a call to continue under the law, including the Ten Commandments, but a call to serve in the “newness of the Spirit” through faith in Christ, who fulfilled the law’s demands on our behalf.

Thank you for your feedback. You’ll be happy to know that most of our sermons are recorded with this level of sound quality. Any variations have occurred when a different phone is used, which sometimes doesn’t register properly with our sound equipment. Moving forward, we’ll strive to ensure that our audio quality consistently matches what you heard in this lesson. Thank you for your support!

Thank you for your feedback. We apologize for the sound quality in this sermon. Since our usual recorder was unavailable, we had to use a different camera, which unfortunately affected the audio.

The sermon does have sound, though we acknowledge that the quality isn’t up to our usual standards. This was due to using a different camera than we typically do. We appreciate your understanding

Ignatius only speaks of the "universal" church. That he was not speaking of the Roman Catholic Church is obvious for 40 years before his statement we read what he read from the apostle Paul. Ignatius did not know of any unmarried bishops who were not family men first. "A bishop then MUST be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; 3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; 4 one who rules his own house well, having [his] children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?)" (1 Tim. 3). Which of these does the Roman Catholic Church say "must" not exist? And if it does not exist, how is he qualified to take care of the church of God?

@@stevenwallace6302 There exists only evidence in support of the Papacy before 150AD. And that passage literally doesn't say Bishops must be married. Just that they can't have more then one wife. “Therefore shall you [Hermas] write two little books and send one to Clement [Bishop of Rome] and one to Grapte. Clement shall then send it to the cities abroad, because that is his duty” (The Shepherd 2:4:3 [A.D. 80]). St. Ignatius absolutely understood the significance of the Holy See: “Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father” (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [A.D. 110]). “You [the church at Rome] have envied no one, but others you have taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force” (ibid., 3:1). "Owing, dear brethren, to the sudden and successive calamitous events which have happened to ourselves, we feel that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the points respecting which you consulted us" - 1 Clement 67-97AD. Why are other Churches asking the Holy See for consultation while the Apostle John was still alive? “For from the beginning it has been your custom to do good to all the brethren in various ways and to send contributions to all the churches in every city. . . . This custom your blessed Bishop Soter has not only preserved, but is augmenting, by furnishing an abundance of supplies to the saints and by urging with consoling words, as a loving father his children, the brethren who are journeying” (Letter to Pope Soter in Eusebius, Church History 4:23:9 [A.D. 170]). “Today we have observed the Lord’s holy day, in which we have read your letter [Pope Soter]. Whenever we do read it [in church], we shall be able to profit thereby, as also we do when we read the earlier letter written to us by Clement” (ibid., 4:23:11).

@@stevenwallace6302 Try again. “Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father” (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [A.D. 110]). “You [the church at Rome] have envied no one, but others you have taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force” (ibid., 3:1). And that verse doesn't say Bishops must be married. Just that they can't have more than one wife.

​@@MasterKeyMagic Not so. The church at Rome is not the same as the Roman Catholic Church. One was established by the apostles' teaching, the other by man and departing from the faith. Also, that verse (1 Tim. 3:2-5) has the bookends of "MUST" (1 Tim. 3:2, 7). That verse also says, "(for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?)." The Roman Catholic Church has Bishops who do not know how to rule their own houses therefore they are not Bible Bishops. Further still, the monarchal bishop establishment was created about 150 or around 85 years after Paul gave these instructions. Yes, the Spirit expressly said that some would depart from the faith (1 Tim. 4:1) and history shows that departure took the face in Roman Catholicism.

@@stevenwallace6302 Again, you're just making claims without any evidence just like the video. Notice how im actually citing the earliest writings we have of Christians outside the Bible? Every single one of them fully backs the Roman Catholic Church being the only Church established by Jesus. You can't find contrary writings. we do have writings of groups you and I both agree or heretics like the Aryans and the Donatists, but none of the heretics before the protestant reformation existed for long, or believed what protestants would later believe.

Hello and thanks for your comments. I would ask what more do you need than the words contained in the scriptures? A few versus for your consideration. ¶ For the word of God is living and effective and sharper than any double-edged sword, penetrating as far as the separation of soul and spirit, joints and marrow. It is able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. 2 Timothy 2::15 Be diligent to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who doesn’t need to be ashamed, correctly teaching the word of truth. Again what more do we need than the word?

@@fizzland Everything Jesus taught and revealed. The scriptures admit only some of it was written down later. If you love Jesus you want the full deposit of faith and he only gave all of it to the Roman Catholic Church, which you need to understand scripture Acts 8:27-31.

2 Timothy 3:16, 17. Where does the bible say there is more than the Bible that is needed? Where does the Bible speak of "Pope", perpetual virginity, and Mary as "the Mother of God"?

Hi again. Listen to the presentation again and I think you can see that men can study and understand the scriptures. It is hard but if one is willing to look at the scriptures without the encumbrance of men’s traditions it can be done. Remember the words of the Apostle Paul to Christians, “so then do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is.” We can understand the words of the Apostles and Jesus if we know what they taught. We only know what they taught by reading their instructions in the letters of the New Testament.

@@fizzland I just told you what the scriptures says and it says you cannot understand it unless taught. This wasn't a presentation. He presented no evidence to support any of his claims. Its just his sifted fallible opinion (Luke 22:31-32).

@@MasterKeyMagic Ephesians 3:2-4: "if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, 3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, 4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)." The Scripture says we understand the mystery when we read. The problem is, some do not read to understand. The Treasurer in Acts 8 needed guidance to understand a prophecy in Isaiah 53 without having the New Testament. We have it today.

@@stevenwallace6302 No, you just changed scripture. Thats a sin. It says may. You left that out. And it never says in Acts 8 what you're trying to make it say. Put the two together and that may means if instructed by those sent by Jesus. Which you cannot reject without also rejecting Jesus (Luke 10:16)

“Interpretation” is distinct from Scripture. The church doesn’t define truth; rather, the Head (Jesus) does. His word is truth (John 17:17). However, any church that prohibits marriage and mandates abstaining from food is not part of Jesus’s body (1 Timothy 4:1-3).

@@stevenwallace6302 Yes, Jesus is the truth but the Bible is not all of his word and not the only place his word is found (1 Thess. 2:13) And what Jesus said is Peter and the Apostles, who he started his Church with, have the power to bind and loose (Matthew 16:18-19 and Matthew 18:15-18) Not you.

@@stevenwallace6302 Also none of those points answer for the fact that there is only evidence of the Roman Catholic Church existing before 1054, and zero evidence for your set of beliefs.

@@MasterKeyMagic That is incorrect. Paul said to not think beyond what is written and all Scripture is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness to make one complete and thoroughly equipped in righteousness (1 Cor. 4:6; 2 Tim. 3:16, 17). We need nothing beyond what is written. To add to His word is pray for God to add the plagues of Revelation upon his soul (Rev. 22:18).

@@MasterKeyMagic This is also incorrect. Disciples of Christ were called Christians, not Catholics (Acts 11:26). The formation of churches were called "churches of Christ" not Roman Catholic churches (Rom. 16:16).

Thank you for listening and for commenting. While it is possible for a preacher to also serve as one of the elders, the preacher is never “the shepherd” or “pastor” of the church. Peter certainly preached God’s word, and he was not only an apostle but also served as an elder (1 Pet. 5:1). Each work is different, however. The work of an apostle, preacher, and pastor (shepherd, bishop, elder) are entirely different works in the Bible and distinguished from each other in Ephesians 4:11, “And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers.” In the early church, a plurality of elders constituted “an eldership” taking the oversight of a local congregation (Acts 14:23; 1 Tim. 4:14). Rather than being over the elders, the preacher fulfills his work under their oversight. Also, elders never extended their oversight beyond the local congregation where they were members. Thanks again for posting.

It wasn't a Catholic who identified the tablets of stone as the "ministry of death" and neither was it a Catholic who penned, "Now on the first [day] of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight" (Acts 20:7). If a Seventh-Day Adventist wrote Acts 20:7 how would it read? Why does Luke completely pass over the seventh day? Responding "Jesuit!" no more answers the argument than when the Jews said, "He has a demon and is mad" (Jn. 10:20).

And Saturday, the seventh day of the week, was associated with Saturn's day by pagans but the Jews kept it as the Sabbath. Likewise, Christian met on the first day of the week to break the bread of the Lord's Supper regardless of what pagans did (Acts 20:8). It was the day Jesus rose from the dead (Mk. 16:1, 2, 9). It was also the day Paul ordered churches to lay something aside for a collection for the saints (1 Cor. 16:1, 2). What day do you partake of the Lord's Supper and lay something aside for the work of the church? If the day doesn't matter, why do NT writers specify it?

@@stevenwallace6302 They do not. Paul asking them to lay money aside for the saints is not about worship. And they, continuing *daily* with one accord in the temple, and *breaking bread* from house to house, *did eat their meat* with gladness and singleness of heart, {Acts 2:46} Just because the fact that Jesus was resurrected of the first day of the week, does not equal changing God's holy day. And when they heard that, they lifted up their voice to God with one accord, and said, Lord, thou art God, which hast *made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is* {Acts 4:24} And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and *worship him that made heaven and earth and the sea and the fountains of waters* {Revelation 14:6-7} For in six days the LORD *made heaven and earth the sea and all that in them* is, and rested *the seventh day* wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. {Exodus 20:11}

And why did Paul go into the synagogues? Was it not to first attempt to win the Jews to Christ by proving that Jesus is the Christ from their holy Scriptures (Acts 17:1-3; Rom. 1:16). "And to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those [who are] under the law, as under the law, that I might win those [who are] under the law" (1 Cor. 9:20). You still haven't shown a commandment by Jesus or an apostle for the church to keep the covenant that is tied to the Ten Commandments. We are under a new covenant today and no one should judge you regarding sabbath days (Col. 2:16). If you listened to the series of lessons, you would know that the sabbath was made between God and Israel, the nation that was in bondage to slavery in Egypt. It was a sign between that one nation and God. Were you ever in Egyptian bondage? Were you ever brought out of Egypt? If not, then you were not given the covenant that came from Horeb (Exo. 20:2; 31:13; Deut. 5:15; Ezek. 20:10-12).

@@stevenwallace6302 They wont allow me to reply

@@larrybedouin2921 I see your reply. It is probably delayed.

What law was a pious Jew delivered from in Romans 7:6?

Thanks for your comment. Are you suggesting that the church keeps the Sabbath and offers burnt offerings and sacrifices today? "...their burnt offerings and their sacrfices shall be accepted upon mine altar..."

@@stevenwallace6302 We are under a new covenant. Now of the things which we have spoken this is *the sum* We have such an high priest, (of the order of Melchizedek; chapter 7) who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty *in the heavens* A minister of *the sanctuary* and of the true tabernacle, *which the Lord pitched and not man* For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. (His life; "no greater love"...) For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests [Levitical] that offer gifts according to the law: Who serve unto the example and *shadow* of *heavenly things* as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make *the tabernacle* for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to *the pattern* shewed to thee in the mount. But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also *he* is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. *For if that first covenant had been faultless then should no place have been sought for the second* For *finding fault with them* he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; *I will put my laws into their mind and write them in their hearts* and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: {Hebrews 8:1-10} (Jer 31:31-33) No new moral law.

@@stevenwallace6302 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. {Hebrews 9:28} And he [Christ] shall *confirm the covenant with many for one week* and in the midst of the week [the 70th] he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate. Daniel 9:27....is speaking of the new covenant that Jesus Christ our promised Messiah confirms with many, for three and a half years of the seventieth week, (not as the unlearned, who give this covenant to the antichrist) from his anointing~baptism at the age of thirty, to his sacrifice and death, and resurrection when he was thirty three years of age, for the remission of sins. By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. [G1242] {Hebrews 7:22} But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, [G1242] which was established upon better promises. {Hebrews 8:6} For this is the covenant [G1242] that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; *I will put my laws* into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: {Hebrews 8:10} For where a testament [G1242] is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament [G1242] is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. {Hebrews 9:16-17} For this is my blood of the new testament, [G1242] which is shed for many for the remission of sins. {Matthew 26:28} And he said unto them, This is my blood of the new testament, [G1242] which is shed for many. {Mark 14:24} Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament [G1242] in my blood, which is shed for you. {Luke 22:20}

@@stevenwallace6302 Now of the things which we have spoken this is *the sum* We have such an high priest, (of the order of Melchizedek; chapter 7) who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty *in the heavens* A minister of *the sanctuary* and of the true tabernacle, *which the Lord pitched and not man* For every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. (His life; "no greater love"...) For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests [Levitical] that offer gifts according to the law: Who serve unto the example and *shadow* of *heavenly things* as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make *the tabernacle* for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to *the pattern* shewed to thee in the mount. But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also *he* is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises. *For if that first covenant had been faultless then should no place have been sought for the second* For *finding fault with them* he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; *I will put my laws into their mind and write them in their hearts* and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: {Hebrews 8:1-10} (Jer 31:31-33) No new moral law.

"Who" kept the sabbath day according to the commandment? Jewish women who came to the tomb (Lk. 23:55). You are right, the testament is in force after men are dead. After Jesus died, His testament was in force. But it was not revealed until the apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 1:4; 2:1-4). The "new covenant" made is "not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day [that] I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, though I was a husband to them, says the LORD" (Jer. 31:32). When was that covenant made? When they came out of Egypt. Where was that covenant made? Sinai/Horeb. When is the new covenant made? On the Day of Pentecost? Where was that covenant made? Jerusalem/Mt. Zion (Isa. 2:1-4). What would not come to mind, be remembered, and not "made" anymore at this time? The ark of the covenant (Jer. 3:16)? What was in the ark? The tablets of stone...the Ten Commandments...the ministry of condemnation (1 Kin. 8:9; 2 Cor. 3:7ff). I hope this helps clarify the issue. The actual day of the sun is the fourth day of creation (Gen. 1:14-19). Day 1 is the day God created light and scattered the darkness and this work parallels what God did by raising His Son on the first day of the week (2 Cor. 4:6).

@@stevenwallace6302 Wrong! Jesus confirmed his covenant with them for three and a half years. Who are the Israel of God? There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. {Galatians 3:28-29} For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, *which is one inwardly and circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit* and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. {Romans 2:28-29} Wherefore remember, that ye being IN TIME PAST Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the COMMONWEALTH of ISRAEL, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: BUT now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh *by the blood of Christ* For he is our peace, who hath made both [Jew and Gentile] one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments [not the ten commandments] contained in ordinances; for to make in himself *of twain* ONE NEW MAN, so making peace; And that he might reconcile BOTH unto God in ONE BODY by the cross, *having slain the enmity thereby* And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but *fellowcitizens* with the saints, and of the household of God; [The commnwealth of Israel ... Jeshurun] {Ephesians 2:11-19} Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But *in every nation* he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. {Acts 10:34-35} Again... But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God. {Romans 2:10-11} Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For *they are not all Israel* which are of Israel: *Neither because they are the seed of Abraham* are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but *the children of the promise* are counted for the seed. {Romans 9:6-8} Now we, [Galatians] brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. {Galatians 4:28-29} For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon *the Israel of God* {Galatians 6:15-16} And they [the Jew] also, *if they abide not still in unbelief* shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in *again* {Romans 11:23} For ye are all the children of God *by faith in Christ Jesus* For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. {Galatians 3:26-27}

@@larrybedouin2921 Are you suggesting that uncircumcised and baptized Israelites were at Mount Horeb receiving the law after the Exodus from Egypt? Further, Paul said the commandments were abolished without a qualifier in Ephesians 2:15.

@@stevenwallace6302 That's not biblical. Jesus did not die for our transgression of the law just to abrogated it. Wrote many replys to you that they have deleted. I am finished here.

@@larrybedouin2921 I am sorry you feel that way. Nothing was deleted and it is absolutely biblical that Paul uses no qualifier in Ephesians 2:15. It is equally biblical that the Jews before the mountain were to be circumcised in the flesh to stand before God as it was commanded since Abraham (Gen. 17:11ff). The spiritual Israel...the church, does not practice circumcision in the flesh because we are not under that covenant. "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creation" (Gal. 6:15). In this same letter, Paul said "Hagar" represents the covenant that came from Mount Sinai (Gal. 4:21-24). What mountain did the Sabbath command come from? Mount Sinai or Mount Zion? Paul said the Mount Sinai covenant gives birth to bondage. Just think about what that means by binding Sinaitic Law today.

You are correct that the rest was not given and that it still remains. You are incorrect in application. The rest that remains for the people of God is in heaven, not on earth (Heb. 4:1-10). While they kept the Sabbath under Moses, they did not enter the rest. While Joshua took men into the Promised Land, there was a rest spoken of afterward by God. Hence, neither the Sabbath day, nor the physical land of Palestine equals the rest that remains to be entered into. Jesus is "ALSO" Lord of the Sabbath (Mk. 2:28). I will address this more in the very next lesson.

@@stevenwallace6302 No! They could enter into his rest and that rest was in addition to the seventh day sabbath, God's holy day.

@@larrybedouin2921 Did they keep the sabbath or not under Moses? You say they could enter his rest, the Holy Spirit says they did not enter. Hebrews 4:6-8, "Since therefore it remains that some [must] enter it, and those to whom it was first preached did not enter because of disobedience, 7 again He designates a certain day, saying in David, “Today,” after such a long time, as it has been said: 'Today, if you will hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts.' 8 For if Joshua had given them rest, then He would not afterward have spoken of another day." Moses didn't give them this rest. Joshua didn't give them this rest. If Joshua had given them this rest then why after so many years since Joshua would David, in the Spirit, speak of another day? David was exhorting the people, people who were already in the Promised Land, to not harden their hearts in Psalm 95. Yes, even though the Jews kept the Sabbath and were living in the land promised through Abraham, there remains (present tense) a rest for the people of God (Heb. 4:9).

Amen! 🙂

Thanks for your reply! If your argument is that Christians are the true children of Israel, therefore Christians are commanded everything Israel was commanded, then are Christians commanded to be circumcised on the eighth day?

Thank you for your thoughts! As said in the sermon (25:16), "Calling somebody to remember something doesn't necessarily force the conclusion that they were always practicing that." For example, in Exodus 13:3, the Israelites were told to remember the Passover when they were taken out of Egypt, but this hadn't happened before. Also, while God rested on the seventh day of creation, He did not "give" any human the Sabbath until He gave it to Israel (Ezek. 20:10-12). How could God have "given" Israel the Sabbath (Ezek. 20:10-12) if all mankind already had the Sabbath from the beginning of creation?

Thanks for your consideration. To whom is the Sabbath given? Please provide a Bible reference for your answer. Here is one that shows it was given to one nation, Israel (Exo. 31:16, 17). What verse shows it is given to the church? Please give one Scripture that shows Jesus or an apostle commanding the church to keep the Sabbath holy. Also, if we changed the subject from a day to the diet of creation, didn’t God give a purely vegetarian diet for man and the animals on earth (Gen. 1:29, 3)? Can this diet be modified and if so, who has the power to modify it? Also, are there any modifications made to it (see, Gen. 9:3; 1 Tim. 4:4, 5)?

​@@stevenwallace6302 Who are the Israel of God? There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise. {Galatians 3:28-29} For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, *which is one inwardly and circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit* and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. {Romans 2:28-29} Wherefore remember, that ye being IN TIME PAST Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands; That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the COMMONWEALTH of ISRAEL, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: BUT now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh *by the blood of Christ* For he is our peace, who hath made both [Jew and Gentile] one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us; Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments [not the ten commandments] contained in ordinances; for to make in himself *of twain* ONE NEW MAN, so making peace; And that he might reconcile BOTH unto God in ONE BODY by the cross, *having slain the enmity thereby* And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but *fellowcitizens* with the saints, and of the household of God; [The commnwealth of Israel ... Jeshurun] {Ephesians 2:11-19} Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But *in every nation* he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. {Acts 10:34-35} Again... But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: For there is no respect of persons with God. {Romans 2:10-11} Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For *they are not all Israel* which are of Israel: *Neither because they are the seed of Abraham* are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but *the children of the promise* are counted for the seed. {Romans 9:6-8} Now we, [Galatians] brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. {Galatians 4:28-29} For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them, and mercy, and upon *the Israel of God* {Galatians 6:15-16} And they [the Jew] also, *if they abide not still in unbelief* shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in *again* {Romans 11:23} For ye are all the children of God *by faith in Christ Jesus* For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. {Galatians 3:26-27}

​@@stevenwallace6302 *One* ordinance shall be both for you of the congregation, *and also for the stranger* that sojourneth with you, an ordinance for ever in your generations: as ye are, so shall the stranger be before the LORD. {Numbers 15:15} Hebron therefore became *the inheritance of Caleb* the son of Jephunneh *the Kenezite* unto this day, *because that he wholly followed the LORD God of Israel* {Joshua 14:14} -- Caleb was not born out of the twelve tribes of Israel. (Gen 15:18-19) Of *the tribe of Judah* Caleb the son of Jephunneh. {Numbers 13:6} -- Not even carrying a patriarchal name is exclusively of Hebrew ethnicity.

@@larrybedouin2921 While Caleb's ancestry is somewhat disputed he is clearly identified with Judah in Josh. 13:6. Regardless, as Numbers 15 shows in context, there was one ordinance for the native and the stranger regarding BURNT OFFERINGS THROUGHOUT THEIR GENERATIONS. We are not a part of their physical generations and are not under the law they were under. What law was a converted Jew delivered from in Romans 7:6?

"So the Saturday Sabbath was given to Israel alone ?" That's right, the Sabbath was given specially to the nation of Israel, the nation that started out as slaves in Egypt (Deut. 5:15). After all, how could God have "given" Israel the Sabbath (Ezek. 20:10-12) if all mankind already had the Sabbath from the beginning of creation? "I say that all the 10 Commandments were given to Israel alone." Good point. Fortunately, nine out of ten of these commandments are also given to Christians in the New Testament. "Therefore Christians are not under the law." You are correct that Christians are not under the law, "for you are not under law but under grace" (Rom. 6:14, NKJV). "But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law" (Gal. 5:18, NKJV). "And all the 10 Commandments are abolished in spite of James 2 : 10" James 2:10 says that being guilty in one part of the law equals being guilty of it all. Blessed be God who sent His Son as a result. "For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God did by sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, on account of sin: He condemned sin in the flesh" (Rom. 8:3, NKJV).

Thanks so much! I'm glad the lesson was a benefit to you! 😃

Thank you, I appreciate it!

Amen to choosing Scripture before opinion! It appears the argument from Mark 2:27 is that “man” (Greek, anthropos) must include Gentiles and that, therefore, Mark 2:27 proves the Sabbath was also made for Gentiles. However, as you noted, we should look to Scripture before assuming our opinions. If "man" automatically includes Gentiles, then this claim logically requires that “man” includes Gentiles in John 7:22-23; Hebrews 5:1-3; Hebrews 7:28 as well. But wouldn't that necessarily imply that High Priests and circumcision must be done to Gentiles today? If "man" doesn't have to include Gentiles in John 7:22-23; Hebrews 5:1-3; Hebrews 7:28, then "man" doesn't have to include Gentiles in Mark 2:27. Of course, you point out that God rested on the seventh day in Genesis, and the only man at this time was Adam, not Jews. However, although God rested on the seventh day in Genesis, we know from other passages that the Sabbath wasn't "given" to anyone else till much later. The Sabbath was specifically "given" to the children of Israel as a sign between God and them (Ezek. 20:12). How could God have "given" Israel the Sabbath (Ezek. 20:10-12) if they already had the Sabbath from the beginning of creation? One reason the Ten Commandments mentions for keeping the Sabbath is because God brought Israel out of Egypt (Deut. 5:15), an event that doesn't apply to Gentiles but to the nation of Israel specifically. Other passages showing that the Sabbath was a "sign" specifically between God and the nation of Israel include Exodus 31:13; Exodus 31:16-17; Ezekiel 20:19-20. Therefore, the Sabbath was specifically for the nation of Israel, not all people. As for the other verse cited, if Isaiah 66:22 proves that Gentiles must keep the Sabbath today because it's mentioned in the verse, then it also proves that Gentiles must keep the New Moons because it's also mentioned in the verse. Do you believe this?

Thank you for responding to this. The Scripture in Mark 2:27, 28 shows the Sabbath was made for man. Opinion says “Adam.” WHAT man and WHEN is not an opinion but answered by Scripture. Contextually, Jesus is addressing Jews (Pharisees) and not Gentiles. When Jesus gives rules that apply to all men, He tells so. See belief and baptism to be saved in Matt. 28:18-20; Mk. 16:15, 16. Mark 2:27, 28 doesn’t tell us “WHEN” the Sabbath was made for man. Opinion says it was made for Adam at creation and was given for all men since. Scripture says God rested on the seventh day of creation and later gave it to one nation, Israel after they came out of Egypt. “See! For the LORD has given you the Sabbath” (Exo. 16:29). “You made known to them your holy Sabbath…by the hand of Moses…” (Neh. 9:14). “Therefore I made them go out of the land of Egypt… “Moreover I also gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between them and Me” (Ezek. 20:10, 12). Moses said the Ten Commandments (which include the Sabbath) was NOT made to the nation’s fathers but to those who were living at his time (Deut. 5:2, 3). That is Scripture, not a man's opinion. Please answer when you were in Egypt and how the Sabbath can be given to all nations when it was a sign between God and one nation, Israel. That is Scripture, not an opinion speaking. Further, Jesus said, “Therefore the Son of Man is also Lord of the Sabbath” (Mk. 2:28). He is “ALSO” meaning He is the Lord of every day of the week. Opinion says “the Sabbath will be in heaven.” Such is an abuse of Isaiah 66:22, 23. If the opinion is true that asserts the Sabbath will be in heaven, then the opinion must also affirm that the “New Moon,” “flesh,” and the "Levitical priesthood" will be in heaven too as Isaiah 66:21-23 has all of these together. The serious Bible student recognizes that Isaiah 66 is speaking of the new heavens and earth as a new order and is figurately looking forward to either the return of captives to the land of Israel which happened during the days of Nehemiah and Ezra or the time when the new covenant is made where all these things are metaphors of that time. There is no physical and separate priesthood in the church. Our priest is in heaven and from the trive of Judah (Heb. 7:11-15). There is no flesh in heaven (1 Cor. 15:50). There are is no sun or moon in heaven (Rev. 21:23). How can there be sabbaths and new moons in a place that doesn’t have days? Please answer. You are correct, that if you are under the Law that Israel was under and you break one, you are guilty of all. We are not under that law but under a new covenant (2 Cor. 3:5, 6). I would recommend a study of the book of Galatians and the two covenants discussed there. Further, what “law” is being discussed by Paul in Romans 7:7? Let us know if you are interested in discussing these things further in a public setting where you can defend your position before your people and have it examined in light of Scripture. We would be happy to oblige.

It is not opinion, but fact that the Sabbath was made, after God made all other things as well as Adam. Who did He make it for if not Adam?. The Sabbath was part of creation, not an afterthought thousands of years later and then given to believers in God. If I tell you to remember something, it is because it was already mentioned before, I will not ask you to remember something that was not mentioned prior to calling it to memory. In Isiah 66 it is not the a Monthly festival that is referred to if you use Hebrew Concordance to clarify, it is simply stating that from Month to Month we will come together on the Sabbath day to worship. If you care to study which law was nailed to the cross you will also find that it was the handwriting of ordinances written by the hand of Moses, that was placed on the side of the ark, the ordinances that was contrary to us. Deu 31:26 Take this book of the law, and put it in the side of the ark of the covenant of the LORD your God, that it may be there for a witness against thee. The law written down by Moses contained all the seremonial laws and offerings that was a symbol of the real offering, Jesus Christ, an lost it's relevance at the cross. Go though The Law that God wrote down with His own hand and you will realize all are still relevant today, murder, adultery, coveting etc is still wrong, it is only the Sabbath that most refuse to REMEMBER that they want to get rid off and therefore it is stated that the Ten Commandments was nailed to the cross instead of the seremonial laws and sabbath days that was a shadow of the sacrificial system that came to an end when the real sacrifice was nailed to a cross. ​@@stevenwallace6302

Exodus 13:3, "And Moses said to the people: Remember this day in which you went out of Egypt, out of the house of bondage; for by strength of hand the LORD brought you out of this [place]. No leavened bread shall be eaten." Please show where the Passover/Unleavened bread was observed by Israel before "this day" that they were to "remember." Isaiah 66:23 says from Moon to Moon and Sabbath to Sabbath all flesh shall come. Even if we grant you your argument, that doesn't help your case seeing that there is no moon in heaven where you contend the Sabbath exists (Rev. 21:24). Further, you must also accept "flesh" in heaven as well as "corpses" (Isa. 66:24) which such worshipers go and look upon. If all "worship" on a literal Sabbath, they will also be "looking" upon the corpses. Does your view of heaven have corpses in it? If not, why not? These verses, along with Neh. 9:13, 14; Ezek. 20:10-12; Deut. 5:2, 3 are not opinions of men, but the word of God and explicitly prove the Sabbath commandment was not given before the Exodus from Egypt. Further still, Col. 2:16 tells us to not let anyone judge us regarding a new moon or sabbath. If you contend that the new moon is simply an ordinary month, please explain how men would judge others regarding the passing of an ordinary month. Also, explain how the moon and sabbath cannot be holy religious days seeing the festivals in this verse are. Do not simply say "sabbath offerings." Finally, please explain how one should not judge another regarding food. Does your denomination teach that men should abstain from pork? If so, why? Thank you.

The Sabbath has it's origin at creation and existed therefrom, the Passover has it's origin in Egypt and existed therefrom, and can therfore only be recalled from these points in times. The Bible has only one defenition for sin, and that is the transgression of the LAW 1John 3:4 also Rom 4:15 for where no law is, there is no transgression. Why was the earth destroyed by the great flood? Was it because of Sin? Was it before or after the law was written in Stone by the hand of God at Mount Sinai? How did Josef who lived before the exodus know that adultery would be a sin against God? There are many other places where sin is pointed out in scripture before the Law was written down by God’s Hand, but according to you reasoning sin or transgression of the law was only possible from the time of the exodus. Col 2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days 17 WHICH ARE A SHADOW OF THINGS TO COME; BUT THE BODY IS OF CHRIST. The handwriting of ordinances, the book of the law that was written by Moses and placed on the side of the ark had written in it all the seremonial laws, feasts, feast days, sacrifices of animals and food and drink that had to be eaten. All the feast days were "sabbath days" plural and all seremonial laws came to an end when the BODY OF CHRIST was nailed to the cross. "sabbath days" plural is not a reference to the Sabbath of creation that existed before sin or the Stones written with God’s hand. As you will know the food and drink referenced to in Col 2:16 is a reference to the seremonial food and drink that was consumed during the seremonial feasts, and since Christ's life and death and reserection is the real thing and not the shadow of the seremonial law that ended at the cross, no one should be judged for not abiding to seremonial eating or drinking. I do not belong to a denomination, so I do not ascribe to a denominations teaching about eating of pork, but common sense tells me that if God asked His people to refrain from eating scavengers because they carry disease, it would be best to listen to the One that knows your bodily functions and nutritional needs better than yourself. Rev 21:24 states the CITY have no need of light from sun nor moon, it does not state there will be no sun nor moon: "the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it" The new Jerusalem will be about 2220 km by 2220 km, or 1380 miles by 1380 miles It is uge but will not cover the earth. If you study scripture on what happens after the thousand years referred to in the book of Revelation, yo will know why ther is a reference of "corpses " in Isiah 66 Keep well, I hope I clarified some points @@stevenwallace6302

We absolutely need to keep God's commandments, and those who teach otherwise violate God's word. We also shouldn't pretend that the Sabbath is the first day, as it's clearly the seventh day (Deut. 5:14). However, the next verse shows the Sabbath was given specifically to the nation of Israel, the nation who started out as slaves in Egypt (Deut. 5:15). Should we keep the commandments that God gave to *other* people? For example, God "commanded" Abraham to practice circumcision (Gen. 21:4), but is circumcision a commandment today? No, it isn't. In fact, circumcision is *contrasted* with the commandments of God we must keep today (1 Cor. 7:19). Similarly, since the Sabbath command was given to the nation of Israel specifically (Exodus 31:13; Exodus 31:16-17; Ezekiel 20:12; Ezekiel 20:19-20), it isn't a commandment for Gentiles. In fact, in the Ten Commandments, God told the Israelites to keep the Sabbath because they were slaves that God brought out of Egypt (Deut. 5:15), which shows God wasn't addressing this to Gentiles. How could God have "given" Israel the Sabbath (Ezek. 20:10-12) if all mankind already had the Sabbath from the beginning of creation?

Thanks for your reply. Have you overlooked that God called on the people to REMEMBER they were slaves in the land of Egypt and that they were to REMEMBER the Passover, the very day they exited (Exo. 13:3; Deut. 5:15; 16:3)? Does your church remember that also? Were you ever a slave in Egypt? Why bind a commandment that is tied to something that you’ve never experienced? To whom were Exodus and Deuteronomy given? Slaves coming out of Egypt, or the church built by Jesus? What is not straightforward is to bind commandments that were given to Israel upon any other people. Neither is it straightforward to bind the restrictive diet of the Jews upon the church (1 Tim. 4:4, 5). Do you do that? We are to obey the commandments of Jesus (Jn. 14:15). Where does Jesus command the church of Christ to keep the Sabbath Holy? What is equally crooked is to bind the Sabbath day while not keeping all the rules associated with it (including the penalty for breaking it). If you listened to the lesson, you would know that we never claim that the Sabbath was changed to Sunday! The Sabbath was always the seventh day.

If we keep the Sabbath as Jesus did, how could we go wrong? God wrote the commandments in stone with his finger. All 10 are everlasting. If they were only for the Jews, is it' ok to murder and steal?

@@chia6676 Thank you for your reply. It's important to remember that what proves too much proves nothing. The first question's reasoning could prove circumcision as well: "If we keep *circumcision* as Jesus did, how could we go wrong?" However, we know that just because Jesus practiced something as a Jew doesn't mean He intended all people to do the same: "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters" (1 Cor. 7:19, NKJV). Even though circumcision was once commanded (e.g., Gen. 21:4) and was practiced by Jesus, it's now *contrasted* with keeping God's commandments. If it can be this way with circumcision, it can be with the Sabbath as well. Of course, you pointed out that the Ten Commandments were written on stone, but we shouldn't assume that means the commandments were universal. As Paul argued in 2 Corinthians 3:7-8, "if *the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones,* was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away, how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious?" (NKJV, emphasis added). The Ten Commandments were a ministry a death written on stones and, while glorious, were not as glorious as the ministry of the Spirit. The Ten Commandments called for keeping the Sabbath because God brought Israel out of Egypt (Deut. 5:15), an event that doesn't apply to Gentiles but to the nation of Israel specifically. Other passages showing that the Sabbath was a "sign" specifically between God and the nation of Israel include Exodus 31:13; Exodus 31:16-17; Ezekiel 20:19-20. Therefore, the Sabbath was specifically for the nation of Israel, not all people. As for whether murdering or stealing is permissible now, both are condemned under the new covenant (1 John 3:15; Eph. 4:28), so of course these practices are wrong. The Sabbath, by contrast, is never commanded under the new covenant.

No matter what problems arise in life, "all things work together for good to those who love God" (Rom. 8:28, NKJV). You can make it through all problems, even death itself, through Christ. What did you think of this sermon?