Last Updated: October 23, 2005

Posted October 23, 2005

Greetings,

I ran across your article about the Law of Moses and the Law of the Spirit and would like to offer a rebuttal. You are breaking the 4th commandment and teaching men to do the same. I don’t know how you “cease from your works seven days out of seven” EVEN as God did, when God clearly rested on the seventh day and not seven out of seven. When do you work if you cease seven out of seven days?

The word, ‘rest,’ in Heb 4:9 is sabbatismos (a keeping of the sabbath). You will notice that the rest of the time the word rest is the Greek word, katapauo. The Sabbath pictures the millennial rest (6000 years, 1000 rest) when the Kingdom of God will reign on earth. Many understood that the Sabbath pictured a LITERAL, PHYSICAL rest. The Israelites understood that the Sabbath pictured the rest that was given to Israel upon entering the land of Canaan (Jos 22:4). However, this was only a type as the land of Canaan is a type of the future rest for the people of God. The writer of Hebrews had to clarify the issue because many thought that the possession of the land of Canaan was the fulfillment of the Sabbath. That is why the writer reminds his readers that if that were so why did David say TODAY (in David’s time) that there still is a rest yet to be entered. Verse 8 clearly states that if the land of Canaan was supposed to be the ultimate fulfillment then why was David mentioning TODAY? The answer is that the Sabbath pictures the rest in the Kingdom of God and interesting enough in the Kingdom of God ALL FLESH (including you) WILL come to worship the LORD on the Sabbath (Isa 66:23). Also read Zec 14:16-19 and find out that ALL nations will be keeping the Feast (AARGHHH!) of Tabernacles. One of the main points of Heb 4 is that as long as there is a rest remaining to be entered, the PEOPLE OF GOD are required to keep the seventh day holy by ceasing from their works even as God did.

If the Sabbath ceased to be an issue, why did the Apostles continue to teach Jews AND GENTILES on the Sabbath day? Do you know better than they?

J____

Mat 12:1 At that time Jesus went on the sabbath day through the corn; and his disciples were an hungred, and began to pluck the ears of corn, and to eat. [In direct contradiction to:]
Exo 16:29 See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.
Matt12:2 But when the Pharisees [ people devoid of spiritual wisdom who observe shadows and types] saw it, they said unto him, Behold, thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the sabbath day.[ Was that true?]
Mat 12:3 But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him;
Mat 12:4 How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful [ Christ agreed with the Pharisees. He and His disciples, Like David were doing that “which was not lawful”] for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests? [ Were Christ’s disciples priests? Absolutely not!]
Mat 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless? [ And you want me to believe that Christ is saying ‘The priests profaned the sabbath and are guiltless, so I and my disciples are guiltless because we have not done anything of the type.’ Is that what you want me to believe Christ is saying here? I don’t think so. I think that His point here is this:]
Mat 12:6 But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple.
Mat 12:7 But if ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless. [ Why is Christ guiltless? Is it because he did not “profane the sabbath as the priests?” Is it because he did not do that “which is not lawful?” Or is it because…]
Mat 12:8 For the Son of man is Lord even of the sabbath day.

And what did Christ do after making this crystal clear point that He IS our sabbath?

Mat 12:9 And when he was departed thence, he went into their synagogue: [Simply because that is where the people were]

Were they in error?

Joh 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye [ a person devoid of spiritual wisdom who observes shadows and types)”] cannot bear them now.

It was a “time of reformation” . It was a time of transition from the old to the new. Read that article. I don’t believe you even read the article. It covered all of this plus Luk 5, which a person who observes shadows would not understand:

Luk 5:36 And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old.
Luk 5:37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.
Luk 5:38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
Luk 5:39 No man also having drunk old [ wine] straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

“The new agrees not with the old” are again the words of Christ.

Again, if what you said is true, then why do the Apostles observe and teach on the Sabbath AND observe the annual Holy Days (see 1Co 5:6-8).

1Co 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. [ You know, like the “unleavened bread,” of Mat 12 1-8].

Jesus Christ criticized the Talmudic interpretations of the Sabbath (over 1500 rules) which he called traditions of the elders which made void the commandments of God. Criticism of abuse of the Sabbath does not constitute abrogation of a commandment.

Here is what God’s spirit inspired John to write. This gospel, by Christ’s beloved apostle refers to every feast as “a feast of the Jews.” Here is how the spirit inspired John to record for our benefit, what the spirit says Christ had done:

Joh 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him, because he not only had broken the sabbath, but said also that God was his Father, making himself equal with God.

Had Christ claimed to be God? Yes, He had (though NOT God the Father)! Had he broken and profaned the sabbath and done that which was not lawful? He said He had. Now should I believe Christ, or should I believe you and the entire “historical orthodox Christian church.”

I would like to know if you keep Christmas and Easter? Just curious.

I do not observe Christmas or Easter or any other days, months, times or years. But now I too, am curious. Do you observe this verse of scripture?

Gal 4:10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.
Gal 4:11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.

Is all of this work I have done in pointing out all of these scriptures for you in vain?

Sincerely ,

Mike – a person who recognizes that :

Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

A person who does not say:

Luk 5:39 … The old is better.

Posted July 21, 2005

Sir,

Does not Paul warn us of “false teachers and unprincipled men” Anti- nomians in Greek, those against the Laws of God. Paul as ‘zealous for the Law”. Not “under Law but Under Grace” would be translated

1. Not Under God’s Law- which Christ is God, and that would mean we are free to murder.
2. Not Under Legalism- which we are not saved by works, but loving God means keeping his Commandments. Which is what Paul constantly states.
3. Not Under Roman Law.

Paul told the Gentiles to keep the Sabbath.

Revelation says that those who are in heaven “have faith in Jesus Christ and Keep the Commands of God”.

Luk 4:16, Jesus kept the Sabbath. Gathering large bundles of food, as in farming would be breaking the Sabbath, but not walking by a vineyard and picking a grape. If Christ did break the Sabbath or sin in any other regard, he could not have been the Messiah.

Paul warned against teachings that mute the Laws of God, it is called the Spirit of Jezebel in Revelations. That is, changing the Laws of God to fit culture.

Sabbaths, plural and lower case, as it is when Paul “Rabbi Sha’ul” speaks of them along with new moons, refers to Jewish Festivals such as the feast of unleavened bread. That’s why he did not say “The Sabbath”. Why did the Jews never try to stone Paul for breaking the Sabbath? Or the other Apostles? The Pharisees made up their own rules about the Sabbath as recorded in the Talmud, but they were notin the Torah.

If men begin to delete God’s Commands, where does it end? Should we not ask not God wants for us, not what we can squeeze out of?

Please remember that you will be accountable to God for changing his times a laws, which is a mark of Anti- Christ.

B____

Hi B___,

Thank you for your concern for my spiritual welfare and for taking the time to write this letter.

Of course I will have to disagree with everything you’ve said here. It does not follow that since Christ came and reformed the law that therefore we “we are free to murder”. It was what Christ always referred to as “the law of Moses” that taught us to murder our enemies:

Deu 20:16 But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee [ for] an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:

Contrast this law with this new law:

Mat 5:43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

Now you tell me, which law do I keep? Do I keep what Paul called “the law of Christ”, or do I keep what Christ called “the law of Moses?” Should I love my enemies, or should I “save alive nothing that breaths”? Does not our rejection of Christ’s law and our support for those who reject Christ in the middle east, show us where this “eye for an eye… elements of the world… law of Moses,” leads us?

You say:

Paul told the Gentiles to keep the Sabbath.

Do you have a scripture for that assertion? If Paul thought we should keep the law of Moses, then why would he make such an assertion as this:

1Ti 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,
1Ti 1:10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;
1Ti 1:11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
1Ti 1:12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
1Ti 1:13 Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.

And what was it that lead Paul to this “Blasphemous, persecuting, and injurious” state? Here are Paul’s own words telling us why he was that way:

Php 3:6 Concerning zeal [ for the law of Moses], persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law [ of Moses], blameless.
Gal 1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:
Gal 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.

Is Paul admitting to breaking the law of Moses by “persecuting the church and being zealous of the traditions of my fathers?” No, he is not. He was blameless, according to this law of which you think so highly. And the way he showed his zeal for this law was by hating and persecuting his enemy just as the law requires.

If Christ was so careful to “keep the law,” then why did He not obey this part of it?:

Deu 22:22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.

Did Christ not want to “Put away evil from Israel?” Show me the words “Neither do I condemn thee,” in your beloved “ministration of condemnation”. So you see, it is not me you are calling “Anti- Christ,” it is Christ Himself who did all the “changing”.

I never cease to be amazed at how the defenders of “the ministration of death” are able to equate ‘hate thine enemy’ with ‘love thine enemy;’ How ‘return good for evil’ is not seen as a contradiction of ‘an eye for an eye;’ and how “Swear by my name only” is not seen as a contradiction of “swear not at all.” And you accuse me of “changing God’s law”!

I have changed nothing. Christ, on the other hand, has ‘changed both the priesthood and the law.’

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

The scriptures answer every question you pose. I have written and posted letters responding to this law article. They are on www. iswasandwillbe. com/. Read all the letters concerning the paper on the law.

You know fully well I do not teach lawlessness. I teach and follow “the law of Christ.” You still teach what Christ referred to as ‘the law of Moses’ which law Christ came to change. Is there a “change of the priesthood?” Most Christians will readily acknowledge that there has been a change of the priesthood. Well, if indeed that is the case, then “there must of necessity be a change also of the law.”

Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.

Paul speaks clearly of those who think of Christ’s work as ‘Anti- Christ:’

2Co 3:13 And not as Moses, which put a vail over his face, that the children of Israel could not stedfastly look to the end of that which is abolished:
2Co 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which vail is done away in Christ.
2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
2Co 3:16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.
2Co 3:17 Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
2Co 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

See that word ‘change?’ I didn’t write that word. And it appears in the context of the law of Moses versus the law of the Spirit. There is now a law that is so far superior to the law of Moses that the law of Moses has no glory in comparison. It is a new law. There is an undeniable “change,” from ‘Kill every thing that breaths” to “neither do I condemn thee.”

I will pray that God will give you the faith to accept the changes that Christ came to reveal.

Mike

Posted December 22, 2004

Mr. Vinson –

I have read your paper on the two laws and have a question concerning mixing the old w/ the new. Most (if not all) of Church going Christians believe in some aspect of the law of Moses (tithing, Sunday observances, etc) as a necessity for good. Do most [ people], in your view do these things because of tradition (as being a good practice) or out of necessity for salvation? I have for a long while separated myself from these so- called commandments of do’s and don’ts really because of a deep belief that if you have faith in Christ and are no longer under the old law – why would you need or want these outward signs? This makes me somewhat at odds with the rest of my family (“oh, that’s the way he is – he is just rebellious”). As a result, every time respectfully I bring these things up – I’m the one that is confused sort of. I am confused all right in that I don’t understand – what is the motive?

Thanks,
M____

Hi M____,

Thank you for your question.

There is no doubt that going to church on Sunday is a tradition. But most Christians will tell you in a heartbeat that this and a multitude of other outward acts (the sinner’s prayer, water baptism, the Lord’s supper or Eucharist, tithing etc.) are absolutely essential for the salvation of a Christian. The Truth, of course is that nothing outward changes anything inward. The change must come within. Outward displays impress no one in the spirit realm.

Mat 23:25 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess.
Mat 23:26 Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
Mat 23:27 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.
Mat 23:28 Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.

We are so into the “things that are seen,” that we actually believe that Christ was instituting another ritual when He washed the apostles’ feet. He was not! He tells us that He was setting us an example of service one to another.

The consequence of such an outward approach to scripture is that while the whole Christian world is looking for an outward ‘beast,’ the true beast is reigning supreme on the very throne where Christ out to be. Be sure to read archive 2 regarding the condition of the Christian church today, as revealed in the book of Revelation. If you haven’t yet read Strong Delusion. God has sent “strong delusion to those He has deceived.

Eze 14:9 And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the LORD have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel.
Eze 14:10 And they shall bear the punishment of their iniquity: the punishment of the prophet shall be even as the punishment of him that seeketh unto him;

So don’t be too harsh on those who are deceived by outward things. Pray that God will remove the veil of the outward and give them eyes to see the “things of the spirit.”

Rom 8:5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
Rom 8:6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.
1Co 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
2Co 3:14 But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which [ vail] is done away in Christ.
2Co 3:15 But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the vail is upon their heart.
2Co 3:16 Nevertheless when it shall turn to the Lord, the vail shall be taken away.

What is their motive for refusing to see the ‘things of the spirit?’ It can be anything from losing one’s hired preacher’s paycheck, to the pure pride of those who support their hired teachers and preachers. It can be anything but a good healthy fear of God and the plain truths of His Word.

I hope you will take the time to read the article and letters on the web page. There is a wealth of information there that will cost you nothing but your whole life for Christ.

Mike