Posts Tagged ‘faith’

The Sabbath as a Sign

February 17, 2026

In today’s post, we will consider the fact that the Sabbath command was considered a sign of the Mosaic covenant with Israel. I’m going to post from Exodus chapter 31 and offer some commentary and emphases along the way.

Exo 31:12 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 
Exo 31:13 Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, Verily my sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you. (KJV- emphasis mine).

Here we have the LORD (His covenant name “YHWH” in Hebrew) speaking to Moses and giving instruction. His instructions are to a specific group of people…the children of Israel! He then states that the Sabbath is a sign between Him and the children of Israel. This sign was to let them know they were being set apart (or “sanctified”) from the other nations of the world. Those who embrace the idea that the Sabbath command is binding upon all of humanity neglect this important facet of the Sabbath. I stated in an earlier post that there was a period of time (nearly 2500 years) from Adam to Moses where there is absolutely no record of anyone keeping the Sabbath! Genesis declared that God rested on the seventh day (Gen 2:2-3) but no mention of any human doing so. As mentioned in that previous post, the first mention of the Sabbath command comes in Exodus 16. Let’s continue our exposition of Exodus 31.

Exo 31:14  Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. 
Exo 31:15  Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. (KJV)

Here is where the inconsistencies of Sabbath-keeping among Torah-ists become evident. The command for proper Sabbath-observance requires that capital punishment is the consequence for breaking this law.

Exo 31:16 Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the sabbath, to observe the sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. (KJV-emphasis mine)

This command was for a specific group of people who were given a specific covenant, the Mosaic covenant.

Exo 31:17 It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed. (KJV-emphasis mine)

Most Torah observant believers and Sabbath-insisters emphasize the Creation aspect of the verse. They do this to make it a law prior to the Mosaic covenant. It is true, that the Sabbath served as a memorial of Creation. But it is also true that it served as a sign between God and the nation of Israel! It is not a sign between God and humanity, or the Church! The Sabbath was a sign or token of the Mosaic Covenant! Not all the covenants of the Bible had signs, but some did. For example, the rainbow was the sign or token of the Noahic Covenant.

Gen 9:12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: 
Gen 9:13 I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth. (KJV)

God promised that He would never destroy the Earth with a worldwide flood again. The sign of the rainbow became the token of that particular promise/covenant. Consider also the Abrahamic covenant which had its own sign/token.

Gen 17:10 This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. (KJV)

As the rainbow was the token of the Noahic covenant, circumcision was the token (or sign) of the Abrahamic covenant. In similar fashion, the Sabbath served as the sign/token of the Mosaic covenant. The Mosaic covenant is no longer in force (see previous post) and has been rendered inoperative with the inauguration of the New Covenant. Since the Mosaic covenant is no longer in force, the sign/token of the covenant is no longer applicable under the New Covenant. A person may voluntarily choose to observe the Sabbath (to the best of their ability), but it is no longer obligatory. In Deuteronomy, we are told that the Sabbath was a sign of the Exodus.

Deu 5:15 And remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the LORD thy God brought thee out thence through a mighty hand and by a stretched out arm: therefore the LORD thy God commanded thee to keep the sabbath day. (KJV)

For four hundred years, the Israelites had been slaves in Egypt. No doubt, they were working seven days a week. The prophet Ezekiel speaks in terms of the Sabbath as a memorial of the Exodus.

Eze 20:10 Wherefore I caused them to go forth out of the land of Egypt, and brought them into the wilderness. 
Eze 20:11 And I gave them my statutes, and shewed them my judgments, which if a man do, he shall even live in them. 
Eze 20:12 Moreover also I gave them my sabbaths, to be a sign between me and them, that they might know that I am the LORD that sanctify them. (KJV)

Just like Deuteronomy, Ezekiel makes it clear that the Sabbath was a memorial of the Exodus experience for Israel. No single event is given as the purpose for the Sabbath. Yes, it is a memorial of Creation. But it is also a sign of Israel’s sanctification, a token (or sign) of the Mosaic covenant, and a memorial of the Exodus from Egypt. Since the Mosaic Law is no longer in force, the sign/token aspect of the covenant is no longer applicable under the New Testament. As mentioned earlier, the Sabbath command is the only one of the Ten Commandments not restated in some way under the New Covenant.

There are certain facets of the Sabbath that are only applicable to the children of Israel. Only they (Israel) were set apart at Mount Sinai. Only they (the children of Israel) were delivered from slavery in Egypt. If a person is going to appeal to the Torah as a basis for the perpetual observance of the Sabbath, they must remain consistent. In addition to the command of cessation from labor, the Sabbath also had mandatory animal sacrifices (Num 28:9-10). This required a priesthood, who also worked twice as hard on the Sabbath day. For them, it was anything but a day of rest!

In future posts, (Lord willing) we will look at what the New Testament has to say about the issue. These posts are not meant to be derogatory or divisive. They are intended to bring clarity to a subject that has ongoing relevance and plenty of lively discussion online.

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

The Law of Moses Has Been Rendered Inoperative

February 11, 2026

There are many within Christendom who claim to be “Torah observant.” Some do so out of a sincere desire to be pleasing to God. Others have adopted a more divisive approach. They tend to look down on those who are not Torah observant. There are some who would say you must keep Torah (the Hebrew word for “law”) to be saved. There are others who deny that Torah observance is mandatory for salvation but still view it necessary for sanctification. There will be a number of posts about this topic but today let’s focus on the issue of the Law of Moses being rendered inoperative.

Rom 7:1 Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives? 
Rom 7:2 For the woman who has a husband is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives. But if the husband dies, she is released from the law of her husband. 
Rom 7:3 So then if, while her husband lives, she marries another man, she will be called an adulteress; but if her husband dies, she is free from that law, so that she is no adulteress, though she has married another man. 
Rom 7:4 Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you may be married to another—to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit to God. 
Rom 7:5 For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death. 
Rom 7:6 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. (NKJV)

When a husband dies, the wife becomes a widow and is no longer bound to the law of the husband. She is free to remarry without committing the sin of adultery. This passage is not Paul’s teaching on divorce and remarriage. He is using an analogy between the believer and the Law. This becomes evident when you look at verse 4, which begins with “therefore.” The application is that Christ has died, and now the believer is also dead to the law. One is either married to the Law or to the Messiah but cannot be married to both! The “oldness of the letter” (verse 6b) is clearly a reference to the Law of Moses. Paul devotes the entirety of Romans 7 to show the futility of trying to be saved or sanctified by the Law. Let’s look at the next passage.

Rom 10:4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. (NKJV)

The Greek word for “end” here (telos) means “termination” or “conclusion.” This means that the Law is not the source of righteousness for salvation. The same is true in regard to sanctification. The new means of righteousness is clearly defined. The condition of justification and sanctification is belief in Christ!

Gal 3:19  What purpose then does the law serve? It was added because of transgressions, till the Seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was appointed through angels by the hand of a mediator. (NKJV)

The Law had a definite purpose. Many Torah observant believers accuse others of denigrating the Law because we refuse to put people under its yoke. But at this point, I simply want to show that Paul explains the temporary aspect of the Law. Notice Paul says the Law was “added?” It was added to what was already in effect (the Abrahamic Covenant). It served the function of showing what was sinful. Once the promised “Seed” should come, it was no longer necessary. The reference to the “Seed” is obviously the Messiah (Gen 3:15, Gen 22:18).

Gal 3:24 Therefore the law was our tutor to bring us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. 
Gal 3:25 But after faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. (NKJV)

The Law was a “tutor” (the KJV opted for “schoolmaster”) to bring us to Christ. The duty of the Law was to bring us to Christ. To use the Law in any other fashion is to use the Law “unlawfully” (see I Tim 1:7-11). The goal of the Law is to show us our need for a Savior and ultimately be justified by faith! Once that has occurred, we are no longer under a tutor (or schoolmaster). Since the Law was the tutor, it is clear we are no longer under the Law!

Eph 2:14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 
Eph 2:15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, (NKJV)

There is much more to be said about all of these passages, but we are focusing on the temporary function of the Law. With that being said, Paul makes it clear that the “middle wall of separation” (the Law) has now been broken down. God gave a vivid visual depiction of this when He tore the veil of the curtain from the top to the bottom (Matt 27:51). In the context of Ephesians 2, he is talking about the separation that once existed between Israel and the Gentile nations. The Law served as a middle wall of partition or separation. The dietary laws alone made fellowship within the two groups virtually impossible. However, the death of the Messiah abolished (that’s strong language!) the enmity produced by those commandments and ordinances. To insist that believers must observe those commandments now is, in essence, rebuilding the wall that God tore down! Or to use the curtain analogy, “sewing the veil back together.”

Heb 7:11 Therefore, if perfection were through the Levitical priesthood (for under it the people received the law), what further need was there that another priest should rise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be called according to the order of Aaron? 
Heb 7:12 For the priesthood being changed, of necessity there is also a change of the law. (NKJV)

Those who claim we are still under the Law have a real problem. The Old Testament predicted that a new priesthood would come about and that the Messiah would be a priest after the order of Melchizedek (and not Aaron!). This was prophesied in Psalm 110:4. This would not be allowed under the dispensation of the Law of Moses! To be a priest one had to be from the tribe of Levi. The Law allowed no exceptions. So, the Old Testament prediction (Psalm 110:4) already gave a clue to the temporary nature of the Law. This new priesthood required a change in the Law (something Torah observant folks vehemently deny!).

Heb 7:18 For on the one hand there is an annulling of the former commandment because of its weakness and unprofitableness, 
Heb 7:19 for the law made nothing perfect; on the other hand, there is the bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. 

The language here is unambiguous and inescapable. The “former commandment” is obviously the Law. It was annulled (the KJV says “disannulling”, but the meaning is the same).

Heb 8:13 In that He says, “A NEW COVENANT,” He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away. (NKJV) 

Here, the writer of Hebrews is referring to Jeremiah 31:31-34 which predicts the New Covenant. To quote Jewish scholar Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum, “thus the Law of Moses became old with Jeremiah and vanished away with the Messiah’s death.”

2Co 3:3 clearly you are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us, written not with ink but by the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of flesh, that is, of the heart. 
2Co 3:4 And we have such trust through Christ toward God. 
2Co 3:5 Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think of anything as being from ourselves, but our sufficiency is from God, 
2Co 3:6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. 
2Co 3:7 But 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, 
2Co 3:8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious? 
2Co 3:9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory. 
2Co 3:10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels. 
2Co 3:11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious. (NKJV)

This passage will zero in on the part of the Mosaic Law that most Torah observant people want to cling to: The Ten Commandments. We know the Ten Commandments are in view because of the phrases “tablets of stone” in verse 3, and “engraved on stones” in verse 7. Paul pulls no punches by calling them “the ministry of death” in verse 7 and “the ministry of condemnation” in verse 9. There is a lot to unpack here, but we are focusing on the temporary nature of the Law. Thus, we come to verses 7 and 11 which speak of the Law “passing away.” The Greek word translated as “passing away” is katargeo in Greek. The word means to “abolish”, “cease”, “do away”, “make void”, etc. In the context of this article, we might opt for the phrase “to render inoperative.”

In contrast with that, we have the New Covenant (or the “Law of Christ”) which will never pass away. Thus, it is deemed superior. Or, to use Paul’s language in verse 11b, “what remains is much more glorious.” No doubt, such talk about the Ten Commandments makes some people very uneasy. But we must remember that in some way, nine of the Ten Commandments are restated in the New Testament (or “Law of Christ”). The exception is the Sabbath command, which has been the subject of other articles, and we will discuss in greater detail. Now let’s examine a passage of scripture that is foundational to most Torah observant believers.

Mat 5:17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 
Mat 5:18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 
Mat 5:19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 
Mat 5:20 For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” (NKJV)

People will use this passage to try and negate every shred of evidence you have been presented with thus far. They will emphasize verses 17 and 18 as proof that the Law is in force because Jesus says He did not come to destroy the Law and that “one jot or one tittle” will not pass till all is fulfilled. But let’s examine this under the proverbial microscope. They will almost always ignore verse 19 and the reference to the “least of these commandments.” Most so-called Torah observant believers that I have encountered focus on only a few aspects of the Law. This is not universal, but emphasis usually centers around a handful of issues. There is emphasis on saying the Name of God properly (usually insisting that God’s Hebrew names must be used). There is emphasis on the Levitical dietary laws (no pork, shellfish, etc.). There is an emphasis on keeping the Sabbath (which biblically speaking is from sundown Friday to sundown on Saturday). There is an emphasis on keeping the Jewish Feasts (Leviticus 23) and an opposition to all so-called “man-made” holidays (some going as far as to label them as “pagan”). Doubtless there are other points of contention, but these tend to be the most common. There is very little emphasis on the “least of these commandments” that Jesus makes mention of.

But to remain consistent, any discussion of Matthew 5:17-20 must include all contextual issues. In the context of Matthew 5:17-20, the whole Law of Moses is in view. When Jesus Christ mentions relaxing the “least of these commandments” in verse 19, this is clearly referring to all 613 of the Mosaic Laws (not just the Ten Commandments or Sabbath laws). Further, Jesus said that He came to “fulfill” the Law and the Prophets. The Greek word for “fulfill” is pleroo. The same word is used in the first chapter of Matthew’s Gospel:

Mat 1:22 So all this was done that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying: 
Mat 1:23 “BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD, AND BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL,” which is translated, “God with us.” (NKJV)

Matthew is quoting from the prophecy of Isaiah 7:14. When the Virgin Birth took place, that prophecy was fulfilled. That means the prophecy has come to an end. It can’t be fulfilled again in the future. The prophecy was accomplished and brought to an end by fulfillment. The point Matthew is making is that Christ did not come to abolish but to fulfill the Law. It must also be noted (and this is crucial!) that these words were spoken during His earthy lifetime while the Law was still in effect! The Law did not end with the coming of the Messiah, but with His death! That rendered the Law inoperative (the entire book of Hebrews deals with this issue).

Most Torah observant folks realize that much of the Law no longer applies (when was the last time you stoned your rebellious teenager in accordance with Deuteronomy 21:18-21?). In order to hold on to the handful of “mandatory” laws from the Torah, they are forced to divide the Law in various ways. One way is to separate the Ten Commandments from the other 603. Those who are most adamant about Sabbath-keeping often adopt this approach. Others will divide the Law into three separate categories: ceremonial, civil, and moral. This camp will state that the first two categories (ceremonial and civil) have been done away with, but the moral law still remains. Within both groups, they will claim that the Sabbath command is part of the moral law. With a little critical thinking, we can refute both lines of objection.

In the first place, the Bible never makes such distinctions or sub-categories of the Law. The Law is always treated as a singular unit in the scripture. Even the language of scripture makes this plain. When the Bible makes reference to the Law (in Hebrew or Greek) it is always in the singular. The Hebrew word for law is Torah, and the Greek word for law is nomos. Both nouns are singular. Greek scholar Douglas Moo makes the following observation:

“Of Paul’s 119 uses of nomos, none occurs in the plural. . .. This statistic should be regarded as significant: Paul discusses the law as a single entity rather than a series of commands.’ Therefore, if the law is an indivisible unit, it follows that there is a certain “all or nothing” quality about it. This understanding of the law as a unit is supported by at least three New Testament texts [Mat.5:19; Gal. 5:3; Jas.2:10.” (Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. Be. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996)

Jas 2:10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. (NKJV)

Note that James sees the Law as a unit and keeping it as an “all-or-nothing” proposition. This underscores the principle of the unity of the Mosaic Law. To put it simply, if you break a civil law, you are breaking the ceremonial and the moral law. If you break a ceremonial command, you’re also breaking a civil and moral command. James was the Lord’s half-brother and the leader of the Jerusalem church. We see him presiding over the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 where it was determined that Gentiles did not have to keep the Law of Moses (Acts 15:24). So, to see his perspective on Torah observance is quite informative. There simply is no biblical basis for dividing the Law into three separate categories. Those who do so, have gone beyond what is written to support their agenda.

Before we conclude this discussion on the moral aspects of the Law, let’s examine the relationship with moral commandments and the Torah. By definition, moral laws are those eternal principles of God which reflect His nature. It is true that these moral laws did not terminate with the death of the Messiah. But it is also true that they did not originate with Moses at Mount Sinai! Adam and Eve violated moral law prior to Moses. We can go back even further than that and see that Satan violated it even before our first parents! Moral law is not synonymous with Torah or with the Ten Commandments. No doubt the latter two contained the moral law of God but it did not originate with them. There was a period of time from Adam to Moses that lasted around 2500 years. During that time period, adultery was wrong, murder was wrong, stealing was wrong (you get the picture!).

Since the Sabbath commandment seems to be one of the most controversial, we will end our discussion on that topic. The question we must answer is, “is the Sabbath command moral or ceremonial?” Most Torah observant believers will insist that the Sabbath command is a moral issue. Hence, those who don’t observe Sabbath are considered “lawless” (or “immoral” if indeed it is a moral obligation!). There are some who insist that we must go to a place of worship on Saturday (the Seventh Day Adventists mostly adopt this position). To do so, is actually a violation of the Sabbath day command. In the Law of Moses, the Sabbath was not a day to travel to church/temple, it was a day to remain at home and rest. The Sabbath synagogue services did not commence until after the Babylonian exile.

The Sabbath is not a moral command, however. This can be illustrated in the following way. Something that is immoral is always wrong. Murder, stealing, adultery is wrong no matter what day it is committed. However, the things that were forbidden on the Sabbath day (kindling fire, gathering of wood, traveling, etc.) were permitted to do on other days. This clearly demonstrates that the Sabbath was far more ceremonial than moral.

There is a strange irony that I have observed regarding the Torah observant movement. The vast majority of its adherents are Gentiles, to whom the Mosaic Law was never given in the first place. To be fair, I must admit that although no believer is beholden to the Law of Moses, Jewish believers were/are still free to observe the Law, if they so choose. The problem comes when it is presented as mandatory for salvation and/or sanctification. There can be no mixture of Law and Grace!

(Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum’s book “The Sabbath” served as primary reference material for this article. You can order it here: https://ariel.org/product/the-sabbath/)

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Excerpt from “The Rapture: Reasons to Believe”

January 7, 2026

I’m going to share an excerpt from the introduction to my latest book. Before I do that, I want to make some introductory remarks. Much confusion exists about eschatology (the study of last things) because of a failure to rightly divide the Word.

2 Ti 2:15 Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. (NKJV)

My book is written from a dispensational point of view. Replacement (sometimes called “covenant”) theology conflates the promises of God to the nation of Israel with the church. The end result is confusion. I believe that the Rapture is an event that is exclusive to the church. I think it’s imperative that we understand when the church began and what it’s comprised of. So, before I post the introduction to my book, let’s take a moment to look at ecclesiology (the study of the church).

What is the church? We can find the answer in Paul’s letter to the Colossians.

Col 1:18 And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. (NKJV)

The church is the body of Christ, with Him (Jesus Christ) being the Head of the body. The next question is, who or what comprises the church? The answer can be found in Paul’s letter to the Ephesians.

Eph 2:11 Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands— 
Eph 2:12 that at that time you 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. 
Eph 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. 
Eph 2:14 For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 
Eph 2:15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 
Eph 2:16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity. (NKJV)

First, we see that initially there were just two groups: Jews and Gentiles. Prior to Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection, the Gentiles were strangers from the covenants of God. There are four unconditional covenants God made with Israel. They are: The Abrahamic Covenant (Gen 12:1-3, 13:14-17, 15:1-21, 17:1-21, and 22:15-18), the Land Covenant (Deut 29:1-30:20), the Davidic covenant (2 Sam 7:11-16), and the New Covenant (Jer 31:31-34). The only way a Gentile could receive any benefit was to become a proselyte to Judaism. The Mosaic covenant (the Law) was a conditional covenant, and as such, is no longer in force.

Paul goes on to say that the Law functioned as a “wall of separation” between Jews and Gentiles. The dietary restrictions alone made social interaction between Jews and Gentiles almost impossible. Those who attempt to force Christians to keep the Law are trying to rebuild the very thing God broke down…the wall of separation! The Cross of Jesus “abolished” the law of commandments and ordinances and subsequently brought about a third entity. There are not only Jews and Gentiles, (see I Cor 10:32) but now there is a third entity…the “one new man” which is the church (comprised of believing Jews and Gentiles). Note that all of that took place after the death of Christ!

So how does one become a part of the “one new man” (the body of Christ, the church)? Paul answers this in his first letter to the Corinthians.

1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit. (NKJV)

The means by which one becomes a part of the church is Spirit baptism. If we can determine when that first took place, we can find a starting point for the church age. Matthew’s gospel is the only one of the four that mentions the church.

Mat 16:18 And I also say to you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. (NKJV)

I want you to notice that Jesus Christ speaks of the church as a future entity. He states, “I will build my church.” This is crucial because many believe that the church started with Adam or Abraham. (Christ did not say “I will continue to build my church.”) Immediately after this statement, He explains His future crucifixion which would accomplish this agenda. I believe the church began on the Day of Pentecost. After His resurrection, Jesus demonstrated His resurrected body for a period of 40 days (Acts 1:3). At one point, He appeared to over 500 people (see I Cor 15:6) in His resurrected body. That would stand as convincing evidence in any court of law! Just prior to His ascension and the Day of Pentecost, He stated these words:

Act 1:5 for John truly baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” (NKJV)

Remember earlier that we discovered that Spirit baptism was the means by which one became a part of the body (I Cor 12:13)? And remember that the church is the body (Col 1:18)? Acts chapter 2 records the first incidence of Spirit baptism in the scriptures. Acts 2 does not explicitly state that these believers were baptized with the Spirit. However, later in the book of Acts, Peter makes it clear that this is what they experienced. Perhaps 7-10 years later, Peter is given a heavenly vision and instructed to visit the household of a Gentile named Cornelius. This is described in Acts chapter 10. In Acts chapter 11, Peter is confronted by the Jewish leadership because he had gone in to eat with the Gentiles (11:1-3). Remember earlier when I said that the Law served as a “middle wall of partition” between Jews and Gentiles? This is further proof of said division.

When Peter gives his defense to the men from Judea in Acts 11, he gives us the proof that we need to determine when Spirit baptism first took place. Notice what Peter says:

Act 11:15 And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them, as upon us at the beginning. 
Act 11:16 Then I remembered the word of the Lord, how He said, ‘John indeed baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ (NKJV)

Peter states that what happened in Cornelius’ home was identical to his own experience in Acts chapter 2. And with that being the case, this proves that Peter was baptized with the Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. This is when the Church age began! Now, I will post the introductory chapter from my book, “The Rapture: Reasons to Believe.” I hope you will enjoy!

Introduction

Act 2:1 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. 

Act 2:2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. 

Act 2:3 And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. 

Act 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. (KJV)

You thought this was a book about the end times, didn’t you? Don’t worry, it is! This book is a defense of the pre-trib rapture of the church. I thought it would be appropriate to start with the birth of the church. Dispensational scholars agree that the church was born on the day of Pentecost in Acts Chapter two. What this author will attempt to do is prove that just as the church was born in a miracle, so will the church age end with a miracle…the rapture of the church!

A great deal of humility is in order here. Admittedly, there are many things we cannot state dogmatically regarding how every detail of prophecy will work out. Thankfully, eschatology is not a matter where true believers must agree on every point. One’s position on eschatology should not be a litmus test for fellowship. There are non-negotiable issues concerning the faith, but this is not one of them. A German Lutheran theologian from the early seventeenth century named Rupertus Meldenius coined a profound saying:

“In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity.”

Unfortunately, when the topic of eschatology (particularly, the doctrine of the rapture) comes up, emotions tend to run high. This has caused many to abandon the discussion altogether. Many pastors refuse to teach or preach on the subject for fear of controversy. When it comes to terms like “pre-trib” or “mid-trib”, they opt for a position of “pan-trib” …it will all “pan out” in the end! I don’t believe this is the correct approach, either. Just because there are varying opinions on a doctrine, doesn’t mean that they are all correct or that we should avoid it altogether. In Acts 17:11, the Bereans were commended, because they searched the scriptures daily to test Paul’s teaching. I invite you to do the same with what I will share with you in this book. To get the most out of this study, please consult with the Bible as we proceed. Take time to look up the references; it will be well worth your effort!

Since the church age was a mystery in the Old Testament (Eph. 3:4-6), we won’t be looking there for a defense of the rapture. I do believe there are types and shadows of the rapture in the Old Testament, and we will look at those as secondary evidence but not primary. We will look at relevant passages in the New Testament as our primary evidence. While it’s impossible to answer every objection, we will also attempt to deal with those we most commonly encounter.

This book is not about doing “newspaper exegesis” or attempting to set dates for the rapture or other prophetic events. All such endeavors are doomed to failure (Matt 24:36). Instead, this book will focus on the doctrine of the rapture and the sequence of events leading up to the Millennial Kingdom of Jesus Christ. It is this author’s conviction that the rapture will take place prior to the seven-year Tribulation (also called Daniel’s 70th week and the “time of Jacob’s trouble”). The exegesis (a fancy theological word that just means explaining or interpreting a biblical text) in this work will attempt to prove this beyond any reasonable doubt.

Having stated that, whenever I use the word “rapture” in this book, it is understood that the phrase “pre-trib” (meaning before the seven-year Tribulation) is implied. I always like to begin any Bible study with a word of prayer. The greatest Teacher of all is the Holy Spirit. Would you agree with me now?

Father, thank you for your Word! As we read and study the Scriptures together, would you open our understanding and give us clarity? Above all, grant us a heart to be doers of the Word and not simply hearers. In Jesus’ name we pray, amen!

(You can order a copy of the book here: https://a.co/d/bxGmjSW )

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

The Issue of the Sabbath in the Law of Moses

August 4, 2025

In our last entry, we looked at the issue of the Sabbath as it relates to the book of Genesis. Those who teach and preach that Sabbath-keeping is mandatory in the current age, will often appeal to Genesis to prove this is a Creation ordinance. In our last post, we investigated this claim. What we found is that the only One who rested on the seventh day in Genesis was God Himself. Furthermore, the word Sabbath isn’t even used in Genesis. To summarize, the period from Adam to Moses (roughly 2500 years) saw a number of covenants and major events. But there isn’t even one instance of anyone keeping the Sabbath, let alone a commandment to do so!

It isn’t until we get to the book of Exodus that we find our first usage of the Hebrew word shabbat (“sabbath” in English). It’s found in Exodus chapter 16. The context of Exodus 16 deals with the issue of manna. In response to the murmuring and complaining of the Israelites, the LORD provided manna from Heaven. One can detect the Divine sense of humor here because the very name manna means “what is it?” The Israelites were told to gather manna but were given a command not to store/save it for the next day (Ex 16:19). Some did not obey (shocking, I know!), and the result was that the manna bred worms and had a terrible smell. On the sixth day, they gathered twice as much manna (Ex 16:22). After reporting this to Moses we are told this:

Exo 16:23 Then he said to them, “This is what the LORD has said: ‘Tomorrow is a Sabbath rest, a holy Sabbath to the LORD. Bake what you will bake today, and boil what you will boil; and lay up for yourselves all that remains, to be kept until morning.’ ” (NKJV)

(I quoted from the NKJV here, because unfortunately, the KJV translators inserted the definite article (“the”) in front of Sabbath. The original manuscripts contain no definite article. Most all translations since the KJV have corrected this. This is an important detail because the lack of the definite article implies that the concept was previously unknown.)

This is the first mention in the Bible of the concept of sabbath. It must be remembered that they had just left Egypt, where they had been in slavery for over 400 years as a people. They were not accustomed to taking any days off, let alone a weekly sabbath! This is why the LORD gives them an extended explanation of this sabbath concept. The primary content of the command concerned the gathering of manna. They were not to attempt to gather manna on the seventh day. There would actually be none provided by the LORD, it would be an exercise in futility. Nevertheless, some went out on the seventh day and attempted to gather manna, and found none (again, I know you’re shocked).

All of this was a test for the children of Israel (Ex 16:4) to see if they would obey His law. Legalists insist that Christians must obey the Law of Moses for justification and/or sanctification. This episode in Exodus 16 shows that human beings have always had difficulty with God’s laws. That’s true even when they had just crossed the Red Sea on dry land and experienced several subsequent miracles! They would soon receive the Ten Commandments and the rest of the Torah (613 laws to be exact). The outcome will not be much better. Speaking of the Ten Commandments, let’s take a look at the fourth commandment which is a topic of great controversy, even today.

Exo 20:8 Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. Exo 20:9  Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work: Exo 20:10  But the seventh day is the sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: Exo 20:11  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.

The fourth commandment in Exodus 20 begins with the word “remember.” Those that maintain the Sabbath is a requirement from Creation (a Creation ordinance) will say that the command to remember hearkens back to Genesis 2:2-3. That is a problem, however, if you are serious about biblical exegesis. As we have already discussed, the word shabbat or sabbath appears nowhere in Genesis! The first appearance of the word is in Exodus 16. This is the nearest antecedent that would have any point of reference for the children of Israel who had just left Egypt. They are to remember the concept that God had just taught them concerning the gathering of manna on the seventh day. This is also seen in the fact that the fourth commandment is stated in a different way in Deuteronomy.

Deu 5:12 Keep the sabbath day to sanctify it, as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee.

Notice there, the command is simply to keep/observe the Sabbath as opposed to remembering it. The reason for the difference in wording is due to a different context. Deuteronomy is written towards the end of the forty-year period of wandering in the wilderness.

Let’s go back now to the fourth commandment in Exodus 20. They are told to work six days a week, but there is to be a cessation of labor on the seventh day. This rule applied not only to people but also to the domesticated animals. In verse 11, the LORD explains the significance from the Creation account. But it must be noted that even with that being said, the LORD only mentions Himself as having rested on the seventh day. This is beyond the scope of this article, but this is a great apologetics tool to prove that Creation was a literal seven-day period. It should also be noted that there is no command for corporate worship on the Sabbath. There are many groups that insist that worship services are to be held on the Sabbath (which is technically sundown Friday-sundown Saturday). What we will discover is that the Sabbath as it appears in the Law is a call to rest and remain at home on that day.

Though this tends to be a hot topic of controversy, it need not be a test of fellowship or point of contention among true believers. The New Testament urges us not to judge or condemn others regarding the observance of sabbath days or other holidays (Rom 14:5-6, Col 2:16-17).

Tags:, , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Romans 7 “Dead to the Law”

May 3, 2025

Romans 7 is probably one of the most misunderstood chapters in the New Testament. Paul’s use of personal pronouns (“I”, “me”, “my”) in the chapter cause confusion for some interpreters. We must remember that Paul as a trained rabbi was a master at logic and the usage of analogies. Romans is Paul’s masterpiece, and he has been careful to lay out a logical basis for justification by faith. The first three chapters lay out the need for justification. Since none are righteous, righteousness must come from somewhere (rather Someone!) else. That takes us to Romans 4 & 5. There, Paul lays out the case for justification by faith. He used Abraham (and David) as an example of one who was justified apart from works, apart from rituals (circumcision), and apart from the Law of Moses. After he has made his case for justification by faith, he moves on to sanctification. Hence, the issue of sanctification doesn’t come up until chapter six.

It will be helpful for us to remember at this point, the three tenses of salvation. We will use the letter “P” to help us remember the terminology. Justification is a legal declaration of righteousness. Justification delivers us from the penalty of sin. Sanctification is the middle-tense of salvation. If you’re a believer, that’s where you are right now. Sanctification deals with deliverance from the power of sin. The final tense of our salvation is glorification (we aren’t there yet!). Glorification ensures us deliverance from the presence of sin. Paul will deal with this in chapter 8 of Romans.

In chapter 6, Paul tells us how to be victorious over the power of sin in our lives. This doesn’t mean that we are ever sinless prior to glorification, but ideally, we are “sinning less.” There are three action verbs in Romans six, that are helpful. They are “know”, “reckon”, and “yield.” We must know the truth about our relationship to sin. Paul says that when we were baptized into Christ, we are now dead to sin (Rom 6:2a). Just as Christ was dead, buried, and raised to life, so are we (spiritually). We identify with Him. Our old man was crucified. We are now raised to new life. This spiritual truth is portrayed vividly in the believer’s water baptism. Death is portrayed as the believer goes down into the water. While under the water, the believer identifies with the burial of Christ. As he/she comes up out of the water, there is the symbolism of being raised to new life. We are also told we have to “reckon” this to be true. This word means to consider it to be so, because it is. It’s not enough for us to know this as fact. We must appropriate it in our daily lives. Finally, we are to yield to the Lord. One of the key verses in chapter six is verse 14:

Rom 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Chapter six deals with the first half of the verse. Chapter 7 deals with the latter half of the verse. It is there that we begin chapter 7. The issue is the Law. What function (if any) does it have in regard to sanctification? If we may say it this way…chapter 6 tells us how to be sanctified. Chapter 7 tells us how not to be sanctified! There is one glaring omission in chapter 7, and this will be extremely helpful in our exegesis of the passage. You should notice that the topic of the Holy Spirit is conspicuously absent from Romans 7. This is a clue that we are not dealing with the Christian life. Despite what I have read in many commentaries (and countless sermons), Romans 7 does not describe the Christian’s struggle between the flesh and the Spirit (you can find that in Galatians 5). This chapter deals with the struggle between the flesh (sin nature) and the Law! They are vastly different topics and must not be confused!

Rom 7:1  Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? 
Rom 7:2  For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. 
Rom 7:3  So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man. 
Rom 7:4  Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. 

In the previous chapter, Paul finished with the analogy of a slave and a master. Now he continues with another analogy. This time, he uses the analogy of marriage. It must be noted here that Paul is not dealing with the issue of marriage, he is using an analogy to explain the believer’s relationship with the Law of Moses. Under the Law, there were no provisions for a woman to initiate a divorce from her husband. She was “bound” to her husband as long as he was alive. Upon his death, however, she was free to be married to another man without committing the sin of adultery. In verse 4, Paul explains the analogy by saying that now the believer is dead to the Law! That’s our relationship with the Law of Moses; we are dead to it! The legalist will object and say, “wait a minute…without the Law won’t that make us sin all the more?” If we were simply separated from the Law, that might be true. But we are not simply dead to the Law, we are married to Another! Now that we are in relationship with Jesus Christ, we can actually bring forth spiritual fruit unto God!

Rom 7:5  For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. 
Rom 7:6  But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. 

Notice the tense in verse 5. When we were under the law, our sinful passions were aroused and brought forth fruit unto death. Verse 6 begins with “but now”, showing that something has changed. We are now delivered from the law, and free to serve in newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter.

The rest of the chapter, Paul is going to make a defense of the law. As he has done in previous verses, he will as a rhetorical question, followed by an emphatic negative.

Rom 7:7  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.

Paul’s opponents will try to paint him as one who denigrates the Law of Moses. What he will demonstrate however, is that the problem is not with the Law, the problem is with the sin nature (a.k.a. “the flesh” in Christian nomenclature). The function of the law is not to sanctify, but rather to show us what sin really is. By the law is the knowledge of sin (Rom 3:20b). Romans 5:20 makes the shocking statement that the law entered “that the offence might abound.”

We will continue this study in our next post.

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

God’s “Good News”

April 20, 2025

For my Resurrection Sunday sermon, I preached from the opening greeting of Paul’s letter to the Romans. The first seven verses of Romans comprise one long sentence. We will look at a few individually.

Rom 1:1  Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, 

Paul says three things about himself. It’s interesting that he first refers to himself as a servant (doulos in the Greek which means a bondservant or slave). The Romans would readily understand this term because there were millions of slaves in the Roman empire. It was not something to be desired. The Jews might possibly think of Abraham, Moses, or David who were all called “servants” of the LORD. In any event, Paul saw himself as one indebted to Another who had paid a great price for his soul.

Next, he identified himself as an apostle. There were at least two qualifications for an apostle. An apostle had to have seen the risen Lord (I Cor 9:1). An apostle had to be directly called by the Lord to be an apostle (Acts 9:15, I Cor 15:8). Evidently, the apostles were endowed with the ability to do miraculous signs as well (2 Cor 12:12).

Finally, Paul identifies as one who is separated unto the gospel of God. Paul understood separation. As a Pharisee (the term literally means “separate”) he had been separated unto Judaism and the traditions of the elders. His life was consumed with it. He spent his younger years furiously persecuting the Church (Gal 1:13,14). But, one day he met the risen Lord. When he did, he was no longer separated as a Pharisee, he was separated unto the gospel!

Notice Paul refers to it as the “gospel of God.” The Greek word for gospel is euaggelion (pronounced yoo-ang-ghel’-ee-on). Outside of biblical usage, it was used to announce the victory of a sovereign or the arrival of a new king. The word literally means “good news.” But this is not any ordinary news… it’s God’s Good News!

Rom 1:2  (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,) 

The next thing Paul discloses, is that the Gospel is not “new news”, it was all over the Old Testament scriptures. Psalm 2:7 and Proverbs 30:4 revealed that God has a Son. The coming of a redeemer was first disclosed in the Garden of Eden (Gen 3:15). God told Abraham that in him all the families of the earth would be blessed (Gen 12:3). David predicted that the Messiah would be crucified (Psa 22) and that the Messiah would rise from the dead (Psa 16:10). Isaiah predicted that the Messiah would suffer, die, be buried in a rich man’s tomb, and rise again! (Isa 52-53)

Rom 1:3  Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;

Paul says that this “Good News” is all concerning, or about God’s Son, Jesus Christ our Lord! All of the Old Testament scriptures pointed to Jesus. Christ revealed this to His apostles after the resurrection (Luke 24:27). All of the types and shadows, the blood sacrifices, the feasts, they all pointed to the finished work of Christ.

Paul then speaks of Christ’s humanity. He was fully God and fully man. He was a descendant of King David. The New Testament opens with Jesus Christ’s connection to David (Matt 1:1) and it ends with the same (Rev 22:16). God had promised David that one of his descendants would be an Eternal Son who would reign forever (2 Sam 7:12-13). In His humanity, Jesus came in meekness and was crucified and buried. When He comes again to rule and reign, it will be much different!

Rom 1:4  And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:

Notice that Paul said Christ was “declared” to be the Son of God. He didn’t “become” the Son of God at the resurrection, but He was declared as such with power. Jesus had already revealed that no man had the power to take His life from Him.

John 10:17  Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. 
John 10:18  No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. 

John records an event at the first Passover of Jesus’ ministry. In Jerusalem He cleansed the Temple, which had become a corrupt place of merchandise. The religious leaders were indignant and demanded that Jesus provide a sign to show His authority to do such things. He made a curious statement.

John 2:19  Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. 

As is typical in the Gospel of John, the people misunderstood spiritual things and confused them with natural. They thought He was talking about Herod’s Temple. But He was talking about His own body! So, when He rose from the grave that was a powerful declaration of His Deity. Evidently, the chief priests and Pharisees finally figured it out and took the issue seriously. This we read at the end of Matthew’s Gospel:

Mat 27:62  Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate, 
Mat 27:63  Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. 

They requested the tomb be made secure, sealed, and guarded with Roman soldiers. Even that wasn’t enough to stop the Son of God from coming out of that tomb victorious! Over 500 people saw Jesus in a resurrected body (I Cor 15:6). That kind of eyewitness testimony would stand in any legitimate court of law! All the religious leaders had to do was produce a corpse. That would have stopped the movement immediately, and Jesus of Nazareth would have vanished into history as an imposter. Instead, His followers would turn the world upside down…before most of them died a martyr’s death. His “Good News” would go into all the world as it is today. Have you received and believed God’s Good News? I’ll leave you with the words of the apostle.

1Co 15:1  Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 
1Co 15:2  By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 
1Co 15:3  For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 
1Co 15:4  And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 

Tags:, , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Grace or Debt? (Romans 4:4-8)

March 26, 2025

We continue to look at Paul’s exposition of justification by faith in today’s post. Paul has already cited the example of Abraham as one who was justified apart from works. Abraham is revered as the “father of faith” and now we will look at David as “Israel’s greatest king.” The one is famous for his faith and righteousness, the other infamous for a few great sins. It’s interesting that Paul chooses David’s failures rather than his great victories to make his point. Let’s see if we can follow Paul’s logic.

Rom 4:4  Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 

We see again Paul’s use of the word logizomai (translated as “reckoned” in the KJV). This is pretty straightforward. When one works and receives their wages, no grace is involved. After a 40-hour week you receive your paycheck. You may be thankful and love your job, but this is hardly considered a gracious act by your employer. You simply receive what you’ve earned. You were given what was owed to you. Grace is something altogether different.

Rom 4:5  But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Here is the language of grace. Abraham didn’t work for his righteousness, he simply believed in the LORD. On that basis, righteousness was “counted” (again “logizomai” in Greek) or credited to Abraham’s account. What may seem shocking at first glance is that we discover those who are justified. It’s not the godly, but rather, the ungodly! Those familiar with the Old Testament may immediately recall such scriptures as these:

Exo 23:7  Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked. 

Deu 25:1  If there be a controversy between men, and they come unto judgment, that the judges may judge them; then they shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked. 

The great expositor Warren Wiersbe remarked that “God justifies the ungodly-because there are no godly for Him to justify!”. Paul has already resolved this dilemma for us back in chapter 3 when he declared that God “set forth” Christ to be a propitiation for the remission of sins (Rom 3:25). Because Christ bore our sins on the Cross, God can now apply His righteousness to our account when we believe.

Rom 4:6  Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

Now Paul turns to David to strengthen the argument. Using the biblical principle of two witnesses, we now have an example from the law and the prophets/writings. Abraham’s faith was reckoned as righteousness by grace. Now we are going to see grace given to David apart from works. To make his point, Paul is going to quote from Psalm 32:1-2.

Rom 4:7  Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. 
Rom 4:8  Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. 

To fully appreciate this, you must be familiar with the Old Testament and David’s story in particular. Most scholars believe that David penned this Psalm after his encounter with Nathan the prophet in 2 Samuel chapter 12. David had committed adultery with Bathsheba. She became pregnant, and David conspired to have her husband Uriah killed (Uriah is memorialized in Matthew’s genealogy of Christ in Matt 1:6). At least nine months later, God sent Nathan the prophet to confront David concerning his sins. I would encourage you to read the whole story in 2 Samuel 11 and 12, but for sake of time I will only cite this one reference here.

2Sa 12:13  And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against the LORD. And Nathan said unto David, The LORD also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.

David had committed at least two capital crimes (adultery and murder). Under the Law of Moses, there were no sacrifices for such willful sins. One could only expect the penalty of death. All David could do was cast himself upon the mercies of God. And look what happened…not only did God forgive David’s sin, He pardoned him from the death penalty! No wonder David’s heart erupted with praise to God in Psalm 32!

Paul has now given two great examples from the Old Testament showing righteousness apart from works. Abraham received what he did not deserve, and David didn’t get what he truly did deserve! You can either ask the LORD for a fair trial (bad idea!), or you can plead guilty and ask God for mercy. Because of what Christ did at Calvary, you and I can be righteous apart from works. I like to call that the “Great Exchange.”

2Co 5:21  For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

Where is Boasting? (Romans 4:1-3)

March 25, 2025

In Romans 4, Paul is making the case for justification by faith. He will use two Old Testament examples to solidify his argument. He begins with Abraham.

Rom 4:1  What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? 
Rom 4:2  For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. 

In Judaism, Abraham is held in the highest regard. As a matter of fact, three of the world’s largest religions trace their roots to Abraham. God promised in Genesis 12:2 that He would make Abraham’s name great, and history has vindicated this. The rabbis have such a high view of Abraham that some had the impression that he was justified by his good works. We can look back at Abraham’s offering of Isaac as the supreme example of obedience and he is known as “the friend of God.” (2 Chron 20:7, James 2:23).

But this is not what Paul chooses to focus on. Let’s follow his train of thought.

Rom 4:3  For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

The first question is of the utmost importance. It doesn’t matter what our opinions are, or even the opinions of those held in high esteem. But what do the scriptures say about the subject? That’s what matters! So, Paul directs us to Genesis 15 for the answer.

Gen 15:6  And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

This is the first mention of “belief” in the scriptures. This is not by accident; this is by design. People often wonder how folks were saved under the Old Covenant. My answer is, “the same way they are in the New Covenant.” People are saved by grace, through faith! Paul uses Abraham (the “father of faith”) to make this point. Abraham was not righteous because of his good deeds. He was declared to be righteous because he believed in the LORD!

The major theme of Romans is “the righteousness of God.” This is a righteousness that is bestowed upon us, apart from any goodness in us. Paul spends the first three chapters of Romans proving that the whole world is guilty before God and there are none righteous…no not one! The key word in Romans chapter 4 is the Greek word logizomai. The word is used 11 times in chapter 4. The KJV translators chose to translate this in a myriad of ways. They translated logizomai using the words, “counted”, “reckoned”, and “impute(d).” Those are all accurate ways to translate the word, but in my humble opinion, they obscure the argument Paul is trying to make. The NASB (New American Standard Bible) sought to alleviate this issue by the consistent translation of logizomai as “credited.”

Abraham believed God, and on that basis, righteousness was credited to him. “Credited” has more of a financial connotation whereas “imputed” carries more of a legal connotation, but both are accurate. Righteousness was “credited” to Abraham’s account. The reason Abraham can’t boast of his good works as a means of justification is because the righteousness was not his own! This righteousness was placed on his account, not because of works but because of faith! We will develop this further in our next post. Thanks for reading!

Tags:, , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »