Turning the Tables

By Brother R. Michel Lankford
 
Did you know that in an increasing number of colleges and universities today, Biblical Christianity is being taught and presented as being nothing more than a myth? According to Richard Rives, author of Too Long in the Sun, and Time Is the Ally of Deceit, many of our 'institutions of higher learning' are misrepresenting Christianity as though it is nothing more than a revamping or a reinvention of Babylonian, Greek and Roman mythologies, and on the basis of that accusation they are making the false argument that, 'Enlightened, intelligent and forward thinking people' should abandon their belief in Almighty God and Jesus Christ, His Son.

Now, you and I love Yahweh Almighty God, and who love His Son the Messiah, and who believe the Scriptures, are quite naturally appalled and disgusted by such a vile false argument. Nonetheless, according to Rives, that appalling deceitful argument is gaining strength in our college campuses in our modern and postmodern day.

No doubt, your knee-jerk reaction is probably the exact same as the reaction I had when I first heard and read about the scenario taking place among our impressionable college kids. I thought to myself, 'Hey, that's absurd!! Who could possibly confuse Babylonian, Greek and Roman mythologies with Biblical Christianity, let alone make a plausible argument that truly biblical Christianity and these other ungodly pagan mythologies are one and the same thing?" "Who could turn such a whopper of a lie into a plausible argument and make people believe it?"

To my shock and horror, turning that awful lie into a plausible argument was not as hard as I had imagined it would be when I first began investigating the subject. Here's how they do it.
They take various aspects of true biblical Christianity, such as the virgin birth, and the visitation of the wise men from the East and they LOOSELY connect them to some Babylonian texts or legends. Then they go on to point out that the key characteristics of Christianity which most Christians observe today, most notably, Sunday worship, Christmas, Easter, Lent and Valentine's Day and other things like these have a clear documented history of originating in Babylon, Greece and Rome which is older than biblical Christianity.

Then they trace the customary 'celebrations', legends and decorations which Christians commonly use to commemorate Love, the birth, death and resurrection of Messiah today, and they easily trace them back to Babylonian, Greek and Roman worship practices, which are widely and historically documented. For one example, the birthday of Nimrod founder of Babylon, the birthday of the Roman sun deity, the Egyptian sun deity, the Nordic sun and fertility deity, the Syrian sun deity, and other supposed deities, (I don't mention the names of these false deities because Scripture forbids doing so- Exodus 23:13), but all of these false supposed 'deities' were all proclaimed to have been born or re-born on December 25th.

So these 'scholars' point to all of the Babylonian Greek and Roman customs and traditions which Christianity has so readily accepted and made commonplace in 'Christian worship,' and then these scholars make the libelous argument that since so many of Christianity's celebrations and practices have their clear origin from Babylonian Greek and Roman mythologies, they claim that Christianity must be nothing more than a myth. They claim that Christianity must be nothing more than a mere re-adaptation of these ancient mythological religions, and so they claim that Christianity should not be believed any more than the intelligent person should believe and follow ancient Babylonian Greek or Roman mythologies.

Yes, the argument that I just described is yet another direct assault against Biblical Christianity by people who hate God, who hate Jesus Christ, who despise and have contempt for people who hold a biblical faith.

Yes the argument I just described, is being forcibly advanced in our colleges by many a left-wing socialists and atheists who want to advance the theory that faith in God and the Bible must surely be antiquated and outdated because they say, "Humanity has advanced far beyond the need for such things as God, redemption and the Bible." Of course it's an assault on Biblical Christianity, but the argument is gaining strength and becoming more popular as is evidenced by a number of documentaries about the Bible which are becoming more commonly seen on documentaries seen in places such as A&E in the history Channels.

What these liberal historians either conveniently gloss over or do not mention at all, is that for more than the first 300 years of early Christianity, the original believers in Jesus the Messiah PURPOSELY DID NOT blend in, they DID NOT mix together, and they DID NOT incorporate ANY aspect of pagan worship practices, beliefs, pagan worship traditions, philosophies, pagan festival days or decorations into Christianity.

In fact, the very early church went out of its way and took extreme measures to make certain that it did not blend Christianity with any of the pagan practices associated with worshiping other gods. They did this for a number of reasons. First, among the Hebrews who were coming to faith in Messiah, many had relatives who were heavily into rabbinical (but not necessarily biblical) Judaism. These relatives were already suspicious of the new Hebrew sect that proclaimed Yeshua (Jesus) to be the Messiah. The believers who came from a Hebrew heritage understood that if they incorporated any pagan practices into their worship, it would be a great excuse for the relatives whom they wished to see saved to reject the Messiah, and not to come into saving relationship with Messiah.

By the same token, those who were coming in to faith in Messiah from a Gentile or non-Hebrew background already knew that these pagan practices were already being used in their day to worship other gods. These believers from a Gentile background were trying to get their family members free and out of paganism, and so they would not want their relatives honoring Yahweh Almighty God and honoring Jesus as an addition to add to the top of the pile of other gods which their family members already worshiped.

They were trying to get their relatives away from the world and into Christ's fellowship. So Christians with a Gentile background did not want to mix paganism into their Christian worship, because these new Gentile converts did not want to further the mistaken point of view that Jesus was just one more god among many other gods, which was a common approach to worship among the pagan cultures of their day. So both sides, believers in Messiah from a Hebrew background and believers in Messiah who originated from a pagan Gentile background both had their own reasons for wanting to make sure that they did not blend any aspects of pagan worship into the early church. In reality many Christians actively went out of their way to make certain that they did not blend pagan practices into Christianity well into the 400s A.D. and beyond. In the early days of Christianity. MIXING ANY ASPECT OF PAGANISM IN WITH CHRISTIANITY WAS SINCERELY THOUGHT TO BE A SIN.

· Here's some key concepts that were well understood in the first centuries of Christianity which have often been forgotten in modern times:

· WE MUST UNDERSTAND that righteousness before the One True Almighty Creator God; the Great I Am That I Am (Yahweh in Hebrew) Comes by Believing HIM (Genesis 15:6; Habakkuk 2:4; Galatians 3:11; Hebrews 10:38).

· It was well understood in the first century that anything which did not originate from faith in Yahweh; or did not truly feed faith or reflect faith in Yahweh IS SIN (Romans 14:23b; 1 Corinthians 10:31).

· They understood that anything which could cause people to diverge or turn from truly believing God, and could cause people to accept ideas and philosophies which were contrary to God, would be the same as causing them to stumble into IDOLATRY. So they went out of their way to make sure that they DID NOT BLEND Christianity with other worldly philosophies and ideas that might cause people to disobey God. The apostles actively and strenuously TAUGHT AGAINST mixing Christianity with any worldly philosophy such as Gnosticism, or any other mythologies that might cause people to pollute their beliefs with other gods (2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1 1 Corinthians 10:1-21; Revelation 21:7-8). They understood that what we believe is literally a matter of eternal life or death, so they did not want to risk causing people to believe other things contrary to God (James 4:4; Romans 12:1-2; Colossians 2:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:22).

· The apostles had a strong Scriptural basis for teaching that we MUST NOT blend our Biblical beliefs with anything related to other gods:

· The Almighty Creator COMMANDED that we MUST NOT MIX, DO NOT IMPORT and do not copy or DO NOT apply ANY idolatrous methods into worshiping God (Deuteronomy 12:1-4, 8, 29-32; cf. Exodus 32:1-10; Jeremiah 10:1-2). Yahweh Almighty God specifically said, "DON'T DO IT."

· God's relationship with His people has always been closely identified with the characteristics of a Holy marriage; which God Himself invented (Hosea 2:19-20; cf. Ephesians 5:31-32: John 17:11, 21 God considered the above commands to be so serious that blending Godly worship with worldly philosophies and other idolatrous religions was considered to be equal to spiritual whoring, spiritual infidelity, spiritual adultery and playing the harlot with other gods. All of those terms are used interchangeably throughout the prophets in Scripture for the idea of mixing aspects of godly worship with worldly philosophies or idolatrous ideas. In regard to prophetic Scripture, normally speaking of spiritual unfaithfulness rather than moral infidelity, that is, the idea of turning from their true God to love a human god, resulting in spiritual harlotry. The concept is so critically important that the entire book of Hosea was written to illustrate the concept (see also Judges 2:17; Exodus 34:15-16; Ezekiel 8:14 etc. etc. etc.).

In Ezekiel 8, for example, we see Israel observing a pagan idolatrous tradition, but doing so in the temple of Yahweh. If you read the chapter, you can see how Yahweh felt about it (Cf. Jeremiah 18:15).


Unlike the popular theory that is being advanced today, Christianity DID NOT originate from pagan Babylonian, Greek, and Roman mythologies. On the contrary, for more than the first 300 years of biblical Christianity, the early church went out of its way to make sure they did not blend biblical Christian doctrine with Babylonian, Greek, Roman and other pagan religions and philosophies, because they wanted to make sure that the bride of Christ (the church) would remain pure and would not defile itself or play the harlot with other worldly belief systems. The first apostles actively preached that God's people should get out of Babylon, not join with it (Revelation 18:1-4).


For this reason, early Christians purposely held their holy convocations and gatherings around the Biblical feasts and festivals which Yahweh Almighty God has ordained in Scripture (Leviticus 23), in order to keep their identity clearly separate from the world. They honored the biblical Sabbaths, they commemorated Messiah's death and holiness in the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread. They honored Messiah's resurrection with the Feast of First Fruits. They looked forward to the Messiah's second coming in the fall feast of trumpets, and the Day of Atonement. They look forward to the wedding supper of the Lamb and eternity, as well with the Feast of Tabernacles.

It was not until well after 312 to 314 A.D. when Emperor Constantine SUPPOSEDLY became a Christian that he FORCIBLY outlawed the biblical Sabbath. He also outlawed the Passover, and ordered that they be replaced with the Babylonian/Roman festival of Ishtar (a.k.a. Easter). Subsequent Roman emperors and Roman Senates passed laws forcing believers to abandon biblical decrees and required people to adopt the "Roman version" of Christianity. If they didn't, they could lose their properties, their liberties and even their lives.

For more then 300 years the Roman Empire tried to destroy Christianity through persecution. They could not defeat Christianity by force. So they pretended to join it and try to defeat it from within.

The Roman emperors held the title Pontificus Maximus (Which means That he claimed the right to rule over every religious belief in the empire), so when the Emperor 'became a Christian, ‘he claimed to be the head of the church and the right to change Christianity. Anyone who did not cooperate could be considered guilty of treason. Later, the Roman Catholic popes (who also claimed the title Pontificus Maximus for themselves), maintain the Imperial tradition of mixing pagan and ungodly religious belief systems with Christianity, but in the beginnings of Christianity this was not done at all.

Over the last 1701 years since Constantine, the tradition of mixing pagan religions and worldly philosophies with Christianity has become thoroughly entrenched. So much so, that for many, there is not even much awareness that these traditions are a CLEAR violation of Scripture, and that there is a far more biblical way to live. Although they are now in the minority, there has always been a remnant of God's people who supported returning to the Scriptural ways which God commanded, and not submitting to the commands of the Roman Empire and later the Roman Catholic Church.

The Argument for Keeping Human Traditions is Now Being Turned Against Christianity

 Among those who support continuing to disobey Scripture in favor of maintaining the Babylonian Greco Roman Catholic traditions of men, the excuse has often been given that by mixing paganism with Christianity, Christian principles have been introduced to more pagans and Christianity has supposedly spread. Isn't it ironic that the very compromise which people said was so necessary to bring Christianity to the pagans, is now being used to claim that Christianity must have been taken from paganism in the first place, and the very compromise is now being used to try to deny the truth of Christianity altogether.

The words of the prophet Ezekiel could not be more eerily appropriate:


“Her priests have done violence to My law and have profaned My holy things; they have made no distinction between the holy and the profane, and they have not taught the difference between the unclean and the clean; and they hide their eyes from My Sabbaths, and I am profaned among them.” (Ezekiel 22:26, NASB95)

“You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.” (James 4:4, NASB95)

Since we have abandoned Yahweh’s ways, and since we have failed maintain the clear separation between what Yahweh Almighty God calls clean and what He considers unclean, God is now being profaned, and centuries of compromise with paganism which was proclaimed is necessary to spread the gospel to unbelievers, is now being used as an excuse to deny God and reject the Messiah altogether.

It’s for this reason that Hebrew Roots Movements and Whole Testament Theology Movements are beginning to spring up and are now spreading throughout the world. It’s a sincere attempt to return to the ancient paths (Jeremiah 6:16), and the Biblically PROVABLE method of expressing faith in the Messiah. In so doing, it also fulfills the prophecy in Jeremiah:

“O Lord, my strength and my stronghold, And my refuge in the day of distress, To You the nations will come From the ends of the earth and say, “Our fathers have inherited nothing but falsehood, Futility and things of no profit.” Can man make gods for himself? Yet they are not gods! “Therefore behold, I am going to make them know— This time I will make them know My power and My might; And they shall know that My name is the Lord.”” (Jeremiah 16:19–21, NASB95)

LET US BE A FAITHFUL BRIDE TO MESSIAH AND RETURN TO GOD’S ANCIENT PATHS.

What WAS Paul REALLY Teaching?

By brother R Michel Lankford

In recent blog entries, we have been looking more closely at the writings and teachings of the apostle Paul. Modern Christian theology routinely teaches us that Paul the apostle supposedly taught that Yahweh Almighty’s eternal Laws, Commandments and Instructions were completed, and therefore done away with and abolished at the cross. Using their interpretations of Paul’s teachings, modern theologians now directly teach that openly defying and doing the direct opposite of the Creator’s Laws, Commandments, and Instructions, is NOW supposedly an act of God’s Grace through Jesus Christ.

What God previously called a disgusting abomination is NOW SUPPOSEDLY good, pleasing and acceptable in His sight, as if God’s righteousness and His decrees and standards completely reversed themselves when Messiah died for our sins.

The Creator’s fundamental definitions of what is good, and what is evil, DID NOT change when Messiah died and rose again. What was evil in the Creator’s eyes (Breaking Almighty God’s decrees),  DID NOT suddenly become a good thing, and what was good in Yahweh’s sight (Loving God and KEEPING His Commandments), DID NOT suddenly become a wicked act of unfaithfulness after Messiah died for our sins, yet that is exactly how modern-day Christianity actually functions, and they believe they can function that way because the apostle Paul supposedly taught the suspension and doing away with God’s Laws Commandments and Instructions through the cross of Messiah.

Now, there is no doubt that certain pieces of Paul’s writings can easily lend themselves to being misinterpreted that way. The problem is that in order to continue to interpret and apply Paul’s writings in the way that is most commonly accepted today, you have to reject and/or twist a ton of Scripture completely out of shape to try and make that work. In order to favor the Lawless interpretation of Paul’s writings that is most commonly accepted and taught today, you have to completely reject and/or twist the Law and the Prophets. You have to reject and/or twist the explicit teachings of Messiah Himself. You would have to completely reject and/or twist the teachings of every other apostle. What is perhaps the most shocking is that in order to apply Paul’s letters that way, you have to reject and/or twist many of the writings and teachings of Paul himself. Even Paul himself taught the opposite of the way that Paul is represented today. The long and short of it is that in order to interpret and apply Paul’s writings the way that is most commonly accepted today, one has to reject or rewrite so much Scripture, that it cannot possibly be sound doctrine, no matter how long-standing and devoutly held that interpretation has been accepted.

In the last two blog entries, we looked at some key passages (but not all) of Paul’s writings where he specifically wrote to Gentile congregations in direct support of doing God’s Laws Commandments and Instructions, because those parts of Paul’s writings are sorely neglected in favor of the more common Lawless interpretations.

We started in part one by examining a key teaching from Paul in Romans 8:5-8:

“For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” (Romans 8:5–8, NASB95)

So let’s review quickly. How does Paul himself describe the carnal mind or the mind that is set on the flesh or set on the sinful nature?

It leads to death (That’s the direct opposite of eternal life by definition)


It’s hostile against God, and why does he say it’s hostile against God?


It’s hostile against God for or because it does not subject itself to the Law of God. So according to Paul, not subjecting our minds to agree with God’s Laws and Commandments, is carnal minded, it’s hostile against God, and it leads to death and not life.

The mind set on the sinful nature CANNOT subject itself to the Law of God, it is not able to do so, (which of course means that a mind that is controlled by the Holy Spirit CAN subject itself to God’s Law).

Lastly, the carnal mind that is set on the sinful nature, which is hostile against God because it does not subject itself to God’s Law CANNOT please God.

If one is truly born again, then you are going to grow in loving Yahweh Almighty with all your heart soul mind and strength, right? If we are truly growing in that manner, then you are going to want to please God. If we are going to please the Most High, then we must allow Him to transform our thinking so that we agree with His Laws Commandments and Instructions, because we cannot please the Almighty unless we subject ourselves to His Laws.

So if you even come close to reading, understanding and believing Romans 8:5-8, then you understand that there is not a snowball’s chance in Death Valley that Paul was teaching people to disregard God’s Law after coming under grace, because doing that is not grace, it is death according to Paul himself. I cannot believe how clueless I was!

How do you know your interpretations are the right ones?

How do I know that the interpretation of Romans 8:5-8 which I have just laid out in the previous paragraphs is indeed the correct one? That’s a good and fair question. Very simply, the weight of Biblical evidence supports the interpretation I described for the following reasons:

First, I have looked at the Word for its own sake. I have paid attention to what the physical text of the passage actually says, and I have NOT re-defined and edited those words or their meaning through the filter of human religious tradition. That’s critical (Matthew 15:9; Mark 7:1-13; Colossians 2:8).

Second, it agrees with and does not contradict Yahweh’s Law or His prophets Deuteronomy 4:2;  Deuteronomy 8:3; Deuteronomy 12:29-32).

Third, it agrees with and does not contradict the teachings and doings of Messiah which Yahweh Almighty has sent (Matthew 5:17-20; Matthew 7:21-23; John 14:21; John 15:10-14).

Fourth, it agrees with and does not contradict the teachings of the other apostles (e.g. James 1:19-25; 1Timothy 1:8; Romans 7:16; 1 John 3:4; 1 John 2:1-6),

So if an interpretation of a Biblical passage meets these for underlying criterion, then it is safe to accept such an interpretation is Biblically sound doctrine. If it violates any of these four principles, then it must be rejected if we are to remain biblical.

To Decipher Paul Correctly We Must Learn to Ask the Right Questions

Many of us often read that the Scriptures on autopilot. It’s not intentional. We just fall into the habit of believing what we have been taught without thoroughly confirming it for ourselves. We start out with certain ideas and definitions of key concepts that we already believe before we’ve ever open our Bibles on any given day, and then we filter our understanding of what we are reading through what we previously believed the Scripture to be saying. Here is the key. Sometimes, if we are not careful to guard against it we can actually edit or filter out and mentally edit out some of what the physical text of Scripture actually says in order to make it fit with what we already believe. In other words we can mentally tune out what doesn’t fit with what we already believe. In a sense we are mentally rewriting Scripture to fit what we already believe instead of reading Scripture for what the text actually physically says. That’s called “Reading into the text.” Whether we like it or not what we read into Scripture will affect how we interpret and understand what Scripture is teaching. It will affect what we draw out from Scripture.

For example whenever we read the phrase “The law,” or under the law,” in Paul’s letters, we often automatically ASSUME that Paul is ALWAYS exclusively referring to God’s law.”

For example Romans 6:14 reads as follows:

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

Most people who read Romans 6:14 AS IF it read something like this (WHICH IT DOESN’T):

For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the God’s law, but under grace. In actual fact, Romans 6:14 does NOT refer to God’s law all, but we trained ourselves to believe and read that interpretation into the text and we assume that it is talking about the believer not being under God’s law. We have read that understanding into the text even though that is not what the text actually says.

Here we have a perfect example. IF Paul were referring to GOD’S LAW in BOTH Romans 6:14, and in Romans 8:5-8, then we have a real problem because Paul would clearly be contradicting himself, and if he were contradicting himself he clearly could not be speaking under the Holy Spirit of God, because God cannot deny Himself. Nevertheless, there appears to be a serious contradiction here. On the one hand, he APPEARS to be saying that we are not subject to God’s law but under grace in Romans 6:14, on the other hand, he clearly states outright that not subjecting yourself to Yahweh’s Law is a clear sign that you are carnal minded and walking in death in Romans 8:5-8. So there appears to be a conflict. We know that he is clearly referring to God’s Law in Romans 8:5-8, because he clearly identifies it. The question then becomes, to which particular law is Paul referring in Romans 6:14? The answer could not be more critical, since it’s quite literally a matter of life and death, even by Paul’s own estimation of the subject. In this specific instance finding the answer is easy.

In this case all we have to do is go back to Romans 6:1, and read slowly and methodically through to verse 23. If we read carefully we will notice that God’s law is NOT mentioned a single time in Romans 6, but sin is mentioned no less than 17 times in this single chapter.

In this chapter one can clearly see that Paul is making the case that if we are renewed by Yahweh through Messiah we should no longer subject ourselves to the law of sin and death, because we have God’s power and grace to overcome the law of sin and death and not to subject ourselves to the law of sin and death anymore. So, Romans 6:14 and Romans 8:5-8 actually agree with each other when we understand to which law Paul is referring.

Next time we will look at more of Paul’s writings, to see if what we assume Paul is saying measures up to the actual text of Scripture. See you then.

Brother R Michel Lankford

Was Paul A Lawless Apostle?

Was Paul A Lawless Apostle?

By Brother R. Michel Lankford

                     

Paul Did Not Advocate Lawlessness

The vast majority of modern-day Christianity, whose worship practices closely imitate Babylonian and Roman Imperial pagan worship traditions more than the rightly divided Scriptures is extremely fond of teaching that the mixing pagan practices with worshiping the Creator is NOW acceptable even though the Almighty specifically COMMANDED us NOT to do such things (Deuteronomy 12:1–4, 8, 29–32; Jeremiah 10:1-2). Most evangelical Christians CLAIM to believe that the Bible is the true, infallible written Word of the Almighty, yet they insist on forsaking the Creator’s seventh day Sabbaths, choosing instead to worship around the venerable day of the sun (which was the commandment of Roman emperors and Roman Catholic Popes, but violates the explicit Commandments of the Almighty. They insist on commemorating the Messiah’s birth and first coming on December 25th, and they adopt Christmas trees, wreaths, mistletoe and other pagan practices which can be easily directly traced back to Druid, Babylonian, Roman, and Nordic fertility sex worship. At the same Time the same Christians who CLAIM to believe the Bible insist on forsaking the Feast of Tabernacles (which is when the Messiah was truly born).

The majority of Christians insist on honoring Messiah’s death through the practice of ‘Holy Communion’ which is a tradition that was clearly taken from the Roman Catholic Church who adapted their tradition from the Roman Imperial worship of the pagan ‘deity’ Mithras. Most Christians will gladly hold to the Roman pagan traditions while they openly reject commemorating the LORD’s Passover, which is the true Biblical picture of Messiah’s death for our sins.

The LORD Biblically appointed the Feasts of Unleavened Bread and First-fruits to commemorate the purity and resurrection of Messiah, but do most Christians choose to honor these things? Of course they do not. Most believers do not even know about the LORD’s appointed feasts, let alone respect them. Instead, the majority of Christianity insists on celebrating Easter. The very name of that ‘holiday,’ the very same calendar day upon which it is celebrated, the decorations used to honor the day (bunnies, decorated eggs, chocolate), Sunday sunrise services, and even the use of the traditional Easter ham can easily be directly traced to the worship of the Babylonian fertility sex goddess Ishtar. Once again, Protestant churches celebrate these things not because it is biblical (in fact it is directly contrary to Scripture), but it is accepted because it was brought into the Protestant churches through Roman Catholic tradition. The Roman Catholics adopted it through Roman Imperial idolatrous worship traditions, and the pagan Roman emperors brought it into Rome through Babylon.

The question that every honest Christian must face is at what point did God change? Repeatedly, throughout both Testaments of Scripture the Almighty Creator of the universe has repeatedly stated that we are not to imitate the ungodly world while we try to worship and walk with the LORD. So, at what point did the things which Creator specifically identifies as being a disgusting abomination suddenly become ‘Good’ and pleasing in His eyes? At what point in Scripture did Yahweh’s definitions change, so that what He called evil is now supposedly good, and what He called good, is now supposedly evil (Isaiah 5:20-24)? What biblical proof do we have that Yahweh Almighty in fact made such a radical reversal of His opinions and decrees? Again, if we’re going to claim to be Bible believing and biblically pursuant Christians, then it really does make a difference.

When you talk to the majority of modern theologians about these penetrating questions, most of them will refer you exclusively to church tradition and certain writings of the apostle Paul. They will claim that Paul received special revelation from Christ, and they will then go on to pick out certain verses from Paul’s writings which they claim illustrates that Paul taught that God’s Law was nailed to the cross and not applicable to the Christian.

While it is true that some of Paul's writings can be easily misconstrued to suggest that we no longer have to obey God's Laws and Commandments. The huge problem is that in order to draw that misguided conclusion you have to ignore other key concepts which Paul HIMSELF specifically taught:

Paul HIMSELF taught the predominantly Gentile congregations that the Old Testament was written for OUR instruction and it was able to make us wise unto salvation, and that it was ALL profitable for Doctrine (True beliefs about God and how to live for Him; Romans 15:4; 2 Timothy 3:15-17). Paul wrote these things well after the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. So if they were done away with, and not to be respected or used any longer, how can they be written for our instruction, and how could they still be profitable for doctrine?

Paul HIMSELF wrote to the predominantly Gentile congregation at Corinth that they must NOT mix pagan idolatrous worship traditions with worshiping the Almighty, and he referred to the Old Testament to prove his point (1 Corinthians 10:1-21; cf. Exodus 32:1-10; 2 Corinthians 6:14-7:1). If God's Law had truly been done away with by that point, and it didn't matter anymore, then why would he make such a point to teach it to the Corinthian church?

Paul HIMSELF wrote to the predominantly Gentile congregation at Corinth that they should KEEP the feast of Unleavened Bread and Passover. Notice, that HE DID NOT SAY ignore the feast because it's been done away with through Christ's death. He did not say reinvent the feast, and make up your own feast to replace it, he said to KEEP it (1 Corinthians 5:8). Once again, if Paul really believed and taught that God's Commandments were abolished and people should not keep it anymore, then why would he teach a predominantly Gentile congregation of believers to KEEP the feast?

Paul HIMSELF wrote that we should be on our guard, that we should be careful that we are not led astray and brought into the captivity of following the rules and traditions set by MEN  instead of obeying Christ (Colossians 2:8). This is one of Paul's teachings that is almost completely ignored by modern-day Christianity, but this teaching is in direct agreement with the Commandments of God and teachings of Jesus Christ (Deuteronomy 12:1-4, 8, 29-32; Jeremiah 10:1-2; Matthew 15:9; Mark 7:1-13). These teachings and principles all agree with each other.

Paul HIMSELF taught the predominantly Gentile congregation in Rome that one of the chief characteristics of being carnal minded was that the carnal mind does not subject itself to the Law of God, and this leads to death (see Romans 8:5-8). If God's Law was no longer valid and had no bearing, then why would Paul say that it was carnal minded not to subject ourselves to God's Law?

Paul HIMSELF specifically bore public witness that he did not believe or teach anything contrary to the Laws and customs which God gave to Moses (See Acts 25:7-10; Acts 24:14-16; Acts 28:17-21). Now, this leaves a serious dilemma for modern-day Christianity. You see, if Paul told the truth in the book of Acts, then he was NOT teaching people to break or leave behind God's teachings and Commandments as we so commonly believe today.

If on the other hand modern-day Christianity has the correct understanding of Paul's writings; if Paul did in fact teach that because of Christ's death, it no longer matters whether you honor the biblical Sabbath and people are now free to bring in pagan practices into godly worship in direct defiance of God's Commandments, then Paul would've been lying in his public statements in the book of Acts. If he said that he was not teaching contrary to the Law when in fact he was, he would be lying. If on the other hand he was telling the truth and he was not teaching contrary to the Law of God, when modern-day Christianity insists that he did, then modern-day Christianity has seriously misunderstood Paul.

These key passages are by no means an exhaustive list. I challenge you to search the Scriptures and find the others yourself. There are countless more passages and examples of Paul where he spoke, taught and exemplified that he supported and instructed people to obey God's Laws Commandments and Instructions found in the so-called Old Testament.

I do not deny that some of Paul's writings lend themselves to misinterpretation. When Paul's writings are read in a certain light and filtered through preconceived ideas originating from human religious traditions instead of God, then one could certainly draw the misguided conclusions that Paul must have been teaching that the Laws Commandments and Instructions of God have no bearing on us since we are now "Under Grace." It's an extremely popular teaching to believe that God's law has been nailed to the cross (when in reality, it is the penalty for violating God's law, and not the law itself that was nailed to the cross)

The enormous problem is that in order to maintain the false doctrine and claim that that Paul was teaching that the Law Commandments and Instructions of God have been done away with at the cross; one has to reject every teaching of the prophets. In order to continue to misrepresent Paul in the way that is so commonplace, one has to reject the explicit teachings of the Messiah (e.g. Matthew 5:17-20; Matthew 7:21; Matthew 15:9; Mark 7:1-13). In order to continue teaching Paul that way, one also has to disregard every other apostolic teaching in the New Testament. Most importantly for this discussion, in order to continue to misrepresent Paul in that manner, one would have to reject many of Paul's own teachings and what he himself said about his own ministry. Lawlessness is popular. Lawlessness is easy, but It is extremely far from sound doctrine.

Brother R Michel Lankford