I challenge ANYONE to prove me wrong.

Both Catholics and Protestants have the COMMUNION wrong. Most protestants have no clue that the Catholics believe in Transub…, whatever that word is. But then again, Catholics is all about ritualism anyway. However, the protestants took that “ritual” and modified it to symbology.

My problem with it is no matter whether you are a Catholic, or a protestant, it’s a RITUAL, and people actually think that it is a “commandment” to participate in this ritual of eating bread and drinking wine, remembering the crucifixion of Jesus.

Has anyone actually read the section of the Bible pertaining to this at all?

1 Corinthians 11:17-34 is the COMPLETE story. But it seems that people are isolating the story down to a couple of verses only, thereby CREATING a ritual called, Communion.

When you read the complete story, you will see that this is nothing more than a Chicken Dinner (with all the fixings), and with desert included (Apple Pie) CHURCH BANQUET with the teaching of ETHICS on how to conduct yourselves at the dinner table at this church banquet, and Paul uses the LAST SUPPER (Passover meal), as his example as how to be polite, and this church BANQUET is called The Lords Supper. It’s not about Bread or Wine. It’s about eating and drinking, tho.

Let’s review:

First, let’s see what Luke has to say regarding “do this is memory of me”:

Luke 22:19
Then Jesus took bread. He gave thanks and broke it. He handed it to them and said, “This is my body. It is given for you. Every time you eat it, do this in memory of me.”

NOTE: It is important to note that none of the gospels indicate anything about “EVERYTIME YOU DRINK OF THIS CUP, DO THIS IN MEMORY OF ME. But Paul mentions those exact words. Do you know what that tells me? That tells me that there is a MISSING testimony that never got put in the Canon of scripture of the GOSPELS. But that’s another topic.

Now, 1 Corinthians 11:17-34 (The COMPLETE story). Let’s do this in the NIV version, then you can go back to your favorite version of your preference.

17 In the following directives I have no praise for you, for your meetings do more harm than good.

18 In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it.

19 No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval.

20 So then, when you come together, it is not the Lord’s Supper you eat,

21 for when you are eating, some of you go ahead with your own private suppers. As a result, one person remains hungry and another gets drunk.

22 Don’t you have homes to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God by humiliating those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you? Certainly not in this matter!

23 For I received from the Lord what I also passed on to you: The Lord Jesus, on the night he was betrayed, took bread,

24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it and said, “This is my body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of me.”

NOTE: See Luke 22:19

25 In the same way, after supper he took the cup, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood; do this, whenever you drink it, in remembrance of me.”

26 For whenever you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

27 So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord.

28 Everyone ought to examine themselves before they eat of the bread and drink from the cup.

29 For those who eat and drink without discerning the body of Christ eat and drink judgment on themselves.

NOTE: DING DING. Verse 29 “body of Christ” is the “congregation”, not Jesus’ physical body. See Verse 31 below.

30 That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep.

31 But if we were more discerning with regard to ourselves, we would not come under such judgment.

32 Nevertheless, when we are judged in this way by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be finally condemned with the world.

33 So then, my brothers and sisters, when you gather to eat, you should all eat together.

34 Anyone who is hungry should eat something at home, so that when you meet together it may not result in judgment. And when I come I will give further directions.


You decide. Is this really about a ritual called communion, or is it about a church banquet? A Chicken Dinner at Church!

Click the Daniel 9 Link below for a Microsoft Word Document that shows a Flow Chart that I created a few years back.

Daniel 9

A few things that I have discovered regarding eschatology:

Many are concentrating on the word “anti-“, as in Anti-Christ. Nothing wrong with that, except we need to bring the “UNBELIEVING” Jews in the picture, and way less focus on Christians. Maybe to the point of NO focus on Christians, really.

It is the Jews who are looking for a CHRIST, not an anti-Christ. So the Jews are the focus, not the Christians.

According to Galatians, Paul is the Apostle to the Gentiles, whereas Peter, James, and JOHN are apostles to the Jews. Now, SOMETIMES Paul writes epistles directly to the Jews. Both of Thessalonians being one huge example that not many people realize. Back in Acts, Paul is able to convert a number of Jews of Thessalonica, and the unbelieving Jews were giving the newly converted Jews a bad time, hence the UPLIFTING letters that Paul wrote to JEWISH BELIEVERS in both epistles of Thessalonians. We all know that Paul goes to the JEWS FIRST before going to any Gentiles. However, James, Peter, and JOHN’s responsibility is to the JEWS. Their focus is NOT the Gentiles. I say that for a reason. JOHN’s letter of Revelation is to JEWS, not the Gentiles. I could expound on this a much more, but I’ll leave it at that for a moment.

I could go thru all the proof texts as to WHY the Jews rejected Jesus, but that would take too much time.

The Jews must believe that their Christ had come, and therefore, THAT Christ is the anti-Christ. Nero would not be able to convince them, even if he had lived beyond his suicide. No one is going to be able to convince them, except:

Matthew 1:1 (Preface)
The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David…

Matthew 22:42 (Proof Text)
Saying, What think ye of Christ? whose son is he? They say unto him, The son of David.

Now, what nationality do you suppose the son of David is? Now, do a word search in the 4 gospels, “the son of David”, where people are crying out, “THOU SON OF DAVID”, etc. They know that their Christ is a Jew. Even the unbelieving Jews know that the Christ is a Jew. So any talk of Rome is outside the bounds, whether it be the 7th Day Adventists and others proclaiming that the anti-Christ is the Pope, or others claiming that it’s someone from the European Union, or the United Nations, et. al. The Anti-Christ must be Jewish, and circumcized, for the Jews to believe that their savior had come.

In addition, a timeline of events is extremely important, and a common theme, or denominator, that I have found is: THE SIXTH SEAL, which many mention.

Jesus mentions that sixth seal in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. The sixth seal is found in Revelation chapter 6. Peter mentions the sixth seal in Acts 2, and Joel mentions the sixth seal 3 times, not just once.

NOTE: Seal number 7 is the Great Tribulation, as found in Revelation chapter 8-16. Seals 1-6, as found in Revelation chapter 6 is not the Great Tribulation. And a final note, chapter 7 of revelation is a BREAK between seal number 6, and the opening of seal 7.

Peter mentions Seal Number 6, referencing Joel. This is due to the non-believing Jews mocking the believing Jews receiving the Holy Spirit.

NOTE: We are SEALED with the Holy Spirit. Sealed is an important word, because, the Sealing of 144000 unbelieving Jews in Revelation chapter 7 is right after the 6th Seal of Revelation chapter 6. So this is what Peter is talking about in Acts 2, regarding the end days.

Now it’s just a matter of connect the dots, from Jesus, and Peter, and Joel, and Revelation 6, and 7 *(sixth seal, sealing of 144000, and rapture, all events that are SIDE BY SIDE in the order of events).

Another NOTE: The latter part of Revelation 7, RIGHT AFTER the 144000 Jews are sealed. The People that John sees. They are located at the THRONE OF GOD. How many are there? They are the ones who CAME OUT OF…the NEXT CHAPTER, which the seal hasn’t even been opened yet. That is important, because this is the rapture, and Jesus mentions this also in Mark’s account of the end times.

******Notice, if you will, that Jesus doesn’t mention anything regarding the 7th Seal in regards to his end times prophesy. That is extremely important to see. Not one word.



So, we escape (in a “secret rapture”, or FLY AWAY (for those who make fun of the term)) the 7th seal. Seals 1-6 is not the Great Tribulation. Seals 1-6 is not the wrath of God. It’s just a prelude. They are just the OBVIOUS warnings that Jesus spoke of events PRIOR TO the rapture, and because Jesus never mentions anything of the 7th Seal, then the conclusion is…resurrection is NOT YET. So it can’t be rapture/resurrection. Look at the 5th Seal for example. It’s nothing more than a Q&A. Question: “HOW LONG”, answer, “NOT YET, WAIT”. Does that sound like the wrath of God to you? NOT YET! Besides, Seal number 5 is BEFORE Seal number 6 that Jesus definately mentions in the gospels.

The destruciton of the temple in 70 AD is NOT, I repeat, NOT in relation to the end times prophesy. THAT generation did NOT SEE the rest of the things that Jesus indicated, regardless of the claims of those who think that they did.

A JEW must walk into that Temple proclaiming to be God, not a Gentile. That negates out ROME, or the European Union. It also negates out the 70 AD destruction of the Temple.

So, the 6th seal is the focal point to set the written timeline in order, before, and after, with clues mentioned by Peter from Acts 2, Joel, Jesus from Matthew 24 AND Mark 13, AND Luke 21, and Revelation chapters 6-7, and the realization that Jesus never mentions any event in seal number 7, and why? Because we are NOT APPOINTED unto the wrath of God.

Here is a side note:
Romans 4:15 (KJV)
Because the law worketh wrath:

It seems that MOST are dismissing the Jews in the story, when it’s all about the Jews, NOT THE GENTILES. Gentiles are involved, but are NOT the focus. Let’s also keep in mind that Jesus came for the lost sheep of the House of Israel (those under the law of Moses). His conversations in end times is directed at the Jews, believing Jews at that, hence FLEE TO THE MOUNTAINS (not the Rocky Mountains). Those in 70 AD, they fled the country, not to the mountains.

Finally, the word CHURCH in Revelation 1-3 is JEWISH ASSEMBLIES, not believers of BOTH JEWS and GENTILES. Jewish believers (assemblies). The definition of the English word CHURCH, of the Greek Ecclesia, is…assembly. When I was a child, we had church is school all the time in the gymnasium. ASSEMBLIES.

In regards to Post Trib, in my view, that is LIKENED, if you will, to the Catholics purgatory on a different scale. WHO, other than the Catholics, believe in purgatory? So are we really to trust CHURCH FATHERS on eschatology matters who believe in a purgatory? No wonder some make fun of Darby, because they still trust Church Fathers.



Now, for those who believe in MULTIPLE resurrections, just because of the words FIRST resurrection, here is a simple response to those people:



The FIRST resurrection is for those who DIED, “in Christ (Christian)”, meaning DEAD believers. The Righteous. There is NO OTHER RESURRECTION for the righteous. But there is also a resurrection of the UNRIGHTEOUS, and that is the 2nd resurrection. Those unrighteous will DIE AGAIN, hence, the 2nd Death. So there is ONLY one resurrection for the righteous, and one resurrection for the unrighteous. Now, regarding the righteous who DIDN’T DIE to begin with, they are CHANGED to a resurrected body, just not resurrected, because they never died to begin with. Resurrection is only for those who DIED, not for the ones who are “ALIVE AND REMAIN”. They are CHANGED, hence, “WE SHALL NOT ALL DIE”. Why is this so hard to understand? It’s so simple.



So, this should also put to bed that Revelation chapter 4, “COME UP HITHER” is not the rapture.  It’s not pre-trib, it’s pre-GREAT trib.  It’s also not post trib or preterist, either.

We’re gonna DISCIPLINE the lad

the practice of training people to obey rules or a code of behavior, using punishment to correct disobedience.

Many pastors are making lots of money writing books on the subject, and they get paid a lot of money just being a pastor, even tho they pretend to be humble taking only small tokens to survive as a humble servant.  They call themselves, “SERVANT LEADER”. The rest of us are just servants, to serve him.   How do we serve?  Paying him ten percent to beat us down.

They are REALLY hot on this Church Discipline topic, and their interpretations of it just make me want to puke.

Pastors/Elders have no authority anywhere in scripture to punish any Christian what so ever.

But they think that they do.

Before I begin, I just want to start off by saying that when I read Matthew 18, I see a HABITUAL sinner, in which, when confronted, all he has to say is “My Bad!”, and he’s forgiven.  WHERE IS THE DISCIPLINE?

Oh…I see…3 verses, Matthew 18:15-17 means that the whole chapter is about Church Discipline?

I was in the US Navy.  I know all about the word DISCIPLINE.  A person that is kicked out is NOT disciplined.  The military person that is KEPT is disciplined.  In other words, PUNISHED TO CORRECT A DEFICIENCY.

But where in Matthew 18 is anyone punished to correct a deficiency?  It’s not there.  So why do reformers put it there?

First of all, Matthew 18 is between 2 people only, and no where does it say that pastors/elders get involved in an issue between 2 people.  Who are those two people?

Person number 1:  The VICTIM ONLY

Person number 2:  The ACCUSED ONLY

Note:  I’ve heard some preachers say that if you see someone in a sin, then this applies.  How?  The person who saw is a witness, not a victim.  Therefore, if you have seen someone in a sin, this STEP does not apply at all, because you are not a victim.  There is a different book, chapter and verse that covers this one.

Matthew 18:15 KJV

15 Moreover if thy brother shall trespass AGAINST THEE, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

In the KJV, if words are added for emphasis, or for the purpose of better understanding, then those words would be italicized.  The words, “against thee” is NOT italicized.  Modern English translations have OMITTED “against thee” from the passage.

That is step 1.

Step two requires ONLY the 2 people involved, plus eye witnesses of the sin (Deuteronomy 19:15), not the pastor/elders.

Deuteronomy 19:15
One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.

Matthew 18:16
But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

NOTE:  Those who practice church discipline seem to think that Matthew 18:16 is discussing people to witness the confrontation of an unrepentant sinner by the accuser.  NO, that is wrong.  The purpose of witnesses is to prove the accusation, and Deuteronomy protects the falsely accused.

Exodus 20:16
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

If there are no eye witnesses, then the whole issue stops at the end of step 1, and it goes no further.  The church (congregation) does not hear it at all.  Neither does the Pastor/Elders, who seem to think that they have “all authority under heaven”.

PLEASE NOTE:  Pastors/Elders LOVE to reference the following:

1 Timothy 5:19
Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.

They seem to think that this is UNIQUE only to them, that they are in an exclusive club, that they can make an accusation against someone without 2 witnesses, but that it takes 2 for them.  This shows just how much that they are abusing the congregation.  It shows their ignorance of scripture which shows that 1 Timothy 5:19 is stating that elders are treated NO DIFFERENTLY than anyone else gets treated.  Again,  references are Deu 19:15 and Matthew 18:16, as well as:

Deuteronomy 17:6
At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.

2 Corinthians 13:1
This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.


Hebrews 10:28
He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:


Step three requires the WHOLE congregation, and the pastor/elders have no more say in the matter than a pew sitter.  The accused has a right to defend himself, and that is what step three is all about, to present the facts on both sides, just like a court hearing.

Did anyone ever think for a moment that a reason that someone is unrepentant is maybe they didn’t do what is being accused?  God put in place safeguards to protect the accused in the case of false accusers, which is why eye witnesses of the sin is required before it can even go to the congregation if step 2 did not solve the problem.

NOTE:  In Matthew 18, there is a victim.  NO ONE has authority to forgive except for the victim.  Pastor/Elder cannot forgive on behalf of the victim, and neither can the congregation.  In Catholicism, priests forgive sins, and there are no protestants that believe that priests have authority to forgive sins.

Then there comes the troubles of victim shaming if the victim does not forgive, and before you know it, the victim is put in this crazy doctrine of church discipline.

1 Cor 6 discusses things that are small matters, and some matters are not small, and church’s that practice church discipline ignore Romans 13.  No one needs pastor/elder permission to call law enforcement.  Can you believe that pastors actually advise not calling the law?  Hush hush in the church?  Pastors demand that the victim swiftly forgives their tormentor, so that everything is hunky dory?  The tormentor gets to stay, to intimidate the victim?

1 Cor 5 are those people that fall under verse 11.

1 Corinthians 5:11
But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

This shows that the individual in 1 Cor 5 is NOT a brother at all.  It shows that he is a wicked person that needs to get kicked out.

And, Paul, being a lawyer of the law of Moses believed the accusations based on Deuteronomy 19:15.  Otherwise, he would have scolded the Corinthians for being busybodies, tattle tales, tale bearers, gossipers and bearing false witness against thy neighbor.

Yes, there is no such thing as church discipline in the bible.  But they sure love preaching it.

Pastor = Feed.  What’s the food?

And I will give you pastors according to mine heart, which shall feed you with knowledge and understanding.

Knowledge and Understanding.  What does that look like?

Nehemiah 8:1-12
And all the people gathered themselves together as one man into the street that was before the water gate; and they spake unto Ezra the scribe to bring the book of the law of Moses, which the Lord had commanded to Israel.

And Ezra the priest brought the law before the congregation both of men and women, and all that could hear with understanding, upon the first day of the seventh month.

And he read therein before the street that was before the water gate from the morning until midday, before the men and the women, and those that could understand; and the ears of all the people were attentive unto the book of the law.

And Ezra the scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose; and beside him stood Mattithiah, and Shema, and Anaiah, and Urijah, and Hilkiah, and Maaseiah, on his right hand; and on his left hand, Pedaiah, and Mishael, and Malchiah, and Hashum, and Hashbadana, Zechariah, and Meshullam.

And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people; (for he was above all the people;) and when he opened it, all the people stood up:

And Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God. And all the people answered, Amen, Amen, with lifting up their hands: and they bowed their heads, and worshipped the Lord with their faces to the ground.

Also Jeshua, and Bani, and Sherebiah, Jamin, Akkub, Shabbethai, Hodijah, Maaseiah, Kelita, Azariah, Jozabad, Hanan, Pelaiah, and the Levites, caused the people to understand the law: and the people stood in their place.

So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

And Nehemiah, which is the Tirshatha, and Ezra the priest the scribe, and the Levites that taught the people, said unto all the people, This day is holy unto the Lord your God; mourn not, nor weep. For all the people wept, when they heard the words of the law.

10 Then he said unto them, Go your way, eat the fat, and drink the sweet, and send portions unto them for whom nothing is prepared: for this day is holy unto our Lord: neither be ye sorry; for the joy of the Lord is your strength.

11 So the Levites stilled all the people, saying, Hold your peace, for the day is holy; neither be ye grieved.

12 And all the people went their way to eat, and to drink, and to send portions, and to make great mirth, because they had understood the words that were declared unto them.

What is the job of an elder?  Well, what did it mean as a child when we were taught to respect our elders?

Elders are mentors, not authoritarians to whip us into shape.

Every Christian STRUGGLES with sin.  Those that are spiritual are to mentor us, not beat us down with punishment, which is a key word in discipline.  

There is a difference between STRUGGLING with sin, and outright not giving a damn about sinning.

Now, I must bring up 2 Corinthians Chapter 2.

Many seem to think that Paul is instructing the CONGREGATION to forgive that wicked person from 1 Corinthians 5.  Where in God’s name did they come to that conclusion?

First of all, as I have been saying, the congregation has no authority to forgive any sins on behalf of the victim, if there is one.  Therefore, we cannot confuse Matthew 18 where there is a victim and 1 Corinthians 5 where there may not be one.

Secondly, we are all sinners, and what brought us to church in the first place?  Wasn’t it because Satan destroyed our flesh so that the spirit may be saved?  Church is not a place for those who wish to practice verse 11.  If they give up those things, then yes, they are indeed welcomed, just like we were when we first came to church.  But NOT until Satan destroys the flesh FIRST, which means that you still kick him out and let Satan do his thing.  People sometimes REPENT just because they got caught, and that does not solve the problem of the flesh.  However…

In 2 Corinthians Paul is discussing a DOWNER letter that he wrote to the Corinthians and it made him sad that he wrote a downer letter and he was asking for forgiveness for writing a downer letter, when he wanted to write a letter that uplifts instead….IN THE 3RD person, which he often did of himself, especially in 2 Cor. Look at chapter 12. Paul was not discussing the guy in 1 Cor 5 at all in 2 Corinthians 2.

But based on their conclusion, that wicked person is brought back into the church and the victim is left hanging by victim shaming if the victim refuses to forgive, when it is so noted in that same Matthew 18 that if the victim does not forgive, then the sin is still unforgiven in heaven.  If the victim forgives, then the sin is forgiven in heaven.  The victim has the right to decide when and if the accused is forgiven or not, not the pastor/elders.  This may take years to get to that point.  But the problem is, the accused never repented to the victim.  He only repented to people who have no authority to forgive on behalf of the victim.  Pastor/Elders/Congregation and Catholic Priests have no authority to speak FOR or on behalf of the victim.

You can discipline your children, but we are adults, and pastors/elders are not our parent.

My extremely short synopsis of the Tullian case is that no one is seeking justice, but  vengence. And that, to me, is awful.

In my views, there is no victim in the case of Tullian. All parties involved are guilty of adultery. All parties were married to someone else. No one forced anyone to have sex with Tulian. He did not, as what is being portrayed, use ANY position of “authority” to have sex with these women.

In my Christian world, pastors do not have any position of authority…UNLESS…unless they are actively counseling a congregant. There is absolutely no power that a clergy has, unless that counseling hat is on. There is no power differential here, just because he is a pastor. There would be, however, if that counseling hat was on, by the statutes of law, and that is only in 13 states, currently.  This is not to be equated with student/teacher, doctor/patient, etc., as some have equated it to be, referencing statutes that they cannot even interpret properly.  Clergy only has power in the capacity of a counselor.

So, it was not against the law as to what Tullian did. But, avoiding adultery is every Christian’s responsibility, not just the pastor.

I can’t blame Calvin’s Reform Theology that these women were somehow weak and vulnerable, and that they had no choice in succoming to Tullians sweet words of seduction that forced each of them to pull down their panties in submission.

If you do extensive research in the case of King David and Bathsheba, the only real reason that they did not face being stoned to death, is because there was absolutely no witnesses. The bible indicates that in order to accuse anyone of any sin (not just adultery), there must be the testimoney of at least 2 or 3 witnesses.

And, that pregnancy would be evidence that adultery would have taken place, in regards to Bathsheba, which is why David had her husband killed.  So, David was indeed guilty of both murder, and adultery.

There is even a law in the Law of Moses regarding the situation that Mary found herself in, being pregnant.  A single girl, pregnant? In Judaism, that does not happen, without death, at least, in the days of a Temple (or “tent of meeting”). If a couple gets married, then finds out that she was not a virgin, she would get stoned, because she played the whore.  Whore is what the Bible states.

Anyway, again, the only reason that Bathsheba and David did not get stoned, was because there was no witnesses to convict them.

David confessed after confronted by Nathan. What was David’s “fruit’s” of repentence? What was Bathsheba’s fruits of repentence? They got married?   What was Bathsheba’s story?

Tullian got divorced. The women involved in adultery got divorced.

The divorce ends it all. And it should remain a closed story at that point. He is remarried now. All of this should remain a closed story for both he and his new wife.  No one should be harrassing Tullian at this point.  No one.

In regards to Tullian being a pastor, that’s not my call, just my opinion. But my opinion is: What did Paul tell Timothy? That should be the ONLY discussion in all this.

There should not be this vindictive vengence and revenge against Tullian that is being done on these various Spiritual Abuse Blogs.

This had absolutely nothing to do with Calvin’s Reform Theology in regards to weak and vulnerable, barefoot and pregnant submissive women.

This is just a simple case of Bible 101 for all parties involved, “Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery”. And to say that these women were ignorant of “Thou Shalt Not Commit Adultery” is insane in basic Christianity.  Tullian knew it, and so did those women.

This is not in any way an equation to the cases of a Jim Jones, scenario or David Koresh.

I do not find this case of Tullian to be any kind of spiritual abuse or clergy sexual abuse, because he had no power to begin with, nor did he use any perceived power.

A very good looking married man seduced and committed adultery on two women, both who were married themselves, so they, too committed adultery. That is not abuse of power. It’s just plain adultery on all parties involved. Coveting, too. Lying, too.

Now, the women (some) wish to come out and “tell their story”? Why? To cover up their own shame for their own sins in order to point fingers at someone else for their own free will decisions to sleep with a married man, in order to tell family and friends, “He made me do it”? Or for vengence/revenge against whom they committed adultery with, because he makes money writing books, while they got the shaft?

No one is seeking justice here, but in my opinion, there is no justice needing to be sought. But they are indeed seeking vengence, for which is totally out of bounds for these women to do, and for the Spiritual Abuse blogs to pursue.

If they are accusing Tullian of rape or molestation, then they need to seek justice thru proper means…the law. By our own Constitution, the accused is allowed to face his accusors in a court of law. But they don’t want to do that. Why? The excuse being used is that “victims” are generally afraid, frightened, scared, blah, blah, blah.

I’m sorry, but I just don’t see any victims in this case of Tullian. None whatsoever.

I am not victim blaming, as what I have been accused of doing.  I just simply do not see that there is any existance of victims period.

Now, if people wish to discuss theology, that is a totally different conversation to have, but I can’t blame any of this on theology at all. I look at Bible 101 stuff, and in this case, the conclusion is that…all parties are gulty of adultery, and Tullian did not break any federal or state statutes in any way.

Calvin’s Reformed Theology about grace cannot be blamed here.  Tullian’s belief about grace is not the issue that many want it to be.  His percieved narcicism is not the issue here either.  The accusations of him being a preditor is way out of bounds, as well.

All parties are guilty.  This vengence needs to end now.

I do not equate this case to the cases of Doug Phillips, and others.  It’s not the same.  There is a huge difference.

When a former president of Liberty University was caught lying, a certain blogger would not let it go.  He kept hounding and hounding until something bad happened.

In that case, if I am not mistaken, a son tried to defend his dad.  In this case of Tullian, a son tried to defend his dad.  What happened to the son of the former president of Liberty University?

I feel that spiritual abuse blogs are going down a road that they once did not want to go down.  I see that Tullian is being harrassed, just like the former president of Liberty University was…in the name of so-called “victims”, for which, in the case of Tullian, I see no victims.  What I see is a couple of women claiming to be victims.  But that does not make it so.

Justice, or Vengence?


  • Children, PUT AWAY your toys, it’s time for school.
  • PUT AWAY your gun

Or, is it:

  • Children, DIVORCE your toys, it’s time for school
  • DIVORCE your gun

Or, does it matter?

Sin can only be defined as what the Law of Moses states. There is no other way to define sin, but by the law of Moses. So, to teach that divorce/remarriage is a sin, that is a travesty. The burden of life long guilt trips of something false weighs more on a person than anything. Frivolous teaching that one can spend eternity in hell for divorcing/remarrying is an evil teaching that no one needs.

Whatever reason that people divorce, it’s allowed. And we need to stay out of it, because it’s none of our business.

What defines sin?

Romans 3:20
for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Sin cannot be invented, modified, or changed. It’s the law.  For example, picking your nose is not a sin.  But, I’m sure that someone has deemed it a sin, all because someone thinks that picking your nose is impolite, or something like that.  To others, farting is a sin.  These are both man made invented sins.

Divorce/remarriage is not a sin to begin with, so how can it be advocated that it is a sin now?

Divorce/remarriage is not a sin in the law of Moses, and neither is it in 1 Cor 7.

Some wish to interpret 1 Cor 7 as a commandment that if violated will send your wife to hell.

And that is what this is really all about. So, they FORBID wives from divorce, threatening them with hell if they leave. Forcing them to stay, when they don’t want to.  Threats and intimidating women as to their spiritual destiny if they leave.

If one spouse is not in love, that is reason enough for a divorce. Boo-hoo for the other spouse. You can’t force anyone to love you that doesn’t, hence, hardened hearts.

1 Cor 7:39
The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth;

Do you see the words, “THE LAW” in that? What law? The Law of Moses, of course.

Another, Romans 7:2-3
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.

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.

Again, if you look at Romans 7:1 it states,
(For I speak to them that know the law,)

So, Paul is taking you BACK to the Law of Moses.

Where might that law be?

Deuteronomy 24:3 is the place.
And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;

Note the word, “OR”.

Deuteronomy 24:1,4 (KJV)

When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

4  Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

But wait a dog gone minute here.

What happened to verses 2 and 3?  Conveniently deleted?

Contrary to popular Christian belief, started by the Catholics, of course, it is not a sin to divorce…for any reason. Neither is it adultery to remarry.


Major note: I use the KJV, not a modern English Translated version. Why?

For example, 1 John 3:4, in some modern English translations state that sin is lawlessness. That means what, in English? In the KJV, it states that sin is the transgression of the law. That means something significant, because according to Romans 3 and Romans 7, the law of Moses is what defines what sin is. What is the Law of Moses? It’s the Old (Not new, or renewed) covenant that spans from Exodus 20 (Not Genesis 1) thru Deuteronomy, which, I might add, includes Deuteronomy 24:1-4, the topic of divorce. It’s The Law.

In the statement by the Pharisees in:

Matthew 19:7
They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?


Many seem to think that Jesus changed the rules of the law in regards to divorce, and that Moses, the person, allowed, or as some state, “tolerated” divorce, against God’s will or plan, so, Jesus comes on the scene to correct that error.  But the only error is in identifying what the word, “Moses” signifies in Matthew 19:7.  Many incorrectly identify “Moses” as the person of Moses, but that is far from the truth.

The Pharisees were not discussing Moses, THE PERSON, but the Law of Moses. The Law of Moses is not an invention of Moses. The law of Moses is the Law of God, to wit:

Joshua 24:26
And Joshua wrote these words in the book of the law of God, and took a great stone, and set it up there under an oak, that was by the sanctuary of the Lord.

Nehemiah 8:8
So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

Nehemiah 8:18
Also day by day, from the first day unto the last day, he read in the book of the law of God. And they kept the feast seven days; and on the eighth day was a solemn assembly, according unto the manner.

Nehemiah 10:28
And the rest of the people, the priests, the Levites, the porters, the singers, the Nethinims, and all they that had separated themselves from the people of the lands unto the law of God, their wives, their sons, and their daughters, every one having knowledge, and having understanding;

The Law of Moses is known by many names, one of which is the Law of God. Another name for the Law of Moses is, “The Law”, for which some confuse with the word “Torah”, which it isn’t. Torah begins in Genesis 1:1, whereas the Law of Moses begins in Exodus 20.

Still, other names include the words, “Book of Moses”, or, just “Moses” alone. So, we should be able to see that Matthew 19:7 is not discussing the person of Moses, but rather, the Law of Moses, or more specifically, the Law of God. Deuteronomy 24:1-4 is Law.

Law is not God’s toleration of a situation, nor is it Moses tolerating a situation. Law is God commanding Moses to “write it down”, so that when the word “Moses” is mentioned, it is God’s Word, written by Moses, so it is God commanding the Children of Israel, not Moses, the person.

Hebrews 10:28
He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

Moses’ law?  Or God’s Law?

So let’s start off with a question.

Is divorce, based on Deuteronomy 24:1-4 the law of God, or a toleration of Moses?

My second question is:

Why isn’t verse 3 taught?

Deuteronomy 24:1-4 shows a, get this, twice divorced woman. Twice. Let me say that again…Twice.

Deuteronomy 24:1-4
1 When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house.

2 And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife.

3 And if the latter husband hate her, and write her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house; or if the latter husband die, which took her to be his wife;

4 Her former husband, which sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife, after that she is defiled; for that is abomination before the Lord: and thou shalt not cause the land to sin, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.

That shows that divorce is not a sin, and neither is, get this…remarriage.

NOTE: Some people, and theologians in particular, ERRONEOUSLY interpret the word in verse one, “uncleanness” as some sort of sexual sin, aka, adultery, or fornication. Some have interpreted this to be “some sort of ‘indecency’”. Indecency? Are you kidding? This is an anatomy issue, not a sin issue. Any interpretation of anything sexual, or sinful here is wrong, big time. This issue deals with the anatomy of the genitals, that there is something wrong with the genitals that the man does not like, stating something like, “I’m not touching that with a ten foot pole!”.

What is the punishment for adultery under Moses, uh, er, the law of Moses? Divorce? Divorce with the opportunity for remarriage? Or Death?

Leviticus 20:10
And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

So, let’s reword Deuteronomy 24:1-2 for a moment and see the logic in this:

When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found out that she committed adultery: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house. And when she is departed out of his house, she may go and be another man’s wife.

What? She can get a divorce and then marry someone else? How is that possible if she is supposed to be dead, according to Leviticus 20:10?

Part 2
Many years later, in the gospels, the subject of divorce is discussed…or is it?

The original question by the Pharisees had nothing to do with divorce at all. It had to do with “put away”, not divorce.

Matthew 19:3
The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?

Mark 10:2
And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him.

This is where I get into theological disputes with SOME people. I use the KJV. Other versions will miss this. There is two different topics being discussed, not just one topic:
1.) Put Away, and
2.) Divorce.

They are not the same, not even the same Greek word, but the Catholics…and others, have equated them to be the same, redefining “put away” to equate it to mean the same exact thing as divorce. That is wrong.

A Put Away spouse is a separated spouse, without a divorce decree.
A divorced spouse is a put away spouse with a Certificate of Divorcement.

Isaiah 50:1
Thus saith the Lord, Where is the bill of your mother’s divorcement, whom I have put away? or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away.

NOTE: GOD PUT AWAY HIS WIFE, BUT DID NOT DIVORCE HER. This shows that put away is not divorce.

In the case of adultery, divorce is not necessary. Why? What is the penalty for adultery again? Divorce? NO NO NO. Death by stoning…even in the days of Jesus, the penalty was STILL death by stoning.

Jesus would not have told any Pharisee that people can get divorced in the case of an adulterous spouse. Never. Adulterous spouses get stoned, not divorced…that is, in the days of Jesus walking under the law himself, discussing the law with lawyers.

Can you imagine the heyday that the Pharisees would have over this one, telling lawyers that adulterous spouses no longer need to be put to death under the law, but rather that they can simply get divorced now, and not face any penalty of death?

Put away, then death is the only thing necessary for adultery. Divorce is not warranted in the case for adultery when Jesus walked the planet, as he, too, was under the Law of Moses, yet did not sin.

“PUT AWAY”, is another way of saying, KICK HER OUT OF THE HOUSE.

For any other reason, if you put away your spouse, you need that divorce decree, otherwise, you are still married. And, if you marry someone else while still being married, that is bigamy.

There is a verse that must be dissected once this is understood. The verse, already dissected, states that if a man marries a put away wife, they are committing adultery, all because the wife is still married to her so-called former husband. She never got a divorce. So, their relationship is bigamy.  Not polygamy.  Polygamy is where a man is married to two people where the first wife was NOT “put away”.

What is that verse?

Matthew 5:32
But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

Note:  The word “divorced” in the above should be “put away”. Note the Greek word used twice in this verse.  You will see this in the following verse.


Matthew 19:9
And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

In these references, a man married an already still married woman. She never got a divorce yet. She was only KICKED OUT of the house (Uh, that is, PUT AWAY, aka Send Away) by her husband…without the divorce.

We can divorce for simply “hating” our spouse, as Deuteronomy 24:3 states. If Jesus didn’t love us, would we be compelled to remain married to Jesus?

But, why do theologians not want to discuss that one verse, verse 3?

Why do theologians not want to discuss that in Deuteronomy 24:1-4, that in any remarriage, NO ONE GOT KICKED OUT OF JUDAISM?

Oh, but, they want to teach us that in Christianity, people are hell bound for eternity if they get remarried? That logic, is insane.

Jesus did NOT change the rules of divorce, nor did he change the law of divorce. And again, Moses, the person, did not allow divorce. God did. He made it a law, not Moses, the person.

Hardened hearts, one may retort. Well, when did that change? Humans have hardened hearts by nature. God made a law allowing for divorce, just simply for hating your spouse. But theologians don’t want to discuss that for some reason, thinking that Jesus forbids divorce, when in fact, he forbids “put away”, WITHOUT THE CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCEMENT.

Now, in regards to 1 Corinthians 7, we are not to PUT AWAY our spouse, but the spouse is FREE TO LEAVE. The choices after she leaves…divorce her, or reconcile with her. Both parties here are believers, where not one party is an unbeliever. A separate verse addresses where one spouse is an unbeliever.

NOTE: Both parties here are believers. In the law of Moses, when a divorce happened, neither spouse was kicked out of Judaism, right? RIGHT.

Now, in regards to 1 Cor 7:10-11…Let not…but if she…let her

Don’t let her go, but if she leaves, divorce her or reconcile with her. (She can leave your sorry butt!). 1 Cor 7:10-11 is to BELIEVERS. Both remain a Christian even if she leaves.

That’s all that means. But like I already said, the Catholics, and others think that it states that she can never marry again.

Again, the two choices when both parties are believers, reconcile or divorce, but don’t “PUT AWAY”. Why? Because she can leave on her own accord without the husband kicking her out. And guess what? She can remarry, and still be in the family of Christians, a Child of Jesus.

Therefore, I disagree with the theologians that put restrictions on people getting a divorce, even those who think that the only reason to divorce is for abuse. A Christian can get divorced for just for not being in love anymore. But we never seem to hear preaching on verse 3 of Deuteronomy 24 from the theologians. That is interesting since they believe that an adulterous spouse under the law of Moses can get remarried.

And for those who think that God hates divorce, in the KJV it does not say that. It states that God hates “PUT AWAY”, not divorce.

Malachi 2:16
For the Lord, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away

Remember, Joseph was going to”put away” his fiance’, quietly. Why quietly? Because her pregnancy would be evidence of adultery, and based on evidence, she would be killed…not allowed to marry another person.

This is what the Law states in regards to the situation that the betrothed Mary was in:

Deuteronomy 22:13-21 (KJV)

13 If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her,

14 And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid:

15 Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel’s virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate:

16 And the damsel’s father shall say unto the elders, I gave my daughter unto this man to wife, and he hateth her;

17 And, lo, he hath given occasions of speech against her, saying, I found not thy daughter a maid; and yet these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity. And they shall spread the cloth before the elders of the city.

18 And the elders of that city shall take that man and chastise him;

19 And they shall amerce him in an hundred shekels of silver, and give them unto the father of the damsel, because he hath brought up an evil name upon a virgin of Israel: and she shall be his wife; he may not put her away all his days.

20 But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel:

21 Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.

She does not divorce…she dies. In Mary’s case, she is pregnant. That is all the evidence that is needed for a conviction of death…not a divorce. Betrothed adulterers were put to death.

So, again, why they don’t preach verse 3 of Deuteronomy 24? What do you do with a married couple that at least one party just isn’t in love anymore? Keep them in bondage because they think that Jesus only sanctions divorce in adultery, abuse and abandonment issues? Really?

Do we not get it yet that there is no such thing as a divorce, let alone a remarriage, for the case of “sexual immorality”? It’s just death. Being stoned is the means of death for sexual immorality, until you are dead. The subject of Deuteronomy 24:1 has nothing to do with sexual immorality, or as some have translated it to be, “indecency” to begin with, and even if it did, verse 2 is NOT ALLOWED, which proves that their theology is wrong in this regard.

To review, the original question by the Pharisees had nothing to do with divorce, but “PUT AWAY” (AKA Send away), is that the Pharisees were allowing “send away” for any reason, not requiring a divorce. And THAT alone is what causes adultery when the sent away spouse “marries” another person, because that “another” person is really an additional person. The old marriage was not severed by divorce.

This is the basis for my argument, because there is no such thing as a divorce for the cause of adultery in the days of Jesus. No such thing. It’s just death.

Christians can get divorced, where both parties are believers, where no abuse issues are going on, simply for not being in love anymore, just like Deuteronomy 24:3 states.

“Put away” is the only conclusion for an adulterous spouse, therefore, put away and divorce cannot be equated. The only authorized reason to put away is in the case of adultery, then death. For any other cause, you must not only put away, but divorce as well.

In the days of Jesus (Jesus was talking to lawyers here), the law states death penalty, point blank. We do remember the woman caught in adultery that was going to be stoned to death, and Jesus made a point to say “He who is without sin, cast the first stone.”

And, I reference the following already:

Hebrews 10:28
He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

It was Jesus who showed mercy, not the people, not the Pharisee’s, nor the rabbi’s, or anyone else. The Law does not allow for a divorce, let alone a remarriage for an adulterous spouse.

Also note: One reason for divorce, according to Deu 24 is just because the husband didn’t like his wife very much. So, what do you do if a spouse does not love the other? Forbid a divorce when Deu 24:3 allows for it?

JESUS would never allow for a divorce for an adulterous spouse. Dead people cannot divorce, let alone remarry.

The Catholics really screwed this one up, and the Reformation folks bought off on it.

I find it amazing the amount of explanations that I hear from many different Church’s in regards to Hebrews 6.  This chapter is most widely used by those who believe that you can lose your salvation.  First let me quote Hebrews 6, and then I will give my extremly short synopsis.

Hebrews 6 (KJV)

6 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

And this will we do, if God permit.

For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,

And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,

If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

For the earth which drinketh in the rain that cometh oft upon it, and bringeth forth herbs meet for them by whom it is dressed, receiveth blessing from God:

But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned.

But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

10 For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labour of love, which ye have shewed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister.

11 And we desire that every one of you do shew the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end:

12 That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises.

13 For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself,

14 Saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee.

15 And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise.

16 For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife.

17 Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath:

18 That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:

19 Which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and stedfast, and which entereth into that within the veil;

20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

My synopsis:

In a nutshell, Hebrews 6 is not discussing that one can lose their salvation.  It is discussing this:

Stop preaching the same ole same ole introductory Christian doctrines and move on to the more advanced doctrines.

The phrase: “If they shall fall away” is an incomplete phrase, because it is accompanied with “to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.”

The key word here is the word “again”…back to repentance to crucify Christ, over and over and over again.

But this whole lesson is incomplete.  Take verse 9 for example:

9  But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak.

Another way to say that is:  We expect more out of you, that you learn not only what you have been taught ABOUT salvation, but what you are not learning is those things that ACCOMPANY salvation.

Again, my summary…stop teaching the introductory Christian doctrines over and over again, but move on to the bigger and better things.


I say, neither.

There seems to be a few sects of Christianity that are “Law/Gospel” oriented.  Just to name a few:

1.  7th Day Adventists
2.  Some sects of Calvinism
3.  Emerging “Returning to our Jewish Roots” movements.

Note the word, “movement”?

There are others, as well.  Some of those Christian sects can’t stand the thought of Christmas, or Easter, and they don’t eat bacon with their eggs, nor will they buy a ham sandwich at Subway.  Some of those Christian sects don’t like the Apostle Paul very much.  They are called legalists.  They all have one thing in common.  Their arguments are coming from their hatred for Catholics, and not the Bible itself.  Another one of their arguments is that God never changes, that is, if God set before us the Law of Moses, then we are to be obedient to the law of Moses, for God never changes.  Some of these sects tells us that Abraham had, or knew the Law of Moses, as they quote the following:

Genesis 26:5
 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

The words commandments, statutes, and laws is somehow equated to the Law of Moses?  The whole chapter of Galatians chapter 3 negates out that claim.  Moses was four generations later.

NOTE:   I have one very important thing to say regarding Abraham in Genesis 26:5, for those who think that Abraham had the law, but that it just wasn’t codified yet.  I make reference of Genesis 26:5 later, in which I will make mention of it then…just to keep you interested to read on.

Galatians 3:18-23
For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.  Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.  Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one.  Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.  But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.  But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

The law kept faith out of the picture.  The law prohibited the inheritance of eternal life (promised land).

I’ve also found that when they preach on the subject of faith, they all have a common denominator of leaving out information.  I use scripture to counter what they leave out.  I was recently given the boot on a “Returning to Our Jewish Roots” blog, not for giving opinion, but by quoting scripture.  In a private email to the blog owner, I stated, “It’s hard for me to fathom people rejecting quoted scripture.”

Are we to be obedient to God?  Well, of course, we are.  To them, however, being “obedient” to God is equal to being “obedient” to the Law of Moses, and somehow that is supposed to be not only Good News, but Great News.  So, I will counter their good news, with the quoting of scripture.  We are to be obedient to the Law of Christ (Faith), not the Law of Moses (works).

So, to start things off with this article, here is one thing that they don’t want to tell you:

Acts 15:5
But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

Acts 15:24
Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

Take, for example, that you have a bus schedule in your hand, and that you are at the bus stop at 1:48 P.M.  According to the bus schedule, the next bus is scheduled for a 2:00 P.M. arrival.  You believe the bus schedule.  You are just waiting for the bus to arrive at 2:00 P.M.  The conclusion is that you have faith in the bus schedule.

Faith is based on the promise (ASSURANCE) that the bus will arrive at 2:00 P.M., and that you are just waiting for it to arrive (HOPE).  You believe that the bus will arrive at 2:00 P.M.  THAT belief is based on the credence of the Bus Schedule.

Hebrews 11:1 (KJV) FAITH IS:
Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Strong’s Concordance Greek Ref #5287:  Assurance
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition defines assurance as:  Pledge, Guarantee

Romans 8:24-25
For we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?  But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it.

Hoped, Hope:
Strong’s Concordance Greek Ref #’s1679, 1680:  Expectation or confidence
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition defines hope as:
to expect with confidence; Expectation is defined as:  Anticipation;   Anticipation is defined as:  The act of looking forward, and, visualization of a future event or state.

Hebrews 11:1 
Now FAITH IS:  The guarantee of things (substance/assurance) expected (hoped/waiting for).

Faith: Strong’s Concordance Greek Ref #4102:
Persuasion, i.e. credence. Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, Eleventh Edition defines credence as:  mental acceptance as true or real.

We are all familiar with the following verses:

Ephesians 2:8
For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Ephesians 2:9
Not of works, lest any man should boast.

The Calvinists believe in a term called “Saving Faith”. The following is from a Calvinist believing website:

“Faith is a gift of God and not a work of man, so that no man can boast and God receives all the glory (Eph. 2:1-10).”

That is not what Ephesians 2:8-9 states.  That is what the Calvinists reword it to state. We non-Calvinists do not consider faith to be a gift, or a work.

The Calvinists boast about the word exegesis.  Dictionary.com defines Exegesis as, “critical explanation or interpretation of a text or portion of a text, especially of the Bible.”  But the Calvinists are expository driven, rather than topical driven.  I do both. The following topics will be covered in regards to this “saving faith” garbage.

What is the Righteousness of God?

Works vs. No Works

According to dictionary.com, one definition of “work” is:  a deed or performance, the word “deed” is defined as:  something that is done, performed, or accomplished; an act, and the word “do” is defined as:  To perform, to accomplish, to execute.

Abraham believed God.  He didn’t work.  He believed. Romans 4:3 and Galatians 3:6 and James 2:23 all state the following:

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

Note the word “it”.  “It” is simply his belief of the promise given to him by God.  What was the promise?  Seed, and Land, hence the terms, Promised Land, and Promised Seed.  A piece of real estate.  These promises are twofold.

1.  Carnal (Physical Land of Israel…with “specific” borders, and Isaac).
2.  Spiritual (Heaven…aka Eternal Life, and Jesus).

Romans 4:2
*For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

*We see here that belief is not considered a work.    What is considered a work is explained below.

Note:  Let’s not get James 2:26 (Faith without works is dead) confused with Romans 4:2.  Abraham was indeed justified by “works” of James 2:26.  What does that mean?  It means that Abraham “lived” his belief.  The works that is being discussed in this post has nothing to do with the book of James.

A worker is one who works, right?  Well, the Bible states that a worker is one who is a “doer”, a doer of the work, not just a hearer.

We should all know that the Old Testament, aka, Old Covenant, First Covenant, begins in Exodus 20.  This is where God spoke to ALL of the children of Israel at Mt. Sinai. After God Spoke the Ten Commandments to ALL of the children of Israel, they were afraid that if God continued to speak to them, that they would die, so they asked if Moses would speak to them about what God wants of them, instead of God himself.

Exodus 20:19
And they said unto Moses, Speak thou with us, and we will hear: but let not God speak with us, lest we die. So, Moses continued to listen to God, and Moses gave the word of the Lord to ALL of the children of Israel.

Exodus 24:3
And Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord, and all the judgments: and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words which the Lord hath said will we do.

Notice the last word in that verse, “do”. Later, in Deuteronomy 5, Moses once again reiterates what was spoken in Exodus 20 – 24. After that review, the children of Israel responds:

Deuteronomy 6:25
And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.

Again, notice the word, “do”.  That is works of righteousness.  Obedience to the law of Moses is known as works of Righteousness. If anyone can keep the law perfectly, then they have “earned” a wage, and God “owes” them eternal life.  That is why it is called “works”, or “deeds”.

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

Romans 3:20
Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

Romans 3:23
For all have sinned.

Romans 6:23
the wages of sin is death

So, who can be obedient to the Law of Moses and get to heaven?  No one.

Galatians 2:16
a man is not justified by the works of the law…for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Galatians 3:10
For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.

Remember the word, “do” from Exodus and Deuteronomy?  Anyone that attempts to be “obedient”, or, “do” works of righteousness, to the law of Moses is under a curse. And yet, the legalists affirm that God did not do away with the Law of Moses.  Well, according to various legalists, some laws were done away, while other laws are not.  They separate the laws into categories,  i.e., ceremony, stone, parchment, food, etc.  Some say that it is OK to eat all meats, while others think that having bacon with your eggs will get you to hell in a hand basket. Others say that only sacrifices were done away, while eating pork chops, or lobster with your steak is an abomination.

And how do they convince people?  Well the 7th Day Adventists ask, “Is it a sin to steal?”, to which we do indeed state, “Yes”.  Then they continue with the remaining 8 commandments before stating that it is therefore a sin to go to church on Sunday, telling people that they are hell bound if they step one foot in church on Sunday.  In regards to the Calvinists, they acknowledge that the Lord’s day is Sunday, so according to them, that is the ONLY commandment that was changed.

Then I have heard people say that if we “love” God, then we will be “obedient” to the Law of Moses, and this is somehow to be “a joy and a delight”?  Really?  A delight?  A joy?

Recently, on one of many “Restoring The Jewish Roots” blogs, by Gentiles pretending to be Jewish, a legalist told me this:

“it is not called the ‘old testament’, nor was it changed to that name except by one lost man’s interpretation”.

What is interesting about that statement, is that I heard that before, from Calvinists. Calvinists are about Law Plus Grace.  Most legalists will quote Romans 6:1 through HALF of Romans 6:2:

Romans 6:1-2 (half of verse 2)
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?  God forbid...(That is where they stop)

This is also demonstrated in Romans 6:15.  But what they fail to do is to read the rest of the chapter, plus Romans 7.  When they do that, they will see that under grace, that it is impossible to continue in sin, all because we are not under the law, and that the question in Romans 6:1 and 14 is a rhetorical question.  When we are under grace, we are not under the law.  In other words, you can’t break a law that does not exist.

1 John 3:9
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

Notice the words, “doth not”, and “cannot”.  It does not say, “should not”. Furthermore, I have been told that Abraham had the law, but it just wasn’t codified yet, that it was codified under Moses.  In addition, I’ve been told that Abraham stumbled at his faith, because he lied about Sarah, and did not consult God about providing him food before going to Egypt.  But when we read Genesis, he did not lie about Sarah.  She was his sister.  And the justification that Abraham gives in not disclosing that Sarah was his wife was because he did not feel that the fear of God was in that place.  Again, he believed God’s promise, and NOTHING was going to change that promise.  Abraham knew that the Pharaoh was not going to harm Sarah.  God would protect her, all due to the promise seed through Sarah, Isaac.  The promise was “unconditional”.  The Covenant of Circumcision came later, and that was based on the family line of Isaac receiving the promise of inheritance, not Ishmael, the first born.  Today, the physical land of Israel belongs to the Jews, promised by God.  Not to the Palestinians, promised by the UN, or whomever.

Note:  That is the “carnal”.  Remember, the spiritual, Jesus is the promised seed, and the promised land…is Heaven, aka eternal life, not a piece of real estate in the middle east.

Romans 4:19-20
And being not weak in faith
He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;

Genesis 26:5
Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

So, if we are to believe that Abraham had the law, but that it just wasn’t codified yet, then we can be led to believe that Abraham was sinless, when reading Genesis 26:5.  And yet, we are told “For all have sinned”.  Like I said above, Galatians 3 counters the claim that Abraham had the Law of Moses. Abraham sinned, too…but (See Romans 5:13 below).

So let’s test to see if Abraham had the law…it’s an easy test.  We will take a good look at the “codified” law, and see if Abraham really did OBEY the Law of Moses, before it was codified.

Leviticus 18:6
None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the Lord.

Leviticus 18:9
The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy
mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their
nakedness thou shalt not uncover.

Leviticus 18:11
The nakedness of thy father’s wife’s daughter, begotten of thy father, she is thy sister, thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.

Leviticus 20:17
And if a man shall take his sister, his father’s daughter, or his mother’s
daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a
wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he
hath uncovered his sister’s nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity.

Deuteronomy 27:22
Cursed be he that lieth with his sister, the daughter of his father, or the
daughter of his mother. And all the people shall say, Amen.
And now, ABRAHAM, who obeyed God’s commandments, statutes, ordinances, and “TORAH”?

Genesis 20:12
And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife.
And yet, God never informed Abraham of this grievous sin, but blessed brother and sister with a promised inbred son.  According to the codified law, Abraham is cursed, because he did a wicked thing, and should be cut off from the sight of his people, and shall bear his iniquity…yet, he was NOT cursed at all, but BLESSED.  God never told him about this sin, but gave brother/sister an inbred child instead.

And somehow we are to equate this with Genesis 26:5?

Genesis 26:5 (again, for those who missed it)
Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.

When was Abraham judged accordingly regarding Sister Sarah? There was no judgment, and why? Romans 5:13, and 4:15, and many others.

Can we finally conclude that Abraham did NOT have the Law, and the law is NOT equated to Genesis 26:5?  Can we also conclude that God never told Abraham anything about forbidding sexual concorse with sisters?  Can we also conclude, based on the two previous, that there was no forgiveness or mercy NECESSARY in this case?  Why or why not?  Hint…keep reading.

Did Abraham go to church on Saturday?  Did Abraham observe the Sabbath?  What Sabbath?  The first mention of MAN observing any Sabbath, or taking a “rest” is in the book of Exodus.

Exodus 16:23
And he said unto them, This is that which the Lord hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the Lord:

Romans 5:13
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

When was “until”?  Until Abraham?  Note the word “Imputed”.  I would conclude that Abraham did not have the law…of Moses…not one bit.  The law is not of faith.  Faith and Law is contrary to one another.  It is faith vs. law, not law plus faith/grace. The Hebrews were slaves in Egypt.  Did the Egyptians allow the Hebrews to take Saturday off?  No.  There was no such thing as a 4th Commandment yet.

Old Testament (The Law of Moses(Works)) vs. New Testament (The Law of Christ(Faith))

Hebrews 8, 9, and 10 addresses Old Testament vs. New Testament . The Jewish Roots folks(Gentiles pretending to be Jewish) are confusing the words, “The Law of Moses” with the word, “Torah (law)”. In other words, law vs. law.  Sound confusing? Torah!, Torah!, Torah! (Wasn’t that a movie?).

The owner of the blog told me:
“Torah simply means…INSTRUCTIONS” Jesus taught…TORAH.”

However, I was taught, by Jews themselves, that the word “Torah” simply means “First Five Books”, hence the Latin word, Pentateuch, penta meaning “five”, teuchos, meaning tool, vessel, book.

I responded with:
“Your teachings are trying to equate the Law of Moses with the Torah, and that is not true. They are two separate things. The Law of Moses is “within” the Torah, but it is not the Torah.”

Further, I explained:

Matthew 5:17-18
Think not that I am come to destroy the law (Torah), or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

I included the above verse because legalists are always referencing this verse.)

“Jesus makes it clear that he didn’t come to destroy the “Torah or the Prophets” (Tanakh).  When it is stated in scripture, “The Law and the Prophets”, it is discussing Genesis to Malachi.  The Law, or Torah, is simply Genesis to Deuteronomy.  The Prophets is Joshua to Malachi.  Put both together, it is Tanakh, or TNK.  The T stands for Torah.  The N and K stand for writings and prophets. However, within the First Five Books (Torah, or Law) is the Old Testament/Covenant/Law of Moses. You  are trying to equate the Law of Moses with the Torah.  The Law of Moses is “within” the Torah, but it is not the Torah.” So, when Jesus discusses Matthew 5:17-18, I see that many folks delete the word “prophets” from the verse, focusing on the word, “law”, as in The Law of Moses, and they falsely conclude that Jesus came to fulfill the Ten Commandments, i.e., the law.  I hear this time and time and time again from many folks, legalists or not.  This is where they are WRONG!  Once you put the word “prophets” back in the verse, properly using it as TNK, you will see that Jesus came to fulfill prophecy of himself from Genesis to Malachi, not to fulfill the Ten Commandments.  But he did indeed come to destroy the Law of Moses and replace it with The Law of Christ (Galatians 6:2), which is totally different than the Old Covenant, hence, New Testament.  The law of Christ is known as the Law of freedom (liberty (James 1:25; 2:12)). “The Law (Torah) and the Prophets” is a phrase used several times, even with the Apostle Paul.  Many are getting confused with “The Law (Torah), vs. “The Law [of Moses].  The Law of Moses is the Old Testament.  The Old Testament does not begin with Genesis 1.  Identifying the Old Testament with Genesis 1 to Malachi is extremely common place with all of Christendom.

Now, lets look at the book of Hebrews:

Hebrews 9:1
the first covenant

Hebrews 9:15
new testament

Hebrews 9:15
first testament

Hebrews 9:16-20
For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.  For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.  Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.  For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,  Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

Exodus 24:8
 And Moses took the blood, and sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words.

What words?  From Exodus 20, beginning with the Ten Commandments.

Hebrews 8:7
For if that first covenant had been faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second.

Hebrews 8:8
new covenant

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

*Hebrews 10:9
He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

*Ding, Ding, Ding, Ding.  He took away the first, calling it old, so that he may establish the second, calling it new.

The New Covenant is NOT a RENEWED Covenant of the Old.

Jeremiah 31:31-32
Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:  Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt;

Therefore, it cannot be law plus grace/faith.  Law was taken away, so that grace may be established.

2 Corinthians 3:14
But their minds were blinded: for until this day remaineth the same vail untaken away in the reading of the old testament

First/Old Covenant/Testament vs. Second/New Covenant/Testament.  The first/old covenant/testament is the Law of Moses, not the Torah.

No Works

1 John 3:4
sin is the transgression of the law.

Romans 3:20
the law is the knowledge of sin.

Romans 5:13
For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

Romans 4:15
where no law is, there is no transgression.

Romans 4:8
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

Romans 6:7
For he that is dead is freed from sin.

Romans 6:11
Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead

Romans 7:4
ye also are become dead to the law

Galatians 2:19
For I through the law am dead to the law,

Romans 7:8
For without the law sin was dead.

Galatians 2:21
if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

Romans 3:21
But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested

Romans 4:5
faith is counted for righteousness.

Romans 4:13
not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Romans 4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace

Galatians 3:12
the law is not of faith

Galatians 3:21
if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.

Romans 4:2
For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

Romans 4:5-6
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.  Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

Romans 11:6
And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Faith is NOT imputed.

There is ONLY two things that can be “IMPUTED” to us.
1. Sin
2. Righteousness

Righteousness can only be imputed in two different ways.
1. Works (DEEDS/OBEYING/OBSERVING) The Law of Moses
2. Faith

For all have sinned (NOT OBEYED THE LAW OF MOSES). Then how are we made righteous? Faith alone without the Law of Moses. We are now under the Law of Christ, which is the Law of Faith, which is the Law of Freedom (liberty) and the COMMANDMENTS of Jesus is a singular commandment: Love Thy Neighbor as Thyself.  Now, some will say that we have two commandments, and I left out the Love God part.  However, the way that 1 John explains it, is that we prove that we love God by loving people. For Love fulfills ALL, not just the parchment, but the stones, too, the law of Moses. The singular commandment of Love is the delight, the joy, not obeying the Law of Moses, which is a curse.

Galatians 4:21
Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

Why was the Law of Moses instituted?  Was it to bring about morality, so that sin would decrease? Many seem to think so.  They call it “God’s Standards”.  Really?

Romans 5:20 (NIVr)
The law was given so that sin would increase.

Did Abraham really need a law that stated, “Thou Shalt Not Steal” to know that it is wrong to steal?  Think about that.

Romans 2:14-16
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:  Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;) In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

By nature, they obey laws that they don’t even have.  It’s called a conscience.  And Jesus judges them by what they know, not by what they don’t know, and Paul calls that good news (gospel), and these people don’t even know God, or Jesus.  So, do people who don’t know God, or Jesus, automatically go to hell because they are sinners?  NO.  But some seem to think so.


Galatians 4:21
Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

Bottom line:
Faith is KNOWING that we are going to get what we are waiting for.  Obeying the law of Moses is earning your way, not knowing for sure.

Acts 15:5
But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

Acts 15:24
Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

The law of Moses is Bondage.  Jesus set us free from the law.  Flesh vs. Spirit

Galatians 4:24
for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage

Everything Begins with Seed

This is one thing that no one, on either side of the debate, has yet to consider. The one side that seems to be leading the charge on the YEC belief system is the Calvinist movement.  As a matter of fact, Calvinism has differing views on many Bible topics that are dead set against non-Calvinism Christian beliefs. It seems to me, my opinion, of course, that Calvinism is set up in such a way as to pit other Christians against other Christians.  The Calvinist debate of Old Earth vs. New Earth is an internal Christian debate, having really nothing to do with atheist vs. Christian.  Also, the Calvinist wants to make this issue a “salvation” issue, as well.  How can that be, since salvation is based on the disobedience of the 613 laws from Exodus 20 to the end of Deuteronomy, having nothing to do with Genesis 1 and 2?  Sin vs. Salvation.  Where does one have to believe that a creation day is 24 hours to be saved?  Which of those 613 laws specify that it is a sin to not believe in a literal 24 hour creation day?

I am an old earth believer.  I do not believe in evolution.  I do, however, believe that Bible genealogy supports a young mankind, including that of the animals, more specifically, dinosaurs.  Animals were “FORMED” after Adam was formed, and Adam named all the animals, not just some, but all.  This supports that there were NO dinosaurs before Adam. It seems to me that all of the young earthers believe that all of the Old Earth believers believe in evolution.  I don’t.

Next, all young earther’s have a stance that a day is 24 hours.  Why?  Someone recently told me “and the evening and the morning were the _____th day. So what?  Does that prove that a day in creation is 24 hours?  I think not. If, as the Bible states, that a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as a day to God, then, just by that statement, after a thousand years is completed, then there is an evening and a morning, then the next day is a thousand years. I say that to show that there is a difference between a carnal day, and a spiritual day.  I am NOT saying that each day was a thousand years, I am saying that each day is a spiritual day, not a carnal day.

Many seem to remember Jesus asking:

John 11:9
Jesus answered, Are there not twelve hours in the day?

But they fail to seek the rest of the story regarding the words LIGHT and DARK.  It is LIGHT during the DAY, and DARK during the NIGHT.  In June, it is light MORE THAN twelve hours, and in November, it is light less than twelve hours.  So, what time of year do you think that Jesus was discussing here?

Walk in the day is the same as saying walk in the light, don’t walk in the darkness where you will trip and fall (SIN).

John 8:12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

John 11:9 Jesus answered, Are there not twelve hours in the day? If any man walk in the day, he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of this world.

John 11:10 But if a man walk in the night, he stumbleth, because there is no light in him.

John 12:35 Then Jesus said unto them, Yet a little while is the light with you. Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you: for he that walketh in darkness knoweth not whither he goeth.

Ephesians 5:8 For ye were sometimes darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord: walk as children of light:

1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

As you can see, we are to walk in the LIGHT (DAY) all day long, no matter what time of the day or night it is.  This has nothing to do with calculating that a day constitutes 12 hours or 24 hours.

The young earther’s dismiss that the 7th day of creation is not over with.  We present them with Hebrews Chapter 4 for this.  God rested on the 7th day.  There has never been an 8th day, or even a 9th day, or a tenth day.  God is still resting. We are to “enter into HIS rest”.  We are to enter into HIS 7th Day, HIS rest, HIS Sabbath. This shows that the 7th day has not ended, proving that there is a huge difference between spiritual days, and carnal days.

Next, both sides of the debate miss one very important issue.  Both sides seem to agree that Genesis chapter 2 is a review of Genesis chapter 1, specifically in regards to day number 6, man’s creation. I disagree that Genesis chapter 2 is a review of chapter 1.  Why?  Simple:

1.  Genesis Chapter 1 is CREATION

2.  Genesis Chapter 2 is FORMATION

1.  Genesis Chapter 1:  Creation of the SPIRITS (SEED), (BREATH OF LIFE) of man.

2.  Genesis Chapter 2:  Formation of the Body (Dirt) of man.

Everything begins with a seed.  Everything. How do I come to this conclusion?  Simple. The ORDER OF EVENTS is DIFFERENT between the two chapters.  Many have not even noticed this. In Genesis Chapter 1, notice that animals were CREATED BEFORE man. In Genesis Chapter 2, notice that animals were FORMED AFTER ADAM.  Then, after all of the animals were formed, FINALLY Eve was FORMED, and yet, in chapter 1, Eve was created at the same time as Adam. Many people assume that Adam was the first human CREATED.  No, We were all created on the same day, as spirits.

We were all created IN HEAVEN. One by one, God plants a seed (spirit) in dirt (BODY), and each one of us became a living soul.  Life begins at conception.  The sperm and the egg are dirt (BODY), but our spirit gives the body life (James 2:26).  When we die, WE GO “HOME”.  Home is where we came from, where we were created.  We were not created on earth, we were formed on earth.  All of us were created, at the same time, in heaven.  God is still resting from creation.  Man does not create man.  And since God is still at rest from his creation, that means that you and I were created at the same time that Adam was created, in God’s image (to be eternal from the moment of creation).

Next, from what I am reading in regards to the Young Earthers, they believe that when God created, say, for example, trees, that they were MATURE trees. But, I don’t believe that, since I believe that EVERYTHING begins with SEED, planted in DIRT. Carefully review how this is worded:

Genesis 2:5-9 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. 6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 8 And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9 And out of the ground made the Lord God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.


1.  Nothing grew until mist watered the whole face of the ground.  This was BEFORE Adam was FORMED of the dirt.  Later, God PLANTED a Garden (How much later?  See note 2 below).  The ONLY thing that is PLANTED is SEED.

2.  When did God put Adam in the Garden?  During, before, OR after Adam became a “living” soul?  The answer is “AFTER”.  So Adam did NOT start out in the Garden.  The “planting” of the Garden was AFTER Adam became a living soul.

3.  After Adam was “IN” the Garden, “THEN” God made every tree IN the Garden GROW.  They weren’t already grown trees.

Do people who claim literal reading on both sides of the debate ever happen to read the order of events? Seed is missing from both sides of the debate. Seed is a very important topic in regards to spiritual things.  Seed is a carnal example of spiritual eternity.  For example, seed has no expiration date.  If you go to the nursery to buy apple seed for example, there is no “Plant no later than” date on the packet.  Come on Christians, think spiritual thoughts on things.  Seek out spiritual matters.  Seed begins all living things, including trees, animals, and man.

Finally, the next topic is also missing from both sides of the debate.  Angels. When were the angels created? The answer to that one is before “time”, before the beginning, in eternity. Genesis states that in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. He certainly was not discussing his abode when he said “heaven”, as his abode is eternal. God has always been in heaven. He created the Angels before Genesis 1:1. Consider the angels in this:

1. When were they created?

2. When were they kicked out?

3. Where were they kicked to?

4. Where is hell?

5. Who was hell created for?

6. When was hell created?

THIS topic in regards to angels and hell is key to my understanding of the gap theory.  Hell is not in “eternity”, but it is in “time”.  Heaven is in “eternity” where there is no concept of “time”.  Spiritual words to consider are the words “darkness”, and “deep”, for example.  Carnal definitions do not always help when looking at spiritual interpretations.  For example, in the book of Jonah Chapter 2, there is a “spiritual” description of hell that Jesus went to.  Put on spiritual lenses and couple that with both 2 Samuel 22:4-51 with Psalm 18:3-50.  They are both the same with the exception of one verse in each.  2 Samuel 22:8 and Psalm 18:7.

Jeremiah 4:23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.

We cannot ignore Jeremiah when discussing the following:

Genesis 1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep.

I do think that if one “spiritually” interprets scripture, that there is a “hint” of a concept of Old Earth.  This, to me, would tie into the tohuw (void)/bohuw (without form).  Something happened, and I don’t know what, but I think it had something to do with the angels that were kicked out of heaven, and placed on this earth.  We know that there are demons in the world, not just down in the “heart of the earth”, but that they are all around us. I just wish that there was more “spiritual” investigation in the debate, rather than all of the science stuff.  Science will never ever ever ever prove the existence of God.  But OBSERVATION OF SCIENCE is an important part of the equation, COUPLED WITH a spiritual look at scripture, and not the carnal 24 hour day concept.

So, when Jesus states, Before Abraham was, I AM, it is simple to conclude that before any of us were CREATED, Jesus exists (present tense, for an eternity). Just doing a simple dictionary dot com will show that the word AM is defined as “BE”, and “BE” is defined as “EXIST”.

Please consider what I have written, and take another fresh look at Genesis 1 and 2, paying particular attention to the difference between the two chapters, rather than the similarities of the two.

Yes, Jesus died Friday Afternoon, Nisan 15 (Not Nisan 14)
Yes, the very next day was the weekly Saturday Sabbath, Nisan 16
Yes, Jesus rose from the dead on Sunday, Nisan 17 at Sunrise
3 Days and 3 Nights; Genesis 1:5, not 72 Hours

Genesis 1:5
 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night

How do you get Three Days and Three Nights From Good Friday Afternoon, to Easter Sunday Morning?

Matthew 12:40
For as Jonas was three DAYS and three NIGHTS in the whale’s belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the HEART OF THE EARTH.


I began this study after hearing that very good question posed by the Herbert W Armstrong breakaway church, Living Church of God, by Roderick C Meridith.  It is widely known that the Herbert W Armstrong clan is not mainstream Christianity, and as such, they blame the Catholics for the teaching that Jesus died on Friday, and rose on Sunday.  In regards to the protestants, they regard that as nothing more than ignorant tradition taught by the Catholics, and not challenged.  In other words, we’ve always done it that way, so why change now?  I myself, being a protestant, do indeed believe that Catholicism is of pagan origin.  Most Catholics dismiss the sign of Jonah, concluding that the timeline is three days, with the first day and last day as partial days, and do not consider the word night in the sign of Jonah.  I also agree that the word Easter is not appropriate.  However, that being said, let’s move on.

The Herbert W Armstrong clan claims that it is flat out impossible to get three days and three nights from Good Friday Afternoon to Easter Sunday Morning.  They believe that Jesus rose from the dead sometime on Saturday Afternoon, finally showing himself on Sunday, so they subtract 72 hours from Saturday afternoon, and teach that Jesus died on the Cross on Wednesday afternoon.  This is how they compute three days and three nights.  But is this correct?  They use a statement that Jesus said, “Are there not twelve hours in the day” from John 11:9 as their basis for 72 hours.  But is this correct?  I think not.

In addition, they believe that Jesus died on Nisan 14.  I will debunk that notion as well in this blog.  They recognize that there was indeed a Sabbath Day the day following the death of Jesus, but they claim that this Special Sabbath was Nisan 15, the first day of the feast of Unleavened Bread.  I will show that Jesus died on Nisan 15, which is the first day of Passover, which is the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is the High Day Sabbath Day for the first day of the Feast.  He was, after all, the sacrificial Passover Lamb.

Lastly, they preach that the day after this High Day Sabbath that the women prepared spices, as they could not do this during a Sabbath, and then that it was dark when the women arrived at the tomb on Sunday Morning, attempting to debunk that Jesus rose at sunrise. But was it really dark when the women got to the tomb?  We will delve into this as the first topic to cover.

But what I find even more interesting, is that people actually believe their claims, because no one can challenge three days and three nights when the conclusion is converted to hours, rather than light and dark.  I have to admit, that it sounds logical, based on the evidence that they provide.  But what they provide is an incomplete and inaccurate story.

One thing that we must know is that the Herbert W Armstrong clan adopts a belief from the 7th Day Adventists in the belief of soul sleep, that when you die, that is the end of the story until the resurrection.  In other words, when you die, the next conscious thought is the resurrection.  So, if you buy off on that, after Jesus died, then the next conscious thought that Jesus had was when he was resurrected from the dead in the tomb. They adopt this belief in part based on Ecclesiastes 9:5, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses do.

In regards to Ecclesiastes 9:5, it is not discussing soul sleep.  It is discussing a corps.  If you see a dead man on the street, and you ask that dead man a question, he will not answer you.  Why?  Because the dead know nothing, the memory has left him.  He is not in his body (James 2:26).  He is elsewhere.  He is either with the Rich Man, or with Lazarus, along with King Saul and Samuel, in Abraham’s Bosom.  This was the place of REST.  The word sleep is in contrast to REST, not unconsciousness.  This rest is in the same concept of a VACATION.  When you are on vacation, you are resting from work, wide awake, enjoying yourself.  No one in Abraham’s bosom could be set free until Jesus paid for sin, reconciling man to God, setting the prisoners free, free from sin to be in heaven with God.  Sin separates God from man.  Thus, Abraham’s bosom does not exist anymore.

They also believe that the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus was a parable.  But Jesus never spoke in parables when the audience was his disciples only.  The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus was to his disciples only. The place of the Rich Man and Lazarus was in the Heart of the Earth, which a fixed gulf between the Rich man and Lazarus.

In order to show that the Rich man and Lazarus is not a parable, you must zipper the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.  When you zipper those gospels, you will see that the LAST conversation to the multitude, or Pharisees, was that of the topic of divorce.  The topic of the Rich man and Lazarus was NOT discussed to the multitude, or Pharisees.  After the topic of divorce to the multitude, Jesus and his disciples went into a house together…without the multitude, or Pharisees.  Once inside the house, the topic of divorce continued, only with Jesus and the disciples.  Then the next topic to the disciples only was the topic of the Rich Man and Lazarus, thus proving that the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus is not a parable, as Jesus did not speak in parables when his audience was his disciples only.

Matthew 13:10-11
And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables?  He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

Mark 4:11
And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:

Mark 4:34
But without a parable spake he not unto them: and when they were alone, he expounded all things to his disciples.

Luke 8:10
And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables

The following link opens a PDF of an excel spreadsheet showing the partial zippered (page 4 of 5) gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke.  The heavy bold indicates that a topic is in all three gospels, while the shaded indicates that a topic is in two of the three.  The x indicates that the topic is in that particular gospel at all.  Finally, hopefully, you will be able to determine that the story of The Rich Man and Lazarus was not a parable.

Click to Open Table

Finally, they believe that Jesus said that he would be in the “tomb” or “grave” for 72 hours, and it is at the moment that his body entered the tomb, or grave, that the countdown actually begins.  But, it must be noted, that the tomb, or grave, is many miles away from the heart of the earth, and that Jesus never said “tomb” or “grave”, nor did he say seventy two hours.  He said three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.  They claim that they get the seventy two hour scenario from John 11:9 when Jesus said, “are there not twelve hours in the day?”  But, during that time of the year, there is twelve hours of light during the day.  Jesus could not say that during, say, November, as there is less hours of light during the day.  If it were November, he would have asked, “are there not ten hours in the day?”  He was CONTRASTING LIGHT AND DARK, to walk in the light, hence the use of the word day, showing that there was 12 hours of LIGHT during the day.

So, their timeline is as follows:

1.  Jesus ate the Passover meal, the Last Supper,  just after Wednesday began after sunset (Wednesday, Nisan 14)

2.  Jesus died on Wednesday Afternoon at about 3 P.M. (Wednesday, Nisan 14)

3.  Jesus buried in the tomb before 6:00 P.M Wednesday, Nisan 14., because after 6:00 PM begins Thursday, Nisan 15, the Feast of Unleavened Bread Sabbath (Annual High Day Sabbath).  The women could not prepare spices on a Sabbath.

4.  The women prepared spices AFTER the High Day Sabbath was over (Friday, Nisan 16)

Note:  The women and spices is extremely important to their claim, as it shows a break between Sabbath’s, which I will cover.

5.  Saturday Weekly Sabbath, Jesus rose from the dead sometime between 3 P.M to 6 P.M. (Saturday, Nisan 17)

6.  The women get to the tomb sometime early Sunday morning when it was dark (Sunday, Nisan 18)

7.  Jesus finally shows himself (Sunday, Nisan 18)

Their timeline is believable, if you study what they provide as evidence.  But they leave out evidences that refute their timeline.

Let’s look at all of this from a different perspective!



The women got to the tomb AFTER sunrise, not when it was dark

The first thing that I wish to cover, is the last thing that the teachers of the 72 hour doctrine discusses.  Hopefully, this will help in keeping you interested in reading the complete story.

Teachers of the 72 hour doctrine only reference John and Luke’s account.  They claim that Jesus rose from the dead sometime before sunrise because the women got to the tomb before sunrise, when it was yet dark.  Is that really the truth?  Let’s look!

John 20:1

“The first day of the week (SUNDAY) cometh Mary Magdalene EARLY, when it was yet DARK, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.”

2. EARLY IN THE MORNING (NO LONGER NIGHT.  If it were still night, delete the word “morning”)
Luke 24:1

“Now upon the first day of the week (SUNDAY), VERY EARLY IN THE MORNING, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with them.”

If you were to only believe the evidence provided, you would be willing to believe that it was dark.  But what about the rest of the four gospels?  Why do they conveniently leave those accounts out?  Let’s look at those accounts.

3.  DAWN
Matthew 28:1-2
“In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.   
And, behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it.

Mark 16:2-4

“And VERY EARLY in the morning the first day of the week (SUNDAY), they came unto the sepulchre AT THE RISING OF THE SUN.  And they said among themselves, WHO SHALL ROLL US AWAY THE STONE from the door of the sepulchre?  And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away…”

Notice, if you will, the progression of time in each gospel.  All four gospels is indicating a progression, not an arrival.  Notice, if you will, that Mark 16:2 states “at the rising of the sun”.  That is sunrise!

At the point that they asked amongst themselves, in Mark 16:3, “Who shall roll away the stone…?”, it was SUNRISE, clearly showing that they were STILL on their journey to the tomb, and had not arrived at the tomb when it was dark.

It was dark when they began their journey, and while on the journey, sunrise happened, so that by the time that they got to the tomb, sunrise had already taken place.

When they got to the tomb, they noticed that the stone was already rolled away.  That being fact, then there would be no need, at the rising of the sun, to even ask amongst themselves, who shall roll away the stone.

This clearly shows that sunrise had already taken place before their arrival at the tomb, and that it was NOT dark when they “arrived” at the tomb.  We will cover when the women prepared the spices later, but this shows that John is discussing “going” to the tomb, and not “arriving” at the tomb.

Do you see how covertly that some leave out Mark and Matthew’s account?  Very convenient, isn’t it? This is one example of how stories get distorted, and believable by those who want you to believe something else happened.  And they put the nail in the coffin when they sarcastically state, “Check out your bibles if you don’t believe me!”  That is code word for “BELIEVE ME”, and “have enough faith that I know what I am talking about so that you don’t have to check up on me in the Bible.”

Have I got your attention to continue?  I hope so.






In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD’s passover.
And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread…

If you read those two statements alone, it gives the illusion that Passover is on the 14th, and that the Feast of Unleavened Bread begins the following day on the 15th.  But that is just an illusion, as the rest of the story is left out.

Leviticus 23:5-8
In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD’s passover.   And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the LORD: seven days ye must eat unleavened bread.   In the first day ye shall have an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.   But ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD seven days: in the seventh day is an holy convocation: ye shall do no servile work therein.

Exodus 12:18
In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even.

Luke 22:1
Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.

Luke 22:1 indicates that the Feast of Passover is equated to the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and is not considered a separate feast, within a feast.  They are synonymous according to Luke.  Passover is a seven day feast, not a one day thing.  It begins on the 14th day of the first month at evening, and ends on the 21st day of the first month at evening.

According to Exodus, the feast of unleavened bread begins the same day that Passover begins in Leviticus 23.  How can that be if it is two separate feasts beginning on two different days?  The illusion is that Passover is a one day feast, and the feast of unleavened bread is a seven day feast, if you only rely on Leviticus 23.

In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the LORD’s passover.

In the following example, I will show that the above statement is not the 14th, but the 15th.  Let’s look at the exact wording of the Day of Atonement, also found in Leviticus 23.

Leviticus 23:27-32
27  Also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement: it shall be an holy convocation unto you; and ye shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD.  28  And ye shall do no work in that same day: for it is a day of atonement, to make an atonement for you before the LORD your God.  29  For whatsoever soul it be that shall not be afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from among his people.  30  And whatsoever soul it be that doeth any work in that same day, the same soul will I destroy from among his people.  31  Ye shall do no manner of work: it shall be a statute for ever throughout your generations in all your dwellings.  32  It shall be unto you a sabbath of rest, and ye shall afflict your souls: in the ninth day of the month at even, from even unto even,  shall ye celebrate your sabbath.

When is the Day of Atonement?
The 10th Day of the Seventh Month.

When does this begin?
ON the 9th Day AT sunset.

Verse 32 is discussing the 10th day, not the 9th day.  Carefully review the wording in verse 32.  Pay attention to the words, “AT” and “ON”.  On the ninth day indicates that sunset OF the ninth day has not taken place yet, which is why the word “AT” is used.  As soon as the word “AT” is used, in conjunction with the word “EVEN (evening, sunset)”, it is no longer the ninth day, but the tenth day.  The way that the Herbert W Armstrong clan does it, is that they think that the sunset is discussing the ninth day, instead of the tenth, because this is how they determine when Passover begins.  They think that Passover begins on the 14th instead of the 15th.

So if the 10th Day of the Month begins “ON” the ninth day “AT” evening, we can conclude that the 15th Day of the first month begins “ON” the 14th day of the first month “AT” evening.  Lets see this one on top of the other.

10th Day Begins “ON” the 9th Day “AT” sunset.
15th Day Begins “ON” the 14th Day “AT” sunset.

Let’s reverse that:

“ON” the 9th day “AT” sunset begins the 10th day.
“ON” the 14th day “AT” sunset begins the 15th day.

Passover is a seven day feast, known as the Feast of Unleavened Bread.  It is held from the 15th to the 21st of Nisan.  Passover does not begin on the 14th Day, as some teach.  It begins ON the 14th AT sunset, which is the 15th, not the 14th.

But, what about the wording of Leviticus 23 where it states, “And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread”?  Since Passover begins at the beginning of the 15th day, the feast of unleavened bread also begins at the beginning of the 15th day, according to Exodus 12, and they are both the same feast, according to Luke.

We have concluded that Passover is the seven day feast of unleavened bread with effective dates of Nisan 15 to Nisan 21.  That is seven days.  This also shows that the Passover lamb is killed ON THE 15th, NOT THE 14TH.  This also shows that Jesus died on the 15th, not the 14th.  This also shows that the lamb is killed on the first day of the feast of unleavened bread.  This also shows that the day that Jesus died was the HIGH DAY SABBATH.  This also shows that the following day was indeed a weekly sabbath, as these two sabbath days were side by side.  I will go into more detail in a moment.  I will also cover the preparation of the spices by the women, as well.  Again, Passover begins on the 15th, not the 14th.  The exact wording of the Day of Atonement in Leviticus 23:27-32 is the supporting evidence.


The Lamb is “killed” “BETWEEN THE EVE’S”

But when is “between the eves”?  Between the eves is the same as saying “twilight”.  Twilight begins AT SUNSET.  It is that period of time FROM sunset TO total darkness.  For short, we call this DUSK.  There is also another time FROM total darkness TO sunrise, which is also called “twilight”.  For short, we call this DAWN.

The following web site shows a calendar month with the specific times of sunset, sunrise, and the various twilight start and end times.  The start time is before sunrise, dawn.  The end time is after sunset, dusk.


Conclusion, the Lamb is prepared AND killed ON THE 15th, not the 14th.  This includes Jesus as the Passover Lamb.  The PREPARATION begins at dusk, which is after sunset of the 14th (meaning the 15th), not before, not during any daylight hours (which would be the 14th).  The lamb is killed after dusk, not during any daylight hours.  Keep that in mind.  It must be after sunset when Jesus is killed, not daylight.  Are you beginning to see now?  Everything about the death of Jesus MUST MATCH that of the actual passover lamb.  It was dark when Jesus was killed, not light.  Please keep this in mind.  It is important to this whole subject, which is explained in part four.


What is Night and Day?

Let’s, for a moment, get the notion out of our heads that a day is 24 hours, because night and day has nothing to do with “time”, but with light and dark.  Forget about hours altogether, because hours has absolutely nothing to do with Three Days and Three Nights.

Genesis 1:5
“And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night…”

If it is light outside, it is day. If it is dark outside, it is night.

Everything about the death of Jesus MUST MATCH that of the actual passover lamb.

Jesus died on Nisan 15 (see Part 2), and since Jesus died on Nisan 15, that means that the actual passover lamb was also killed on Nisan 15, not on Nisan 14 as many want you to believe.

Exodus 12:6 (This is the 15, not the 14th)
And ye shall keep it up until the fourteenth day of the same month: and the whole assembly of the congregation of Israel shall kill it in the evening.

This is at “between the eves”, or twilight.  Twilight begins “AT” sunset, which is why the word “evening” was used.  This is “dusk”.  The Strong’s Concordance confirms the word dusk.  The dictionary confirms that dusk is synonymous with the word twilight.

On the fourteenth day at sunset begins dusk of the 15th day.  Jesus was crucified on the 15th.  And, IT WAS AFTER SUNSET when Jesus was killed, too.  It was dark when Jesus was crucified, not light.

That darkness is counted, or as many use the word, “reckoned” as a night in the count of three days and three nights (Genesis 1:5).



Mark 15:25
And it was the third hour, and they crucified him.

Some claim that Jesus was crucified at 9:00 am, citing Mark 15:25, equating that crucifying means putting Jesus on the cross at 9 am.

But Jesus was not on the cross at 9 am, nor was he crucified at 9 am. Mark 15:25 states that it was the third hour, but people seem to assume that Mark was discussing the third hour of the day, which would be 9:00 am if he was, but he wasn’t.

He was discussing the third hour of the night, not the day. Darkness (NIGHT-Genesis 1:5) began at NOON. It was 3 pm, and they crucified him.

Mark 15:25 (Third hour of the night (3:00 P.M., not 9:00 A.M.))
And it was the third hour, and they crucified him.

Now, check out the following:

John 19:14-16 (The Sixth Hour of the DAY (About Noon, and he had NOT been crucified yet…”TO BE CRUCIFIED”.)
“And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified.”

Mark 15:25 cannot be the 3rd hour of the day (9 AM) because in John 19:14-16 it was noon and he hadn’t been crucified yet. At noon he was “TO BE” crucified. He had not even gotten on the cross yet, until about noon. And Jesus was crucified three hours later, the 3rd hour of DARKNESS, or, the third hour of the night.

And lastly, we must know that John was the spiritual speaker, and when John speaks of the “preparation of the Passover”, he was discussing Jesus as the Passover lamb, and not that of the actual lamb.

John 19:14
And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King!

That is discussing Jesus only.  He is the Lamb of God being prepared.  John is not discussing the preparation of the traditional Passover lamb for a meal.  He was discussing Jesus as the lamb being prepared.    John 19:14 gets many people confused about the Passover, thinking that it is Nissan 14, rather than the 15th.



Tons of people that have a problem with a Good Friday crucifixion do not even consider the darkness (noon to 3 pm) as a part of the “reckoning” of a night in the calculation of three days and three nights.

Time reckoning shows that the actual Passover lamb was killed AT about 6 pm, and Jesus was killed about 21 hours later at 3 pm. This is where the confusion comes in that Jesus ate the passover a day early. But BOTH OF THEM was killed ON Nisan 15, after sunset.

Based on the Law, days are “reckoned” as sunrise to sunset, and nights are “reckoned” as sunset to sunrise. This is in Genesis 1:5. If it is dark outside, it is night. If it is light outside, it is day. The number of hours in a day or night is completely and totally irrelevant.

Yes, Jesus did say, “are there not twelve hours in the day?”. He did say that. But lets look at how many hours of day “LIGHT” that there is during THAT TIME OF THE YEAR. Jesus could not say that during, say, November or December, as there is more hours of darkness during that time, especially if we are “reckoning” that there is 24 hours in a day.

But in the case of a literal three days and three nights, we are not discussing how many hours there is in a 24 hour day, or partial days.

Three Days and Three Nights
*Night #1. About 3:00pm Friday (PARTIAL NIGHT)
Day #1. 3:00pm (Sunrise) to Sunset Friday
Night #2. Sunset to Sunrise Saturday
Day #2. Sunrise to Sunset Saturday
Night #3. Sunset to Sunrise Sunday
**Day #3. Sunrise Sunday (PARTIAL DAY)

*Night Began at noon, by which legally ended the Feast of Unleavened Bread Sabbath.  Thus, the women had an opportunity to prepare spices before the next sunset which begins the weekly Sabbath.

**The women got to the tomb after sunrise, not when it was dark.

Notice that the timeline begins at the death of Jesus, not at the entrance of the body in the “tomb” or “grave”!!!  Likewise, the timeline ends at the moment of resurrection, not at the time of exiting the “tomb” or “grave”!!!



Matthew 27:63
Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.

Mark 8:31
And he began to teach them, that the Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again.

Out of all of the topics here, this is the most debated.  Some seem to thing that it must be 72 hours all due to the words “after three days”.

If we were to deduce that this is after the completion of 72 hours, then that would be the fourth day, not the third day.  Three Days has nothing to do with Three Days and Three Nights and neither of those has anything to do with Third Day.  Three different topics.  But the Herbert W Armstrong clan, and others, lump all of those words into the same definition, seventy two hours.

The following verses state that Jesus will rise the third day, not after the third day, meaning the fourth day:

Matthew 16:21
From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

Matthew 17:23
And they shall kill him, and the third day he shall be raised again

Matthew 20:19
And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.

Mark 9:31
For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.

Mark 10:34
And they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him: and the third day he shall rise again.

Luke 9:22
Saying, The Son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.

Luke 18:33
And they shall scourge him, and put him to death: and the third day he shall rise again.

Luke 24:7
Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

Luke 24:46
And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:


Luke 24:1
Now upon the first day of the week

Luke 24:21
But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.


Luke 24:19-20
And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.

Notice in Luke 24:21 that TODAY, being Sunday is the THIRD DAY since Jesus was crucified.  When did Jesus say that he would rise?  THE THIRD DAY.  Jesus was talking to the two on a journey to Emmaus ON THE THIRD DAY.  When did the third day begin?  At sunrise.  When does the third day end?  At sunset.

That means that Saturday was the second day, and Friday was the FIRST DAY.


I have been told that based on a Thursday crucifixion, that Friday is the first day, because Thursday cannot be counted as the first day. I was told that you cannot include the current day inclusively.  I retorted.

I used to be in the US Navy for many years.  My job in the US Navy was that of a payroll clerk.  The following is an example:

On Thursday I became entitled to hazardous duty pay, but I haven’t gotten paid yet.  Today is Sunday.  How many days worth of back pay am I entitled to?

His answer:  3

My answer:  4

All because he didn’t want to use an inclusive day, Thursday, I get shorted out one day pay.

I further told him that I was glad he were not MY pay clerk.

His response, “You should not try to understand scripture with worldly sailors logic.”  He continued to say that God has a different set of math laws than man does, which is why he referred to my logic as “worldly”.  Nice!  I always thought that math was universal, regardless of whether you believe in God or not.  His explanation was that since Thursday is not a whole complete 24 hour day, that Thursday cannot be counted inclusively.  Now, that is indeed a rule that I never heard before in all my days as a “worldly” payroll clerk.

To further explain his concept as to why we cannot include Thursday as an inclusive day, he presented me with 1 Kings 18:1, Luke 4:25, and James 5:17.

1 Kings 18:1
And it came to pass after many days, that the word of the LORD came to Elijah in the third year, saying, Go, shew thyself unto Ahab; and I will send rain upon the earth.

Luke 4:25
But I tell you of a truth, many widows were in Israel in the days of Elias, when the heaven was shut up three years and six months, when great famine was throughout all the land;

James 5:17
Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.

His objective in providing me these three references was to prove that three and one half years is more than three years, and as such, three days can be more than 72 hours, hence, after three days.  To me, that just makes absolutely no mathematical sense whatsoever.  As a payroll clerk for 17 years, I am very well aware as to how numbers are read, and the related words associated with numbers, i.e., three, third, first, last, inclusive, etc.

First of all, 1 Kings 18:1 does not say three years.  It states “IN” the THIRD year.  He forgot the word “IN”.

This also relates to topic #2 above with the words “In”, “On”, and “At”.

IN the third year is INCLUSIVE, FROM the third year beginning, TO the third year ending.  That means that three and one half years is OUTSIDE  those parameters, not inside, which proves that the references that he provided has nothing to do with each other.

In the third day is anytime within the parameters AFTER the third day begins, but BEFORE the third day ends.

The witnesses on the road to Emmaus was IN the third day, the first day of the week.  Jesus said he would rise on the third day, which would be the first day of the week, not the seventh day.  After three days means AFTER THE THIRD DAY BEGINS, BUT BEFORE IT ENDS.

Secondly, the word “after” in regards to “after three days” is Strong’s Concordance Greek reference 3326, which is defined as:

a primary preposition (often used adverbially); properly, denoting accompaniment;
“amid” (local or causal); modified variously according to the case (genitive
association, or accusative succession) with which it is joined; occupying an
intermediate position between 575 or 1537 and 1519 or 4314; less intimate than 1722
and less close than 4862):–after(-ward), X that he again, against, among, X and,
+ follow, hence, hereafter, in, of, (up-)on, + our, X and setting, since, (un-)to,
+ together, when, with (+ -out). Often used in composition, in substantially
the same relations of participation or proximity, and transfer or sequence.

We agree that the definition of “after”, in this case, is succession.  But we disagree on the definition of succession as it relates to three days in the phrase “after three days”.  He still insists that this means after seventy two hours is completed.  However, I still have scripture to prove him wrong.

The following web site best describes the above definition:


If Jesus was crucified on Thursday, then Thursday would be the FIRST DAY.  How do I prove this?

Luke 13:32
And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.

Notice the wording in the above.  TODAY is the FIRST DAY, then to morrow is the Second day, and the next day is the THIRD DAY.

TODAY, the current day,  is always counted as the FIRST DAY.

The Third Day is NOT “AFTER” the third days ENDS (that would be the FOURTH DAY), but AFTER the third DAY Begins, but BEFORE it ENDS.  SUNDAY WAS THE THIRD DAY as the witnesses proclaimed.  Friday was the first day, clearly showing that Jesus was crucified on Friday, the inclusive day.

No matter what time of the day an event takes place TODAY, TODAY IS THE FIRST DAY.

Luke 24:21
But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.

One more time:

Luke 13:32
And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.


*Night #1. About 3:00pm Friday (PARTIAL NIGHT)
Day #1. 3:00pm (Sunrise) to Sunset Friday
Night #2. Sunset to Sunrise Saturday
Day #2. Sunrise to Sunset Saturday
Night #3. Sunset to Sunrise Sunday
**Day #3. Sunrise Sunday (PARTIAL DAY)

In the above, there is three days and three nights, three days, “after” three days, and there is a first day, a second day, and a third day.  How much more do they want?  It is all there!  Remember, “after” three days is completed after the third “day” (Day #3 above) begins, not ends.  Yes, you can get three days and three nights from Good Friday to Easter Sunday.  How is it that they say that it is impossible?

Light and dark; sunset to sunrise, sunrise to sunset.  Hours is not a factor, and is totally irrelevant.  There is nothing in the Law pertaining to hours.  Everything is based on the sun setting or rising, and the new moon.  There is no looking at a wristwatch, or a clock to determine anything in any feast.  Moses was not given a Rolex.



I find it necessary to include the following in this write up, as some actually think that Jesus said that he would be in the grave for three days and three nights.  He did not say that.  This is extremely important, as some believe that the countdown of three days and three nights begin at the moment that the body of Jesus entered the tomb, rather than at the point that Jesus died on the cross.  Heart of the Earth does not equate to “tomb”, or “grave”.  It is appointed unto man once to die, and then the judgment.  Jesus took our sins upon himself.  Sin is the separation of God.  Jesus said, My God, My God, why hast thou forsaken me.  That indicates that Jesus took our sin at that point.  But sin is not judged while alive, sin is judged after death of the body, not when one is buried into the ground, or enters a tomb.

Jesus NEVER said that he would be in the “Grave” for three days and three nights.  Many seem to “covertly” use the word “Grave”, rather than the words that Jesus actually used.

Jesus actually said that he would be in the Heart of the Earth for three days and three nights.  The word heart means “core”.  Where is the core of an apple?  In the middle.  You will see that definition in the Strong’s Concordance.

Jesus was in the middle of the earth for three days and three nights.  That is not the earthly tomb.  Some believe in soul sleep, that when you die, that is the end of the story until the resurrection.  I don’t buy into that doctrine.  Yes, I know about Ecclesiastes 9:5, but that isn’t what that is interpreted as.  If you come across a dead man in the street, and you ask that dead man a question, he will not answer.  That is what that is describing.  The person is not in his body.  He is elsewhere, heaven or hell.

Some do not believe in an actual hell with demons, fire, and torment.  I do.

Note:  Read AND compare 2 Samuel 22:4-51 with Psalms 18:3-50.  They both say the same thing, except for one verse.

Then, compare the one verse:  compare 2 Samuel 22:8 with Psalm 18:7.

When that is complete, compare all this with Jonah Chapter 2.

The time frame begins, that is, counted upon the death of Jesus.  Not upon the entrance to an earthy tomb, called a grave, which Jesus never even used the word grave to begin with.  However, the word grave is a “spiritual” term of hell fire with demons and torment.  The Carnal would be an Earthly tomb.  Eternal life requires no grave.  But Jesus was going to death, in the heart of the earth, which began when he died on the cross.  Jesus had to go to the place of torment with demons and fire.  He had taken the sin of the world upon his shoulders, and that sin still needed judgement.  It is appointed unto men once to die…then after death is the judgment, not before death.  Keep that in mind.