What a tragedy! There are actually some members in the church that teach that Christians need to divorce their present mate because of having been previously involved in a divorce. Wow! This is an absolutely and pitifully deceptive teaching!\u00a0 And these sorts of doctrines need to be settled and denounced immediately, once and for all.<\/p>\n\t
So what you are saying is that it is perfectly acceptable to grant a divorce for any cause?\u00a0 You are even saying so in the face of Jesus saying that “It was not so from the beginning<\/em>” (Matthew 19:8).<\/p>\n If you make a vow to God to live with a woman as her husband and then break the vow by divorcing that woman, you have broken a covenant with God.\u00a0 If you later remarry, according to Jesus in Matthew 19, you are an adulterer.\u00a0 Adultery is the act of having sexual relations with a person to whom you are not married while being married to another.\u00a0 So, Jesus is essentially saying that if you divorce and marry another, the second marriage is not really a marriage.\u00a0 If it was a legal (in God’s eye) marriage, then Jesus would have said the person was guilty of polygamy. Instead, he said the person was guilty of adultery — meaning that God does not recognize the second marriage.\u00a0 We would say that the couple is just “shacking up”.\u00a0\u00a0 So, you would then be in a real bind, because the law of the land says you are legally married, but the law of God says that you are just living together.<\/p>\n So, if you are in a marriage that God does not recognize, how do you rectify the situation?<\/p>\n by Darrell Hamilton<\/p>\n\t I’ve always been taught that when a person refuses to let go of God’s Old<\/strong> Covenant (Matthew 19) while trying to be married to Christ and His New<\/strong> Covenant (Acts 2 – Revelation 22), they then become a spiritual adulterer (Romans 7) and that causes them to fall from Grace (Galatians 5). I really appreciate your faith. Would you be able to shoot me the answers to these questions:<\/p>\n 1. Was Jesus sent “only<\/strong>” to the lost sheep of Israel<\/strong>?<\/p>\n 2. Did Jesus say that he came to Israel to “fulfill” the Law of Moses, or to reveal New <\/b>Covenant doctrine?<\/p>\n 3. Every single word that Jesus spoke before the cross were the words of His Father, not<\/strong> His own words. Including when Jesus states, “You have heard that it was said, but I say unto you.” And over 100 times in the gospels Jesus declares that He is referring to the Law of Moses, Does Jesus ever <\/b>state that He is speaking His own words, declaring that He is now the author, revealing New <\/b>Covenant law?<\/p>\n 4. When Jesus told Nicodemus that he needed to be born again, what was Nicodemus supposed to do at that very moment?<\/p>\n 5. Was Jesus King of His New Covenant Kingdom at the time of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John before the cross?<\/p>\n 6. Was Jesus High Priest of His New Covenant Kingdom at the time of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John before the cross?<\/p>\n 7. What High Priest was mediating the ‘supposed’ new <\/b>anger Law that Jesus was instituting in Matthew 5:22 when He immediately connects this Law with the Jews, under the Law of Moses, leaving their gift at the altar?<\/p>\n 8. The immediate following Sundays after Jesus shared the last Passover with His Apostles, did His followers partake in the Lord’s Supper?<\/p>\n 9. Did Jesus posses all <\/b>authority prior to offering the Father His perfect sacrifice?<\/p>\n 10. As an O<\/strong>ld <\/b>Covenant prophet, did Jesus have the authority to enforce a New <\/b>Covenant while the Father’s Old <\/b>Covenant was still binding?<\/p>\n 11. Will the Testament of a Testator, hold up in court, if 1\/4 of his Will was revealed prior to his death, and then the remaining 3\/4 of his Will is revealed after <\/b>his death, when much of the 3\/4 contradicts their previously revealed 1\/4?<\/p>\n 12. Is the New <\/b>Covenant the Father’s Covenant or the Son’s Covenant?<\/p>\n 13. How did Paul hear of the complete New <\/b>Covenant after he became an Apostle?<\/p>\n 14. In 1486 A.D. did Johannes Pruss of Strasbourg, France, a member of the false Catholic denomination, place an unauthorized ‘New Testament’ Title Page in between the books of Malachi and Matthew? (If so, how immense have the repercussions been for 520 years ?)<\/p>\n 15. Are just some<\/strong> of the Scripture in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John (before the Cross), now binding New Covenant Law?<\/p>\n 16. Could all <\/b>Scripture in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John (before the Cross) now be considered binding New Covenant Law?<\/p>\n 17. By what rule <\/b>do you determine which Scripture in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John (before the Cross) is, or is not, binding New Covenant law?<\/p>\n\t See the lessons “Questions<\/a>” for a discussion of how people argue with questions instead of addressing issues. see Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John: Old Testament or New Testament?<\/a>\u00a0for a study on many of the issues raised. See “How Do They Do That?<\/a>” for a discussion of the techniques used for misleading people in regards to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.<\/p>\n by Jeff Hamilton<\/p>\n\t So, if I could summarize your points, what you are saying is that anything Jesus said only applies to the kingdom of God if it was either confirmed by the apostles or could be irrefutably shown to not apply to the Law of Moses. Stated another way your point would be, Jesus primarily offered commentary on the Law of Moses and only occasionally discussed what would be in the new covenant.<\/p>\n Of course, that still does not solve Matthew 19, since Jesus appealed to Genesis 2 for his rule on marriage and the law of Genesis 2 was established 2000-3000 years before Moses.<\/p>\n by Darrell Hamilton<\/p>\n\t Jesus never discussed what would be in the New <\/b>Covenant, but he did ‘prophesy’ the Lord’s Supper and the new birth. Absolutely every <\/b>word Jesus spoke before the Cross was the voice of the Father. No question. Why? Because Jesus said so, just like He said He was sent only<\/strong>\u00a0to the lost sheep of Israel.<\/p>\n I don’t understand why (one would say) the Father can’t tell the Jews (like He did) that He allowed Moses to change His original Law. That’s no big leap, or is it?<\/p>\n\t I’ve bounced back and forth between answering your questions and not answering them.\u00a0 I see little value in answering them when it is very obvious from the way the questions are stated that we are starting from two distinctly different ways of looking at who Jesus is.\u00a0 If I were to answer them, I would probably answer most of them from Isaiah or Hebrews and given the way that you split the distinction between laws given to Jews and laws given to Gentiles, I’m not at all convinced that you see either of those books as authoritative in your life.<\/p>\n I believe that\u00a0Hebrews 1:1-2\u00a0and\u00a02:1-4\u00a0explains it well enough. Heb\u00a01:3-end of the chapter elaborates on Jesus\u2019 credentials as the final Spokesman for God, establishing the fact beyond a doubt why He is the One. This then compounds the value of the next section:\u00a0“For this reason we must pay much closer attention to what we have heard, so that we do not drift away from it. For if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just penalty, how will we escape if we neglect so great a salvation? After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will<\/i>.” (Hebrews 2:1-4 NASB)<\/p>\n What was\u00a0“first spoken through the Lord<\/i>” is contrasted with the Law,\u00a0“if the word spoken through angels proved unalterable, and every transgression and disobedience received a just penalty<\/i>?”Was Jesus therefore merely commenting on the Law as He was in the process of fulfilling it, or was God speaking through Him announcing the covenant to be sealed with His death, burial, and resurrection?<\/p>\n As with the Old Testament prophecies, while they were accurate comments and statements concerning the time they were spoken, they also referred to the Christ. In the same way, Jesus was dealing with the present situation while preparing the people for the coming kingdom: “But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you”\u00a0<\/i>(Matthew 12:28).<\/p>\n by Darrell Hamilton<\/p>\n\t “But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you<\/em>” (Matthew 12:28).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Are you saying that God’s last kingdom, the church, was upon the Pharisees in Matthew 12?<\/p>\n\t What other kingdom could he be referring to?\u00a0 There are only two kingdoms of consequence in the Bible.\u00a0 One was the physical kingdom of Israel and the other was the spiritual kingdom of Christ.\u00a0 Jesus said in\u00a0John 18: 36\u00a0“My kingdom\u00a0is<\/strong>\u00a0not of this world.\u00a0 If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews.\u00a0 But now my kingdom is from another place.<\/em>“<\/p>\n Jesus used the present tense in the sentence when describing the kingdom.\u00a0 He could not have been referring to the physical kingdom of Israel because that would have been\u00a0a kingdom in this world<\/strong>.\u00a0 He could only be talking about the spiritual kingdom.<\/p>\n Rather than trying to look at the scripture and get it to say something other than what it says, you have the option of just letting it teach.\u00a0 You assume that the kingdom and the church are the same things in both place and time. However, the kingdom is spoken of in both the future and present tense in the gospels by Jesus and in the past, present and future tenses by the apostles.\u00a0 What you have to understand about the kingdom is that it has different aspects based on the audience, the time and the object of the sentence.<\/p>\n When Jesus spoke in\u00a0Mark 9:1\u00a0of some being alive to see the kingdom of God come with power and yet in John 18 he refers to it as already being there, we have to ask what changed.\u00a0 One thing that changed was the target of the statement.\u00a0 The audience in Mark 9 was the target and they were not in the kingdom yet, but would see it come in their lifetime.\u00a0 Jesus was the target of the John 18 and he is clearly affirming that he is already in the kingdom.<\/p>\n When we understand who Jesus is, it is not at all surprising that he could be in the kingdom prior to his death.\u00a0 He was the “crown prince” as it were.\u00a0 We and the Jews could not be because our sins have separated us from God.\u00a0 We can only enter the kingdom at the invitation of the only person who could enter the kingdom on merit.<\/p>\n Hence the word “church,” which in the Greek is translated from a word that means “the called out”.\u00a0 When used in its original form we are “called out” from the world (or sin) to enter into his kingdom.\u00a0 Those that are called out of the world are the “church”.<\/p>\n To those who were addressed in Mark 9, there is not much of a practical difference in the church\u00a0(who)<\/i>\u00a0and the kingdom\u00a0(where they reside)<\/i>.\u00a0 The kingdom already existed and Jesus was a part of it, however, none of us could see it or enter it until it was revealed with power.\u00a0 The church, though, could not exist until there were people who were called out of the world.\u00a0 If we can neither see nor enter it, then from our limited point of view, it is as if it did not exist.\u00a0 The kingdom was revealed at the time that the rules for entry were announced, i.e., on the day of Pentecost.<\/p>\n This also solves your conundrum with the apostles and the Lord’s Supper.\u00a0 Between the cross and Pentecost, the kingdom had not been revealed.\u00a0 The Lord’s Supper was for the members of the kingdom.\u00a0 Since no one was a member, no one had to partake.<\/p>\n To then address what seems to be your biggest concern, the gospels were all written after Jesus rose from the dead by men who were inspired by God to do so.\u00a0 Therefore, as John attests in\u00a0John 20:31, “these were written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.<\/em>”\u00a0 John here is adamantly stating that if there was something worthy of being left out (because it was just a commentary on the old covenant), that John already left it out.\u00a0 All that was left (the entire book of John in this case) was useful for understanding who the King is.<\/p>\n by Darrell Hamilton<\/p>\n\t 1. Was Jesus sent only<\/strong>\u00a0to the lost sheep of Israel<\/strong>?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n No. Although Matthew 10:6 and a few others sound like he was only concerned with the Jews, we find: “I, the LORD, have called you in righteousness; I will take hold of your hand. I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people and a light for the Gentiles, to open eyes that are blind, to free captives from prison and to release from the dungeon those who sit in darkness<\/em>” (Isaiah 42:6-7).<\/p>\n This is a prophecy about Jesus and it says that Jesus’ purpose all along was going to be to save the Gentiles also. Therefore, since the scriptures cannot lie, Jesus must have been referring to the spiritual house of Israel — which was also lost. Also, Paul said several times in Romans that he had to go to the Jews first. Just because he went to the Jews first did not mean that the game plan did not include Gentiles.<\/p>\n 2. Did Jesus say that he came to Israel to fulfill the Law of Moses, or to reveal New <\/b>Covenant doctrine?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Yes. “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished<\/em>” (Matthew 5:17-18 NIV).<\/p>\n Note though, that the fulfillment is conditional until everything is accomplished. That means that an end is coming and he knows how the end comes.<\/p>\n 3. Every single word that Jesus spoke before the cross were the words of His Father, not<\/strong> His own words. Including when Jesus states, “You have heard that it was said, but I say unto you.” And over 100 times in the gospels Jesus declares that He is referring to the Law of Moses, Does Jesus ever <\/b>state that He is speaking His own words, declaring that He is now the author, revealing New <\/b>Covenant law?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Well, I’m not going to bother to count, but given your record of accuracy on the gospels, I suspect it is less than 100 times. Although you would be perfectly correct to prove a point even if he only said it once.<\/p>\n However, there is the verse in Isaiah that is quoted above plus:<\/p>\n “This is what the LORD says: “In the time of my favor I will answer you, and in the day of salvation I will help you; I will keep you and will make you to be a covenant for the people, to restore the land and to reassign its desolate inheritances<\/em>” (Isaiah 49:8 NIV).<\/p>\n “Give ear and come to me; hear me, that your soul may live. I will make an everlasting covenant with you, my faithful love promised to David. See, I have made him a witness to the peoples, a leader and commander of the peoples. Surely you will summon nations you know not, and nations that do not know you will hasten to you, because of the LORD your God, the Holy One of Israel, for he has endowed you with splendor<\/em>” (Isaiah 55:3-5 NIV).<\/p>\n ““The time is coming,” declares the LORD, “when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them, ” declares the LORD. “This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,” declares the LORD. “I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people”<\/em>” (Jeremiah 31:31-33 NIV).<\/p>\n There are actually several more prophesies in the Old Testament that speak of Jesus coming to establish a covenant.<\/p>\n Also, Jesus himself said, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins<\/em>” (Matthew 26:28 NIV). By this he shows that he is establishing a covenant. And since he could not be reestablishing the old covenant, he must be establishing a new one.<\/p>\n “Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.”<\/em>” (John 6:68-69 NIV). Peter confirms that Jesus’ words are those of eternal life.<\/p>\n “There is a judge for the one who rejects me and does not accept my words; that very word which I spoke will condemn him at the last day<\/em>” (John 12:48 NIV). Jesus said that his words would be the standard by which all are judged. That would be a pretty petty statement to make if his words were only going to judge those from the time he spoke them here until his death. Therefore, the only logical conclusion is that all his words were binding and they would be binding forever.<\/p>\n 4. When Jesus told Nicodemus that he needed to be born again, what was Nicodemus supposed to do at that very moment?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Believe.<\/p>\n 5. Was Jesus King of His New Covenant kingdom at the time of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John before the cross?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n “and asked, “Where is the one who has been born king of the Jews? We saw his star in the east and have come to worship him”<\/em>” (Matthew 2:2 NIV).<\/p>\n “The written notice of the charge against him read: THE KING OF THE JEWS<\/em>” (Mark 15:26 NIV).<\/p>\n If he was born king and died king, then he was king all of his life.<\/p>\n 6. Was Jesus High Priest of His New Covenant Kingdom at the time of Matthew, Mark, Luke, John before the cross?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I’m not aware that he was declared high priest before his resurrection other than through the Old Testament prophets. “Although he was a son, he learned obedience from what he suffered and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him and was designated by God to be high priest in the order of Melchizedek<\/em>” (Hebrews 5:8-10 NIV).<\/p>\n 7. What High Priest was mediating the supposed new <\/b>anger Law that Jesus was instituting in Matthew 5:22 when He immediately connects this Law with the Jews, under the Law of Moses, leaving their gift at the altar?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Here I have no clue what you are asking. Are you trying to mix the particulars of the examples of everyday life in his lifetime with something we are supposed to do? And what would mediation have to do with any of it?<\/p>\n 8. The immediate following Sundays after Jesus shared the last Passover with His Apostles, did His followers partake in the Lord’s Supper?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n It is not recorded and it would be speculation on our part to assume either way.<\/p>\n 9. Did Jesus posses all<\/strong> authority prior to offering the Father His perfect sacrifice?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David’s throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the LORD Almighty will accomplish this<\/em>” (Isaiah 9:6 -7 NIV).<\/p>\n 10. As an Old <\/b>Covenant prophet, did Jesus have the authority to enforce a New <\/b>Covenant while the Father’s Old <\/b>Covenant was still binding?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n “In the case of a will, it is necessary to prove the death of the one who made it, because a will is in force only when somebody has died; it never takes effect while the one who made it is living<\/em>” (Hebrews 9:16-17 NIV).<\/p>\n “Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him<\/em>” (John 14:21 NIV).<\/p>\n 11. Will the Testament of a Testator, hold up in court, if 1\/4 of his Will was revealed prior to his death, and then the remaining 3\/4 of his Will is revealed after <\/b>his death, when much of the 3\/4 contradicts his previously revealed 1\/4?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I don’t know what this has to do with anything, but yes a will is completely enforceable even if 100% of it was revealed prior to the death of the testator. It makes a good murder mystery plot when the murderer thinks they know what the will is and then are surprised to find that the rest of the will makes what they knew of little value — or a different will was the actual one.<\/p>\n I think, though, that you are insinuating that there is some sort of contradiction between what is revealed in the gospels and what is revealed in the remainder of the New Testament. I have never found any contradiction. I have met some people who would like there to be some, but usually, it works out that they just don’t like the consequences of what it means when the passages are reconciled.<\/p>\n 12. Is the New<\/strong> Covenant the Father’s Covenant or the Son’s Covenant?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Yes. “I and the Father are one<\/em>” (John 10:30 NIV).<\/p>\n 13. How did Paul hear of the complete New<\/strong> Covenant after he became an Apostle?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n “but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit. The Spirit searches all things, even the deep things of God<\/em>” (I Corinthians 2:10 NIV).<\/p>\n “But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you<\/em>” (John 14:26 NIV).<\/p>\n 14. In 1486 A.D. did Johannes Pruss of Strasbourg, France, a member of the false Catholic denomination, place an unauthorized ‘New Testament’ Title Page in between the books of Malachi and Matthew? (If so, how immense have the repercussions been for 520 years ?)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n I did some looking on the Internet for this Pruss fellow and I found some references to a printer by that name who lived about that time. I could find no reference of him being associated with any controversy concerning the Bible. I also found a reference in a rather nicely outlined history of the Bible that said that the 27 books of the New Testament were defined in 317 AD by Athenasius. While some apostasy was already at work by then, the Catholic church really didn’t come into full bloom until about 506 AD (or was it 605?)<\/p>\n Now, it is fully possible that Pruss was the first one to add a separator page in a printed Bible, but printing was still a new thing in the 1480s. The first Bible was only printed in 1455. And since no one else seems to know or care about what Pruss did, I suspect that his added page has nothing to do with denominations being formed in the last 500 years.<\/p>\n The whole charge against Pruss is a railing accusation. (See Jude 9)<\/p>\n 15. Are just some <\/b>of the Scripture in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John (before the Cross), now binding New Covenant Law?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n “Whoever has my commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves me. He who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I too will love him and show myself to him<\/em>” (John 14:21 NIV).<\/p>\n 16. Could all <\/b>Scripture in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John (before the Cross) now be considered binding New Covenant Law?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n “If you love me, you will obey what I command<\/em>” (John 14:15 NIV)<\/p>\n 17. By what rule <\/b>do you determine which Scripture in Matthew, Mark, Luke, John (before the Cross) is, or is not, binding New Covenant Law?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n “You are my friends if you do what I command<\/em>” (John 15:14 NIV).<\/p>\n by Darrell Hamilton<\/p>\n\t What other kingdom could he be referring to?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Jesus is simply stating that His miracles were of God’s Kingdom and not Satan’s.<\/p>\n There absolutely is no such thing as a Kingdom without a King. Jesus was not ‘Resurrected’ King of His New <\/b>Covenant Kingdom in Matthew 12. Or anywhere else before the Cross.<\/p>\n When we understand who Jesus is, it is not at all surprising that he could be in the kingdom prior to his death.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Impossible!<\/strong> You need to abandon such an earthly doctrine. God’s word is not hocus pocus, it’s governed by God’s own King, Spirit, Prophet rules<\/strong>. It’s not ‘flighty’.<\/p>\n He was the “crown prince” as it were. We and the Jews could not be because our sins have separated us from God. We can only enter the kingdom at the invitation of the only person who could enter the kingdom on merit.’<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This sounds so many of the bizarre denominational teachings floating around in cyberspace, no offense.<\/p>\n This also solves your conundrum with the apostles and the Lord’s Supper.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n There is absolutely no conundrum with the Lord’s Supper. The only conundrum that occurs is when Traditionalists try to say that Jesus instituted the Lord’s Supper at the last Passover meal.<\/p>\n 10 Reasons why it was impossible <\/b>for Jesus to institute the Lord’s Supper at the last Passover meal.<\/p>\n is adamantly stating that if there was something worthy of being left out (because it was just a commentary on the old covenant), that John already left it out. All that was left (the entire book of John in this case) was useful for understanding who the King is.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Exactly! And to understand that He was only <\/b>God’s last Old Covenant prophet prior to the Cross. And to see that Jesus nailed each one of the Father’s words that He spoke to the Cross.<\/p>\n If Christ’s New <\/b>Covenant kingdom was upon Nicodemus, what was he supposed to do immediately when Jesus told him that he needed to be born of the water and Spirit?<\/p>\n\t To your 10 points:<\/p>\n Obviously, you missed the entire point of John in “Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name<\/em>” (John 20:30-31 NIV). Jesus was not just an Old Testament prophet. He was the Son of God. He was the Christ. (By the way, “Christ” means “the anointed one” and is a word generally reserved for kings).<\/p>\n You seem to be proclaiming a doctrine that is not found in the scriptures. Note that you quoted no scripture. I’ve replied by scripture.<\/p>\n by Darrell Hamilton<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Question: What a tragedy! There are actually some members in the church that teach that Christians need to divorce their present mate because of having been previously involved in a divorce. Wow! This is an absolutely and pitifully deceptive teaching!\u00a0 And these sorts of doctrines need to be settled and denounced immediately, once and for…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[20],"tags":[34,606,799,268],"class_list":["post-5790","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-answer","tag-false-teaching","tag-gospels","tag-new-testament","tag-old-testament"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":67117,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/is-matthew-5-only-for-the-jews\/","url_meta":{"origin":5790,"position":0},"title":"Is Matthew 5 only for the Jews?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"March 20, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Question: Hello, A friend of mine who is against divorce and remarriage says that Matthew 5 has a \"Jewish element,\" that is, the word \"council\" in Matthew 5:22, so it is a chapter only for Jews and not for Christians.\u00a0 What do you think about that? Thank you. Answer: This\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Answer"","block_context":{"text":"Answer","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/answer\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":56576,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/the-gospels-and-the-covenants\/","url_meta":{"origin":5790,"position":1},"title":"The Gospels and the Covenants","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"December 2, 2007","format":false,"excerpt":"by Roger Blackwelder It has been observed that the traditional divisions we use to describe the Bible are inaccurate. Genesis through Malachi are called the Old Testament or Old Covenant. Matthew through Revelation are called the New Testament or New Covenant. The titles are problematic for at least two reasons:\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Article"","block_context":{"text":"Article","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/article\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":47600,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/is-matthew-199-only-for-jews\/","url_meta":{"origin":5790,"position":2},"title":"Is Matthew 19:9 only for Jews?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"May 26, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Question: About the marriage and divorce issue in Matthew 19:9, Jesus was replying to the Jewish people. Does this mean that it does not apply to Christians but only Jews? Answer: You are missing an important implication. When laws were given to people there is an immediate audience and implied\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Answer"","block_context":{"text":"Answer","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/answer\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":8851,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/why-did-god-allow-polygamy-under-the-old-testament\/","url_meta":{"origin":5790,"position":3},"title":"Why did God allow polygamy under the Old Testament?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"March 2, 2007","format":false,"excerpt":"Question: Wondering if anyone has any materials on \"multiple marriages\" in the Old Testament? Would like to hear your views on why this was tolerated among God's people. I understand this was not God's choice, however, there is no outcry from the prophets against such. The practice of multiple wives\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Answer"","block_context":{"text":"Answer","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/answer\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":84654,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/matthew-mark-luke-and-john-old-testament-or-new-testament\/","url_meta":{"origin":5790,"position":4},"title":"Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John: Old Testament or New Testament? (Robinson)","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"February 17, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"by Garland M. Robinson If you reject the Gospel records of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (including Acts 1) being any part of the Lord's New Testament, then you have to accept the conclusion that nothing the Lord said or taught while on earth is valid for the church today.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Article"","block_context":{"text":"Article","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/article\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":37394,"url":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/is-divorce-only-allowed-during-the-engagement\/","url_meta":{"origin":5790,"position":5},"title":"Is divorce only allowed during the engagement?","author":"Jeffrey Hamilton","date":"February 27, 2013","format":false,"excerpt":"Question: Regarding\u00a0How could a woman in an adulterous marriage have the right to remarry after a divorce?\u00a0I believe there is something very important you are missing. Matthew was written to a\u00a0Jewish\u00a0readership, Mark and Luke were written for a\u00a0Gentile readership. As you know from the nativity story, Joseph was betrothed to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Answer"","block_context":{"text":"Answer","link":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/category\/answer\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5790","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5790"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5790\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5790"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5790"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lavistachurchofchrist.org\/cms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5790"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Question:<\/h2>\n
Additional Note:<\/h2>\n
Answer:<\/h2>\n
Question:<\/h2>\n
Answer:<\/h2>\n
Question:<\/h2>\n
Answer:<\/h2>\n
Additional Answer:<\/h2>\n
Question:<\/h2>\n
\n
Answer:<\/h2>\n
\n
\n
\n“The beginning of the gospel about Jesus Christ, the Son of God<\/em>” (Mark 1:1 NIV).
\n“So they set out and went from village to village, preaching the gospel and healing people everywhere<\/em>” (Luke 9:6 NIV).
\n“One day as he was teaching the people in the temple courts and preaching the gospel, the chief priests and the teachers of the law, together with the elders, came up to him<\/em>” (Luke 20:1 NIV).<\/li>\n