Should Be Saved, or Shall Be Saved? That Is The Question.

John 3:16 is probably the most well known passages in all of Scripture. It is also probably one of the most misunderstood passages in Scripture. This verse is also translated in many Bibles incorrectly because of the doctrine  "all you have to do is believe." To a certain extent, that's true. But what does it mean in the biblical sense "to believe?" I'll get to that a little bit later.

Dr. Sterns in the Complete Jewish Bible translates John 3:16 this way:

¹⁶ “For God so loved the world that he gave his only and unique Son, so that everyone who trusts in him may have eternal life, instead of being utterly destroyed.

He hits on something there that is very important for the proper understanding of the text. Many people, and even many Bible translators miss a very important detail from this verse. It's a shame because it is right there before their eyes, but people do not take the time to think about what is really being said.

 Notice the words "may have eternal life." The question I'm forced to ask is this. Is the word "May" an absolute? Probably another way of saying it is, Is the word a definite statement, or is it an indefinite statement? I mean, what if I say to a child, You may eat that lemon. Does that mean that the child automatically wants the lemon. There is a good probability that the kid doesn't even care for lemons and may not want any part of it. So, in this case, the word "May" carries with it a sense of being something indefinite. He may want it, and he may not.

I like to compare this verse from every other Bible version against the old King James Version. Not because I think the KJV is always correct. but because, in this particular instance, I find the KJV to be one of the most accurate versions when compared to the Greek.

How does the KJV interpret this verse. It says it like this:

¹⁶ For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Again, I have to ask the question. Is the phrase "should not perish" an absolute statement?  Think about this for a minute. If God says to you, "You should not eat shell fish." Is that a definite statement, or is it indefinite statement? Is it a suggestion, or is it a commandment? What if you like shell fish? You would probably eat shell fish. Now, what if God said to you, "You shall not eat shell fish." The whole focus of the idea changes. Now we can easily recognize it as a commandment. What was the difference? The difference was between the meaning of the indefinite word "should" and the definite meaning of the word "shall."

The words in the Greek are in the indefinite.  Properly translated, it should be either '"may" as in the CJB, or "should" as in the King James. Looking closely at this verse from the context – which I shall show shortly – bears this out. Think about this. If I say you, "you should not perish." Does that statement not imply that you possibly could perish, simply because I used the indefinite word should?  There is a condition at work here. The condition hinges upon the word "trust."

Comparing verse 16 with previous verse, and then with 17, you should soon see the context I'm talking about. Along with it, comes the idea that the words used here are in the indefinite state. Verse 15, from the Complete Jewish Bible reads like this:

¹⁵ so that everyone who trusts in him may have eternal life.

Notice again the indefinite word may

Then when we move on to verse 17, we see the same train of thought.

¹⁷ For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but rather so that through him, the world might be saved.

The same verse in the King James reads like this:

¹⁷ For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

Now I have to ask. Is the word "might" a definite or an indefinite word.

Suppose I said, the world through Him will be saved, or perhaps if I said, the world through Him shall be saved. These words are both in the definite case. The fact that words in these verses are actually in the indefinite implies that believing in Yeshua does not necessarily mean you shall not perish.  Hold on before you all go crazy!  It also does not mean that the world through Him will be saved – in the sense that most people believe.  Remember, James 2:19 says, You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! Are the demons going to be saved? I hardly think so.

There is a condition required here. What is that condition? Verse 18 from the CJB says:

¹⁸ Those who trust in him are not judged; those who do not trust have been judged already, in that they have not trusted in the one who is God’s only and unique Son.

I like the KJV better. It says:

¹⁸ He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

In verse 18 we have our explanation. Verse 18 moves from the indefinite to the definite.

There is a tremendous difference between believing in Yeshua, as in the sense that; Yes I believe that he was a great man, or perhaps; Yes, I believe he was a great teacher, but I cannot believe that he was God in the flesh. Those people believe that he was, but there is no trusting upon him for their salvation. In their case, they might be saved. However, first they are going to have to come to the realization of whom Yeshua really is and begin to trust in His name.

The opposite is those people who believe on Him with their whole heart. They believe that He was the Word made flesh and there is no other name under heaven by which we might be saved. Those who have thrown their complete trust upon Him, and walk in obedience to His commandments are those who shall be saved. There is no might concerning them. In their case, they will be saved.

Where do you stand? Are you in the might be saved category, or are you in the will be saved category. Are you one of those who should not perish, or are you one of those who will not perish? It's your choice. choose wisely.

Shalom,
Barry W. Gaugler

What is Heresy?

According to Webster's Twentieth Century Dictionary (Unabridged) Second Edition heresy is defined as such:

her'e-sy, n.;  1. a doctrine, opinion, or set of opinions or principles at variance with established or generally received views or doctrines, as in politics, morality, philosophy, etc.  2. in theology, a doctrine or belief that is contrary to the fundamental doctrine or creed of a particular church; especially, such a belief specifically denounced by the church and regarded as likely to cause schism.        3. the holding to such a belief  or opinion.

Would it upset you if I told you that the early communities of believers in the Jewish Messiah would look upon the vast majority of Christian communities today as heretics? That is not an easy statement for many Christians to swallow. It shakes at the core of everything they believe. However, when you compare the things Yeshua and His apostles spoke, and wrote, there is very little semblance between what they taught, and what is taught in congregations today. We have received a mushy, diluted, watered down gospel that is actually not the Gospel taught by Yeshua, or His apostles at all.

If one is willing to be honest with themselves, one would only have to do the slightest amount of prayerful research and it would become apparent that most of what Christians believe isn't supported by Scripture in its proper context. Do a careful study of Matthew 15 and Mark 7 and see what Yeshua was accusing the scribes and Pharisees of doing. He was coming down hard on them because they were judging people, and condemning them, for violating the traditions of men while at the same time totally ignoring the instructions given by Almighty God in Torah. Notice Matthew 15:3 where it says:

And He answered and said to them, “Why do you yourselves transgress the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition?  (NASB)

Then in verses 7-9 Yeshua continues with these words:

⁷ You hypocrites, rightly did Isaiah prophesy of you: ⁸ ‘This people honors Me with their lips, But their heart is far away from Me. ⁹ ‘But in vain do they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the precepts of men.’”  (NASB)

Before we continue, one needs to get this simple fact embedded into their spirit. Satan hates the words of Almighty God. He directs this hatred towards God's people who were created in His image. From the Garden of Eden forward Satan has intentionally twisted the words of the Almighty with the intention of destroying God's people. I can't express this fact strongly enough. If you miss that fact, you will miss everything. He has done this throughout all time. His working in this area was especially evident even while the apostles were still walking this earth. After they had passed from this life Satan went to work with a vengeance trying to destroy all evidence of truth about Messiah and His love for His covenant people the Hebrews.

Satan's first attack was the same tactic he used back there in the Garden with the same results in mind. He attacked the Word of God with the intention of destroying God's people (the Hebrews), and the Gentiles who had now been grafted into Israel and would follow His instructions. His favorite tool has never changed. He mixes confusion with the Word of God. It has always worked well for him. Add a word here, subtract a word there, or cloud the intended meaning by substituting a word with a vague, or completely different meaning. He works especially well in this area through translating from one language into another. Particularly from Hebrew and Aramaic into Greek and then again into English. His work is easy for an unsuspecting people lacking spiritual discernment and real knowledge of God's word. That is the reason for the pouring out of the Spirit in the last days. God is still in charge and He will defend and reveal the truth found in His word.

One of Satan's tricks was to flood the early church age with many counterfeit copies of the accounts of Yeshua. Several counterfeit gospels and epistles were circulated around the known world at that time. Many poorly written copies and forgeries of the actual Gospels and epistles of the apostles were also circulated. Then the idea was to attack the Jews and discredit them. People like Marcion even attacked the Scriptures themselves. He went as far as to formulate the false idea that there were two Gods. The cruel and rigid God of the Hebrew Scriptures, and the loving and merciful God of the Apostolic Scriptures. He coined the terms Old Testament and New Testament to support this doctrine. Many today still buy into his heresies unknowingly. There is one, and only one, God. Not two.

It was the Jewish people who carried the Good News to the world in those days. However, as time went on, Gentiles began to outnumber the Jews in the Messianic communities and anti-Semitism grew. The ancient Hebraic understanding of the Apostolic Writings, which was fully built upon and supported by the Hebrew Scriptures, was soon replaced with Western modern Greek philosophical reasoning. These new Christians were former pagans who began to mix paganism with the Hellenistic mindset and the Gospel. Heresies began cropping up everywhere and instead of the church resisting these heresies, they adopted them. Jews were looked upon as the murders of Messiah. They were hated, persecuted, and often slaughtered. The instructions which God had delivered to the Hebrews  at Mount Sinai was rejected. God's appointed times were rejected and replaced with pagan festivals. The pagan festivals were now given Christian names mixing the profane with the holy. The pagan icons were now given Christian names, and all things considered Jewish were rejected and in most cases outlawed. The church had departed from the established doctrines of Yeshua and the apostles.

The so-called church fathers in the second through the fourth centuries had established a doctrine or belief that is contrary to the fundamental doctrine delivered by Yeshua and the apostles. They had in fact a created a doctrine, opinion, or set of opinions or principles at variance with established or generally received views or doctrines of the apostles. From the time the apostles had all died out the church was now committing heresy. They had rejected the apostles doctrines in favor of the anti-Semitic doctrines of the so-called "church fathers." These heresies still continue in most of the churches to this day. Yet, many accept it them as the doctrines of Yeshua and the apostles. They are not!

The first thing that had to go was the so called Jewish commandments. They were now called "the Law." People do not like laws as they are a way of restricting one's freedom. So we now call the instructions given by God at Sinai, "Laws." The belief was introduced that these "Jewish" commandments were now changed by Yeshua even though He Himself said in Matthew 5:17-19:

¹⁷ “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. ¹⁸ For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. ¹⁹ Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (NASB)

Notice that Yeshua says, "but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Does that sound to you like Yeshua was talking about doing away with Torah? I would be curious to know how you would come to that conclusion.

Some attempt to focus upon the word "fulfill" as though Yeshua now made the instructions of God obsolete, but that is not what is being said here. What we have here is one of those examples of a weak translation using the word from the Greek and translating it into the English as fulfill. Ask yourself a question. But first, let's substitute the word "fulfill" with the word they would really like for you to be thinking. Let's substitute the word fulfill with destroy. Do you really think Yeshua was saying that He came to destroy the instructions He just said, He came not to destroy? The word for fulfill from the Greek used here means to "complete" or better yet, to "fully preach" or to "reveal the true meaning." When you have the proper interpretation the true meaning becomes clear. What Yeshua is saying here is that He came not to destroy the Torah, but to "reveal its true meaning. The question to ask yourself is this. Have heaven and earth passed away? I didn't think so. I look out my window and still see stars, the moon and the sun. I also see grass and trees. Heaven and earth are obviously still here. Therefore the Torah has not passed away either.

Here is something else to contemplate. If Yeshua had changed any part of God's Torah, He would have been a false prophet according to Deuteronomy 13. If Yeshua had changed any part of Torah He would be guilty of rebellion against YHVH (the LORD) by seducing you away from the way God had commanded us to walk. Deuteronomy 13:5 clearly says:


⁵ But that prophet or that dreamer of dreams shall be put to death, because he has counseled rebellion against the Lord your God who brought you from the land of Egypt and redeemed you from the house of slavery, to seduce you from the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk. So you shall purge the evil from among you.

If Yeshua had done away with any part of Torah, He could not possibly have been the Messiah, because the Messiah could not possibly be a false prophet according to Torah. It's long past time that we start reading our Bibles for ourselves. Yeshua has promised us that when He returned to the Father in heaven, He would send us the Comforter. He would lead us into all truth. It is imperative that we begin to get on our knees and fall upon our faces before Almighty God and ask Him for His Holy Spirit to lead us into all truth. It is His promise to reveal Himself to those who will diligently seek Him. We need to awaken to the shocking fact that we have been sitting in apostate churches since the fourth century. We have been listening to heresies passed down to us for centuries from heretics.

 It's time to get uncomfortable in the churches and start asking questions which most pastors will not be able to answer. They will not answer, either because they don't know, or because their paycheck may be in jeopardy if too many people start asking the hard questions. Remember this, there is a time, coming soon, when God will hide His people from the vicious and merciless onslaught of Satan and his people against the true believers in Messiah Yeshua. God will protect those who are truly His. However there are some requirements to receive His protection. He will not protect those who insist on remaining in the confusion of Babylon and her heresies. What are those requirements? They are found in Revelation 12:13-17. Pay very close attention to the last verse. There are the two requirements.

¹³ Now when the dragon saw that he had been cast to the earth, he persecuted the woman who gave birth to the male Child. ¹⁴ But the woman was given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness to her place, where she is nourished for a time and times and half a time, from the presence of the serpent. ¹⁵ So the serpent spewed water out of his mouth like a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away by the flood. ¹⁶ But the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed up the flood which the dragon had spewed out of his mouth. ¹⁷ And the dragon was enraged with the woman, and he went to make war with the rest of her offspring, who keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.


Shalom,
Barry W. Gaugler







   

Under the Law, or Subject To It?

Romans 3:19-31 New King James Version (NKJV)

19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, 25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law. 29 Or is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also, 30 since there is one God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith. 31 Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law.

The difference here is being under the law, as opposed to being subject to the law. I don't like the use of the word "law" as it is probably the least acceptable interpretation of the word "Torah" and the context makes it plain in these verses that Paul is not always talking about Torah, but rather the legalistic observance of the oral traditions. It is unfortunate that most English versions usually translate the Greek word "nomos" as "law" every time they see it. Unfortunately, they make no distinction between Torah, civil law, church laws, or the oral traditions by translating the vague word as "Law." It creates little light, but often generates a lot of heat. The context must define the proper interpretation of the word, not just the random understanding of the translators. Both Torah and the oral traditions are used in these verses. How do we distinguish the difference? Notice Paul says, "By what law?"

We are subject to the law [Torah] (not for salvation, but to set us apart from the ways of this world). We are not under the law [oral traditions] as the way to righteousness. To give a physical picture of this we can look to a horse and rider. When a horse is to be ridden, in the common manner, a horse is said to be "under saddle." He is not only carrying the weight of the saddle, saddle blanket, and rider, but also whatever the rider places upon his back. He must carry the full burden of all that is placed upon his back. So it is with being "under the oral traditions." In Judaism, its adherents were required to carry the full burden of the oral traditions placed upon them by the traditions of their fathers. These are the same things Yeshua/Jesus was condemning the scribes and Pharisees for doing in Matthew 15 and Mark 7. Messiah removed that burden from off our backs. We are no longer carrying the burdens placed there by the traditions and doctrines of men, which placed a hedge around Torah. It also added to the word of God, which in of itself was sin.

However, like the horse is also subject to a bit and bridle, we are subject to Torah. The bit and bridle do not weigh very much and they are carried quite easily. But on the other hand it has a powerful influence over the direction of the animal. In like manner, through the working of the Holy Spirit in our lives, keeping Torah is not burdensome. Torah is to be the bridle that sets us apart from this world and causes us to go in the direction the Almighty is directing us to go. Without Torah, we have nothing to tell us what is sin. It is our schoolmaster. Without the schoolmaster, there is nothing to teach us what God requires of us for righteous living. Without laws all you have is lawlessness.

Shalom Ahlaychem,
Barry W. Gaugler.

• Clarification: There seems to be a lot of reservation, by some, that Paul is not speaking about Torah every time the Greek word (νομος) "nomos" is used in Scripture. The main focus of the problem stems from the erroneous Christian understanding of the phrase "works of the law (Torah)" and "under the law (Torah) as is used in Romans 3:28, and elsewhere in Scripture. Some examples are as follows:
  
  Romans 3:28 American Standard Version (ASV)
  We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.
  
  Romans 3:28 Common English Bible (CEB)
  No, not at all, but through the law of faith. We consider that a person is treated as righteous by faith, apart from what is accomplished under the Law.
  
  Romans 3:28Complete Jewish Bible (CJB)
  Therefore, we hold the view that a person comes to be considered righteous by God on the ground of trusting, which has nothing to do with legalistic observance of Torah commands.
  
  I could go into a long detailed and drawn out explanation, but there is no need. Andrew Gabriel Roth gives a great explanation in His comment of Romans 3:28 in the A.E.N.T. (Aramaic English New Testament), so I will simply quote him.
  "The term "works of Torah" and "under Torah predate Paul by hundreds of years. These terms were discovered in the Dead Sea Scrolls (A Sectarian Manifesto 4QMMT:4Q394-399)while originally referring to the ultra religious halakha of the Essenes, the same principles may apply to the Pharisees' halakha. These two phrases are also mentioned in Romans 6:14,15; 9:32; 1 Corinthians 9:20; 21; Galatians2:16; :2, 5, 10, 23;4:4, 5, 21; 5:18. "Under Torah" refers to the orthodox/traditional interpretation and observance of Torah. Religious halakha is clearly NOT what Y'shua or Paul followed in their observance of Torah. The Renewed Covenant promise of Jeremiah 31:33 is to write Torah of YHWH upon the hearts of His people, not the "Torah of men."The idiomatic expression "works of Torah" provides insight to those of a "traditional" Jewish upbringing. Paul references Jews at the very beginning of this chapter; in verse 19 he states "Now we know" referring to those who understand Torah and halakha."

Shalom,
Barry W. Gaugler