Chapter 1: Redefining biblical unity

Amen. Thank you, Glenn. Okay. Unity or uniformity. Why am I doing this lesson? Well, [snorts] gosh, based on this morning’s fellowship beforehand where we’re talking about when is Shabbat and what is the name of Yeshua or Yahweh or Jesus. Th this this is an important topic and it will probably remain an important topic for a long time now. It’s not those topics that motivated this discussion. What really motivated this discussion is the unity

quote unquote unity that denominationalism has forced upon us in the past has mandated in the past depending on your background uh where you came from. Me personally, I came from as you know very conservative Christian background where uh unity was required uh and the kind of unity that was required was that I agree with their perspective on any one topic and if I didn’t or somebody else didn’t and they were not unified

regardless of whether or not the said doctrine or the said belief [snorts] was biblical or not. And many people have lost their fellowships over this issue. And some have voluntarily left their churches because of it. Others have been kicked out because they refuse to embrace a certain belief system or doctrine of of that church. So I thought we need to take a good hard look at some of the things, some of the verses

that have been used erroneously, incorrectly to support this position. If you recall last week, we looked at being a heretic and what that word meant and what it didn’t mean and we learned that it didn’t mean what we thought it meant. Well, I [clears throat] think the truth is um the same here you’ll find. So let’s jump into this and see what we can see about unity or uniformity. In much of the modern church, unity has been quietly redefined just like the word heretic.

Rather than meaning a shared submission to the authority of scripture and fidelity to the gospel that Paul preached, unity is often treated as agreement with an established theological framework, leadership structure, or some kind of denominational boundary. To disagree, to question or to re-examine the text is framed not as faithfulness but as divisiveness. That’s true of me that I was accused of being divisive simply because I suggested that we look at these things again.

In this way, unity becomes uniformity. And being of one mind is reduced to thinking the same thoughts, using the same language, and arriving at the same conclusions as those in power or authority. Paul’s appeal to the Corinthians, which we’re going to look at later on in the lesson, was not a call to intellectual conformity or institutional loyalty, but to a Christ centered alignment shaped by humility, truth, and the mind of Messiah. When unity is detached from

truth, tethered instead to enforced agreement, stops being a biblical unity and becomes a mechanism for preserving control rather than cultivating faithfulness. And this phenomenon that we’re going to look at is not limited in any way to any one religion or any one denomination. you’re going to see that it’s a part of the human condition.

Chapter 2: The human drive for control

This impulse of being unified by something other than truth did not begin with the tr the church. It’s rooted in the fallen heart of man. From the earliest pages of scripture, humanity demonstrates a tendency to replace trust in God’s word with trust in human judgment. in obedience to God with the preservation of control. In Eden, the issue was not ignorance but autonomy. And we’ve looked at that many times uh in many different lessons, subjects.

The desire then was to determine good and evil independently rather than to receive it from God. That same impulse drives the redefinition of unity. Agreement becomes safer than truth and conformity becomes preferable to submission. Let’s look at this. We can see all of what I’m talking about here in the garden. In Genesis chapter 3, we can see that the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely

die. For God knows that in the day you eat of it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil. So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, that was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate. She also gave to her husband with her, and he ate. my opening statement there. You can see everything that I wrote there in that opening statement displayed here in Genesis 3:es 4-6.

When I said that our human definition of what unity is replaces a trust in God’s word with a trust in human judgment, we we can see that in four words in Genesis 3. When the woman saw, her sight, her understanding of what the serpent was saying made it possible for her in that moment to replace her trust in the father with her own judgment, with what her own two eyes were seeing. What else can we see? There’s this thing called the preservation of control.

And for the purposes of our discussion this morning, when I use the word unity, at least initially, I’m going to be using it in its negative sense in the way that I described it as being used by denominationalism in the very first slide. So this unity that is hidden somewhere deep into the heart of the human condition has this thing where it wants to be in control. And in Eve’s case, we can see that when she took of the fruit and ate it. So she

saw she had this understanding of something that was outside of her trust in the father that then made her take action in an effort to be controlling her future. Well, what was the future she wanted to control? Well, it was desirable to make one wise. It was pleasant to the eyes. and she wanted to have control of those elements. What else? To determine good and evil independently rather than to receive it from God. And

I just talked on this in in the human heart in the in human nature. What I believe Genesis 3 is showing us really the first few chapters of Genesis is not just the quote unquote evil heart of man. We have to break down that evil a little bit. We have to try to make sense of it. And when you do that, then what you can see is that Eve and Adam, he’s not innocent in any way, shape, or form, wanted to be able to have the authority

or the independence and thus be unified in the ability to determine good and evil on their own instead of receiving it from God. It was desirable to make one wise. It was desirable to give one the kind of wisdom that they perceived that the father had and they wanted it. What else? Agreement becomes safer than truth and conformity becomes preferable to submission. Well, how is that displayed in the story?

Hava Eve gave this fruit, whatever it was, fig, apple, peach, doesn’t it doesn’t really matter. Dragon fruit, some people think, gave to her husband with her and he ate. [clears throat] Now, isn’t it interesting that nowhere in the narrative do we see Adam’s rebuttal? He didn’t say, “Whoa, wait a minute. Where’d you get that, babe? That looks an awful lot like the one thing that the father told us not to eat.”

Why? I I don’t want that. Get that away from me. Why don’t we see that in the text? It’s very simple. Agreement becomes safer than truth. Conformity becomes preferable to submission. Hava Eve is the only other human being on the planet at this time. And Adam wants to be unified with this person. And so the text simply says he ate. And so we can see this human tendency at work in the very beginning with the

father’s creation. The most damning aspect of this verse as it pertains to our topic today is this. Agreement becomes safer than truth and conformity preferable to submission. Now, here we can see it in the garden and actually you can see it all throughout scripture. But when we’re when we’re discussing institutionalized unity, that statement goes a long way. When I think about my past, when many of you think about your past and why a you

were in these groups and b why you remained in those groups and c why you didn’t ask the questions that you had your whole life in that group. The answer, at least in part, is found right there in that statement. Agreement became safer than truth. Being unified and not at odds with my pastor or my brother or my sister became more important to us than what the truth of any one matter actually was. as it’s found in script scripture and conformity

preferable to submission. Submission to what? Submission to the truth. We we wanted to be conformed. We wanted to be one. We didn’t want to be at odds. Many of us in our nature, our sinful nature are conflict avoiders. Now, I’m not one of those people. But I still am guilty of doing this in in my life where where others they wouldn’t even fathom bringing up a question that somehow challenged the perspective or

the authority or the position of a pastor or a church just doesn’t even register with them because they fear it. They fear the the conflict. So agreement becomes safer than seeking truth. So as I’m describing this, hopefully you can see that what we’re talking about here isn’t just a evil decision made by an evil church. No, this goes this is in our I hate to say it in our DNA. It’s it’s it’s almost an instinctual response to unity as we’ve described it already.

So that was Adam and Hava. What happened next?

Chapter 3: False unity at Babel

After the flood, this human disposition that we’ve been talking about surfaced again at Babel. The people were of one language and one speech. Their unity was not oriented toward Yah. It was oriented towards self-preservation, reputation, centralized power. Their unity existed, but it was unity against dispersion, against dependence, and ultimately against Yah’s command.

Scripture presents this as a false unity. One rooted in fear and ambition rather than trust and obition. Okay. Uh obedience. Okay. So there is such a thing as a false unity. Right? It’s up to us, the student of scripture, the one who is seeking with him with all of our hearts, soul, strength, and mind to determine what is false and what is true about any unity that we are a part of. In the case of Babel, we know the story.

We know what was going on. We can see all of this in Genesis 11. The whole earth had one language and one speech. Remember where we’re at in human history. This is shortly after the flood. It came to pass as they journeyed from the east that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and they dwelt there. Then they said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They had brick for stone, and they had

asphalt for mortar. And they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower whose top is in the heavens. And let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the earth.” I wanted to look at this here for a moment, something that I’ve looked at before in other lessons. But I always found it interesting that the scriptures tell us that in this point in human history, it had the humans had one language and one speech.

And and initially when reading this, I thought this was just Hebraic poetry. Hebraic poetry will often say the same thing twice in a single sentence. This is not that. There’s something more to this that they had one language and one speech. This is not redundancy in the text. What’s the difference here? Well, when we look at the difference in the Hebrew language, we can see there on the left that the word language is saf.

The literal meaning is lip, edge, border. The extended meaning linguistic system, shared vocabulary. On the right hand side though we have the word speech or dar or darim for plural. It’s literal meaning a word, a matter, a thing and the content is the message, the purpose, the intent. So what that what that really means if we were to put that in today’s vernacular in the sense of Genesis 11:1

would be that they had a common vocabulary that much is clearer but they also had a unified ally ideology that and that’s what that means here they not only had a single language they were also unified in their speech They were unified in their ideology, in their world view, and in their goals. The problem at Babel was this unified debar or intent that stood in opposition to Yah’s command in Genesis 9:1 to fill the earth. That was his command to Noah.

And what we ended up getting at Babylon was a unified ideology to reverse that command. What was the unified ideology that reversed that command? Let our let’s build ourselves a city and stay right here. Let’s make a name for ourselves. Lest what? Lest we be scattered abroad the whole face of the whole earth. Well, wait a minute. Wasn’t that the command in Genesis 9:1 where the father told Noah he wanted them to go over the whole face of the whole earth.

So here we can see the false unity that we were just speaking about happening here at Babel where the intent of their unity was to defy God and hopefully you can see that. So what’s behind it? Obviously, preservation, reputation, and centralized power. After all, you’re going to build yourself a city. You’re going to build yourself a tower. Somebody’s going to live in that tower. Someone’s going to live at the top of that tower. Someone’s going to be in charge of that city.

We know who that was in scripture, but you can tell that from the very beginning that was the intent of their unified speech preservation, reputation, centralized power. As I’m walking you through this, I hope and pray and trust that it’s not being lost on you. as to our current situation in our current religious structures be they Christian or otherwise preservation reputation centralized power. Babel was ideological ideological unity that suppressed divine authority.

The linguistic sameness plus the ideological shameness historically only produces one thing. A centralized power and a collective rebellion. centralized power, as I said, because one person ultimately ends up determining the ideology in a collective rebellion because at some point the people willingly embrace that determined ideology, that determined doctrine, that detered determined religion, whatever it is, plug it in and and we can see it as far back as the book of Genesis.

At Babel, humanity’s dvar, remember what that was? That was the intent, rose upward. It was a declaration against the father, a self-generated word formed by collective ambition that sought to establish their identity, their security and their permanence apart from the submission to God. It was a cry to the heavens. This devar this intent at Sinai we see it is coming down at Sinai God’s intent his devoir descended downward and revealed a word or instruction

issuing from his authority establishing covenant order identity and purpose through obedience to his command. Why am I showing you these two things? On one hand, you have a people unified falsely raising up their intent to the father at Mount Si. You can see him giving his intent to the people and that was what he wanted them to be unified on. One is a false unification and what the other one is not. So when Israel or a unified majority within Israel acted together with

coordination and agreement in opposition to Yah’s word when when did this happen? these these u human conditions that I’ve spent some time showing you from the garden and from Babel. The question arises, did it continue? Did it continue on through man’s history? And of course it did. And that’s why I asked this question. When

Chapter 4: History of false unity

can we see Israel or unified majority of Israel acting together with this false unity in coordination and agreement in opposition to God’s word? Well, gosh, everywhere started with the golden calf, a unified worship against God immediately after Sinai. I mean immediately. Their refusal to enter the land. That was a unified fear and a rebellion at Kadesh Barnea. Korah’s rebellion was a unified challenge to God’s appointed authority on earth, that being Moses.

What about the demand for a king so that they could be quote unquote like the nations? That was a false unified rejection of Yah’s kingship in their life. What about Saul? and the people preserving what the father had forbade. Remember that when the father said kill everything that breathes and they didn’t. There was this unified disobedience and Saul tried to excuse it away as worship. What about the breach of Jeroboam? Often called Jo Jeroboam’s institutional idolatry was

a unified state religion. Remember he he was the one the king that invented his own festivals, his own feasts. He was the one who erected high places so that the people of the land didn’t have to travel so far for their festivals, for their pilgrimage festivals. They could just stop off at one of these high places that he created. What about Judah constantly rejecting the prophets?

a unified resistance to correction. And of course, we have the unified religious establishment, the leadership of Israel in Judaism that collectively and in false unity rejected the Messiah. So again, showing you all of this to drive the point home that this isn’t just a problem with any one church or anyone denomination or anyone religion. It’s a problem with the heart, with the human heart.

And there is a solution to it. Just off the top of my heart here as I go into this next slide, I happen to know for a fact that within my little group here, if you want to call it my little group, our little finding the ancient path group, there are people who are determined to use the name Yahweh. There are people who are determined to use the name Yehovah. There are people who are determined to use the word Yahweh.

There are people who are determined to say yes Yahusha or Yahosua or Yeshua. There are some people who are not on the Yviv calendar. There are some people who are on the Zadok calendar. I know this to be true. But you will never ever hear me as the quote teacher or leader of this group try to get those people to line up with Ed Doss. I just won’t do

1. And and there’s going to be a reason and I’ve explained this reason many times to uh at least our our group, our members in our videos. I’m not the standard and I am certainly no arbiter of truth and neither is Glenn number two or David. We are not and nor do we claim to be. We are seekers. We are searchers. And if I try to force you to say yehovah or if I try to force you to embrace Abib and then someday we learn from Yeshua that I was wrong. [laughter]

I told you I never want to be in that position again in my life. When I realized for the first time that the law of God was never abolished, that so humbled me that at that moment in my life, I determined that I would no longer not ever again be so dogmatic in my belief. So what’s the solution?

Chapter 5: Yeshua’s definition of unity

How should we understand unity in the New Testament? Well, it starts here. First and foremost, biblical unity is inseparable from truth. Scripture consistently presents unity as something that exists only within truth and never apart from it. What does that mean? That means you can only have a true unity in the truest sense of the word within the context of biblical truth. Anything outside of that is fake unity. It’s a it’s an impostor.

John 17, one of the verses that so many in the Christian body uh want to turn to uh to get people in line with their doctrines. Let’s look at it. Yeshua speaking, I have revealed your name to the men whom you have given me out of the world. They were yours and you gave them to me and they have kept your word. Now they have known that all things which you have given me are from you. For I have

given to them the words which you have given me and they have received them known surely that I came forth from you and have believed that you sent me. I I pray for them. I don’t pray for the world but for those whom you’ve given me for they are yours and all mine are yours and yours are mine and I am glorified in them. Now I am no longer in the world but these are in the world and I come to you holy father keep through

your name those whom you have given me that they may be one as we are that they may be one as we are one. So Yeshua prays that we may be one as he and the father are one. So I asked the question, how did Yeshua define this oneness, this unity between he and the father? Well, he does it in several places, but in the context of this verse, he tells us right there, “For I have given to them the words which you have given to me, and they

have received them, and they surely know that I came forth from you, and that they believed that I came forth from you.” So how did Yeshua define this unity? He defined the unity by flat out making the statement that everything that Yeshua teaches and everything that comes from his mouth has come from the father. His words and the fathers are the same given to Yeshua from Yah and Yeshua was sent by Yah. That’s the one thing that they came to agreement on

in their belief and that’s how Yeshua defined this oneness. He says in else in other places John five Jesus answered and said to them most assuredly I say to you the son can do nothing of himself but what he sees the father do for whatever he does the son also does unlike manner. John 10. And boy howdy are we going to look at this one. If I do not do the works of my father, do not believe me.

But if I do, though you do not believe in me, believe the works that you may know and believe that the father is in me and I and in him. Let’s camp out on this for just a little bit, shall we? It’s a little bit of a rabbit hole, but I couldn’t resist, so forgive me. Bear with me. This is the one and only place in all of scripture where Yeshua challenges the reader or the hearer to quote not believe him. The only place in all of scripture I I found that to be amazing.

But there it is. Yeshua lays out a challenge to not believe him. Well, what were the conditions of this challenge? If I do not do the works of my father, don’t believe me. Well, where are the works of the father recorded? I would normally say Glenn number two, but he’s not with me here this morning. [laughter] Where are the works of the father recorded? Well, we know the answer to that question. They’re recorded in the Hebrew scriptures, the Old Testament. Unity.

Remember how often I have told you that in your Bible study everything has to be unified. If there is something that is see appears to be disunified with something else in scripture there’s something you’re missing. If you could just hold on to that you would it would help you understand so much more of your Bible. Yeshua says, “If I don’t do the works of my father,” and those works are recorded in the Hebrew scriptures in the Old Testament,

then don’t believe me. And of course, we did this lesson, right, some months ago that Yeshua, Jesus, taught nothing but Torah in the Old Testament, which just verifies this verse in John 10. Well, what does this mean? If you believe that Yeshua somehow broke the Sabbath, which so many people in the Christian church do, you should not be believing in him. Right? According to John 10, if you believe that Yeshua declared all foods clean, and so many people in the

Christian church do, you should not be believing in him, right? If you believe that Yeshua died to free you from lawful obedience, you should not be believing in him according to his own words. If I do not do the works of my father, which are already recorded for you to read, do not believe me. If Yeshua broke the Sabbath, he’s not doing the works of the father. If Yeshua taught that bacon was okay, he’s not doing the work of the father.

If Yeshua says he he came along to free you from the law, he’s not doing the work of the father. Therefore, do not believe him and you still do. This is his challenge and this is his challenge to us. Again, I told you side note, but I felt like I couldn’t not go there. So, we end up here looking at Paul’s uniformity verses, and we’re going to see them for first

Chapter 6: Paul’s teaching on unity

Corinthians, but I wanted to read this first. By the time Paul addresses the church in Corinth, this same human tendency that we’ve been talking about all morning is repeating itself in these young assemblies. Factions are forming around personalities, teachers, and there’s preferred interpretations. And Paul’s appeal to unity is absolutely necessary precisely because the human heart gravitates towards group identity and loyalty rather than humility and truth.

When this goes too long, seeing no repentance, the heart is ultimately drawn away to peace through sameness and security through agreement, even if it requires suppressing scripture itself. So let’s look at this verse in 1 Corinthians 1. This is the verse that David shared a couple weeks ago or last week maybe where it was used against him. David wanted to talk about biblical things. They didn’t. And they used this verse. Now I plead with you, brethren,

by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind, in the same judgment. What’s going on here? Well, first it’s inform it’s very unfortunate that many churches of all different flavors, I’m not picking on any one group here have hijacked this verse as a tool of control by redefining what this phrase speak the same thing means

to them. It’s an agreement with their institutional doctrine. It’s an agreement with their leadership interpretation. It’s a agreement with their denominational authority. And unfortunately, that’s happened. Unfortunately, too many people have done that with this verse. The question remains, is Paul saying that we should all speak the same thing, I.e. our doctrines, our beliefs, our interpretations, they should all be the same. Is that what Paul is saying?

How can we know for a fact without even going much further that that’s not what Paul is saying? Well, we know because we’re students of scripture that Paul is already on record as saying there must be factions among you. There must be differences. There must be differences of interpretation. There must be differences of beliefs. Why? So the Holy Spirit can use us to reveal what’s true and what’s not true.

So if that’s Paul’s position already, then we know for a fact that he can’t be saying here in 1 Corinthians 1 that all of our doctrines, beliefs, and interpretations need to be exact. And that’s what the church does. If you don’t see things the way they do, you’re an outsider. And if it goes too long, you’re kicked out. You’re removed. You face church discipline. But that’s not what Paul’s saying.

Not at all. He’s not saying those things at all. What does speak the same thing mean? Well, in the Greek, speak the same thing really means more have a uniform testimony instead of actually verbalizing speaking the same thing. Because if we don’t figure that out, then what we think we’re seeing here in 1 Corinthians 1 is a repeat of Babel where they all spoke the same thing [laughter] and they didn’t do it right. Is that what Paul’s saying? No.

Paul is saying that we need to have a uniform testimony. Well, what testimony? Well, if you read the chapter, then you know that in verse six, he tells us what the testimony is. The testimony of Christ. So, what could that mean? This is Paul’s appeal for a shared objective confession in the proclamation of who Messiah is and what he came to do. not an agreement on your personalities, your philosophies, or your secondary judgments.

He’s saying he wants you to be agreed, unified on the testimony of Christ. Remember, there has to be factions among you. Those are fine as long as they’re not destructive factions, which we talked about last week, because there can be some destructive factions. But Paul is saying in 1 Corinthians 1:10, the the speech, the same thing that you should be speaking is not I follow Paul, I follow Apollos, which he goes on later to say.

The one thing that we should all be unified on is the testimony of Christ. And that’s why he says in the very next chapter, I determined to know nothing about you except Christ and him crucified. That’s the testimony. That’s the same thing that we should be speaking. If you’re a church leader or a church member or an elder and you’re using this verse to kick out your people, you’re flat out in sin

and you have misinterpreted Paul because you yourself are not a student of scripture. So, let’s finish this up. Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 2, that single statement alone dismantles uniformity at its root. Paul does not anchor unity and shared opinions, preferred teachers, polished systems, or agreed upon conclusions. He anchors it in a single non-negotiable reality. Christ crucified.

Everything else is exposed as secondary and anything that demands agreement beyond that center has already moved past biblical unity. When unity is redefined as agreement with us or it inevitably expands beyond Christ crucified and begins to police thought, that’s that’s where we’re at. Policing thought, policing language and policing inquiry. Did you hear that brother so and so actually asked about A, B, and C? Paul refuses to build that kind of structure.

He narrows the center so radically that unity can only exist where humility, dependence, and submission to God’s work in Messiah actually remain intact. The moment unity requires more than Christ crucified, 1 Corinthians 2:2, it ceases to be unity and becomes uniformity. And scripture shows that kind of agreement does not preserve the faith. It replaces it. And that’s exactly what it’s done. Uniformity has replaced faith.

Now, my last image here, as you may have noticed, is this rope that is no longer fraying. It’s no longer about to snap.

Chapter 7: Unity as a collective rope

And there [clears throat and cough] was an astute member of our group, Michael Booth, who who realized where I was going with this. The word for wait [snorts] in the Hebrew is kaba. and its lexical sense is to wait, to hope, to expect, to look eagerly, to bind together. This verb of off often conveys active expectant waiting, not passive delay. It carries the idea of tension or stretching forward in hope. Tension.

stretching forward in hope like several singular strands that collectively twist together to make a single rope. Look at the image. That’s not just a single strand. That’s multiple. That’s two, I think, in this particular rope. But my other ropes, they’re many. And these singular strands are stretched together. and we’re stretched together in hope to become a single strand. And in doing that, we wait together with our godly factions, if you will.

And that’s true unity. It’s not forced uniformity. And that is my discussion. And now it’s time for you to share your thoughts and your insights and your rebuttals and your rebukes. I take them all. I welcome them all as you know. So, Brother Springfield has his hand up first. Let’s let him go first. Go ahead, Glenn. Good morning, everybody. Shabbat shalom.

Chapter 8: Community discussion

I have a few comments. Um, whenever you’re talking about the Garden of Eden and Eve’s sin, it reminds me of First John 2:16. It says, “For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. It’s not from the father, but it’s from the world.” Well, that matches exactly what Eve was dealing with. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes. He It looks

good. It tastes good. it’s going to make me smart. Um, and so anyway, I I thought it’s interesting that that was addressed. Um, now you take the scripture that talks about there must be factions among us a little different than I do. Um, I think that what what Paul is saying is that there must be factions so that people can show themselves approved. which means their decisions about the factions uh is what they’re going to be judged on. So, it’s a point of judgment. It’s

not that okay, it’s okay for everybody to have different opinions on what the word says because it’s not. But the factions that you choose is something that God uses to approve you or disapprove of you. So, I want to throw that in there. And um you know the we have to recognize that God doesn’t want to take all the all the Protestant churches, the Catholic churches, the he’s not trying to fix churches. Uh if

they’re a false church, they’re a false church and they’re not going to be fixed. God doesn’t want to fix them. He’s going to bring the kingdom of God that’s going to wipe them out and is going to eliminate uh false churches. Uh and yet, you know, we most of us were exposed to just the whole concept of God through a false church. And so, we have emotional ties and good feelings. Uh, but if it’s an anti-nomeian church,

which means lawless, then Matthew 7 says that God’s going to talk to talk to them and say, “I never knew you.” So that’s just a fact. He never knew them. Even though they cast out demons in his name, even though they healed in his name, he’s going to say, “I never knew you.” That’s all I got for today. Thank you, brother, as always. Appreciate your wisdom, your insights. Okay. I think uh let’s see. I think the Lykan clan was up next. So jump in there, guys.

Okay. Hey, Ed. Thank you. Um hey, I have so I have a question on John 10:37. Uh if I’m not doing the works of my father, then don’t believe me. And I wanted to get yours uh andor uh the group’s uh thought on this. Preceding that, you know, Jesus is doing a lot of work, so to speak, miracles, turning water to wine, healing at the pool, feeding the 5000, walking on water, heals the blind man. And in verse 31, [snorts]

uh the Jews picked up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, “I have shown you many good works from the father.” So my question is when you go to verse 37 and in the context I think you used it was that was a test that if he was not obeying the law then do not believe him. What would you say to the question that someone would say um I think the works he was doing was not of of the father was not obeying the law. is the miracles and those were the

works of the father rather than obeying Torah. Okay. Amen. Well, listen, I have my thoughts on that, but I don’t want this to be the Ed Dah show. So, uh if anyone else wants to address that uh question first, I’d be happy to let you do that. Any anybody else any Let me go back to gallery view where I can see your faces. just wave at me if uh if you wanted to address that question. Well, I I my opinion is that it’s neither. What

what he came to do was to announce the coming kingdom of God, the gospel of the kingdom. He came to preach the gospel of the kingdom and and that’s what he did. Now, how did he how did uh the father get people’s attention? We got got people’s attention through miracles. Uh mighty, awesome, undeniable miracles from God. That got the attention. But the message, everything that Christ taught was about the coming kingdom of God. That’s my answer. Okay. Amen. Anybody else?

I’ll speak to that, brother Ed, if you don’t mind. Oh, glory to Samuel. But as long as we can see your face. Oh, here we go. Oh, [laughter] all right. out of respect for you um brother Dawson since this assembly is is placed within your stewardship. Um so so so works encompass a a number of things in terms of what we do with respect to each other. Um how we behave with respect to those who are outside the covenant to whom we are to be a light to. And then you have

within that these things of signs and wonders and they all serve a purpose. The purpose of the signs and wonders is more or less the seal of approval from the most high that this is indeed a prophet or an apostle ackum that has been established by the father for the purposes of promoting the gospel the kingdom work. I think the confusion comes in in terms of whether or not these things necessarily import that someone is

approved and that’s not the case. It’s it’s a conjunctive thing. It has to be the Torah is upheld. The Torah is guarded, reaffirmed, and you get the signs and wonders. That’s how you establish that someone is truly a prophet or an apostle of the most high. So all the things that Messiah performed, all the things that the apostles performed in the in the in the Brit as opposed to the the renewed um covenant, all the the the signs and wonders that you see from Elijah and

Elisha, those things were done or provided to glorify the most high and to be a sign to the people. Otherwise, what purpose does Moshe really serve in terms of leading the children of Israel out of Misraim and into the wilderness in preparation for going into the promised land? What purpose does it serve for uh Yahosua, Joshua, to do those things that he did in preparation into moving into the land of promise after he took the

mantleship of leadership from Moshe? So those things are fundamental in order to establish who is whom. Now in and of themselves, signs and wonders can also be from other Elohim, other entities outside of the most high. They’re quite well possible to do. They can do that. And we see that within within scripture because we see what happened with the witch of Endor being able to bring forth what Saul um looked upon as being um Samuel.

But again, that in and of itself is not the clear indication. That is not the clear work saying that this is indeed of of Yahovah the most high. It has to be the upholding of Torah and it has to be the works and the the the signs and wonders that establishes who is a prophet and who is an apostle. So when you see people out there who carry these titles of prophet or prophetess or

apostle meaning that they receive direct direct commission from the father. If they’re not showing the signs and wonders and upholding the Torah, you know they’re false. You know that they’re false. So, it’s not the essential piece of it. It’s it’s in tandem with guarding the Torah and the correct division of the word and the fruits that those things bear with respect to um their lives and their interaction with those who are supposed

to be led by the Ruaka Cadesh which is the Holy Spirit. Thank you, brother Samuel and Glenn. Okay, let me give you my two cents on Ry’s question. Um, first and foremost, Randy, you have to consider the source of the question, you will find that when you’re talking to church people, more often than not, that everything in their mind and everything in their heart wants to somehow separate Yeshua from the Old Testament.

That’s that’s what’s behind the question. That’s what’s behind the belief system in the in in the Christian mind by and large because of the things that we’ve been taught for so many years, literally thousands. Yeshua stands separate from the Old Testament and everything that he’s doing is somehow new and somehow different and somehow better than what we’ve seen in the Old Testament. That’s what’s behind that person’s rebuttal that it’s got nothing to do with the Old

Testament. It’s got everything to do with Yeshua’s miracles and all all that kind of stuff. So you have to understand that first and foremost and that’s why I taught the lesson that I taught that Yeshua taught nothing but Torah and the Old Testament. The second thing I would say is this. There was a prophecy that I believe Samuel was alluded to [clears throat] from Deuteronomy 18.

And what does Deuteronomy 18 says? I am going to send a prophet like you Moses Moshe to speak to the people. And what does he say? I am going to put my words in his mouth. He shall speak them in my name. So when he said what he said in John 10 was basically reaffirming the prophecy about him from Deuteronomy 18. He is speaking the father’s words and the father does not change.

So it’s it’s almost a logical thing. It’s almost one of those things where you got to sit down and go, “Huh, okay, now I’m starting to put these pieces together that Yeshua is this prophet that the father said he would send to speak things in that I have taught him, that I have said, and he does it in my name.” An interesting little note here for you regarding the miracles, Randy, is every public miracle was done as a um intentional rebuke of Judaism’s beliefs.

All of them public miracles were done to challenge the authority because everything that he did in these miracles challenged the agreed upon the unifi falsely unified belief system that Judaism had set up. So that’s why he was doing those public miracles. The ones that he didn’t do that were not public like walking on the water weren’t done to uh rebuke the people of Israel so much as to prove his identity. I think it’s in Jeremiah.

It might be in Jeremiah. It might be a psalm. You guys can can confirm this on your own. One of those two places. It says that only God walks on water. So when Yeshua walks out on water to his guys, he was making a statement. Anyways, we’ve gone too long on that question. Thank you, Randy. I hope if it doesn’t answer that question, please reach out to me and I’ll do a better job. Uh let’s see. Brother Bear Supernaw was next.

I uh I’ll spare you I’ll spare you all the minutiae of our journey, but basically we’ve been seeking the truth for about nine years now. And uh our path has been very similar to what you all have experienced. I have found it’s uncanny. So uh but we’re here just to learn and also we are seeking a fellowship because we’ve been without a fellowship for about a year now. So uh we’re tickled to be here. Love your teachings, Ed. And Shabbat shalom, everyone.

Amen. Thank you, Bear. Appreciate you, man. Glad to have you. Really are. Uh let’s see. Brother Allen in Alabama, you’re up next. Uh thank you. Um I just wanted to respond um to Brett and as he was speaking um Matthew 7 uh verse 22 I think uh shows that miracles maybe not necessarily prove that you’re aligned with the father as they said they asked did we not cast out demons in your name? Did we not heal the sick? Uh, but they were still rejected for for lawlessness.

Um, so that was it. I just wanted to respond and thank you very much. Amen, brother. Luke, looks like Luke’s wearing another one of my shirts, too. Yes, I am. Um, Shabbat shalom, Ed. Uh, Shabbat shalom, Mishbak. Um I you know you you brought up Jeroboam and I was in a back and forth with the pastor of my church [snorts] which is Church of God 7th Day uh not Seventh Day Adventist [snorts] and they keep the food laws and you know

they they keep the Sabbath but that’s where it stops. And they gave me this book. I don’t know if that’s going to read frontwards or backwards, but it’s the covenant of God. And it starts off by basically saying that all the covenants that that the covenant of the Mosaic covenant was done away with pretty much. And I’m like, and you know, it’s a it’s a 80 90 page book. Uh actually 146 pages. And I shredded this thing. And I I actually we were texting back and

forth because I had stopped going for a couple of months and I actually called him Jeroboam [laughter] in one of our texts. I said, “Then you for there are Jeroboam.” And he he this is a guy who with great humility, he never asked me to leave the church. He never asked me to disassociate myself in any way. I mean, he’s he’s definitely willing to engage and but he just he he just couldn’t get

past the doctrine of the church. And he he loves to call them the principles of God. And I’m like, well, what’s the difference between a principle and a law? Doesn’t law supposed to establish a principle? you know. Anyway, um this was a phenomenal teaching, but if anybody could give me a little bit of help on differentiating between the principles of God and the laws of God so I could make a better argument cuz I it kind of befuddled me. I’m like, principles,

laws, they’re pretty much the same thing. And he just he couldn’t get past it. and we’re still on very good speaking terms. Um, but that line of communication has since ended. Um, but yeah, Ed, this was just a phenomenal phenomenal teaching and I I can’t thank you enough and uh, thank you. God bless. Hey, man, Luke, as always, appreciate your insights and your thoughts, man. Um, okay, Samuel, you’re up.

All right. Shabbat shalom. Let me um let me address brother Luke’s question first. Um I think there there’s some misconceptions or problems when we’re talking about the instructions and the underlying principles of those instructions. They’re not separated. They’re one and the same. They’re together. And I’m not saying this for the purpose of argument. This is not something to argue. This is simply for your edification. And if you wish to deepen

your walk and it just happens that it it um shines a light within your mind to the to the structure of our covenant obligations to walk within the father’s instructions, that’s fine. And if you share it going forward with with with that friend and others, then then feel free to do so as long as it’s producing fruit within your life.

So when we talk about when we talk about the principles, we’re talking about the spirit of the Torah. And I’ve given this example and I’ll give it here. In in Torah, there is a specific construction with respect to to oxen or um a class a class of animals that are uh husbanded by by by people who have farms such as ox, bulls, dealing with the the the the proper possession of such animals. So if you have an ox and that ox gores another individual

then you are responsible for the harm that is caused to that individual. If you know that that animal gores individuals there’s a history of goring and you fail to take that animal and properly um restrain it and it does it again there’s additional penalties that fall upon you. is a sin. Right now, in a modern context, most of us aren’t on farms. Most of us live within cities and we don’t have oxen. We don’t have bulls that we’re keeping, but we have other

animals. You may have a dog. It may be a pet or it may even be a guard dog. If it’s an aggressive animal and you know that it can bite someone and it has a history of biting someone is not an ox but the principle of Torah, the instruction carries over to that. So if that dog gets loose and it bites a guest of yours or is running wild outside and it bites someone, that responsibility, that liability and accountability falls

on you. No, it’s not an ox, but the principle of Torah, that instruction still carries forward. I think for us now within a modern context is we think that, you know, a lot of the the instructions within Torah are suspended. That’s true for some things. That’s not true of everything. So the real question is what are the instructions and thinking those things those things through with clarity and with the help of the rock understanding what applies

to us within this modern context. That’s what’s essential. So you’re not separating the principles of of the father from the actual instructions. Those those literal instructions are very important. But that doesn’t mean that they’re divorced from the underlying principles and that you can just conveniently say we don’t have to do that anymore. We just take the principle and we move forward with that.

To me, that’s absolute nonsense. And this is where the wisdom which only comes from the ru and our love for the father that helps us navigate these things and we’re able to take those things and apply them properly. Now, with respect to the to the topic um at hand, wonderful teaching um uh brother Doss, I love it. And and when I think of of of unity, especially now at this stage, because we’re still working through the correct um dividing of the word. We don’t have

it all together. Some of us are a little more advanced than others. It’s true. But there are certain things that we really don’t have clarity on. That’s not a mistake because even when the children of Israel had clear understanding of what was being spoken to like what it means not to boil a kid within his mother’s milk and other similar things that you know just reading the English may befuddle us. They still disobeyed. They still

didn’t walk righteously in infidelity to the covenant. So really the idea is that we’re going through this journey subjected on two major principles and this is what I shared at the at the last Shabbat. The first principle is that Yeshua Hamashiach is confessed as our king as our master and we’re fully submitted to him within a covenant relationship. And that is what ties us in to the father. And then number two, that by virtue of that, that the

instructions that were given throughout the entire without throughout the entire brick, what we call the Old Testament, 1 hour, 12 minutes are valid, are standing, and something to be upheld. On those two principles, everything else hangs. And we are sharpening each other. We’re walking in disciplehip with each other. We’re fellowshipping in order to have the ruach

given to us to provide us greater and greater clarity and understanding. So it’s about where is your heart? Is your heart about just doing what you want to do and thinking that you’re going to get rewarded with the trip to heaven when you close your eyes and you lose the breath of life that the father gave you? or are you really concerned about doing what’s pleasing in the sight of the father and the son, walking in

righteousness and seeking his face? The rest is us walking together, giving each other understanding, building each other up as living stones. as living stones in this whole edifice of the true temple, the people, Israel, us. At a certain point, we are going to come into the full knowledge. Until then, we are working under the mercy of the most high, but our intentions have to be clear to honor the covenant. And part of that

covenant is following through on that cuba, which are the instructions that are for our benefit because they’re there to transform us into the likeness of Messiah. That’s what they’re there for. Not as just some background noise and as proof that we couldn’t hold the Torah and therefore was done away with and Messiah came and did away with all that because everything is made to us, given to us by grace. That’s nonsense. Those instructions are there for an express

purpose, for transformation. That’s all I have to share. Thank you. Shabbat shalom. Amen. And I This is the reason why guys I I believe the father is teaching us on unity because Samuel sees things from a different angle than I do. Blend number two sees things from a different angle that I do. And individually, we’re not going to make the necessary points that we have to make. Collectively, we can. And that’s what I think that’s

so amazing about what the father is trying to teach us here about what true unity is. Okay. So, let’s see. Samuel, you’ve got a question that was directed to you directly in chat. You can answer that while we listen to Carson and Ellie. Hey guys, I had a question um referring to the common um testimony regarding Christ and his coming and how that is the one thing that we’re supposed to be actually unified on with that as we try in our lives to live

out the Torah, hopefully share that with other people that are in our lives. That is kind of just one thing that I was considering. How are we supposed to like we share that common belief even with the modern day church where they would say they believe that Jesus came and died on the cross and we’re covered in grace. How do we navigate that where we can share the Torah under that unified belief but it’s kind of it seems like it’s two worlds apart.

That is fantastic question, Carson. And really, the best way I can answer that is to tell you to watch my my three-hour video on Jacob to Jesus. [laughter] Be because of this. you you you hear someone like me make the point that we’re supposed to be unified on this one issue being Christ crucified. And yes, that’s true. However, until I became aware of why Yeshua died

in the first place, I realized at that moment that this new understanding was not unified with my old understanding of the cross. In the Christian world, yes, they believe that Christ was crucified and and died for our sins, but they have no understanding of why he had to die, why death was an important part of of that event. And so, in that sense, we’re not completely unified. We’re unified in the fact that he was that he died and was resurrected for the sins of the world.

Yes. So what’s the ultimate answer to your question? How how can you be unified with the Christian church under those terms? You can’t. And it’s not because you don’t want to. It’s because they won’t let you. Because as soon as your uh explanation 1 hour, 17 minutes of why Yeshua had to die gets thrown into the mix, that shines light on your Torah observance. And in the Christian mind, as Randy has already alluded to in his question, it just doesn’t jive. So in

our hearts, we want to be unified with these people based on that fact. But they won’t let you be unified as long as you bring the Old Testament with you into the argument because in their mind, the two don’t blend and can’t blend. So, and I hope that answers your question. Uh because we’re running low on time, I’m going to leave it at that. Follow up with me if you need to, brother Carson, in an email. And let’s move on to Andrew Anna Gee.

Shabbat shalom, everyone. Um yeah, I I wanted to uh thank you, Ed, last week uh for the fact that this ministry allows us to still uh have some fellowship on days like last week where the weather was not permitting and like this week where uh unfortunately my wife um she got up out of the chair in some weird way and it it uh messed up something in her hip so we couldn’t uh couldn’t make it out to our fellowship today. Um couple of things. So with with Carson’s

um question, I think one good tactic you can probably use is to ask them to define sin because we agree that uh Christ was crucified uh for our sins. And when you get them to define what sin is, what you know, what exactly did he die for? Um, their argument, their position starts to crumble. Um, also Samuel, I wanted to thank you for bringing up um this thing that constantly comes up, which is uh and and I know this was addressed in a previous teaching about um

uh is it a salvation issue? And I’m so tired of hearing that because [clears throat] ultimately it reveals that all they’re concerned about is their ticket to heaven. And while it’s perfectly human to be uh concerned about where we’re going to end up after we die, that shouldn’t be our primary motivation. Um if we love God with all our heart, soul, strength and mind and uh uh if you love God, you keep his commandments, then you know if it pleases him, that’s that should be our

motivation is to please our father. Um, and then if he sees fit to to to um grant us access to the kingdom, then great, amazing. Um, and if if if he chooses to send us to hell, then we deserved it. So, as long as we’re okay with his decision, then we can live at peace. Um my question really comes in in relation to the topic about unity and I thank you for bringing this up because I I mentioned in the last

teaching that uh that was something that uh that verse about um we have to be unified in uh one one thought or not one thought one mind um in relation to councils Right? Cuz we see that there are councils in uh uh first century Judaism. Um and even within the body Messiah, there are councils of elders and like somewhat of a hierarchy, but not in a you know power trip kind of way. Uh especially in like Acts 15. um to what degree should we be unified in like I don’t

know in in the essence of like a council where you know a group of elders makes decisions on behalf of the whole. Okay, great question. And we’re going to have to leave today with uh his question with Andrew’s question being our last because we’re run out of time. More specifically, I have run out of time. I got so much time this morning. But um yes, Andrew, you’re correct. We see in

scripture councils, whether it’s uh whether it’s the Jethro theory in the days of Moses or the brother’s council in Acts 15, we we do see them. And the most easiest way I can answer this question is when you have councils of these godly men, we should listen to the council of these godly men. As long as their counsel is framed within scripture and scripture alone,

once that council leaves the boundaries of scripture, then we are not to listen to it. How do I know that? Well, because Exodus says we should not follow a group into sin. That’s Torah. What group? Any group. Doesn’t it doesn’t matter if it was a bunch of men that we love and admire and respect, if they if their council goes outside of scripture, then we shouldn’t be following them.

Again, the student of scripture should know the difference. And the truth of the matter is, the sad truth of the matter is historically these councils do these councils have left the ancient path. So, uh I hope that answers your question. If not, please continue the question in an email. It looks like uh Glenn and Luke still have things to say. We’re running out of time. Um, I’m going to give Glenn 30 seconds only because

he’s my my cohort and um he wants to share some things briefly. Glenn, if you can do that, I’ll let you very briefly. Uh I just wanted to point out uh that the question that was posed is actually far more complicated and we see that in in the uh council uh that met to to discuss circumcision and and so you know you look at that and it’s like well scripture says this but we’re going to do X and so it it um it’s

just a lot more complicated then uh you know than we have time to present today. So that that’s a a great lesson for the future. Okay. Amen. Thank you, Glenn. Guys, listen. Been great to be with you on the Shabbat. Thank you so much for your involvement. Thanks for being here at all. Thanks for taking time to to join us from wherever you’re at around the world. And I pray that you have a

fantastic rest of your Shabbat, fantastic weekend, whatever you’re doing, wherever you’re at. and uh we’ll come together again next week. I will most likely not be the one teaching, but I’m looking for a fantastic solution for us all, some something special if I can pull it off. I’m not going to tell you what that is now, but um I hope you have a fantastic week. If you’re in these areas where it’s storming and blowing

snow and all that kind of stuff, be safe, drive slow, and we’ll talk to you soon, guys. Shabbat shalom. Shabbat shalom. Shalom. Shalom. Shalom. Shalom. God bless you. Blessings from Finland. Blessings. Blessings from the Czech Republic. Hi everyone. Have a nice weekend. Enjoy the rest of Shabbat. Love you bunches. Love you bunches. Love you too. [laughter] Byebye. [snorts] Bye. Bye. Good to see you all.