Does Peter’s Vision prove we can eat anything? The difference between “common” & “unclean”

Peter’s Vision is often cited as proof to say we are free to eat anything we please. Many believe that God showed Peter that the previous Food Laws were no more as he was able to eat anything from thereon. There seems to be many issues with this theory, which we previously looked at in detail in this study.

The vision was clearly about “calling Gentiles Common or Unclean” as Peter himself proclaims:

Acts 10:28 “ And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.”

So how is it that “Peter’s Vision” is used to teach God changed unclean food to clean? The problem is in the poor understanding of what is considered “common”(some translations say impure). The word “common”(Koinos-Common/Defiled) is vastly different from “unclean”(Akarthatos-Impure/Unclean).  The word Common is not from God’s Law but the Law of the Pharisees – also known as the Traditions of the Elders or the Oral Law. We see this clearly in the following verse:

Mark 7:2 And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled(Koinos), that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault.

The Pharisees were finding fault with the disciples for eating with defiled/common hands. In God’s Law He had specified the state of purity/Cleanness and impurity/uncleanness. There was nothing in between. The state which is called common/defiled was a Pharisaic manufacturing which said a clean thing which is next to an unclean thing becomes defiled where it is not clean nor unclean but in between. This was what is known as “common”. This was why it was deemed unlawful(as per the religious authority in the 1st Century) for a Jew to keep company with a Gentile. The understanding and doctrine of the day was that a Jew who is in a state of cleanliness would fall to a common state even if he/she ate with a gentile who were deemed unclean.

Coming back to the vision, let’s read it again to see what exactly God told Peter:

Acts 10:15 And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

In the great sheet of Peter’s Vision, all the clean and unclean animals were mixed and together in one place. The clean were now in a state of being “Common” as per Peter’s understanding. There were only two categories of animals in the sheet according to God – “Clean” and “Unclean”. The Clean could be eaten.

When God told Peter to “Kill and Eat”. His response was “Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean“. According to Peter the two categories were “Common” and “Unclean”. And both categories could not be eaten.

God says not to call things that He has cleansed “Common”. Which means He deems what man calls “common”, as “Clean”. God does not say anything to Peter about Unclean animals. God speaks to Peter about the clean animals who Peter thought were Common because of the Unclean animals in the same great sheet in his vision. Those who were deemed common (in Peter’s mind), God considered as Clean. Not that the unclean animals suddenly became clean animals.

The vision, if carefully dissected is very clear. God considers “Clean” what Peter calls “Common”. NOT that the “Unclean” were made “Clean”

So even if on argues that the Vision was about Food, God did not change His Word, but taught Peter what he had been taught was a fallacy. There was nothing called “Common”. Peter clearly understood the vision when he came to Cornelius’ house, as God had shown the man-made Pharisaic Law of “A Jew should not keep company with a Gentile” was removed from his mind.

Conclusion
In Peter’s Vision, God called what Peter considered “common” as “clean”. The voice never said that I have made the unclean, clean to you. God said “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.” So if you believe God told Peter that the Food Laws He had instituted were no more, I implore you to study the text a bit more in-depth, before you make your decision. If God deems it Clean we can eat it. If He deems it unclean, we cannot. Simple as that.

What are Phylacteries?

Have you ever noticed or been puzzled by the word “Phylacteries” in the New Testament? Ever wondered what Christ was talking about in Mat 23:5? His words were “But all their works they do to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments”.

I had paid little notice to this word before, picturing in my mind that it was some sort of clothing item that the Pharisees wore. Not paying full attention to details in the Bible can, and have, had a major impact on the beliefs that are prevalent in the Christian congregations.

The “Pharisees & Scribes” who were wearing phylacteries mentioned by Yeshua (Jesus’ true name) would have looked something like this. The “Phylacteries” or “Tefillin” as it is called in Hebrew, is a small box which contains Scripture with a strap, which can be bound on the Head or the Arms.

The importance of this verse is in the fact that it sheds light on a major misunderstanding in Christianity. Which one, you ask? “It’s the common belief among Christians that the Scribes and Pharisees Kept the Old Testament Law, and that this is why Yeshua called them Hypocrites and white washed tombs – because the Old Law was done away”.

The problem with this understanding is that both biblically and historically, we have evidence that the Pharisees did not keep God’s Law. In fact, wearing “Phylacteries” was not a Commandment given by God. Then why did the Pharisees wear these things? Because it was part of their “Oral Law”, known as the “Traditions of the Elders” throughout the New Testament (Mat 15:2,3,6, Mar 7:3,8,9,13, Gal 1:14). Wearing “Phylacteries” was how they had interpreted Exo 13:9,16 & Deut 6:8, 11:18 which says that “God’s Word should be a sign upon our hands and between our eyes”. Obviously, this was a figure of speech to say “that we should do or obey as well as remember God’s Word”.

The Pharisaic Sect of Yeshua’s day had taken a piece of Scripture out of context and made a separate Law out of it. The “Oral Law” which is still in use today, known as the “Talmud” is strictly adhered to by Orthodox Jews around the world. Not only do they wear it, the “Talmud” provides strict laws on how to even put it on. (If you want to learn more about the Pharisees and their traditions, I recommend that you watch this video, brought to you by former Orthodox Jew – Nehemiah Gordon)

What does this mean? Are all Jews like Pharisees? Are all Pharisees alike? The picture of “Pharisees” and some times, even “Jews“, in a Western Christian mind, is that they were wicked, legalistic and nonspiritual people. This is hardly the case. We know that there were quite a lot of Pharisees who respected Yeshua, as well as some who believed in Him (Luk 13:31, Joh 9:16, Act 15:5). We should by no means generalize people. Furthermore, it is important to remember that Yeshua, His Disciples, His followers and even Apostle Paul, were all Jews.

The Orthodox Jews of today, still adhere to a plethora of extra laws (from the Talmud), thinking that it is genuinely what God expects from them. They are misguided, as much as the Christians who think the Law is done away in Christ. We must understand that not all Jews are like the Pharisees of Christ’s age. Consider the Karaite Jews who reject the Talmud and anything other than the Old Testament, and the Messianic Jews who believe in Yeshua.

The many persecutions which have fallen on the Jews have always happened because of this huge misunderstanding. A lot of people have persecuted “Jews” standing under Christ’s banner, making it impossible for them to except Yeshua as the prophesied Messiah.

What was the main Commandment which the Pharisees broke through their traditions?
God’s Word specifically instructs that no one can add or remove anything from God’s Law/Commandments.
Deu 4:2  Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
Deu 12:32  What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.
The Scriptures call anyone who adds to God’s Law, a Liar (Pro 30:6). This was one of the main concerns Yeshua had regarding the Pharisees, when He said “For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men”(Mar 7:8) & “Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? (Mat 15:3).

Are all traditions bad? Are all traditions sin? definitely not. But the moment we put “Tradition” over “God’s Commandments”, or teach “man made Traditions” as “God’s Law”, we are breaking His Words. This is why Yeshua said (quoting Isaiah 29:13)”But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men“(Mat 15:9) regarding the Pharisees.

Adding and Diminishing & the 2 Houses of Israel
If you know about Biblical History, you would know that the people “Israel” divided into 2 Kingdoms after the death of King Solomon. These 2 Kingdoms were called “The House of Judah” & “The House of Israel/Ephraim”. “The House of Israel” was carried away by Assyria and scattered in the nations with a promise of being regathered, while “The House of Judah” was exiled for 70 years in “Babylon” being let back into the land. (Please go to this link for more info) It is interesting to see how “the Jews” (House of Judah) add to God’s Law, through their various traditions and man-made laws written in the Talmud, while “the gentiles” (House of Ephraim) diminishes from God’s Law, saying it is done away and that they are free from it.

“Phylacteries” are a good reminder of checking our lives, our doctrines and our thoughts for anything that we may be adding or diminishing from our Creator’s Words. It is a call to really put His Words in our hearts and souls, binding them on our hands by being obedient to Him, that His Words may be always foremost in our minds (Deut 11:18), so that we do not turn to the left or to the right from them (Jos 23:6) choosing God and His Word alone in the midst of man-made commandments & traditions.

Paul – the misunderstood Apostle

According to the prevalent understanding of Paul’s teachings amongst Christians, Paul was a major opponent of the Law. He taught that it is done away with, in Christ. That there is no need for us to obey the Law, as we are now under Grace. Are these claims really true? Did he believe and teach that the Old Testament is now abolished? That all who obey it are under a curse? Or is this all a 2000 year old misunderstanding of his words?

Consider Peter’s words and his warning regarding Paul’s Words
2Pe 3:15,16   And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest(pervert), as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

If Paul’s words were hard to understand in the 1st century AD, and some were even using his words to teach something different to its original meaning at that time, are we so sure that our current understanding is so accurate?

Note: Let me be clear at the onset of this study, that this is NOT an attempt to say “we must keep God’s Word for Salvation”. On the contrary, God’s Word is clear that Righteousness/Salvation cannot be attained through keeping God’s Law. It is only attained through God’s Grace. As we move forward you will see that Paul’s whole ministry revolved around this idea – We are saved through faith & God’s Grace alone. But after we are adopted into His fold, we have to serve Him in obedience to His Commandments/Laws through the help of His Spirit.

The call for an Audit
If you are keen to learn the truth above all, and you are willing to go the distance and do whatever is necessary in obedience to our Heavenly Father, I call you to an Audit. Evaluate yourself and your beliefs. If what you understand is right, an audit will only strengthen your beliefs. If you see some questions raised that you never thought of, it will still help you to learn more and draw closer to God.

Remember that the first major reformation in Christianity as we know it, which happened in the 1500’s under Martin Luther, was a response to some of the incorrect doctrines that were taught and practiced by the Roman Catholic Church. If such an Audit of Doctrine had not been done, the majority of Christians today could have still been following the Catholic church without question.

My request to you is, that you do not approach this article with preconceived notions. Be like the Bereans(Acts 17:10,11) and search the Scriptures for the Truth. You are more than welcome to disagree with me. But I ask you not to disagree with Scripture. Test everything written in this article. See whether everything falls into place. Remember that there can be no disagreements between the Biblical Authors. There can be no conflict between two verses in the Bible, when taken in context. Our goal is to serve God Almighty in Truth and Spirit.

Fitting it all in – a personal testimony
If any person believes that they have the whole of Scripture figured out, they are only deceiving themselves. The Scriptures are the pieces of a great Puzzle. All of the pieces in the puzzle needs to fit perfectly. We cannot force pieces of the puzzle to fit where we want it to. It needs to be in perfect harmony to all the pieces around it, giving us a complete picture. We have all been taught by someone or the other, where these pieces of the puzzle fit. Personally, for a long time, I did not question the placement. I knew some of the pieces and their placements did not make sense. But I thought, others knew best. I thought who am I to question the placement which has been this way for centuries, approved and taught by great men and women of God. But sometimes, you come across verses that go against YOUR beliefs and doctrines. Now, some people, like me, had the ability to just read over these lines and not even notice them. I was like Paul (but not even 1% as knowledgeable as he was), on my way to Damascus, with my understanding and belief of the Word. All of us need Yeshua(real name of Jesus) to open our eyes. All of us need the guidance of God’s Spirit. No one person, including me, has the whole puzzle figured out. All of us are learning. If you have and open mind to look at the puzzle again, let’s proceed.

As we read above, Peter clearly states that the Beloved Brother Paul writes to the assemblies according to the wisdom given to him. Some of the things that he writes are hard to understand. And that people who do not understand these things, pervert these teachings to their own destruction. This is a clear warning given to the assembly about Paul’s writings. But today, Paul’s writings are key to some of the doctrines in Christianity. Whether it fits or not with other verses in the Scriptures, is overlooked.

Using his words, I myself used to think that we are free from God’s Law/Commandments. I used to think that we should act according to his word, as he was the apostle to the Gentiles. An audit changed my understanding and my life. At the end of the day, we are called to be disciple of Yeshua(Jesus’ true Hebrew name). Not of Paul or anyone else for that matter. Even Paul said that he follows Yeshua (1Cor 11:1). And Paul admonished people who called themselves followers of anyone else other than Yeshua (1Cor 1:11-13).

So let us look at a few instances which sheds light onto Paul the Apostle, his beliefs and his teachings

1. Contrary to common belief, his Hebrew name which was Saul, was not changed to Paul. He was also called Paul(Act 13:9). This name would have been easier to use in the Greek speaking world of his day, as Paul (Paulus) was of Latin origin.
2. Paul was a Jew (Acts 21:39) and was brought up as a Pharisee (Acts 26:5)
3. Paul’s message did not contradict the Old Testament, as the Bereans examined the Scriptures and checked whether it was true. (Acts 17:11)(The Scripture that is spoken here was the Old Testament, as there was no New Testament or Gospels at that time, which were written later and compiled to what we have now, only around 400AD)
4. Paul’s custom was to go to synagogue on the Sabbath. (Acts 13:14,42,44, 17:2, 18:4)
5. Paul took a Nazarite vow where one shaves his head (Acts 18:18 – Num 6)
6. There were many “rumors” that he taught against God’s Law (Acts 21:21)
7. There was no proof that he broke any of God’s Laws (Acts 24:13, 25:7,8)
8. Paul kept the Law, and walked according to it (Acts 21:24)
9. Paul purified himself at the Temple in accordance to the Law (Acts 21:26)
10. Paul said Ananias was a devout man because he kept God’s Law (Acts 22:12)
11. He worshiped God believing everything written in the Law & Prophets (Acts 24:14)
12. He said that he does not nullify the law by faith, but that he upholds the law (Rom 3: 31)
13. He said that the Law is not Sin, but the knowledge of Sin (Rom 7:7)
14. He said that the law and the Commandments are holy, righteous and good (Rom 7:12,16)
15. He said that the Law is not what leads us to death (Rom 7:13)
16. He said that the Law is Spiritual (Rom 7:14)
17. He said that he delights in God’s law (Rom 7:22)
18. He said that He serves the Law of God (Rom 7:25)
19. He said that the Law is good, and that one must use it properly. (1Tim 1:8) (Please read this article to understand more on what Paul meant, as Pharisees were using God’s Law inappropriately, while the “Circumcision party” used it to earn salvation)
20. Paul said that all Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (He did not say some of it is done away, but that all of it is God-breathed)
21. Paul went to Jerusalem to celebrate the Feasts according to the Law (Acts 18:21, 20:16 /Ex 34:22/Lev 23)
22. Paul used the Law to defend himself. How can he defend himself with something, if he was preaching that it was abolished (Acts 23:3)
23. Paul signified that he unwittingly broke a law, quoting the specific Law from the Old Testament (Acts 23:5 / Exo 22:28)
24. Paul taught the Law of Marriage and Divorce out of the Law (Rom 7:2/1Cor 7:39 – Deut 24)
25. Paul taught keeping of the Passover (1Cor 5:8)
26. Paul used the Law regarding muzzling an Ox (Deut 25:4) to teach how people who work for the growth of the Kingdom, should be taken care by it, just like an ox (1Cor 9:9-12/1Tim 5:18)
27. Paul quotes Deut 19:15 – a matter is established by 2 or 3 witnesses (2Cor 13:1/1Tim 5:19)
28. Paul quotes Deut 27:26 – a person breaking God’s Law is cursed (Gal 3:10)
29. Paul quotes Hab 2:4 – the just shall live by faith (Gal 3:11)
30. Paul quotes Lev 18:5 – the man who keeps God’s Law, lives because of it (Gal 3:12)
31. Paul quotes Deut 11:26-28 & 27:15-26 – the curses of the Law (Gal 3:13)
32. Paul quotes Lev 19:18 – Love thy neighbor as thy self (Gal 5:14)
33. Paul quotes Deut 5:16 – Honor thy father and mother (Eph 6:2)

Looking at all of these verses, still some would say, that he kept the Law because he was a Jew. And that we don’t need to, as the Law was given to the Jews. First of all, the Law was not given to the Jews (Please read Defining “Jews” and “Gentiles), but to the whole of Israel. Secondly, as Paul said, there is no more Jew & Gentile(Gal 3:28). And as Yeshua said, there is only one flock(John 10:16). Furthermore God’s Law was for the Native born as well as the stranger (Exo 12:49, Lev 24:22, Num 15:15,16). And by his own words, we are now grafted into Israel (Rom 11:16-26) becoming partakers (Eph 2:12).

Will Apostle Paul be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven?
Mat 5:17-19 records Christ’s Words “Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven”. According to the prevalent understanding of Paul’s words, he has broken almost all of God’s commandments as well as taught others, that the law is no longer applicable. If so, according to Christ’s own words, Paul would be the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. How can Paul go against God’s words which clearly states, no one can add or abolish any of God’s Commandments (Deut 4:2, 12:32)?

What about the many instances where Paul speaks about the Law in a negative way?
The misunderstandings that exist regarding his teachings, are caused by a few main reasons
1) We have not read/understood God’s Law and the Old Testament
For example, it is taught that when Paul says “curse of the Law”(Gal 3:13), that this means the Law is the curse. While actually the “curse of the Law” means, the curse which comes on whomever who does not obey the Law (Deut 11:26-28/ Deut 27:26/ Gal 3:10). Reading the front of the Bible(Old Testament) first, makes a vast difference when understanding Paul’s teachings, as this is the only Scripture which was available to the 1st Century Church.
2) We do not know the history/context of his epistles
For example, it is taught that when Paul says “Those who are trying to be justified by the law have fallen away from grace” (Gal 5:4), that this means all who obey God’s Law has fallen from Grace. While actually what Paul was teaching against was “justification by the Law”, as no one can gain righteousness by keeping God’s Law – only Christ’s blood can redeem us and justify us. (Gal 2:21). This was the main debate even at the Jerusalem Council – as some said you have to be circumcised to be saved(Acts 15:1), which is a baseless doctrine according to Scripture.
3) We have been handed down inaccurate teachings, doctrines and preconceived ideas
For example, it is taught that when Paul says “Blotting out the Handwriting of ordinances nailing it to the cross”(Col 2:14), that this means the Law is done away at Christ’s death. While actually what Paul teaches is that the ordinances that said, we should undergo the penalty of death for our sins, were nailed to the cross, as He died in our place.
4) We have not understood Biblical Definitions
For example, some of the terms used in the New Testament such as, Church, Israel, Jew, Gentile are not clearly defined Biblically. (please refer links)
5) We have not clearly understood characters/groups portrayed in the Bible
For example, “The Pharisees” are commonly linked as the group who kept the Old Testament, which is clearly not the case. (please refer link)
6) Reading verses out of context
For example, it is taught that when Paul says “you are not under Law, but under Grace” (Rom 6:14), that this means we don’t have to keep God’s Law. While actually throughout the letter to the Romans, Paul teaches that : Law is not Sin, but the knowledge of Sin(Rom 7:7), Law and the Commandments are holy, righteous and good (Rom 7:12,16), Law is not what leads us to death (Rom 7:13), Law is Spiritual (Rom 7:14), that he delights in God’s law (Rom 7:22) and serves the Law of God (Rom 7:25). The problem is that we have forgotten that these are “letters”, written without chapters or verses addressing issues of specific assemblies of people. We cannot, and must not, pick particular verses out of context.
7) Paul’s usage of the term “Law”
In his epistles, Paul talks about several different “Laws”, namely –
1)Law of Faith (Rom 3:27)
2)Law of Sin (Rom 7:23-25)
3)Law of the Spirit of life (Rom 8:2)
4)Law of Sin & Death (Rom 8:2)
5)Law of Righteousness (Rom 9:31)
6)Law of God (Rom 3:31, 7:22-25, 8:7)
7)Law of Christ (Rom 8:2, 1Cor 9:21)

Conclusion
In conclusion, I ask you to test everything in this study against the Word of God. Do not rely, or place your trust solely on a denomination, a church, a doctrine, a teacher, a pastor or anything/anyone of this world. Put your faith in God, and God alone – The Creator, Redeemer and King! Ask Him to show you the whole Truth through His Word, through the help of His Spirit.

And keep in mind Peter’s Warning when reading Paul’s letters. His words are hard to understand. So we must be diligent in dividing his teachings for the truth. Apostle Paul could not, and would not have gone against God’s Word which is the same yesterday, today and forever. Let us put off all the misunderstandings regarding his teachings and get to know the Paul we never knew.

The misunderstood parable of New and Old Wine

Christ often spoke in parables and sometimes the interpretations are also recorded clearly in the Gospels. In Matthew 9:9-17, Mark 2:14-22 & Luke 5:27-39, Yeshua(Jesus’ true name) spoke another parable to the pharisees, which He did not provide an interpretation afterwards. The “Parable of the New & Old Wine” is often used to say that Yeshua was discarding the Old Mosaic Law, while introducing “A New Law which was built on Truth & Grace”. We will delve into this misunderstood parable and try to understand (with proper context) what Yeshua was really trying to say.

If time permits, I suggest that you also read “Who the pharisees were” which shows how they were not keepers of God’s Law & “Did Christ overule the Old Ten Commandments with 2 New Commandments?” which shows how Yeshua merely quoted the 2 New Commandments from the Old Testament and that He did not introduce a New Law.

For the purpose of this study, we will use the reading from Luke to investigate and understand what Yeshua was trying to say taking proper context into consideration. (I have highlighted the important parts below).

Luk 5:27-39  And after these things he went forth, and saw a publican, named Levi, sitting at the receipt of custom: and he said unto him, Follow me. And he left all, rose up, and followed him. And Levi made him a great feast in his own house: and there was a great company of publicans and of others that sat down with them. But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans and sinners? And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eat and drink? And he said unto them, Can ye make the children of the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them? But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those days. And he spake also a parable unto them; No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the old. And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

Notice how this Parable is connected to a feast made in Levi’s House. Levi, who is also called Matthew in Mat 9:9, follows Yeshua leaving his work which was Tax Collecting, and makes a feast to which Yeshua was invited. Many of Levi’s friends and some who were Tax Collector’s(Publicans) were also present at his house.

The Scribes and Pharisees who kept a close eye on Yeshua all the time, ask Him why He is sharing a meal in the midst of sinners and tax collectors. Yeshua answers them by saying that He came to bring sinners to repentance.

Then they ask Yeshua, why His disciples do not fast often, and pray, like the disciples of the pharisees. To which Yeshua answers by saying that they will fast when He is taken away from them.

Then He goes onto convey the parable which is in question. Before we move onto the Parable, I want you to understand the context behind this parable and why Yeshua said this parable to the Pharisees. (We know that the Pharisees were actually hypocrites and keepers of their own laws and traditions which were against God’s Commandments).

Proper Context
Let us observe the events leading to this parable. Luke 5 starts off with Yeshua asking Peter, James & John to follow Him, which meant becoming His disciples. This was a bold move for a person who was gaining respect throughout Judea as a great Rabbi/Teacher. There would have been so many more well educated people He could have chosen from the Scribes or the Pharisees, but He opted to choose lowly fishermen. In Luke 5:27, Yeshua enrolls a Tax Collector named Levi, next as one of His disciples. First, fishermen and now a Tax Collector – The Pharisees and Scribes would have been furious. Fishermen were “uneducated” while Tax Collectors were “traitors” in the eyes of the Pharisees. This is the background behind this event and the parable of interest.

Yeshua’s choice in disciples were a concern to the Pharisees and they found fault with them saying “Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but yours eat and drink?” This was the reason behind the parable that Yeshua put forward to the people who questioned Him.

Now that we understand that the reason behind the parable was “the question about His disciples”, let’s move on to decipher the parable.

Part I of the Parable
No one tears a piece from a new garment and puts it on an old garment. If he does, he will tear the new, and the piece from the new will not match the old.

Part II of the Parable
And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins and it will be spilled, and the skins will be destroyed. But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins. And no one after drinking old wine desires new, for he says, ‘The old is good.'”

Using proper context, we understood above, that this parable was spoken out as a reply to the questioning which came up regarding Yeshua’s choice of disciples. Using this context we can come to a proper interpretation as follows:
Old Garment/ Old Wineskin = Disciples who have learned Pharisaical TeachingsThe Piece from a New Garment/ New Wine = New/Proper Teaching of God’s Word
New Wineskin = Disciples who are open to learning God’s Word/who have not learned pharisaic ways
Old Wine = Pharisaic Teaching of God’s Word which is God’s Word mixed and changed with their own laws, traditions and teachings

(In the parables given above, “The Old Garment” and “The Old Wineskin” are parallels, meaning they represent the same idea. In the same way, “The Piece from a New Garment” and “The New Wine” are also parallels. The “New Wineskin” is obviously the opposite of the “Old Wineskin” in the same way that the “Old Wine” is the opposite of the “New Wine”.)

Let’s try to read the Parable again with the interpretation given above, to see whether it makes sense in proper context, as an answer to the Pharisees.

Part 1 of Parable No one tears “a piece from a new garment” and puts it on an “old garment”. If he does, he will tear the “new”, and “the piece from the new” will not match the “old”.
Interpretation No one can put “New/Proper Teaching of God’s Word” into a “Disciples who have learned Pharisaical Teachings”. If done, the “New/Proper Teaching of God’s Word” will go to waste, as it will not match the lifestyle of the “Disciples who have learned Pharisaical Teachings”

Part 2 of Parable And no one puts new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the new wine will burst the skins and it will be spilled, and the skins will be destroyed. But new wine must be put into fresh wineskins. And no one after drinking old wine desires new, for he says, ‘The old is good.'”
Interpretation And no one puts “New/Proper Teaching of God’s Word” into “Disciples who have learned Pharisaical Teachings”. If done, “Disciples who have learned Pharisaical Teachings” will not be able to contain the “New/Proper Teaching of God’s Word” and the “New/Proper Teaching of God’s Word” will go to waste, and the “Disciples who have learned Pharisaical Teachings” will be condemned/destroyed(because they rejected the proper teaching). But “New/Proper Teaching of God’s Word” must be put into “Disciples who are open to learning God’s Word/who have not learned pharisaic ways”. And no one after learning “Pharisaic Teaching of God’s Word which is God’s Word mixed and changed with their own laws, traditions and teachings” desires “New/Proper Teaching of God’s Word”, for he says, ‘The “Pharisaic Teaching of God’s Word which is God’s Word mixed and changed with their own laws, traditions and teachings” is good.'”

Using this interpretation we can come to the conclusion that Yeshua was indeed speaking in context, to the pharisees, who were questioning Him about how He was choosing uneducated sinners as disciples. To which Yeshua replied by a parable that showed how it was better for Him to choose “uneducated sinners” over the so called “educated ones learning pharisaic doctrine, which was clearly against God’s Word“. He spoke how He needed to choose new wineskins so that He could pour the “correct teaching of God’s Word” into them, while old wineskins which contained “different teachings” could never hold the correct teaching of God. This was the simple argument He made with this parable, so that the pharisees would not question Him anymore.

Some have interpreted this parable to say the “Old Wine” represents the “Old Mosaic Laws/Commandments” while “New Wine” represents “Grace and Truth”. One who studies the bible will understand that “God’s Word/Commandments are not against Truth, but Truth itself” and that you cannot pit God’s Commandments against Grace and Truth.

I am not, in any way, saying that this is the final and conclusive interpretation of this Parable. But I am offering everyone a chance to look at the parable afresh with proper context according to God’s Word. As I always say, Do not believe anyone. Read it for yourself and check whether what you understand, is in complete agreement with everything written in the Scriptures. For too long, we have been giving ear to people who have taken things out of context and given their own interpretations, that do not gel with God’s Word completely. Test this interpretation with the same critical mentality and may the Holy Spirit, the helper, who is there to help us understand God’s Word, help you in having a closer walk with our Father in heaven.

Did Christ declare all foods clean? Misunderstandings regarding Mark 7:19

Living in an island nation, I was brought up as any other child in our country, to love our sea food. Prawn, Crab, Cuttlefish were the norm in our diet. A meal without seafood at least once a week was unthinkable. With the Dutch, Portuguese & English influences in our country, we had come to love Pork as well. I myself was a fan of Bacon and had prawn & cuttlefish regularly. I couldn’t think of a life without Seafood in my diet. Growing up, we were taught that God is now more loving than in the Old Testament. He was portrayed as the “God of Love and Grace” instead of the Old Testament version which was the “God who was a consuming fire”.

Furthermore, it was taught that Yeshua(Jesus’ true name) came with a New Covenant, a new teaching, new Laws and we were no longer under the Old Covenant Laws. This worked out fine with our lives, society and our diet, because most of what we ate was what God had told His People not to, in the Old Testament (ie; Pork & Fish without scales and fins which included prawn, crab, cuttlefish, shellfish, lobster, etc).

When I first started looking at the Scriptures as a whole, where no verse can go against or annul another, something dawned on me. Does this mean, we have to still eat and not eat according to what God said in Leviticus 11? But what about Paul’s writings? He seems to be saying that we can eat anything. And doesn’t the Gospels even show Messiah Yeshua declaring all foods clean?

Before I addressed Paul, I needed to see whether our Savior (who we are meant to follow) really did change the Food Laws given by God. The only place I could find Him saying something close to “We can eat anything we want” was in Mark 7.

Mark 7:19 was of particular interest. So I read through a couple of English Translations of the Bible, and most of the versions said that “Jesus declared all foods clean”. Interestingly enough, the KJV did not contain this part, while all of the other versions had this in brackets.

New International Version “For it doesn’t go into their heart but into their stomach, and then out of the body.” (In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean.)
English Standard Version “since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?” (Thus he declared all foods clean.)
New American Standard Bible “because it does not go into his heart, but into his stomach, and is eliminated?” (Thus He declared all foods clean.)
King James Version “Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?”

Why didn’t the KJV, one of the earliest translations into English done in 1611, not contain this portion? And why did the rest of the versions carry it within brackets? As I dug into the issue, I found out an interesting piece of information.

The Original Greek Manuscripts do not carry “In saying this, Jesus declared” which is in Mark 7:19. You can check this for yourself here, in The Codex Sinaiticus.

This had been a later addition by some of the translators to give this verse more clarity. And this was the reason why the KJV Bible did not have this part included. Since this was cleared out, I now had to make sure whether the decision by the Translators to add “(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean)” was valid. Whether Yeshua was clearly stating that the Food Laws were no more. Looking at the context of the 7th Chapter of Mark leading upto verse 19 was essential to make this decision. Let us study Mark 7, from verse 1, and work our way down to the verses in question.

Mark 7:1-21 – Is it about eating any food or eating food without the tradition of washing the hands?
Reading Mark 7:1-4, I recognized that the story began with the Pharisees accusing some of Yeshua’s disciples of not washing their hands before eating bread. And Mark went on to note how the Pharisees and the Jews would not eat without washing their hands according to the “Tradition of the Elders”. And how they don’t eat without washing after coming from the marketplace and how they have a lot of these traditions like washing of cups, pots, brazen vessels and tables.

Now, some would associate the Pharisees with the Old Testament and conclude that these washings were from the Old Testament Law of God. But, praise God, I had been privileged to learn about the Pharisees and how they had their own Law & Teaching additionally to God’s Law.  (Learn who the Pharisees were, here).  This made all the difference as I understood what Mark meant by “Tradition of the Elders” in verse 3.

In verse 5, the Pharisees ask Yeshua, why His disciple don’t walk according to the “Tradition of the Elders”, eating with unwashed hands.

This is what Yeshua addresses in the verses that proceed. Not holding to the Tradition of the Elders & Eating with unwashed hands.

In verse 6&7, He starts by quoting Isaiah 29:13, showing their hypocrisy saying, that they honor God with their mouth but their hearts are far from Him and that in vain they worship Him, teaching “Commandments of Men” as “Doctrine”.

Verse 8-13, He further establishes and clarifies their mistake showing that they are laying aside God’s Commandments and are holding onto the Traditions of Men, which include washing of Cups and pots and such other things. He says that they reject God’s Commandments, so that they can keep their own Traditions. And that they make God’s Word of no effect by Their Traditions. (For more information on this verse, read “Who were the Pharisees”). Observe how Yeshua is pointing out the difference between God’s Commandments and Traditions of Men.

What is the context so far? is it Food? Or is it man made traditions? Isn’t the whole conversation revolving around eating food with unwashed hands which was the tradition in focus? Let us read on.

In Verse 14&15, He said, Nothing that goes into a person from the outside can make him unclean. It is what comes out of a person that makes a person unclean. What is Yeshua saying, if and when we take it in context? Is He saying that we can now eat whatever we want?

What Yeshua said was not a statement, but a Parable. In Verse 17, the disciples ask what He meant by the Parable.

Now we come to the verses in question
Yeshua answers the disciples in verse 18-23 saying, whatever enters into man cannot make him unclean, but only through sin that proceed from the inside of man. It is clear that He says that man is defiled by the Sin which is inside.

But is He in the same go, saying that God’s Food Laws are of no use because whatever we eat is purged out of the stomach? Is the same Yeshua that called the Pharisees, hypocrites for making God’s Law void, saying that God’s Food Laws are now void? Before we make a decision on this, I would like to focus your attention onto Matthew 15. In this chapter, Matthew is recording the same story which is in Mark 7. (I will not go into discussing the whole chapter from the beginning, though reading it for yourself will show that it is identical).

Let us read from Matthew 15:15
Just like in Mark, the disciples, in fact Peter(as Matthew records), asks Yeshua to explain the parable to them. Yeshua goes onto say the same thing “whatever enters into man cannot make him unclean, but only through sin that proceed from the inside of man”.

Matthew 15:20 is the Key
Yeshua, then explains what He was talking about the whole time. He says, “These are what defile a person. But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile anyone.”
Doesn’t this single verse explain everything? Whoever uses Mark 7:18,19 to say that Yeshua gave us freedom to eat whatever we like, will have a hard time explaining Mat 15:20. What Yeshua’s whole argument was that “a person does not become unclean by eating with unwashed hands, but by the sin that comes out of the same person.

The fact is, that this whole conversation revolved around “eating with unwashed hands”. Mark 7 and Matthew 15 talks about the same instance and Matthew records Yeshua’s words to be regarding the issue of “Eating with unwashed hands”. There is no mention of God’s food Laws in these chapters and no translator has the authority to add phrases such as “(In saying this, Jesus declared all foods clean)” with or without a proper understanding of context.

I will not be addressing the verses written in Paul’s epistles on this post, which I am planning on doing on a later date. Even though the point of this study is not to prove that God’s Food Law still stands, I hope, you have adequately seen that Mark 7:18,19 cannot be used to prove that Yeshua did away with God’s Food Laws written in Lev 11.

Is Sabbath, Saturday, Sunday or Everyday? Defining the Biblical Sabbath day – Part III

In the 1st Part of this study, we laid the groundwork in understanding The Sabbath day which is also God’s 4th Eternal Commandment. We learned that the Sabbath had a direct connection with the 7th Day of Creation. That God made it for man, so that he may be refreshed, just as God was refreshed on the 7th Day. That it is an important day for Him, as He calls it “My Holy day” and “My Feast/Appointment”. And that the only thing you cannot do on the Sabbath, according to God’s Commandment, is your regular work/occupation done for monetary gain. (If you have not read the 1st Part, please start there, as you will have a clearer understanding of the definitions).

In the 2nd Part of the study, we answered one of the most famous questions that people ask regarding the Sabbath; whether the Sabbath is Saturday, Sunday or everyday. We found out that the Sabbath cannot be Sunday, any day we like, or everyday as some presume, and that it has not been done away with yet. The most interesting finding was that the Original Greek Manuscripts proved that the Sabbath recorded in the new testament was indeed Saturday by showing us that the original Greek word translated as Sabbath “G4521 – σάββατον – sabbaton – sab’-bat-on” is still the name used for Saturday in Greek even today! (If you have not read the 2nd Part, please click here).

Today, as promised, we will address some of the famous questions and thoughts people have regarding the Sabbath. The questions addressed in this post are given below.

1. Did Yeshua(Jesus’ true name) break the Sabbath, showing us that it is no more?
2. Since the “Keep Sabbath Holy” Commandment is never mentioned in the New testament, it is clearly not important
3. Hebrews 4 proves that Yeshua is our Sabbath rest, not any particular day. We should keep everyday holy, not any particular day
4. The 1st Century Church met on Sunday’s since the “Lord’s Day”(Yeshua’s resurrection) is on Sunday, which means they didn’t keep the Sabbath.
5. There is no mention of the Sabbath in the book of Revelations
6. Col 2:16,17 proves that we do not need to keep the Sabbath
7. Yeshua said that I am working just as Father God is always working. So we do not need to keep the Sabbath, as Yeshua & God is working on the Sabbath
8. Yeshua gave Commandments that abolished the Old, which contained the Sabbath Commandment
9. The Sabbath Commandment is not a Spiritual Commandment, while we are asked to keep the Spirit of the Law, and not the letter of the Law
10. We are under grace and not under Law, so we do not need to keep the Sabbath
11. Yeshua is the Lord of the Sabbath, so this Commandment ends with Him
12. The Sabbath was made for Jews, not Gentiles. It was given to Israel and not the church
13. It doesn’t matter which day you keep, as long as you keep one and you are fully convinced in your own mind according to Rom 14:5,6
14. Sabbath keepers are working for their salvation and have fallen from Grace
15. Gal 4:9,10 specifically says not to be in bondage to observing days
16. Even if we do need to keep the Sabbath, we wouldn’t know which day it is because of the numerous calendar changes in history
17. There is no proof in Scripture that the Sabbath is Saturday
18. There is no Sabbath service near to where I live. Am I to keep Sabbath by myself? Isn’t it better for me to go on a Sunday and worship God along with others?
19. How can this be right, when everyone I know including powerful Pastors & Teachers worship on Sunday instead of the Sabbath
20. Their were strict Laws concerning the Sabbath such as not lighting a fire. Are we supposed to stay in the dark without cooking food just to observe this old Sabbath Law?

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q1) Did Yeshua(Jesus’ true name) break the Sabbath, showing us that it is no more?
Accusation no.1: Yeshua defended His disciples, who broke the Sabbath by plucking and eating corn – Scriptures in concern – Mat 12:1-8, Mar 2:23-28, Luk 6:1-5

In these verses we see the pharisees accusing Yeshua’s disciple of breaking the Sabbath by plucking and eating corn. Nowhere in the Old Testament does it say, that you cannot pluck or eat on the Sabbath.  Then why and how can the Pharisees accuse the disciples of doing what is “not lawful”? (Please read – who were the pharisees). Because the pharisees had their own man made Law which is also called the “Oral Law” & “Tradition of the Elders”. (This Law has been written down today in a book form called the Talmud and is still adhered to by the Orthodox Jewish Community). Yeshua was not defending His Disciples, who the Pharisees accused of breaking the Sabbath. He was actually showing the Pharisees their error in adding to the Law of God (No one can add or diminish from God’s Law – Deut 4:2, 12:32), when there was no such Law regarding the Sabbath in the Scriptures. Yeshua’s defense was two pronged. 1) He related the story of David in 1Sam 21:3-6, thereby showing how feeding a man in hunger was not considered a sin, even when the priest gave them the bread in the temple specifically reserved for the priests themselves. 2) He showed how the Priests worked at the Temple on the Sabbath. The livelihood of the priest was their service at the temple. Even though they carried on with their day to day work, even on the Sabbath, which was working at the temple, it was not considered sin, as they were working for God.

Accusation no.2: Yeshua healed on the Sabbath, thereby breaking it – Scriptures in concern – Mat 12:10-13, Mar 3:1-5, Luk 6:6-10, 13:10-17, 14:1-6, John Chap 9

In these verses, the pharisees accused Yeshua of breaking the Sabbath as He healed people from their infirmities. (Please read – who were the pharisees) Healing was considered work by the Pharisees according to their own “Oral Law” (Refer Talmud) as discussed above in “Accusation no.1”. But Yeshua clearly stated in Mat 12:12, that it is Lawful to do good on the Sabbath, according to God’s Word, as the only prohibition was regular work/occupation for monetary gain.

Accusation no.3: Yeshua asked a person to carry a bed, which was considered working on the Sabbath, thereby breaking it – Scriptures in concern – Joh 5:5-12

In this verse, Yeshua asked the man to take his bed and walk. Carrying anything, including a bed was considered work by the Pharisees according to their own “Oral Law” (Refer Talmud) as discussed above in “Accusation no.1”. (Please read – who were the pharisees). The Pharisees who had added to God’s Law, were making false accusations in all these instances against Yeshua, who had not broken God’s Sabbath. Yeshua had only broken the Sabbath according to the Pharisaic Laws.

Conclusion: In all the above instances, the accusations that the Pharisees brought against Yeshua were false accusations that had no bearing in Scripture according to God’s Law. Believing that Yeshua broke the Sabbath because of the accusations brought forward by the Pharisees, is quite a misguided theory. They accused Yeshua of casting out demons by the power of Satan as well(Mat 9:34, Mar 3:22, Luk 11:15). Just because someone accuses another, it does not make that accusation true. The key is to know who the pharisees were, and what their teaching was.

Also, consider these thoughts. If Yeshua broke the Sabbath, according to God’s Law(which He did not), how could He be a blameless, sinless person(1Pet 2:22, 2Cor 5:21, Joh 8:46, 1Joh 3:5) as breaking the Commandments is Sin(1Joh 3:4). If Yeshua broke the Sabbath, according to God’s Law(which He did not), why did the Chief priests and elders have to find “False” witnesses? (Mat 26:59, Mar 14:56) Couldn’t they have just stoned Him to death?

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q2) Since the “Keep Sabbath Holy” Commandment is never mentioned in the New testament, it is clearly not important
It is true that Yeshua never spoke out the 4th Commandment specifically. Mat 19:17,18, Mar 10:19, Luke 18:20 shows a certain man coming to Yeshua asking “what shall I do to inherit eternal life?” to which Yeshua answers “Keep the Commandments”(Mat 19:17) and goes on to elaborate “Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother”. He never mentions the Sabbath Commandment, in fact,   He does not mention any of the first 5 Commandments. Does this mean, we can have other Gods alongside God Almighty? Does this mean we can make idols and worship them? Does this mean we can take His name in vain? And does this mean we can break the Sabbath? I believe Yeshua expected anyone who believes in God to obey all of God’s Commandments. The ones He spoke out, were specifically expressed, maybe because they were the Commandments that were not clearly adhered to at that time.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q3) Hebrews 4 proves that Yeshua is our Sabbath rest, not any particular day. We should keep everyday holy, not any particular day
First of all, I must say, that the Book of Hebrews is a letter written to Hebrew people by an unknown author who is trying to make a single point. This point being “How Yeshua is our new High Priest and Mediator in Heaven between man and God”. Even though we read specific Chapters and Verses off this Epistle, it was written as a letter(without chapters or verses separated), and like all letters, we cannot pick and choose pieces from here and there. We must read the whole letter from beginning to end, to understand the real meaning of it. (Please go here, for a comprehensive study on Hebrews)

In Hebrews Chapter 1, We learn that Yeshua is now better than the angels. Chapter 2 is about how Yeshua was initially made lower than the angels and how He prevailed over sin and death.  Chapter 3 calls Yeshua our New High Priest and asks the reader to hold on to God till the end, and quotes Psalms 95:7-11 to show how Israel did not obey God in the wilderness, and in return did not enter into His rest. The author then explains that the people who God was angry with and could not enter into His rest were the ones who provoked Him, sinned against Him and did not believe in Him.

Chapter 4 – the Chapter in focus – a simple commentary
4:1 Author continues the same point made in Chapter 3, saying we should fear God and not come short, and thereby not enter into His rest
4:2 Showcases the difference between us (the reader) and them (the people in the wilderness) and how they fell short because they did not have faith when it was the same Word preached to them and us
4:3,4 We who believe, enter in to this rest. Then the author quotes Psalms 95:11 showing that there is a pending rest for us, even though God finished His work on the 7th day.
4:5 Author quotes Psalms 95:11 again highlighting the word “Enter”
4:6 We must enter into God’s rest, unlike the people in the wilderness who did not enter because of their unbelief
4:7 Author refers back to Psalms 95:11, where David says “Today” and that the time when David wrote this Psalm was a long time after the wilderness journey
4:8 Even though Joshua took the people into the Promised Land (which was their “Rest”), the author suggests that God is talking about another “Rest” through David. (Special note: KJV has Jesus in place of Joshua. This is a mistake which has been rectified in most other versions of the Bible, and is one of the key pieces of evidence to suggest that Jesus had the same name as Joshua which was mistaken by the KJV interpreters)
4:9 author says that there is a Rest for God’s people. (The word translated as “Rest” in this verse is G4520 – σαββατισμός – sabbatismos – sab-bat-is-mos’ – From a derivative of G4521; a “sabbatism”, that is, (figuratively) the repose of Christianity (as a type of heaven): – rest,
and is different from the word “Rest” used in all of the other verses. (G2663 – κατάπαυσις – katapausis – kat-ap’-ow-sis – From G2664; reposing down, that is, (by Hebraism) abode: – rest.)
4:10 whoever has entered into God’s rest has ended their work as God ended His own work. The author is talking about the Rest of death, and being gathered to Abraham and our forefathers to await for the New Kingdom of God, ruled by Yeshua our King.
4:11 Author says that we must labour to enter into that rest, without falling into unbelief
4:12 For the Word of God shows us the right way without falling to unbelief
4:13 And God sees into our hearts. Nothing is hidden from Him
4:14,15 Yeshua is our High Priest who is in Heaven, who knows our weaknesses, who was tempted like us but did not fall into sin
4:16 So, let us come to throne of Grace, to obtain mercy, in the time of need.

Looking at the above commentary, we can see clearly that the author is not saying that the Sabbath is done away, or that Yeshua is our Sabbath in any way. The Rest, talked about in Hebrews 4 is the Rest we will have in Yeshua, at the end of our journey, when we enter into His Kingdom. We must keep ourselves Holy(without Sin) everyday, but the Sabbath remains a day specially consecrated by God.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q4) The 1st Century Church met on Sunday’s since the “Lord’s Day”(Yeshua’s resurrection) is on Sunday, which means they didn’t keep the Sabbath.
This question contain 2 parts.
1) The belief that the 1st century church met on the 1st Day of the Week, which is Sunday, discarding the Sabbath.
Acts 20:7 & 1Cor 16:2, shows us how the assembly was gathered on the 1st Day of the Week. Does this mean that they did not keep the Sabbath? Hardly. Acts 2:46, shows us how people assembled together daily. And Paul himself regularly went to the Synagogue on Sabbath(Acts 17:2). The fact is, that the 1st Century Church attended synagogue on Sabbath and met the rest of the days in the temple and each others’ houses.

2) Isn’t Sunday the Lord’s Day?
Some say, the reason behind meeting on Sunday, is that He rose from the dead on that day. (By saying this, they further establish that Saturday is Sabbath, as Yeshua rose after the Sabbath). The Lord’s Day is mentioned only once in the New Testament, in Rev 1:10, and Yeshua or His apostles never commanded us to keep that day special, while the Sabbath Commandment is seen throughout the Scriptures spoken out of the Mouth of God, written down with the Finger of God, and is part of the Commandments that are forever to which even Yeshua agreed(Mat 5:18, Luk 16:17). What most fail to see is that, “The Lord’s Day” also means the great day of judgement, which is also called “The day of the Lord” throughout scripture. (Isa 13:6, Joe 3:14, Oba 1:15, Zep 1:14, Zec 14:1, Mal 4:5, Act 2:20, 1Cor 5:5, 1Thes 5:2, 2Pet 3:10). In Rev 1:10, John could be saying that he is witnessing the great and dreadful Day of the Lord, as he is seeing what is about to happen at the end of time.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q5) There is no mention of the Sabbath in the book of Revelations
The book of Revelations contain a lot of information about the End Times. And true to the point made, there is no mention of the Sabbath in this book. But, is this definite proof that The Sabbath is no more? Let’s look at some facts.

Rev 12:17  And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.
Rev 14:12  Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.
Rev 22:14  Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city.

The Commandments mentioned in the book of Revelations are the 10 Commandments given by God. The Sabbath Commandment is also part of these 10. Additionally, In the future, after the Final Judgment, the Sabbath will still be in effect (Isa. 66:22-23). If the Book of Revelations mention God’s Commandments in a positive, if not indispensable way, how can anyone say that the Sabbath is no more using the Book of Revelations?

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q6) Col 2:16,17 proves that we do not need to keep the Sabbath
Col 2:16  Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

Some say, that this verse proves that Paul wanted no man to keep the Sabbath. People interpret this verse as: Let no man judge you “because you do not adhere to” meat, drink, respect of an holyday, the new moon, or the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.

But the converse can also be true. It could be interpreted as: Let no man judge you “because you do adhere to” meat, drink, respect of an holyday, the new moon, or the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. (Some of the Jews were known to dislike Gentiles who tried to obey God’s ways).

In Col 2:20-22, Paul goes on to explain that, we are not subject to laws, commandments and doctrines of men. We must ask ourselves only one question. Are the Food Laws or Sabbaths mentioned in the Word of God; laws, commandments and doctrines of men? The whole context on what not to do, is around laws & traditions of men (Col 2:8). Paul could be telling the new believers in Colossi, who were previously gentiles, who were trying to adhere to God’s Law, to not let anyone judge you and tell you how to keep God’s Law, other than how it is written in the Scriptures alone.

Additionally, another point to note is that Paul says that the Sabbath, Holydays, etc are “Shadows of things to come”. The reason God gave the Sabbath & holy days were as shadows of things to come. (Passover – Yeshua’s death / Pentecost – Giving of Holy Spirit / Trumpets – Yeshua’s Second Coming, etc) But, as Paul says, the completion of all things are in Yeshua.

If one says, Col 2:16,17 is proof that Paul told the Colossians not to be judged for not keeping the Sabbath. One could also say that Paul was telling the Colossians not to be judged for keeping the Sabbath as well.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q7) Yeshua said that I am working just as Father God is always working. So we do not need to keep the Sabbath, as Yeshua & God is working on the Sabbath
In John 5:17, Yeshua replies to the Jews who were trying to persecute Him for healing a man on the Sabbath saying that He works just as Father God does. What did He mean by “The Father works”? Yeshua did no miracle through His own power, but God worked through Him (Joh 14:10). He did the work of Father God(Joh 10:37). So, whatever miracles that Yeshua did was, actually the Father working through Him. And as we studied in the 1st part of this study, we know that the only work prohibited on the Sabbath was, what was done to make a living/ occupation done for monetary gain. Yeshua merely showed the pharisees and all who followed their teaching (which was contrary to God’s Word) that doing Good things was allowed and Lawful on Sabbath (Luk 6:9, Mat 12:12, Mar 3:4)

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q8) Yeshua gave Commandments that abolished the Old, which contained the Sabbath Commandment
Contrary to popular belief, Yeshua never replaced the 10 Commandments with 2 New Commandments. The 2 commandments mentioned in the New Testament were directly quoted from the Old Testament(Deut 6:5, 10:12(Love God) & Lev 19:18, 34(Love neighbor). These 2 Commandments were known by others before Yeshua spoke them out (Luke 10:25-28). The 2 Commandments were summaries of the 10 Commandments. (Please refer this post for further study on this subject)

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q9) The Sabbath Commandment is not a Spiritual Commandment, while we are asked to keep the Spirit of the Law, and not the letter of the Law
Some quote Rom 7:6, saying we are no more under the Old written Law(which included The Sabbath Commandment), but we serve Him through the Holy Spirit. The mistake these people make is not clearly understanding what Paul means by this remark. Let us review some of the things Paul says about the Law, in the letter to the Romans.

1. Paul does not make the Law void. He establishes it (Rom 3:31)
2. Paul says that the Law is not sin, and he would not have known what sin is, if it wasn’t for the Law (Rom 7:7)
3. Paul says the Law & the Commandments are Holy, just and good (Rom 7:12)
4. Paul says the Law is spiritual (Rom 7:14)
5. Paul delights in the Law of God (Rom 7:22)
6. Paul serves the Law of God (Rom 7:25)

Paul himself says that the Law(which contains the Sabbath Commandment) is Spiritual and that he serves, delights and establishes it. But then what does he mean by “delivered from the Law”?

Please read this post to understand more about the Biblical definitions of “Sin”, “Law” & “Grace.
In short, Sin is Breaking the Law/Lawlessness.(1John 3:4).
The Law can do only 3 things ;
1. Bless us if we keep it (Deut 11:26,27)
2. Curse us if we don’t (Deut 11:26,28)
3. Let us know what sin is (Rom 3:20, 7:7).

The new Covenant mentioned in Heb 8:8-11 which is quoted from Jer 31:31-34 says that God will put His Law inside our minds and write it on our Hearts. This is essentially the New Covenant. What Paul means in Romans 7:6 is that we are dead to the Law which said that we are cursed and deserve death for our sins, through Yeshua our Savior and His Righteousness. And that we serve God in Spirit rather than in written letter. (The written Commandments were rigid, while Yeshua taught how to connect Heart & Mind to the Commandments. Eg: The written Commandments said “Thou shall not commit adultery” while Yeshua said, “Even if you think an adulterous thought, you are committing adultery”)  Paul cannot mean that the Law & God’s Commandments are done away with, as he would be going against his own words listed up above. What he is saying is, that we no longer serve in the rigidness of the written Law, but the Spirit of the Law, which talks directly to our Hearts & Minds. In conclusion, this verse does not prove that the Sabbath with the other Laws of God have been abolished in any way.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q10) We are under grace and not under Law, so we do not need to keep the Sabbath
Some quote Rom 6:14 saying, we are not under the Law but under Grace, so we do not need to keep The Sabbath which is part of the Law. Please read this post to understand more about the Biblical definitions of “Sin”, “Law” & “Grace and what Paul meant by this verse.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q11) Yeshua is the Lord of the Sabbath, so this Commandment ends with Him
One of the favorite scriptures used to debunk the Sabbath is Yeshua being the Lord of the Sabbath (Mat 12:8, Mar 2:28, Luk 6:5). Some even say, that Yeshua showed that the Sabbath was not important by saying “The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath” in Mar 2:27.

The Sabbath was indeed made for man as God specifically said that it is given to man, so he would be refreshed(Exo 23:12), just like God rested on the seventh day and was refreshed (Exo 31:17).

Through Yeshua’s proclamation of being the Lord of the Sabbath in Mar 2:28, what did He mean? Remember, that this was the reply He gave to the Pharisees who accused His disciples of breaking the Sabbath, as discussed in Q1 in this post. Yeshua did not excuse the breaking of the Sabbath. He merely showed what it meant to break the Sabbath. (Please read question 1 in this post for a better understanding on this issue). And Yeshua, rightfully, is the Lord of the Sabbath. But this does not make the commandment void in any way.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q12) The Sabbath was made for Jews, not Gentiles. It was given to Israel and not the church
First of all read these definitions : 1. Jew & Gentile    2. Israel    3. Church
The Sabbath was not made for the Jews. It was made for man and given as a Commandment to Israel – God’s people. Jews are only one tribe of people, from the children of Israel. Gentiles are people who do not know God. Israel is God’s chosen people forever. The word “Church” means “assembly”, and it relates to the people who believe in God. If you believe in God you are part of the Church & Israel. You are no more a Gentile, when you come into the Covenant with God. If you believe in God, you have no choice but to obey His Commandments. We should obey Him because we Love Him, not because we have to obey Him. (Please read the links given above for more information on this subject).

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q13) It doesn’t matter which day you keep, as long as you keep one and you are fully convinced in your own mind according to Rom 14:5,6
Paul in the letter to the Romans said he does not make the Law void, he establishes it (Rom 3:31). The Law is not sin, and he would not have known what sin is, if it wasn’t for the Law (Rom 7:7). The Law & the Commandments are Holy, just and good (Rom 7:12). The Law is spiritual (Rom 7:14). He delights in the Law of God (Rom 7:22). He serves the Law of God (Rom 7:25).

The same Paul seem to be suddenly saying that we have the freedom to do as we will. Is Paul saying, that if we want to, we can eat anything and If we want to, we can keep or not keep the Sabbath if we are fully convinced in our own mind? Which means each of us can do things how we see fit instead of doing what God has commanded us. Or could it be that he is talking about a completely different subject, which is Fasting? The whole chapter is talking about eating or not, and what day is better than another. The argument could have been on what day was better to fast on. The fact is, the Sabbath is not mentioned here at all. Please read the whole Chapter for a better understanding on this verse.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q14) Sabbath keepers are working for their salvation and have fallen from Grace
In Gal 5:4, Paul tells the people in Galatia that “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” What does it mean to be justified by the Law?

Law, as we know is God’s Commandments.
Breaking the Law is Sin(1Joh 3:4).
And the Law can do only 3 things
1. Bless us if we keep it (Deut 11:26,27)
2. Curse us if we don’t (Deut 11:26,28)
3. Let us know what sin is (Rom 3:20, 7:7).

Can we attain righteousness by keeping the Law? Can we be justified in front of God by keeping the Law? Can we attain righteousness with our own strength? This is what Paul addresses in Gal 5:4. If anyone seeks to be justified by the Law(attain righteousness through their own power by keeping God’s Commandments), that person has lost God’s favor/grace, as he or she is putting faith in him/herself rather than in Yeshua, who was the atoning sacrifice for us. If Righteousness could have been attained by each of us through keeping the Law, Christs death is in vain (Gal 2:21). Yeshua died for all of our Sin. Because of His death, Sin has no more dominion over us. When Yeshua died for our sin, we moved from being under God’s Commandments and the penalty of breaking it, which is death, to being under His favor/Grace (Rom 6:14).  But, just because we have God’s Favour, and because we are no more under the penalty, can we Sin(Break God’s Law)?  No we cannot. (Rom 6:15). Please read this post for more information on this subject.

You fall from Grace if you try to attain righteousness by your own power, by putting faith in yourself. You do not though, fall from Grace by obeying God and His Commandments (which contains the Sabbath commandment) because you Love Him. Can you fall out of someones favor because you obey that person? Just by obeying God and His Commandments(which contain the Sabbath Commandment as well) you cannot fall from His Grace.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q15) Gal 4:9,10 specifically says not to be in bondage to observing days
Reading Gal 4:8, we understand that the people in Galatia did not know God at one time, and was serving things that are not God. Paul then goes on to ask in verse 9, why they are turning back to weak and beggarly elements, after they have come to know God. So the days, months, times and years mentioned in Gal 4:10 cannot be God’s Sabbaths and appointments. Paul just asked them why they are turning back to weak and poor principles/beggarly elements. Are God’s Sabbath and His Commandments the weak and poor principles Paul is asking the Galatia assembly about? Is this the bondage he is talking about? Or is it that the Galatians were turning back to their former observances done before?

We know that the Galatians did not know God at one time, and they wouldn’t have kept the Sabbath, when they did not know God’s Commandments. Ask yourself this question. If it was the Sabbath, Paul was talking about, How can the Galatians be turning back to observing the Sabbath which they did not observe in the first place? These observances must be days and months that come from different pagan cultures.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q16) Even if we do need to keep the Sabbath, we wouldn’t know which day it is because of the numerous calendar changes in history
The Seven Day Week has never been effected with the numerous changes done to the Calendar systems in history. Meaning there has never been 2 consecutive mondays, tuesdays, etc. The 7 day week has continued on as 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and so on and so forth, without any change. Which means the 7th day in Yeshua’s time is still the 7th day, today! (Please refer any Encyclopedia to recheck this theory) The 7 day cycle has never been broken to date!

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q17) There is no proof in Scripture that the Sabbath is Saturday
As we saw in the 2nd Part of this study, the word translated as “Sabbath” in our English translations come from (G4521 – σάββατον – sabbaton – sab’-bat-on) in the Original Greek Manuscripts. The word “Sabbato” is still in use in Greece, as Greeks call Saturday “Sabbato”. (Please check this for yourself in any Greek – English Dictionary) Let me put this in another way. In Greece, the day which is called “Saturday” is still called “Sabbato” – the same word which is in the Original Greek New Testament Manuscripts which is translated as “Sabbath” in English. SABBATH = SABBATO = SATURDAY. There is no doubt about it.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q18) There is no Sabbath service near to where I live. Am I to keep Sabbath by myself? Isn’t it better for me to go on a Sunday and worship God along with others?
We can worship God on all 7 days of the week. You are not breaking the Sabbath by going to a Sunday Service. The only thing which was banned on the Sabbath was your regular work. Even if you go to worship meeting on Sundays, remember that the Sabbath is the day which was separated and commanded to be remembered by God. It was a sign between Him and His people(Exo 31:13,17)

This is not some kind of ritual. You don’t need to light candles and say special prayers, as none of it is Commanded in the Scriptures. Refrain from buying, selling, working or making others work for money. Set the day apart for studying and worshiping the God of Creation and the Sabbath. Do anything and everything, if it means helping others in need. The Sabbath spans from Friday Sundown to Saturday Sundown as per the Biblical day (Lev 23:32, Neh 13:19, Luk 23:34)

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q19) How can this be right, when everyone I know including powerful Pastors & Teachers worship on Sunday instead of the Sabbath
The only thing I can say to you is, in the Bible itself there are many stories where the people who obeyed God was the Minority. Just because the majority does not obey God, it does not make the wrong, right. God could choose to use anyone to help people and release them from their infirmities (Even the pharisees had the power to cast out demons – Luk 11:19). Each of us is given a measure of knowledge by God. What matters is, what we do with that measure. “to whom much is given, much will be required”.

I used to believe that the Sabbath was no more as well, at one time. But when God opened my eyes to the Truth, I chose to obey. We cannot pick and choose what we like out of the Scriptures. We need to look at it as a whole and come to our own conclusions through the helper Yeshua left us, God’s own Holy Spirit. Pray for your friends, Pastors & Teachers, that they may also see the truth and start obeying God without question.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Q20) Their were strict Laws concerning the Sabbath such as not lighting a fire. Are we supposed to stay in the dark without cooking food just to observe this old Sabbath Law?
Some say, Are you seriously saying we need to keep a Commandment which even has a Law attached to it, which says you cannot even light a fire on the Sabbath? If God has commanded, we have to obey. But we need to understand what He meant by this first. What did He mean by not lighting a fire? Did He mean that everyone has to go hungry that day, because you cannot cook a meal? Did He mean that you have to sleep in the cold and freeze to death because you cannot light a fire? We have to understand God’s Words and His Laws before we make any assumptions.

In Exo 35:2,3, God speaks through Moses saying, Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you an holy day, a sabbath of rest to the LORD: whosoever doeth work therein shall be put to death. Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the sabbath day.
What is the context of Exo 35:3? Why does He say not to light a fire? Because God did not want anyone to do “regular monetary work” on that day. Remember that fire was essential for “work” at that time. If someone uses this verse to say “If you keep the Sabbath, you shouldn’t even cook using fire”, I would show them Exo 12:16 which talks about the High/Special Sabbaths of Unleavened Bread, and how God specifically says that people can prepare their meals on these special Sabbath days.

Some point to the punishment in Exo 35:2, and say, “Are we to put people who break the Sabbath to death? Surely, this is not a commandment for today”.
When this Commandment was given to the people, God himself reigned as King over them. He directly solved matters regarding everything through Moses. On the other hand, today, we are in exile. We are scattered around the world waiting for God to come back and establish His kingdom. He alone can punish a person who breaks His Commandments. When He said “shall be surely put to death”, that was a curse of the Law. The punishment for breaking God’s Commandments is Death. This is what Yeshua took upon Himself, so that we could have Grace when we fall short. It is not an open invitation for us to freely break God’s Commandments, just because we have Grace. That is making the blood of Yeshua into a worthless thing.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Conclusion
The Sabbath is quite a complex subject, with people teaching that it has been abolished for many hundreds of years. We must put our faith in God’s Word, rather than any man’s preaching or teaching and audit ourselves. Test every teaching and every verse we know, that goes against God’s Word. I sincerely hope this study has helped you clear out some of the questions you had. Even though it is a very long post, there was no way of shortening it more, as without hard facts shown through Scripture, we can make our own doctrines very easily. It has already led our world to have many denominations with various teachings which have no foundations in the Word of God. As with all of my other studies, I ask you to check everything which is written in this post and to make your conclusions using only the Word of God. May God Almighty bless you for your obedience in keeping His Commandments which include The 7th Day Sabbath!

Who were the Pharisees?

One of the recurring main characters throughout the New testament is the group called “Pharisees“. Common misconceptions regarding this sect of Judaism has led to a lot of confusion in Christianity.  The so called “Vipers” or “Hypocrites” according to Yeshua (Hebrew name of Jesus), represent the Old Testament and God’s “so-called” archaic Laws in lots of Christian minds. If you believe that the Pharisees were the ones who kept God’s Commandments perfectly, and Yeshua came and loosened these archaic Laws, I would like to showcase some “irrefutable evidence” from the Word of God to suggest otherwise.

Let’s start by asking a few questions about the pharisees? Who were they? Were they the ones who obeyed God’s Commandments & Laws in Yeshua’s time? Did Yeshua really condemn them because they were keeping God’s Commandments? Was Yeshua getting rid of the Commandments of God along with the Pharisees who kept them?

Let’s review some facts about the pharisees first, using the Bible as our guide

• The Pharisees were a sect of Judaism – Acts 26:5
• The Romans had given them the power and place/authority that they held – John 11:48
• They had power over the Synagogues – John 12:42
• They had their own officers and guard – John 7:32; 18:3 / Mat 26:65,66
• Some pharisees wanted to protect Yeshua – Luke 13:31
• Some pharisees were waiting to accuse Yeshua – Luke 11:53,54
• They had disciples of their own – Mark 2:18
• They traveled to make disciples  – Mat 23:15
• They did not keep God’s total Law – Mat 23:23
• They had their own law/doctrine/teaching – Mat 16:12, Mar 7:8, John 7:51
• Their disciples had power to cast out evil spirits – Mat 12:27
• They had many customs/traditions like washing of hands – Mark 7:3,5, Luke 11:38
• Paul was a pharisee – Philip 3:5, Acts 23:6; 26:5
• There was a division amongst them about Yeshua being righteous or sinful – John 9:16
• The 1st century church contained believers who were from this sect – Acts 15:5

Looking at the above scriptures, a few things should become clear to you:

1. Not all Pharisees were hypocrites. Some even believed Yeshua was Messiah(Acts 15:5)
2. Pharisees obeyed something other than God’s Law/Commandments, often called “Traditions of the elders” or “Traditions of men” (Mat 15:2,3,6/ Mar 7:3,5,8,9,13/ Gal 1:14/ 1Pet 1:18)

What proof is there to say that they did not keep God’s Commandments?
Let’s read Mat 15:1-20. The pharisees questioned why Jesus’ disciples did not eat with washed hands(Mat 15:1,2). Jesus replied by how they were breaking GOD’S LAW, by keeping the TRADITIONS OF MEN(Mat 15:3) and adding to God’s Law. This whole event revolved around the washing of Hands, and whether or not it makes you unclean(Mat 15:20). Mar 7 talks about the same event. The Pharisees asked why Jesus’ disciple are not keeping the “traditions of the elders“(Mar 7:5). They laid aside the COMMANDMENTS OF GOD to keep the TRADITIONS OF MEN(Mar 7:8,9). They broke GOD’S COMMANDMENTS because of their TRADITIONS(Mar 7:13). Paul kept these traditions before he beleived in Yeshua(Gal 1:14)

The Pharisees believed in another Law, other than the written Law of Moses, called the “Oral Law”. They believed that the “Oral Law” was passed down from Moses to Joshua, and to the Judges after them, and that the Pharisees were the keepers of this extra Law. This “Oral Law” is what was called “The Tradition of the elders” at that time, mainly because each Rabbi/Teacher of the Sect of Pharisees would teach the Oral Law to his students “Orally”, and these Teachers of the Law could add to this Law. This “Oral Law” has now been written down, and is available as a book called the “Talmud”. You can read more about the “Talmud” in any Encyclopedia. The Orthodox Jews, who you see clad in black with hats and beards, live by this “Oral Law” additionally to the “Written Law of Moses”. Even today, they do not eat unless they keep the tradition of washing the hands.(The “washing of the hands” is not in the Old Testament. It is not part of God’s Law). And their are many traditions like this, that I will not go into. If you want to learn more about the Pharisees and their traditions, I recommend that you watch this video. The Orthodox Jews could be called the Pharisees of the modern era, because they are keeping the same traditions. A Rabbi or teacher of the sect of the pharisees could make a law that would be added onto the “Oral Law”, making it a tradition or what they would call a “Law”. They believed that they had the authority to make and change Laws as they pleased, and that not even God or Prophets like Elijah could stand up against them. (I highly recommend that you watch the video linked above, to understand more about this Oral Law and who the Pharisees really were).

Did they really teach something different or in addition to God’s Commandments?
They taught doctrines of men INSTEAD OF the commandments of God (Mat 15:6,9, Mar 7:7)

But did they break and teach to break God’s Commandments?
Let us go back to Matthew 15 to see how they added to God’s Commandments.
In Mat 15:3-6 and Mar 7:10-13  Yeshua asked the Pharisees, Why do you disobey the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying, Honor your father and mother: and, He that curses his father or mother, let him die. But you say, Whoever that says to his father or his mother, It is a gift/Corban(Meaning an Offering), by which you profit, he does not have to honor his father or his mother, he is free. In this way, you have made the commandment of God “of none effect by” your tradition. What was Yeshua trying to explain here? He said that God’s Commandment was clear. We have to honor our parents. How do you honor your parents? By taking care of them and bringing honor to them by who you are. But what were the Pharisees tradition saying? A person could tell their parents, that whatever he uses to take care of the parents, is a gift/offering to God, and not have to take care of his parents. Has God ever said that we should give offerings to Him while our parents suffer? Does giving to God free us of taking care of our parents? The Pharisees had said that the offering was more important than taking care of your own parents. This is how they broke God’s Law. By adding to it and taking away from it. Which God specifically said not to do(Deut 4:2, 12:32, Prov 30:6). This is how they made God’s Commandments “of none effect” or worthless. By putting “Traditions of Men” above “God’s Commandments”.

The main thing to understand, is that the teachings of the Pharisees, was not the Commandments of God.

Yeshua taught to obey God’s Commandments.(Mat 5:19, 19:17, Joh 12:50). He also taught His disciples to beware of the Doctrines/teachings of the Pharisees.(Mat 16:11,12)

Some think that the “Washing of hands” is in the Old Testament. And Yeshua is abolishing those Old Laws. I would ask such a person to find exactly where the “Washing of hands” is mentioned in the Old Testament before you make up your mind.

Note:
I have purposely kept the argument between Yeshua and the Pharisees about the Sabbath (Luke 6, Mat 12, Mar 2:23), out of this study. (This will be covered in a Study that is done solely on the Sabbath, in the near future) Though, I would like to point out, that just like the “washing of hands”, another one of the Laws written in the “Talmud”, the “Oral Law” of the Pharisees, is specifically how one should not even pluck corn on the Sabbath Day.

In conclusion, I hope you have adequately understood the following:
The pharisees did not adhere to God’s Commandments.
They did not represent the Old Testament or God’s Laws.
Yeshua’s arguments with the pharisees does not mean He was going against Gods’ Law.
The pharisees had a Law of their own.
They broke God’s Commandments through keeping their own Laws

Even though the objective of today’s study is not to find answers to whether Yeshua freed us from the Old Testament Laws or whether He upheld God’s Law, I would note, learning who The Pharisees were, is one of the keys to getting rid of a lot of misunderstandings about Yeshua, His Teachings & God’s Commandments.