"The Beatitudes" and "Are You Prepared?"

On Saturday, March 28, 2009, Kalon Mitchell and Michael Link will give split sermons, titled, respectively, “The Beatitudes” and “Are You Prepared?”.

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

On Tuesday evening, after sunset, April 7, 2009, is Passover, followed by the Night to Be Much Observed on Wednesday evening, April 8, after sunset.

On Thursday, April 9, 2009, is the First Day of Unleavened Bread. Rene Messier will be giving the sermon in the morning from Oregon, and Norbert Link will give the sermon in the afternoon from California. Further announcements will be given in next week’s Update.

For those of our scattered baptized brethren who need to partake of the Passover at home, we are giving pertinent information in this Update, under Feasts.

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new member letter was sent out reporting about our recent conference. We attached a flyer to the member letter with important information regarding the Feast of Tabernacles 2009.

In addition, important Feast information has been posted on our various Websites.

A new StandingWatch program was recorded this week and will be posted shortly. It is titled, “Why Most Americans Disapprove of Obama Administration.”

Norbert Link’s new German sermon “In Frieden Leben” (“Living in Peace”), from March 18, 2009, was posted on Google Video.

Assume Love

by Kalon Mitchell (23)

I was recently listening to a podcast. The lady on the show was talking about assuming love. Now maybe this sounds very fishy to some of us, but the lady had a point.

She explained that many times when we are upset, we as human beings tend to just fly off the handle. We may also blow situations way out of proportion because we have a desire to want to be justified. But this is not right. Instead, she went on to say, many times we don’t have all the information or may not know or understand what is truly going on in another human being’s mind.

That being said, what if we could take any situation we are in and learn to put ourselves in that person’s shoes? If we tried to empathize a little more, and attempt to understand where someone is coming from, a lot of fights would not happen or continue.

For the last couple of weeks I have been trying to put this into action. At first it was hard and I would get mad at many of the things that go on in daily life! But the fact is that when I do assume love, I am more calm and can think more clearly about the situation at hand, instead of flying off the handle. This is the exact opposite of what Satan wants. He wants me to get upset with others and go for the throat.

When I feel myself getting upset, I need to take a deep breath. Rather than dwelling on something bad, I need to reflect on what is good. Rather than reacting with anger, I need to concentrate on “assuming” love. This helps to work out whatever it is that bothers me.

Would you please explain James 1:14-15?

The passage reads:

“But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.”

When and how does sin start? Does death only await us when sin is “full-grown”?

Vincent’s Word Studies explains that the terms “drawn away” and “enticed” “are metaphors from hunting and fishing.” It continues: “Drawn away, as beasts are enticed from a safecovert into a place beset with snares. Note the present participle, as indicating the progress of the temptation: ‘is being drawn away.’ Enticed– As a fish with bait. Also the present participle.”

We see, then, that a PROGRESSION is described.

In addition, the ORIGIN of sinful conduct is not mainly external, but INTERNAL. The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown explains:

“Every man, when tempted, is so [tempted] through being drawn away of… his own lust [or, desire]. The cause of sin is in ourselves. Even Satan’s suggestions do not endanger us before they are made our own. Each one has his own peculiar (so the Greek) lust, arising from his own temperament and habit… drawn away [describes] the beginning step in temptation: drawn away from truth and virtue. Enticed [means] literally, ‘taken with a bait,’ as fish are. The further progress: the man allowing himself… to be enticed to evil… ‘Lust’ [or ‘desire’] is here personified as the harlot that allures the man…

“The guilty union is committed by the will embracing the temptress. ‘Lust,’ the harlot, then, ‘brings forth sin,’ namely, of that kind to which the temptation inclines. Then the particular sin… ‘when it is completed, brings forth death,’ with which it was all along pregnant…”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible gives the following additional explanation, showing that the sin in the heart becomes manifest for all to see:

“… the fountain or source of all temptation is in man himself. It is true that external inducements to sin may be placed before him, but they would have no force if there was not something in himself to which they corresponded, and over which they might have power. There must be some ‘lust’; some desire; some inclination; something which is unsatisfied now… The original propensity may not be wrong, but may be perfectly harmless – as in the case of the desire of food… The error, the fault, the sin, is, not restraining the indulgence where we are commanded to do it, either in regard to the objects sought, or in regard to the degree of indulgence. ‘And enticed’ [actually means] Entrapped, caught; that is, he is seized by this power, and held fast; or he is led along and beguiled, until he falls into sin, as in a snare that springs suddenly upon him… Without doubt, the apostle traces the whole evil of temptation, which some falsely ascribed to God, to the sinful desires of the human heart…

“The whole passage, with the words and figures which are used, show that the idea in the apostle’s mind was that of an enticing harlot… The meaning is, when the desire which we have naturally is quickened, or made to act, the result is that sin is produced… In the mere desire of good, of happiness, of food, of raiment, there is no sin; it becomes sin when indulged in an improper manner, and when it leads us to seek that which is forbidden – to invade the rights of others, or in any way to violate the laws of God…

“‘It bringeth forth sin’ [means that:] The result is sin – OPEN, actual sin. When that which is conceived in the heart is matured, it is SEEN to be sin. The design of all this is to show that sin is not to be traced to God, but to man himself…

“There are, first, our natural propensities; those which we have as men… Such Adam had in innocence; such the Saviour had; and such are to be regarded as in no respect in themselves sinful and wrong. Yet they may, in our case, as they did in Adam, lead us to sin, because, under their strong influence, we may be led to desire that which is forbidden, or which belongs to another… And sin, when it is finished bringeth forth death…”

Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible alludes to the fact that James has the progression of sin in mind, which, through habitual conduct, may lead to committing the unforgivable or unpardonable sin:

“Every man is tempted (in an ill sense) when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. In other scriptures the devil is called the tempter, and other things may sometimes concur to tempt us; but neither the devil nor any other person or thing is to be blamed so as to excuse ourselves…

“The method of sin in its proceeding [is described:] First it draws away, then entices. As holiness consists of two parts – forsaking that which is evil and cleaving to that which is good, so these two things, reversed, are the two parts of sin. The heart is carried from that which is good, and enticed to cleave to that which is evil…

“Then, when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin; that is, sin being allowed to excite desires in us, it will soon ripen those desires into consent, and then it is said to have conceived. The sin truly exists, though it be but in embryo. And, when it has grown [to] its full size in the mind, it is then brought forth in ACTUAL EXECUTION…

“Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. After sin is brought forth in actual commissions, the finishing of it… is its being strengthened by FREQUENT ACTS and SETTLED INTO A HABIT. And, when the iniquities of men are thus FILLED UP, death is brought forth… the wages of sin is eternal death… Your own hearts’ lusts and corruptions are your tempters; and when by degrees they have carried you off from God, and finished the power and dominion of sin in you, then they will prove your DESTROYERS.”

It is correct that James is addressing here, foremost, the concept of the UNPARDONABLE SIN. All sin deserves the death penalty, and sin is not only to be seen in outward acts, but also in inward WRONG desires. Christ said that whoever LOOKS at a woman with the thought of committing adultery with her has already committed adultery in his heart and has therefore sinned in the eyes of God (compare Matthew 5:27-28). He also said that whoever HATES a person in his mind has already committed murder in the eyes of God (compare Matthew 5:21-22). But sin can be forgiven, upon repentance (1 John 1:8-10), unless it has reached such a state of habitual conduct that the perpetrator does not want to repent of it anymore. In that case, it is IMPOSSIBLE to renew such a person to repentance (Hebrews 6:4-6). His conscience is seared–he does not see anymore that what he does is evil; he has embraced his sinful conduct as a way of life to be desired. In that case, eternal death is the fate of such a person, and his sin–which began in his mind but which was allowed to grow unchecked–has led to the second and final death in the lake of fire from which there will be no resurrection (Revelation 20:15; 21:7-8).

We are admonished to bring every thought into the obedience of Jesus Christ–not to dwell on evil thoughts, but to eradicate them from our minds (2 Corinthians 10:5). Christ was tempted in all points as we are, but He never allowed any tempting thought to take root in His mind; He never allowed any natural desires to embrace sinfulness. When Satan tempted Him in the desert, He resisted Satan by dwelling on the Word of God. When people tempted Christ by either wanting Him to become their king or by ending His misery and pain at the cross, He rejected those tempting thoughts by dwelling on the Word of God. He never allowed desires to settle in His mind to conceive sin–let alone allowing sin to grow in His mind and to even manifest itself in outward acts.

We read that Christ, who had been GOD since all eternity, BECAME flesh–a human being. He came into sinful flesh (Romans 8:3), being born of the Virgin Mary who had human nature, but He overcame sin in His flesh. He never sinned once–not even in His mind. When He was in the garden called Gethsemane, He prayed to the Father to let the cup of torture and crucifixion depart from Him, if there was a different way to accomplish the same purpose for His Coming, but He added that the Father’s Will–not His own Will–needed to be done. He always submitted to God’s Will. His prayer for relief from death was a product of His human desire not to die, but this desire was not bad or sinful. IF, however, He had decided NOT to go through His ordeal and flee from the soldiers who had come to arrest Him, then He would have sinned, as He would have violated the Will of God. But He did not do this–in fact, He never entertained the thought of doing this. He never had the desire to disobey God; but He controlled His human desires so as to never entertain the thought of wanting to do evil.

With Christ living in us through His Holy Spirit, we CAN reach the same kind of mind frame which Jesus possessed. We are told to renew our mind (Romans 12:2); to acquire and have the same mind which Jesus had (Philippians 2:5). We, too, can CONTROL our thoughts and overcome any desires to sin. We CAN become more and more perfect by eradicating from our minds the very desire to disobey God and to sin.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

It’s Easter Time Again

On Saturday, March 21, 2009, Norbert Link will give the sermon, titled, respectively, “It’s Easter Time Again…”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new member letter has been written reporting on the recent Church Conference held on the dates of February 25-March 3, 2009, in San Diego, California. This letter will be sent to those on our mailing list in the next few days.

What is your position regarding the "Apostles' Creed"?

We do not consider the “Apostles’ Creed” as inspired–neither in the form used by the Roman Catholic Church, nor in its numerous variations used by Protestant churches. Some claim that the “Apostles’ Creed” is the oldest of all the Christian creeds. It is considered the basis of all other creeds in non-Catholic churches. As fairy tales would have it, some allege that each of the apostles supplied one article to the Creed. This claim is totally without merit. The apostles had nothing to do with formulating this Creed.

In “The Lost Books of the Bible,” the following is explained:

“Mr. Justice Bailey says [in Mr. Justice Bailey’s Common Prayers, 1813]: ‘It is not to be understood that this Creed was framed by the Apostles, or indeed that it existed as a Creed in their time,’ and after giving the Creed as it existed in the year 600… he says, ‘how long this form had existed before the year 600 is not exactly known…’ The most important ‘addition,’ since the year of Christ 600, is that which affirms, that Christ ‘descended into hell.’ This has been proved… to have been an invention… after the time of Eusebius.”

The Cambridge Encyclopedia, Volume 6, explains that the Apostles’ Creed is “a statement of Christian faith widely used in Roman Catholic and Protestant Churches, and recognized by the Orthodox Churches. It stresses the trinitarian nature of God (as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit)… In its present form, it dates from the 8th [century] but its origins go back to the 3rd [century].”

The encyclopedia continues:

“Many Lutheran sources label the Apostles’ Creed as ecumenical since the essential tenets of the creed are held in common by all Christians, though its practical use appears to be limited to Churches whose rituals are derived from the Latin rite (i.e. The Apostles’ Creed holds a special place in Roman Catholic tradition as the ‘ancient Baptismal symbol of the Church of Rome’)…

“Many hypotheses exist concerning the date and nature of the origin of the Apostles’ Creed. The earliest known concrete historical evidence of the creed’s existence as it is currently titled (Symbolum Apostolicum) is a letter of the Council of Milan (390) to Pope Siricius…”

In its present form, the Apostles’ Creed, as used by the Roman Catholic Church, reads as follows:

“I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord.
He was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit
and born of the Virgin Mary.
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried.
He descended to hell.
On the third day he rose again.
He ascended into heaven,
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit [or Holy Ghost],
the holy catholic Church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen.”

As mentioned, this Creed, as used by the Catholic Church, is not substantially different from the versions of many of the Protestant churches. It is widely used by a number of Christian denominations for both liturgical and catechetical purposes, most visibly by liturgical Churches of Western tradition, including Lutheranism, the Anglican Communion, and Western Orthodoxy. It is also used by Presbyterians, Methodists, Congregationalists and many Baptists.

Most even use the term “catholic” in the phrase, “I believe in the… holy catholic Church,” with the exception of a few Lutheran churches, especially those in Germany, which have replaced the word “catholic” with “Christian.” Those who have maintained the word “catholic” in their version of the Creed claim that it just means “universal.”

The doctrinal problems with the “Apostles’ Creed” are numerous.

First of all, it clearly suggests the belief in the Trinity–a belief which is a human invention and which cannot be found in the Holy Scriptures. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Is God a Trinity?”

It also suggests that Christ went to “hell,” while He was dead and in the grave for three days and three nights, apparently, so it is said, to preach to demons. This concept is false–Christ had NO CONSCIOUSNESS while in the grave, and He did not go anywhere. For more information, please read pages 26-28 of our free booklet, “Do We Have an Immortal Soul?”

Another wrong or at least misleading concept is expressed in the term, “I believe in the resurrection of the body.” Those who have died will not be resurrected with the same body they had. THAT body has long decayed. Those in the FIRST resurrection–who died “in Christ”–will be resurrected to immortal spirit life. Their physical body will not be resurrected at all. Those who died without having known and accepted the truth, will be resurrected in the SECOND resurrection to a physical life–but it will not be a resurrection of their physical bodies which they had when they died, and which since that time had long decayed. For more information, please read our Q&A on the resurrection of the body.

The statement that we believe in the resurrection of the body is not in accordance with Biblical teaching. For the exact nature of CHRIST’s resurrection, please read the above-mentioned Q&A on the resurrection.

Rather than following human attempts to create an “Apostolic Creed,” you might want to review our Statement of Beliefs, summarizing the essential doctrines of the Bible which Christians should believe in and adhere to.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock

A new StandingWatch program was posted on StandingWatch, Google Video and YouTube. It is titled, “Too Embarrassed for God?”

In the program, Norbert Link asks the questions whether you are ashamed to uphold Christian values and seemingly unpopular teachings of the Bible? Are you too afraid to reject the theory of Evolution? Do you think that you need to apologize for the biblical truth that man can ONLY be saved through Jesus Christ?

Is the "Epistle of Barnabas" inspired? Shouldn't it be part of the Holy Scriptures?

The “Epistle of Barnabas” is not inspired. It was clearly not written by the Apostle Barnabas. Mosheim states in his “Ecclesiastical History” that the author “must have been a very different person from the true Barnabas, who was St. Paul’s companion.”

The epistle contains numerous Scriptural errors and should therefore not be considered as inspired. It was never referred to by Jesus or any of the New Testament writers as Scripture, and it was not included in the New Testament by the apostles. As we explained in a prior Q&A, the apostles Paul, Peter and John canonized the New Testament Scriptures, but the Epistle of Barnabas was not one of those books.

The Catholic Encyclopedia explains that a reference in the Epistle of Barnabas (in chapter 4, verse 4) pertains to a command given by Adrian in A.D. 130 for the reconstruction, in honor of Jupiter, of the Temple at Jerusalem, which had been destroyed by Titus. Adrian had also forbidden the Jews to practice circumcision. The epistle must, consequently, have been written in A.D. 130-131–long after the canonization process of the New Testament writings was completed.

It is further explained that “the extremely allegorical character of the exegesis leads to the supposition that the author of the letter was an Alexandrian. His way of constantly placing himself and his readers in opposition to the Jews makes it impossible to believe that either he or the larger part of his readers were of Jewish origin. Besides, he is not always familiar with the Mosaic rites… The history of the epistle confirms its Alexandrine origin. Up to the fourth century only the Alexandrians were acquainted with it…”

Some Interesting Concepts

Even though the Epistle of Barnabas is clearly not inspired, it does contain some interesting concepts. For instance, the author speaks out against abortion. It says in chapter 19, verse 5 (We should note that some divide the epistle in different chapters than the ones given in this Q&A): “thou shalt not kill a child by abortion, neither shalt thou destroy it after it is born…”

Abortion is indeed wrong. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Are You Already Born Again?,” pages 13-15.

In addition, the author seems to refer to the belief of a 7,000 year plan–the concept that God assigned six “days” of 1,000 years each to man to rule himself, followed by the Millennium or the seventh “day” of one-thousand years, which is referred to in the book of Hebrews as a “Sabbath” rest (compare Hebrews 4:1-10):

We read in chapter 15 in the Epistle of Barnabas:

“(15:3) He speaketh, too, of the sabbath in the beginning of the creation: And God made in six days the works of his hands, and finished them on the seventh day, and rested in it and sanctified it. (15:4) Consider, my children, what signify the words, He finished them in six days. They mean this: that in six thousand years the Lord will make an end of all things, for a day is with him as a thousand years. And he himself beareth witness unto me, saying: Behold this day a day shall be as a thousand years. Therefore, my children, in six days, that is in six thousand years, shall all things be brought to an end. (15:5) And the words, He rested on the seventh day, signify this: After that his Son hath come, and hath caused to cease the time of the wicked one, and hath judged the ungodly, and changed the sun and the moon and the stars, then shall he rest well on the seventh day.”

For further information on the existence of a seven-thousand-year plan, see our Q&A.

Doctrinal Errors

However, the doctrinal errors contained in the Epistle of Barnabas are quite striking, showing that this book could not possibly be “inspired” by God. We are setting forth below some of its major errors:

Error #1:

The Epistle of Barnabas alleges that the Seventh-Day Sabbath has been replaced by the “eight day” Sunday, on which “Jesus rose from the dead.”

Quoting from the 1885 translation of the “Apostolic Fathers, Charles H. Hoole,” we read in chapter 15, verses 8 and 9:

“(15:8) And, further, he saith unto them, Your new moons and your sabbaths I cannot endure. See, now, what he meaneth. The sabbaths, that now are, are not acceptable unto me, but that which I have made is, even that in which, after that I have brought all things to an end, I shall make a beginning of the eighth day, which thing is the beginning of another world. (15:9) Wherefore we keep the eighth day as a day of gladness, on which also Jesus rose from the dead, and after he had appeared ascended unto heaven.”

Nowhere does the Bible teach that the Sabbath was replaced by Sunday; nor, that Sunday is the “eighth day”; nor, that Christ rose from the dead on Sunday. For more information, please read our free booklets, “Jesus Christ–a Great Mystery,” and “God’s Commanded Holy Days.”

Error #2:

The Epistle of Barnabas alleges that the dietary laws (as contained, for instance, in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14) were never meant to be understood literally and that they were never binding, in their literal application, on anyone, including Jews or Christians.

We read in chapter 10, verses 1-9:

“(10:1) But in that Moses said, Thou shalt not eat the swine, nor the eagle, nor the hawk, nor the crow, nor any fish that hath not scales in itself… The commandment of God is not, therefore, that they should not eat; but Moses spake in a spiritual sense. (10:3) He spake of the swine with this meaning: Thou shalt not cleave, he meaneth, unto men of this sort, who are like unto swine, for when they become wanton they forget their Lord, but when they are in want they think upon the Lord; even as the swine when it eateth knoweth not its lord, but when it is hungry it crieth, and when it hath received it is again silent. (10:4) Nor shalt thou eat of the eagle, nor of the hawk, nor of the kite, nor of the crow. Thou shalt not, he meaneth, cleave to, nor be like to men of this sort, who know not how to provide sustenance for themselves by labour and sweat, but in their iniquity seize the property of others, and, as though they walked in innocence, watch and observe whom they shall plunder, through their covetousness; even as these birds alone provide not sustenance for themselves by means of toil, but, sitting idle, seek out how they may eat the flesh of others, being destructive by reason of their wickedness.

“(10:5) And thou shalt not eat, he saith, of the lamprey, or the polypus, or the cuttle-fish. Thou shalt not, he meaneth, cleave to or become like unto men of this sort, who are impious unto the end, and have been already condemned to death, even as these accursed fish alone swim in the depth, not floating as the others do, but dwelling in the earth below the depth of the sea. (10:6) Thus, he saith, Thou shalt not eat the hare, meaning thou shalt not indulge in unnatural lusts; (10:7) nor shalt thou eat the hyaena, meaning thou shalt not be an adulterer; (10:8) nor shalt thou eat the weazel, meaning thou shalt not do uncleanness with thy mouth concerning food; (10:9) therefore Moses spake in the spirit these three doctrines. But they, according to the lusts of their flesh, received them as being about meat.”

This is utter nonsense and totally contradicted by Scripture. For more information, please read our free booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound.”

Error #3:

The Epistle of Barnabas alleges that the “Azazel” goat to be sent alive into the wilderness at the time of the annual Day of Atonement was a symbol of Christ, not of Satan. We read in chapter 7, beginning in verse 6:

“(7:6) How, then, did he give his commands? Attend ye. Take ye two goats, fair and like each other, and offer them up. And let the priest take one of them as a whole burnt offering for sin. (7:7) But what shall they do with the other? Let the other, he saith, be accursed. Now attend ye, how the type of Jesus is made manifest. (7:8) And do ye all spit upon it and pierce it, and put scarlet wool around its head, and so let it be cast out into the wilderness… One is brought to the altar, the other is accursed, and the accursed one is crowned, because they shall see him in that day, who had the scarlet robe about his flesh, and they shall say, Is not this he whom once we set at naught and crucified, and spat upon and pierced? Truly this was he who at that time said that he was the Son of God.”

The Azazel goat was NOT a symbol for Christ, but for SATAN. For more information, please read our free booklet, “The Sacrificial System and the Tabernacle in the Wilderness.”

Error #4

The Epistle of Barnabas alleges that the Twelve Apostles were the most unrighteous of all people prior to their conversion. It says in chapter 5, verse 9:

“But when he chose out his own Apostles, who were about to preach his gospel, they were men unrighteous beyond all sin, that he might show that he came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.”

Nowhere do we read anything like this in Scripture. To state that the apostles Peter, John and James, for example, were more unrighteous men than others–in fact, “beyond sin”–is utterly ridiculous.

For all the foregoing reasons, we must in no way view the Epistle of Barnabas as inspired. It is a book which contains some truth and many errors, and should not be viewed as a manual for Christian living or doctrine.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

©2024 Church of the Eternal God