A Biblical Cafeteria, or the Whole Course? Part 2
Copyright 1994 - 2018 Bill's Bible Basics

Authored By  :
Bill Kochman

Published On :
July 13, 1997

Last Updated :
January 3, 2009

Are Other Works Inspired Of God?

In part one of this article, I attempted to show how that,
despite the fact that the Apostle Paul may have never sat at
Jesus' feet, his writings were still every bit as inspired
as the rest of the New Testament books and epistles. In this
second part, I want to address some of the additional
comments made by those who inspired this article. To refresh
your memory, here is what was said:

"I would like the group to consider: Is the book of Mormon
Scripture? Is the Koran Scripture? Why then would Paul's
letters be considered as such? Messiah, while He was on
Earth, never mentioned anything but the TANAKH. If I write
you a letter and we hide it in the desert for a few thousand
years, does it become Scripture?"

----- End Of Quote -----

Let me commment on the last part of this statement first. I
am sure that everyone will agree that the idea of validating
a text for its scriptural worth based solely on how old it
is, should certainly be viewed as a lack of professional
integrity. I believe that when this person made the above
comment, he was more than aware that it was a weak argument.
Granted, dating a text or parchment is an important part of
the process; however, the ultimate decision as to what
should and shouldn't be included in our modern day Bible was
not based on the time factor alone. It was also based on how
much the writing in question concurred with all of the other
inspired texts of that period. If there was agreement
between them, if they spoke of the same characters and
events, if the writing style was similar, then these were
good indications that it might be a valid text. However, the
ultimate decision was based on the witness of the Spirit.
Did each newly-discovered or translated text agree in Spirit
with all of the others? Was the same Spirit of God detected
in them? Did the Spirit flow from one work to the other, or
was there conflict and contradiction?

This is one of the very things which confirms that what we
have today in the Christian Bible is in fact the inspired
Word of God. Despite the fact that it was written by so many
different authors over such a long period of time, the
entire book agrees with itself. It flows in Spirit from one
end to the other. As stated in part one of this article, the
Old Testament is the New Testament concealed, and the New
Testament is the Old Testament revealed. There are many many
prophecies in the Old Testament which find their completion
in the New Testament, particularly those dealing with the
life of Christ. There are absolutely no contradictions as
the enemies of Christ like to claim. If there is any
contradiction, it is not in the Word of God itself, but
rather in our poor understanding of it. In the case of those
who have consciously rejected the Bible, or at least some
part of it, God will purposely allow them to be decieved due
to their own hardheartedness and the darkness in their own
minds. As I have quoted before, the Lord says:

"I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their
fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer;
when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before
mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not."
(Isaiah 66:4)

So again, trying to use this example of burying something in
the sand for a few thousand years to discredit the writings
of Paul carries absolutely no weight. His writings were
judged by all of the above criteria, and not just by how old
they are.


In his above comment, the Messianic Jew also tries to make a
comparison, and a poor one at that, between the Book of
Mormon, and the Epistles of Paul. For the record, I have
read the Book of Mormon in its entirety. Actually, for
reasons which I will share shortly, it would be more
truthful to say that I struggled through the Book of Mormon.
I have likewise read other Mormon literature, and have had
chats in person, as well as electronically, with members of
the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. While they
disagree with my understanding of their religion, I am left
with the impression that it is a mixture of grace and works.
'Jesus saves us, but we need to help Him to keep ourselves
saved,' is what they seem to be saying. Perhaps I just don't
have a full enough understanding of their faith.

However, what bothers me the most about Mormonism is that
when pressed for an answer, adherents of the faith will
readily admit that they esteem the Book of Mormon above the
Bible. Unless my memory fails me, several decades ago, they
didn't even carry Bibles with them when they went house to
house. All they carried was their Book of Mormon and their
church literature. When it came to witnessing, out would
come the Book of Mormon instead of the Bible. From what I
understand, they have changed their strategies since that
time. But the fact remains; instead of seeing the Book of
Mormon as a supplement to the Bible, they view the Bible as
a supplement to the Book of Mormon. They feel that their
book is the new revelation.

In addition to the above, I did not feel the same Divine
Inspiration when I read the Book of Mormon. It is for this
reason that I stated previously that I struggled with it
just to complete it. The more I read it, the more I found
things which I had to seriously question. I felt like I was
walking in totally unfamiliar territory. As stated above, if
something is an inspired work of God, then it should have a
lot in common with all of the other texts which have been
verified as such. The Spirit should flow from one to the
other. The Book of Mormon contains very little of this.
Quite frankly, I find the whole story of the tablets, the
gold-rimmed glasses, the Thummim and the Urim, and Joseph
Smith staring into the darkness of his hat to translate the
tablets a bit far-fetched. While the Thummim and the Urim
are indeed mentioned in the Bible, they were not a pair of
magical glasses. Exodus chapter twenty-eight deals with the
garments of Aaron the High Priest. It is here that we read
of the two onyx stones worn on his garments. The Scriptures
say that these stones contained the names of the twelve
tribes of Israel:

"And thou shalt take two onyx stones, and grave on them the
names of the children of Israel: Six of their names on one
stone, and the other six names of the rest on the other
stone, according to their birth. With the work of an
engraver in stone, like the engravings of a signet, shalt
thou engrave the two stones with the names of the children
of Israel: thou shalt make them to be set in ouches of gold.
And thou shalt put the two stones upon the shoulders of the
ephod for stones of memorial unto the children of Israel:
and Aaron shall bear their names before the LORD upon his
two shoulders for a memorial. And thou shalt make ouches of
gold; And two chains of pure gold at the ends; of wreathen
work shalt thou make them, and fasten the wreathen chains to
the ouches...And thou shalt put in the breastplate of
judgment the Urim and the Thummim; and they shall be upon
Aaron's heart, when he goeth in before the LORD: and Aaron
shall bear the judgment of the children of Israel upon his
heart before the LORD continually." (Exodus 28:9-14, 30)

If you read the entire chapter, it seems to be indicating
that Urim and Thummim were the names given to those two onyx
stones which Aaron wore on his priestly garments.

Another thing which bothers me regarding the Mormon faith,
is that they adopt an attitude and a belief which is very
similar to other organizations I have had experiences with.
Like these others, they are of the mentality that they are
the chosen of God. They are God's organization. They were
founded by God's prophet, (Joseph Smith), and their leaders
are His twelve apostles. How many other organizations have
we heard of which make similar claims? Without getting deep
into their actual doctrines, these are just some of the
basic reasons why I reject the faith of the Mormons. To even
make a comparison between the Epistles of Paul and the Book
of Mormon is ridiculous to say the least in my view.


As to comparing the Pauline Epistles to the Qur'an (Koran),
I also find this to be a weak argument. There is absolutely
nothing in common between the writings of Paul and the
Muslim holy book. I have undertaken to read parts of the
Qur'an, and perhaps someday I may yet finish it, time
permitting. Perhaps I may be mistaken, but it seems to me
from what I have read thus far, that Muhammad may have been
trying to explain Christianity to his Arab brethren in a way
which they could understand it. If not that, then he was
trying to incorporate some Christian teachings into his own
doctrine. Regardless of what his motivations and intentions
may have been, the Muslims turned around and idolized their
prophet and just about made a god out of him. I do not
believe that Muhammad intended for this to happen. In fact,
I also question if Muhammad really taught his disciples that
it was honorable to kill for the faith. This is one aspect
of Islam which many adherents of the faith try to keep
undercover. I wonder if this might not be something which
was added later by special interest parties. If Muhammad did
teach this, then this is in direct contradiction to the
teachings of Christ, and I must reject Islam wholeheartedly
as just another false religion cooked up by Satan. In
addition to these points, devout Muslims openly admit, as
their literature clearly demonstrates, that they believe
that Muhammad was God's final prophet. They believe that he
was greater than Jesus, and that like Jesus, Muhammad
ascended bodily into Heaven. In other words, in Muslim eyes,
Mohammad is not just equal to Jesus, he is greater. No
sincere Christian can possibly accept this idea.


What we need to remember about all of these other religions
and supposed 'holy' writings, is that they are false
imitations. It doesn't matter how much they sound like the
Bible. It doesn't matter how much they teach the same
spiritual principles, wise philosophies, love for your
fellow man, care for the Earth, etc. That is exactly part of
Satan's bag of tricks. He offers people all of these other
belief systems such as Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism,
Zoroastrianism, Hinduism and their many modern New Age
derivatives, which almost seem identical to The Truth, but
they aren't. And do you know why they aren't? If you are a
believer in the True Jewish Messiah, then I am sure you
already know the answer: none of them can offer eternal
life, because they all leave out the Main Ingredient...Jesus
Christ, Yeshua the Messiah, the Son of God Who died on the
cross for the sins of the world. They can offer all of their
wisdom and mystical practices, but in the end, it is all
dead works...and it will leave you spiritually dead if it
does not bring you to Jesus. After all, Jesus is the only
one Who said:

"...I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh
unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6)

These other religionists, be they Muslim or otherwise, can
shout and holler about how good their religion is as much as
they want, but unless it acknowledges Jesus as the only
begotten Son of God, and not just as another great prophet,
Ascended Master, Sananda, Krishna or whatever other titles
they may give Him, then it is a lie. This is exactly what
the Qur'an does. Yes, it speaks about some of the very same
people and events as the Bible does, albeit by different
names than most of us are familiar with. Afterall, the Jews
and Arabs are half-brothers through Abraham; they share a
common history up to a certain point. However, the Qur'an
falls short on the key point; and it is for this reason that
we must reject it and any other purportedly 'holy book,' as
being a cheap counterfeit without any degree of true Divine
Inspiration. If it was truly inspired, it would contain the
whole counsel from God, and not just a partial answer. It
would point us to the One who can save us.


Satan is very subtle. He will give all of these poor
deceived people everything they need to know except the one
thing which will free them from his grip. Sadly, this demon
of darkness hasn't been happy with just spreading his lies
of the ancient mystic religions of the East. Today he has
added a new flavor to the poisonous candy he offers. It is
called New Age thought and New Age religion. Those of you
who are already familiar with my writings know how I have
already exposed the lies and subtlety of one of these modern
deceptions: the Urantia Book. In a way, it is much worse and
more deceptive than the others, because the Urantians do
preach Jesus. They even say He is the Son of God. Of course,
they delve into all of their complicated New Age jargon as
well which includes a lot of terminology which the common
man cannot even begin to understand. It certainly isn't the
simple Gospel which Jesus preached! You almost need a degree
just to be able to understand the Urantia Book. The
adherents of the Urantia Book claim that it is not New Age
because it has been around since the early part of this
century. However, if you dig a little deeper, you discover
that this book was purportedly received as a set of papers
from some higher spiritual beings, through a technique which
is similar to, if not identical to what is commonly known
today as New Age channeling.

In addition to the above, just like the Mormons and other
modern-day religious groups, the followers of the Urantia
Book hold their book in higher regard than they do the
Bible. They are not the first group to do this, but the
Urantians do continue in this practice. They, and other
groups like them, will even quote from their writings as if
it is the New Age Scriptures, the New Revelation, as the
Urantians prefer to call it. From my own former experiences
of many years ago, I also know that the members of the
Children of God/Family Of Love also consider the writings of
their 'prophet' Moses David as being the word of God, and
they also quote and memorize it on a regular basis. Of
course, that brings up a whole new issue: weren't the
Gospels, the book of Acts and the Epistles new Scriptures at
one time? For that matter, wasn't the entire Bible new
Scriptures at one time? At what point did it become
universally recognized as the Word of God? At what point did
it become permissible and socially acceptable to memorize
and quote from it? Perhaps some day I will have time to
address these questions more in full.

In the case of the Urantians, they will say, 'Oh yes, we
read the Bible!' However, as I pointed out in various other
articles dedicated to exposing the false doctrines of this
satanically deceptive book, they read it with a critical
eye. They claim it is full of errors and things which Jesus
never said. In fact, they go as far as to say that Jesus did
not come to die on the cross for the sins of the world! They
claim that they are the New Christians, and that they have
the New Revelation from God which states in part that we got
it all wrong, that the blood atonement is a false doctrine!
They say that the very thought of someone having to die on a
cross for our sins is barbaric and repulsive to them! Well,
of course it is repulsive! Having to kill anything is
repulsive! Maybe if more of us watched when cattle where
slain for their meat, we would all start being vegetarians.
The point is, as explained in other articles, God's plan of
redemption was at work since the Old Testament. Only through
the pouring out of blood is there remission of sins. If we
were to accept the lies of the UB people, then just being
good and following Jesus' example, and forgiving each other
is all that is needed to merit eternal life. In short, they
basically deny a major part of the salvation message which
tells us that we are all sinners in need of a Saviour. In so
many words, they seem to be saying, 'We can save ourselves.
Jesus didn't have to die on the cross.' You see, it is a
totally self-righteous works trip, and not a doctrine of
faith and grace. Similar to other New Age doctrines, the
Urantian doctrine says that we have become our own gods. We
can save ourselves just by being good and loving and
forgiving. Sorry folks, but the Bible paints a very
different picture!

One of the typical tactics used by these people when accused
of being false prophets by sincere Christians, is to make a
comparison between themselves and Jesus and the Early
Disciples. They say that just as the Jews of old accused
Jesus and His followers of being possessed by the devil, we
Christian non-believers are doing the same today. Folks, do
not fall for this deceitful ploy! Satan, through the mouths
of those deceived by the doctrines of the Urantia Book, is
twisting the Truth of God, and unless these people repent
and come back to the Truth of the Gospels, they will face
certain chastisement and possible destruction. In the light
of the Scriptures, the doctrines espoused by these people do
not stand up to scrutiny, plain and simple. If you are
interested in more specifics regarding the UB, as it is
commonly called, please refer to my two articles under the
'Aliens, UFOs And New Age' articles group at the website,
as well as the article 'The Blood Atonement: In Jesus' Own
Words' under the 'Salvation And Holy Spirit' articles group.


On this same topic of what is and what isn't the inspired
Word of God, our friend the Messianic Jew was then
questioned regarding his opinion of the Apocrypha. For those
of you who may not be aware, the Apocrypha consists of a
series of books or fragments which are not included in the
common Protestant Bible. They are referred to as apocryphal
works because their Divine Inspiration and authorship was
placed in question by some of the Church Fathers. These
texts are: The Prayer of Azariah (added to the book of
Daniel), the book of Baruch, the book of Bel and the Dragon
(added to Daniel), 1 Esdras, 2 Esdras, additions to the book
of Esther, the Epistle or Letter of Jeremiah (Jeremy), the
book of Judith, 1 Maccabees, 2 Maccabees, Prayer of
Manasses, the book of Sirach (aka Ecclesiasticus), the Book
of Wisdom (Solomon), the book of Susanna (added to Daniel),
and the book of Tobit. While these books and segments are
not found in the Protestant Bible such as the Authorized
King James Version, most of them are included in the
Catholic Bible. Our Jewish friend commented as follows
regarding the Divine Inspiration of the Apocrypha:

"Well, since Chanukkah is recorded in 1 & 2 Maccabees, the
'Official' stand is: they were never in the Holy Scrolls,
HOWEVER, they were regarded as important historical

----- End Of Quote -----

I personally possess and have read the Apocrypha. Although
it has been some time since I did so, as I recall, I was
left with the impression that there is Divine Inspiration in
most of it. The writing style and the flow of the narratives
seems, in my opinion, to go right along with what we find in
the King James Bible. Some of the same characters are
mentioned, and some of the narratives are simply extensions
of what we already have in the KJV. In other words, I don't
recall having seen any blatant contradictions to what is in
the KJV. In my view, the only exception to the rule may be
the two books of the Maccabees. I personally don't feel that
they are inspired. They seem to be more historical in nature
and really don't appear to uplift the Lord as in the other
writings. Something else I noticed is that the characters
mentioned in the books of the Maccabees cannot be connected
to those we find in the KJV, as those in the other books
can. Thus, I have certain reservations regarding the books
of the Maccabees. Perhaps I should also mention that I have
undertaken to read other apocryphal and pseudepigraphal
works as well. I must admit that the vast majority are
highly questionable inasmuch as Divine Inspiration is
concerned. The only one which struck a chord with me is the
book of Enoch which I have commented on and quoted from in
other articles such as in 'The Book Of Enoch: Truth Or
Heresy?' I encourage you to read it if you haven't done so
already. You may agree with me, and then again, you may not.

What it really comes down to is, where do we draw the line
of distinction here? What criteria, other than the Dead Sea
Scrolls and other ancient Hebrew and Greek texts, can we use
as a frame of reference for determining what is and what
isn't the inspired Word of God? Who really has enough Godly
wisdom and guidance to decide on such a matter? Should we
just trust the judgment of the Church Fathers, or should we
each trust in our own witness of the Spirit? For many years
I have unquestionably accepted the Authorized King James
Version as the purest translation of the Word of God. When I
began delving into these other apocryphal and
pseudepigraphal works, it wasn't because I doubted the
Divine Inspiration of the King James Bible; I just wanted to
see what else was out there. I wanted to discover what was
left out and why it was omitted. Being of the inquistive
nature than I am, I wanted to make a determination for
myself which I could then compare with the conclusions
arrived at by the Church Fathers. As stated previously, what
I am seeing thus far is that for the most part, they were
right in their judgments. A lot of these other works do not
impress me as being Divinely Inspired in the least. There
are still many which I have yet to read. Perhaps as I
continue in my studies, I will have more to say on this.


On a related subject, as I touched on above, we must ask
ourselves, is God still speaking today? Does He have His
prophets and emissaries who are giving us, not necessarily
new information, but perhaps expanding upon what has already
been given in the Recorded Word? If God has stopped talking
to modern man, at exactly what point in history did this
occur? Some use the following verses from the book of
Revelation to claim that the Lord stopped speaking almost
2,000 years ago:

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the
prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these
things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written
in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words
of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part
out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from
the things which are written in this book."
(Revelation 22:18-19)

Personally, my understanding is that these verses only apply
to the actual revelation given to John. I am not fully
convinced that they were meant to be applied to the entire
Bible as some Christians like to do. We must ask ourselves
then, why are some people so intent on shutting God up?
Exactly what is it that they are afraid of? Do they fear He
might say something which they will not like? Are they
afraid that the Lord might expose their sins? Is it possible
that God does indeed have His modern-day prophets and that
the vast majority of us have simply shunned, ridiculed and
villified them due to our ignorance of things of the Spirit?
Many of us believe that God speaks to us and guides us on a
personal level through His Holy Spirit. If this is true,
then what would prevent Him from selecting someone to speak
to us on a local, national or even international level? Are
we saying that the Lord can speak to us personally, but we
must not even consider that He might speak to more people on
a larger scale through a modern day representative? And that
is exactly where the problem lies. There are many different
religious faiths, Christian and non-Christian alike, which
claim that they are that Representative or Voice. As I have
said many times, the criteria by which we as Christians
should judge them all, is the Word of God, the Bible. If
what they say and teach is in total agreement with the Word,
then maybe they are sent of the Lord...but if not, we should
shun them as workers of darkness.

What about the gifts of the Spirit such as tongues, healing
and prophecy which Paul mentioned in his epistle to the
Corinthians? Are they still valid today? Some say that they
are, while others deny them saying that they were just for a
time to give the early Christian Church a strong spiritual
foundation. Naturally, I cannot answer this question for
anyone except for myself. I believe we all have to operate
according to our own faith. Having been involved in what I
was taught were the gifts of tongues and prophecy in times
past, I tend to hold a very reserved attitude nowadays. With
so much deception and lying spirits in the world, I prefer
to exercise caution and even a healthy degree of skepticism
regarding such matters. In the case of the gift of prophecy,
I particularly regard this as a very serious matter. There
are many so-called 'prophets' in the world today who claim
to be the very voice of Jesus or of God Himself. For any
human to accept the responsibility of saying such a thing is
not something which should be taken lightly. I would tremble
in my boots before making such a claim. Believe me, I speak
from experience as I have made the same claim in times past.
I have prophesied in the name of the Lord...or at least what
I thought was the voice of the Lord. Nowadays I must
question how much of it was really the Lord, and how much of
was just my own spirit. I do not say these things to squelch
those who may be true prophets of God; but I do say them so
that you will seriously consider what you are doing before
you do make such a claim. I'd sure hate to be wrong,
wouldn't you?

I recommend the same cautious attitude towards miraculous
apparitions, angelic voices and other manifestations
commonly reported within certain religions such as
Catholicism. Let me again direct the reader to other of my
articles such as 'Lying Wonders Of The Endtime' where I
expose the devices of Satan. As said there and elsewhere,
our faith is built upon the solid sure Word of God, and not
upon the need for physical manifestations of any kind. Faith
which requires physical signs and wonders is not true faith.
These things may result as a by-product of our faith, but
they should not be necessary to create faith within us to
begin with. We should compare everything to our knowledge of
the Scriptures and to the experiences of how God has worked
in our lives. If you have a doubt about anything, if it
doesn't appear to conform to God's Word, if you don't have a
positive witness of the Spirit, then it is probably best to
reject it. I think the best thing we can all do is to
operate according to the inspired Word of God which we do
have and leave it at that. After all, most of us have a hard
time living by what we already know anyway, don't we? At the
same time, we don't want to go so far to one extreme that we
totally reject the possibility that God might indeed perform
miracles today. Speaking from personal experience, I am not
sure that I have ever witnessed a true bona fide miracle.
There are a few instances where the possibility has existed,
but I can't say with any degree of certainty. Neither have I
ever witnessed any type of miraculous apparition or angelic
voice. To be honest, I don't feel that I need these things
in my life. My God's grace, my faith is sure without them.


Returning to the central theme of this article, there is one
other topic which I feel I should discuss. As some of you
will know, in a number of articles where I discuss grace
versus law, I have made the statement that Jesus came to
fulfill the Law. Through quite a few scriptural references,
I have explained this as meaning that through fulfilling all
of the Old Testament prophecies, and by ultimately giving
His life on the cross, Jesus brought an end to and did away
with, or terminated, the Mosaic Law. He was the final blood
sacrifice. I have tried to demonstrate this through a series
of verses such as those used by Paul in his epistle to the
Galatians. Another one I have quoted frequently is Romans 7:4
which states:

"Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law
by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another,
even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should
bring forth fruit unto God." (Romans 7:4)

Some folks who believe that we are still under the Law have
had a hard time understanding exactly what it means to be
dead to the Law. Some may even question how I can say that I
believe in the whole Bible when I have clearly stated that
the Mosaic Law is outdated, outmoded, and that we are dead
to it. Again I must ask you, what do think I mean by this?
Do you think I am saying that it is now okay to murder,
commit adultery, rob people, and commit other acts of
violence which the Mosaic Law clearly prohibits? Obviously,
this is not what I mean. Without getting into a lot of
Scriptures which I have already quoted in other articles,
let me just say that being dead to the Law means that we
realize that no matter how hard we try to observe all of the
different ordinances of the Mosaic Law, we will never live
up to it. As I quoted from the epistle of James in part one
of this article, if you break even one of the commandments
of the Law, you are guilty of breaking all of them. We will
never earn or merit eternal life due to our observance of
the Mosaic Law because none of us can keep it. The Mosaic
Law basically teaches us two things: First, it teaches us
what kind of behaviour God expects from us, that is, it is a
schoolmaster; and second, it shows us that we are sinners
because we will never be able to live up to God's
expectations. Sin, as John explained it, is simply the
transgression, or breaking of the Law:

"Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for
sin is the transgression of the law." (1 John 3:4)

Simply put, the Law teaches us that we are sinners. It
teaches us that we need a Saviour. With Jesus' death on the
cross, we are now to put our faith in Him for our salvation,
and not in the old Mosaic Law. The Law cannot save us, so we
should not have faith in it. We are dead to it, and by its
very ordinances, we are in fact dead, if we think we still
have to observe them.

Think again on what I said in part one of this article. When
it came down to the real nitty gritty, when confronted by
Paul, even The Elders at Jerusalem had to admit that
circumcision (a part of the Old Mosaic Law), cannot save
anyone, that it is no longer a necessary practice. They had
to decide right then and there where their faith was. Was it
in still obeying the Law, (works of the flesh), or was it in
the blood of Jesus, (the work of the Spirit)? This is what
being dead to the Law is all about.

With His death on the cross, Jesus brought in a New Covenant
and a New Law...and that is the Law of Love. In a sense, God
was saying, 'Look, I am making a new set of rules, much more
simplified than the last. I realize that you can't possibly
keep all of the Mosaic Law, so here is the New Deal; here is
My New Covenant with you.' That New Convenant was sealed by
the blood of Jesus Christ. Based on the New Covenant, we
will now be judged, not by whether or not we can observe all
of the practices of the Mosaic Law, but rather by how much
of what we do is motivated by love. Of course, as I have
pointed out in other articles, if we love someone, then of
course we are not going to kill them, steal from them, go to
bed with their wife, or anything else. So you see, in a way,
the Law of Love is just as demanding of us as the Mosaic Law
was, but what we now realize is that doing these things will
not save us, only our faith in Jesus will. Why? Because He
did what we cannot; He fulfilled the whole Law, thus
becoming the perfect sacrifice on the cross. Through that
sacrifice, He opened the way for a new agreement between God
and man. If He hadn't kept the whole Law, then His sacrifice
would have been invalid. But He did, and now all we have to
do is put our faith in that sacrifice instead of in the Law.

This is exactly why Paul said that we are married to another
in Romans 7:4. The Mosaic Law was our old master, our former
schoolmaster, our old husband. But now, Paul tells us that,
as the bride of Christ, we are to be married to another. We
are to enter into a new relationship. We cannot be married to
both the Old Law and Jesus. That is akin to polygamy, or
perhaps even spiritual adultery. We are to be married to
only One, and that is Jesus. We cannot love both, we cannot
be saved by both. We cannot have two husbands. After all, we
are told many times that our God is a jealous God. He won't
put up with it. As Paul said, either we are saved by grace
(faith in Jesus), or by works (trying to keep the Old Law):

"And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise
grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no
more grace: otherwise work is no more work." (Romans 11:6)

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but
according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of
regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" (Titus 3:5)

People who say that Jesus saves us but who still insist on
water baptism, circumcision, or other works of the Law, are
basically saying that they want to be married to both. They
want to accept the new relationship, but they aren't quite
ready to give up the old one yet. Try that in real life and
see what happens. <grin>

So, as you can see, by saying that we are dead to the Law is
not to deny part of the Bible. It is not to pick and choose
just what we like and leave the rest. It is simply accepting
the New Conditions, the New Rules laid out in the New
Testament, the New Covenant. You can only drive an old car
so far and so long. Eventually you have to trade it in for a
new model. That is what Jesus is; He is the author of the
New Model, the New Covenant, the New Law. He is in the
Driver's Seat, and He wants to take us to Heaven if we will
just hop on board and leave behind the decrepit old model
which has run out of gas. I don't think I can make it any
clearer than that. You can stay with your '52 Chevy, or else
you can grab a seat in God's Celestial Sedan. Won't you
please leave the driving to Him? Or do you prefer to try to
get there yourself by trying to fix that old chevy of yours?


In conclusion, I believe in and accept the entire 1611 KJV
Bible as the inspired Word and Full Counsel of God, from the
pages of Genesis, to the pages of Revelation. The KJV has
stood the test of time. It has changed countless lives and
saved millions of souls over the past three hundred plus
years. I personally believe that those who translated and
compiled it were God-fearing men, Spirit-filled men who
carefully and prayerfully considered the usage of every
word. I believe that God has ensured and preserved the
veracity, validity and true meaning of His words within its
holy pages. While some newer versions may do this as well,
there are others which do the exact opposite. They are
spiritless and dry. Is this to say that the KJV is a perfect
work? Of course not. Afterall, it is a product of human
endeavors to translate the Spirit of God into print.
Undoubtedly, there probably are some minor discrepancies
from the original Hebrew and Greek texts, but I believe they
are just that, minor, and not of enough significance to
where they would alter the overall message the Lord wishes
to convey to us. I believe that God is powerful enough that
He would not allow politics or human religious philosophies
to corrupt what He has given to His prophets, apostles and
disciples. I honestly don't know if I can say that for some
of these newer versions. It is all really a matter of faith.
We should each use whatever version we feel most comfortable
with. The most important point to consider is, do we accept
it all, or do we not? I hope this article has been an
encouragement and a blessing to many.

BBB Tools And Services

Please avail yourself of other areas of the Bill's Bible Basics website. There are many treasures for you to discover.