Matthew

[@lenorewang6573]

He’s always a generous n brilliant teacher, but this one is so rich it requires 2 listens. Amazingly packed!

[@edgarsiaton8222]

❤️ watched from Philippines 🇵🇭

[@revin_john]

Thank you so much! I have had lots of confusion about a few scriptures and the sermons on this channel helped me to understand things much clearer

[@Asegh]

Shabbat shalom

[@saysharon]

Praise God for this explanation!

[@satreddy2825]

Thanks again for the message

[@bryanfields]

The eveready bunny of scripture and teaching!

[@rosepetal9748]

❤❤❤

[@guidetv7379]

Thank you

[@QueenCityFilmsComm]

I see that he didn’t deal with remarriage at any serious level lol. I see this type of move WAYYY too often by pastors. Even the great RC Sproul “ conveniently” overlooked it in his sermon treatment of the same verse. What’s not clear on his position on remarriage is when a husband divorces his wife (or vice versa) for any issue that is not based upon infidelity. The question is does she have the right to remarry then or is she bound by her vows to a lifetime of singleness (essentially nunnery)? He references “something” very slightly when he says that Christ argues that you’re going to make adulterers everywhere, but he doesn’t deal with it in great detail in any robust way. My assumption is that he didn’t want to offend many in his congregation that are in fact in this very type of sinful relationship currently. This is actually a VERY IMPORTANT question however, and the pastor’s position should be absolutely clear. Ex. Can a woman who is married to a man (who is a professing Christian) at the age of 22 remarry at the age of 27 if her husband divorces her for let’s say irreconcilable differences (that she doesn’t agree with at all and begged him to stay) or would this be considered perpetual adultery (non ceasing and willful sin everyday that she remains remarried to her second husband) because in the eyes of God, they’re not truly divorced? In other words, what God put together let no man or civil magistrate take apart. This issue the real question and it was unfortunately completely avoided

[@nickt6746]

Sorry, I still don't understand Mathew 5:17. We are saved by Grace and not by works, I get that, but if no letter of the law has passed away, then why shouldn't we follow the Old Testament laws? Shouldn't we obey them just to please God? Some of them are already listed in the New Testament, like staying away from blood etc, so why aren't people following all of them?

[@JohnAdams-zh4tz]

Two things: Jewish idiom: Matthew 5:18, “until heaven and earth disappear” should be understood as a hyperbolic way of saying that the Law will stand until God’s ultimate plan is completed, which for Christians includes the fulfillment of God’s redemptive work through Jesus Christ. The idiom points to the lasting authority of God’s commandments until the fulfillment of God’s redemptive plan, not necessarily the literal end of the physical universe. Second thing. Think the key is end of verse: until everything is accomplished, fulfilled. Everything stays in place until the cross. At that point Grace and the New Covenant take over. As you point out - the commands repeated in NT from OT are still valid

[@nickt6746]

@JohnAdams-zh4tz God's redemptive plan is not yet fulfilled and it won't be fulfilled until heaven and Earth is destroyed and "the elements will melt with fervent heat". That's when having an earth will actually pass away. Jesus's disciples continued observing the law after his death, and early church fathers observed the law as well, it wasn't until 3rd century when Romans completely took over the church and changed it.

[@JohnAdams-zh4tz]

@@nickt6746 heaven and earth passing away” can be understood as a Jewish idiom, often signifying the most permanent, unshakable realities. In ancient Hebrew thought, “heaven and earth” represented the entire created order - everything that exists. When Jesus uses this phrase in passages like Matthew 5:18 (“Until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law”), it emphasizes the enduring authority of God’s Word and covenant, not literal cosmic destruction. This idiom can also signal profound covenantal shifts, such as the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant, rather than the literal end of the physical universe. It’s a way of expressing something as lasting or permanent from a human perspective, often tied to the stability of God’s promises.

[@nickt6746]

@@JohnAdams-zh4tz You're basically proving my point that the law will not pass away no matter what. God's covenants are forever and the old covenants are still going on in addition to the New covenant, they are not mutually exclusive. The very definition of sin is violation of God's laws. 1 John 3:4 “Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.” Romans 7:7 “What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Certainly not! On the contrary, I would not have known sin except through the law. For I would not have known covetousness unless the law had said, “You shall not covet.”

[@JohnAdams-zh4tz]

@@nickt6746 It seems I am not posting clearly. You are reading literally and the cultural use on Israel of this idiom is not saying what you think. Also the second half - of verse only says the Law will be fulfilled - not the prophets because they include the Second coming. The Law is fulfilled in Christ, and at the cross the New Covenant starts. That is the crux of the verses. Just curious - is your view yours, something you read, or what is taught in your church? You do not have to respond if you think this question too personal.

[@katianaa4892]

What version of the Bible are you reading in?

[@CalvaryABQ]

Hello Katiana thank you for watching our KZbin videos! Pastor Skip will occasionally use other Bible translations but the one he uses most often is the New King James Version (NKJV). Thank you for watching! - Miguel R. Calvary Online Coordinator

[@Asegh]

He should really tell people that when Jesus said law the word he used was Torah

[@JohnAdams-zh4tz]

Actually - the Greek word used was “nomos” which commonly refers to Mosaic Law.

[@420dieter]

devine??????? OR Divine/////

[@glennkrieger]

I always thoroughly enjoy these. However, today Skip didn't go into what is happening in the modern church for the past 30 years or so. I wish he had. There are a multitude of divorced Christian couples who have then remarried. Mixed families in church's are quite common nowadays. I wish he would have gone into the issue of remarrying in Christian couples in light of the scripture passage he read at the end of this talk. I do have to say that as he answered that last question he seemed a bit nervous and jittery. I felt bad for him. And, he really didn't answer the question either. Not really.

[@satreddy2825]

Thank you